Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 08-26-2004, 10:35 AM

the left tradition that shapes signficant elements of what i do sets itself in opposition to the dominant ideology in general---the assumption is that modes of thinking/judging within that ideology are predicated on streaming folk in a particular, highly overdetermined direction, confusing movement within a restricted set of options with choice in any meaningful sense--to oppose this means to undertake both a critique (the negative part) and what amounts to a philosophical/political project directed at shifting relations to the signifiers that constitute the surface of the existing order (the positive part)..fact is that this left tradition is in flux, unsure of its conceptual framework and therefore unsure of how exactly to elaborate its positions (this is the vacuum created by what i refer to as the collapse of the marxist tradition)--this is the case regardless of whether particular organizations that try to operate in opposition (usually on the basis of very localized issues) acknowledge this vacuum or not---it follows then that there is no coherent presence within the existing order for anything like the position i am arguing from, and this for historical reasons (like i said above)--so it does not follow that "both sides" as you put it are engaged in parallel operations.

even so, there are significant differences between the neocons and other political movements: only the neocons have been in a financial position to construct a network of thinktanks (aei, brookings, heritage, rand, cato, etc etc.) modelled on the example of the hoover institution...

only the right has developed patterns of open-ended funding: big big donors give money to these institutions that is not earmarked toward particular issues/results----this gives right thinktanks far more latitude than those which work for progressive/left-ish causes. this open-ended financing has been critical---it is the condition of possibility for the development of their increasingly sophsiticated strategies for media penetration.

only the right has been in a position to exploit access to congress/congressional staffers and to tailor their press releases into labor saving devices for staffers that insert their logic implicitly into the sorting process (for example)--this route has given these institutions enormous cultural power within the general space of govt, enabling their frame of reference to increasingly become **the** frame of reference.

only the right has been in a position to systematically work its way into the opinion generating machinery that accompanies the 24-hour news stations.
partly because it is the right that has cultivated the reduction of political positions to sound-bytes--"progressive" folk have never managed this one well--their arguments work from the outside, they require space for explanation, for context--tv does not give this space.

only the right has undertaken operations like the funding "science" etc for political purposes, designed to make coherent political judgements impossible for the public. the assumption is that if there is not highly specialized training and alot of time for research available to members of the public, they will shift away from environmental issues to a kind of agnostic know-nothing position--which is fine for corporations, who can continue to do as they like in the meantime--the idea is that you shove information sorting functions back onto the public, knowing that this sorting function is pretty much impossible for most people.
this idea is antithetical to any left position out there. any left position i know about is centered on trying to inform judgement, make it more repvalent, more possible--this is about the opposite. and it does not work to revert to examples from the old days---we are not still trapped in the days shaped by stalinism.

only the right has colonized am radio--only the right has new "news" channels like fox and "news" outlets like the washington times--any argument that there is anything comparable for "the left" is simply bullshit--arguments floated to conceal what has been happening...there are press outlets that tilt slightly "left" or at least retain some independence in the states--but they do so outside the institutional networks that the right has constructed since the middle 1970s. the neocons love these relatively independent outlets because it allows them the space to construct their (totally disengenuous) martyr narrative (o boo hoo, we might have this institutional infrastructure, we might have this influence, we might have this huge amount of cash, we might have succeeded in imposing our idiotic frame of reference on national discourse, but the ny times is not with us, and barbra streisand is not with us, boo hoo, so they must be a mirror image of ourselves and see, we dont control absolutely everything, poor persecuted us....but that is not enough--these opposing voices must be silenced if possible, even as they operate to prop up the martyr story...)

if you havent done it, do some research on the matter--the above is a series of statements (among many more possible) of the assymetircal state of affairs that presently obtains in the states, and that is motoring a general march toward political self-immolation. i can point you at lots of sources on the matter, if you need them.

i can talk about many things and be relatively open--but this is simply one where the empirical situation belies any attempt to relativize things.

08-26-2004, 10:35 AM	#40 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	the left tradition that shapes signficant elements of what i do sets itself in opposition to the dominant ideology in general---the assumption is that modes of thinking/judging within that ideology are predicated on streaming folk in a particular, highly overdetermined direction, confusing movement within a restricted set of options with choice in any meaningful sense--to oppose this means to undertake both a critique (the negative part) and what amounts to a philosophical/political project directed at shifting relations to the signifiers that constitute the surface of the existing order (the positive part)..fact is that this left tradition is in flux, unsure of its conceptual framework and therefore unsure of how exactly to elaborate its positions (this is the vacuum created by what i refer to as the collapse of the marxist tradition)--this is the case regardless of whether particular organizations that try to operate in opposition (usually on the basis of very localized issues) acknowledge this vacuum or not---it follows then that there is no coherent presence within the existing order for anything like the position i am arguing from, and this for historical reasons (like i said above)--so it does not follow that "both sides" as you put it are engaged in parallel operations. even so, there are significant differences between the neocons and other political movements: only the neocons have been in a financial position to construct a network of thinktanks (aei, brookings, heritage, rand, cato, etc etc.) modelled on the example of the hoover institution... only the right has developed patterns of open-ended funding: big big donors give money to these institutions that is not earmarked toward particular issues/results----this gives right thinktanks far more latitude than those which work for progressive/left-ish causes. this open-ended financing has been critical---it is the condition of possibility for the development of their increasingly sophsiticated strategies for media penetration. only the right has been in a position to exploit access to congress/congressional staffers and to tailor their press releases into labor saving devices for staffers that insert their logic implicitly into the sorting process (for example)--this route has given these institutions enormous cultural power within the general space of govt, enabling their frame of reference to increasingly become the frame of reference. only the right has been in a position to systematically work its way into the opinion generating machinery that accompanies the 24-hour news stations. partly because it is the right that has cultivated the reduction of political positions to sound-bytes--"progressive" folk have never managed this one well--their arguments work from the outside, they require space for explanation, for context--tv does not give this space. only the right has undertaken operations like the funding "science" etc for political purposes, designed to make coherent political judgements impossible for the public. the assumption is that if there is not highly specialized training and alot of time for research available to members of the public, they will shift away from environmental issues to a kind of agnostic know-nothing position--which is fine for corporations, who can continue to do as they like in the meantime--the idea is that you shove information sorting functions back onto the public, knowing that this sorting function is pretty much impossible for most people. this idea is antithetical to any left position out there. any left position i know about is centered on trying to inform judgement, make it more repvalent, more possible--this is about the opposite. and it does not work to revert to examples from the old days---we are not still trapped in the days shaped by stalinism. only the right has colonized am radio--only the right has new "news" channels like fox and "news" outlets like the washington times--any argument that there is anything comparable for "the left" is simply bullshit--arguments floated to conceal what has been happening...there are press outlets that tilt slightly "left" or at least retain some independence in the states--but they do so outside the institutional networks that the right has constructed since the middle 1970s. the neocons love these relatively independent outlets because it allows them the space to construct their (totally disengenuous) martyr narrative (o boo hoo, we might have this institutional infrastructure, we might have this influence, we might have this huge amount of cash, we might have succeeded in imposing our idiotic frame of reference on national discourse, but the ny times is not with us, and barbra streisand is not with us, boo hoo, so they must be a mirror image of ourselves and see, we dont control absolutely everything, poor persecuted us....but that is not enough--these opposing voices must be silenced if possible, even as they operate to prop up the martyr story...) if you havent done it, do some research on the matter--the above is a series of statements (among many more possible) of the assymetircal state of affairs that presently obtains in the states, and that is motoring a general march toward political self-immolation. i can point you at lots of sources on the matter, if you need them. i can talk about many things and be relatively open--but this is simply one where the empirical situation belies any attempt to relativize things. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 08-26-2004 at 10:42 AM..