|
i dont know, ustwo:
when i see responses like yours, i wonder if the idea behind them is that information--or "news"--should serve a therapeutic function for conservatives rather than provoke debate, ask questions, function as a check on the exercize of state power.
it is only in that kind of context that it makes any sense to me when you simultaneously acknowledge that you are being fed disinformation--but from a viewpoint you generally agree with--and then claim that "america will be just fine" in the absence of a broader spectrum of information.
inside of this, there is a truly dismal understanding of democracy, such as it is: for the right, democracy is a problem to be countered with opinon management. the idea seems to be that "opinion" got out of control during the vietnam period--the specious notion of the "vietnam syndrome" floated by the reaganites seems apropos here. so the problem with vietnam was not the manifold illegalities of that war, its brutality, its specious underpinnings--but it was the press coverage of the war, the primary fault of which was to prevent conservatives from feeling good about themselves----because the coverage at times exposed the contradictions that seperate the reality of american policies from their ideological justifications. since then--and manifestly since the reagan period--the right has worked to eliminate this problem not by adjusting policy, not by rethinking anything based on the fiasco that was vietnam (not to mention more recent fiascos) but by working to eliminate dissonant information about these same contradictions.
all this is almost funny, given the conservative cliches about their fantasy double on "the Left"--which here as elsewhere i assume refers to anyone and everyone more moderate that paul weyrich--the cliches usually center on the liberal penchant for "feel good" policy and information...maybe its easier to slide into a kind of smug know-nothing position if you attribute the functions of the press you agree with to elements of the press that you do not agree with.
it is also funny in that it seems geared toward disabling critique in periods of crisis. it seems pretty clear that the right is worried not about crisis but about the problems of disunity provoked by crisis. so the obvious solution is tightening the mechanisms and extending the reach of opinon management.
shanberg is simply rehearsing the outlines of this situation from a viewpoint not beholden to the contemporary right. this should give you a good idea of what seperates the right from the rest of us: what you endorse as a type of information looks more or less as schanberg outlines it to folk who do not share your politics.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|