Would you agree that propaganda is a nessceary aspect of governemnt? Do you think we'd be better off without it?
First, welcome to sciforums. I hope you enjoy the ranting and raving. The way the world is today, most people have access to only a small amount of data regarding what is going on around them. Responsibility is placed in the hands of only a few people. Many people believe odd things, such as: - An invisible monkey made the universe, - We're better than those people over there, - The invisible monkey tells me I'm better than those people over there, - The invisible monkey tells me to kill, And so on. Until people realise they are pretty much all the same, they will not treat each other fairly with regard to resources and such. They draw borders, and build walls, and wipe out neighbouring tribes, and stone women to death. To keep some sort of order amongst all these morons, you need to tell them things to make them content, angry, or whatever you want them to feel. Until people have absolute responsibility for themselves and their actions, and absolute respect for the rights of others, we will need people to lie to the masses.
the bulk of the problem is that sadly, it is the masses that demand to be lied to. that there's a sticky wicket right there. ayup.
so this is a first one, but... so they demand to be lied to--this is true but only in so far as they are not sure that that what they demand is a lie. and in so far as those who are lying all know that they are giving the same lie.
in fact they demand that they are lied to and that they are not lied to simultaneously. the part about the same lie is silly. not everyone who is telling the lie knows about it nor is there a single lie. Actually, there exists a vast multi-layered web of lies in the minds of man. Much of it unknown. Maybe the majority of it is in the minds of the masses eh? Maybe it's the lies that they have in their heads really, that demand to live, to grow. (damnit, there's that memes thing again) in general we are a culture in denial. given the pace of life and conveniences of the modern world, but no increase in mental capacity such that said conveniences can be understood (there are many related reasons)(and mass communication becomes an enabler, not that it doesn't have it's great points (like allowing me to rant)) it becomes path of least mental resistance to avoid certain truths. if one cannot deal with the truth, one will be lied to. in fact, if one cannot deal with the truth then one is asking to be lied to. the other side of the coin I suppose is maybe this theory I've been playing with: There are a lot of varieties of art that exist and all of them have their virtuosos.... for somewhat obvious evolutionary social reasons there seems to me to be (am I crazy?) a large number of per capita virtuosos in the art of human manipulation. Throw that into a cultural mix and the liars seek power (since power lets them propogate their lies) and thereby the liars gain power so policy makers culture wide propogate their distorted and self serving CRAP. Hehe... I could have maybe just summed it up with "corruption" but that's a little more general than what I presented. man that made my head hurt. yours too I'm guessing. hehe.. I swear I see this HUGE thing of truth but I can only talk about one little part of it at a time and by the time I finish with one I go to another one that wasn't the one I planned and... hehe.. wow. it can get a to be a bit much. Pardon me please. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Once idioms start to be recast in this way, they can take on a whole new lease on meaning. One cricketing expression that does have something of a foothold in American English is ‘on a sticky wicket’, usually shortened simply to ‘sticky wicket’. This is rather a surprising acquisition, particularly given the fact that its obscurity is heightened by its out-datedness: ‘sticky wickets’ no longer exist in the modern game of cricket as pitches are now all covered which prevents the effects of moisture on them that used to produce such a difficult playing condition. Entries in American dictionaries label it as ‘Chiefly British’, but I did find a website published out of Washington DC that calls itself ‘The Sticky Wicket: Poverty’s Home Page’. The page is headed with three definitions as follows: Sticky Wicket – a difficult or delicate problem or situation. Poverty – a difficult problem for people in a delicate situation. Poverty in America – a sticky wicket. http://www.abc.net.au/rn/arts/ling/stories/s296921.htm
lbw = Leg Before Wicket. A term used in Cricket to indicate you are out because the ball hit your leg before the wicket. Well I found it funny. th "caught for a duck at silly mid-off" ed
the part about the same lie is silly. not everyone who is telling the lie knows about it nor is there a single lie. Actually, there exists a vast multi-layered web of lies in the minds of man. Much of it unknown. this i would agree with. if, for argument's sake, at some point there was an original lie it would further implicate a singular knowledge of the lie, meaning that a person or a singular collection of people knew that they were putting forth that first lie. it is much more probable that no such "awareness" actually existed. a propaganda which lies--must in some way play by the same rules that lies play by. This would mean that it would be possible for an omission or a skewing of the truth to be just as much a lie, but that, say a government spokesman or politician, would not neccessarily be conscious of the real truth he is skewing. in general we are a culture in denial. given the pace of life and conveniences of the modern world, but no increase in mental capacity such that said conveniences can be understood (there are many related reasons)(and mass communication becomes an enabler, not that it doesn't have it's great points (like allowing me to rant)) it becomes path of least mental resistance to avoid certain truths. if one cannot deal with the truth, one will be lied to. in fact, if one cannot deal with the truth then one is asking to be lied to. as i said above, however, this makes lie and truth very black and white when in reality a sublte shading of the truth can turn into a lie through degrees of separation. i would agree that we are a culture of denial--but only because there is no one place to find the certain truth about the realities of what is happening around the world--and i think that this makes us that much more complex in terms of our "mental capacity." people many would claim are in denial are actually just aware that "certain, absolute truth" is a lie in and of itself and they are just remaining aloof from a cesspool of claimants to the truth. this in not to vindicate the large number of people who still remain incapable of distinguishing between a heavy handed lie and a subtle "non-truth" only to say that in their ignorance they remain blissful to a degree--even though they help further dangerous lies. the other side of the coin I suppose is maybe this theory I've been playing with: There are a lot of varieties of art that exist and all of them have their virtuosos.... for somewhat obvious evolutionary social reasons there seems to me to be (am I crazy?) a large number of per capita virtuosos in the art of human manipulation. Throw that into a cultural mix and the liars seek power (since power lets them propogate their lies) and thereby the liars gain power so policy makers culture wide propogate their distorted and self serving CRAP. Hehe... I could have maybe just summed it up with "corruption" but that's a little more general than what I presented. who says that power and lying doesn't actually trap the liars into a perpetual never, ending lie against lie struggle? i may not agree with the president's comments or what his aides tell us, but the alternative to their lies may not even be an option--either because they, like us, have been involved in so many lies that the truth is not really known or because the truth is ultimately dangerous. anywho, i can't use the word lie anymore because i feel evil now.
which is why we must advocate term limits. for especially sticky lies that seem to be woven into the fabric of a society so as to appear as immutable and transcendental truths, i would also support periodic revolutions. say every 100 yrs? bastille style?? what say you?? hit or miss? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
reveloutions won't ever happen the way they did back in 1798. it's a nice thought, but... they will happen along the lines of the enron corruption scandal. that was a kind of revolution. we could debate whether or not it has had an effect for all of us--but the truth is that that event has probably effected as many people as the french revolution. the difference--and i am sure i will here about it from someone--is the context of the event. bastille day had a profound effect on the entire world, because of what it mean to intellectual culture in its coincidence with the enlightenment. enron was, if your really think about, an amazing turn of events that would have had even more effect in a time when our government and our media was more trusted--when lies weren't considered the norm--like the late seventies or the 50's and 40's. alot of people realized, that the government wasn't the only thing powerful enough to propagandize and lie to the point that it would ruin their jobs, the economy, and over run the government with scandal-worry. one would hope that in an economy of information--as is becoming a reality--that revolutions will be able to happen and effect all of us almost instantaneously--that would return ideas and Truth to prominence--right now there is just a hazy swapping of lies and capital--both of which continue to vie for hegemony.
"that revolutions will be able to happen and effect all of us almost instantaneously-" already happens. the lefties use the internet (forums, email, im) and can mobilize and hit the streets pretty quick
yeah but nothing the "lefties" ever did comes close to the kind of thing we are talking about--at least not in terms of a "revolution".
I'd love to tell you, but I don't quite understand your reasoning. term limits will help to create or help to destroy the big honkin lies that seem to be truth? you think revolution will help support the lies or help to destroy them? You tell me, I'll tell you.
Fukushi: YOU CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH!!! :Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!ulls out neuralizer:: **FLASH**
the funny thing is that none of us really would care about this if we were just sheep. if someone has the ability to be critical of a system that lies, then they have the ability to do something about it. if they don't do anything they they aren't sheep their complicit collaborators--wolves in sheep's clothing.:bugeye:
