Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Hate Speech Leads to Violence and Death
Please read "Where Did ‘We’ Go?", by Thomas Friedman, The New York Times, September 30, 2009. It's posted on their website.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
The Ministry of Truth of the United States of America
President Obama revealed his educational agenda by telling children to stay in school and study hard. He also told them that hard work leads to good things. The very thing that President George Herbert Walker Bush told schoolchildren in 1991.
At that time, the Democratic Party wrongly complained about Bush’s agenda and even investigated the money that was spent to broadcast the speech. Yes, wrongly, since nothing illegal was done. The whole incident made the Democrats look silly. Yet during the last few days, the Republicans, instead of learning from the silliness of the Democrats, blustered about Obama’s lust to preach the doctrines of socialism to schoolchildren, his desire to set up a personality cult, and his abuse of presidential power.
Before Obama gave his speech, a forthright conservative parent worried that Obama would turn public schools over to some socialist agenda. A guest on Rush Limbaugh’s radio program compared Barak Obama to Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong-Il. Another radio pundit, fearful for his child’s safety, said, "I wouldn’t let my next-door neighbor talk to my kid alone; I’m sure as hell not letting Barak Obama talk to my kid alone." These assessments of Obama’s speech appeared in The New York Times on Friday, September 4, 2009, four days before Obama spoke, and three days before the text of the speech was released.
I would think that these concerned citizens might be embarrassed now that Obama’s speech has been delivered. Some others might even expect these good people to admit they were wrong and support Obama’s statements to American schoolchildren. But they cannot and they will not. Without realizing it, these folks have themselves become indoctrinated by the American version of the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s novel, 1984.
The Ministry of Truth was run by the Party, which was divided into the Inner Party and the Outer Party. The Inner Party was in complete control of all economic and political activity. It also broadcast news of glorious military victories and increased manufacturing production. The data was repeated again and again. And again.
The Outer Party’s members, who obeyed all rules promulgated by the Inner Party, had to listen to the news everywhere, in the street, in restaurants, in train stations. Even in their homes, where television sets, installed by the Ministry of Truth, could not be turned off. The uninterrupted news distracted them from the rusty plumbing in their flats, their utter dependence on the Inner Party for employment, and the ever-diminishing vocabulary that they were allowed to use. Their world was a vast echo chamber of ideals preached by the Inner Party.
Members of the Outer Party never thought of examining the data they were told; to do so would have been a thought crime, punishable by public humiliation, torture and maybe death. So, they repeated the data to each other in conversations that became ever more restricted in subject matter. There were no discussions of sex, politics and religion, only the repetition of data and the three principles of the Inner Party: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
Repetition and more repetition taught them the truth, and they believed it because their fellow members of the Outer Party believed it. As a matter of fact, it comforted them and, as Winston Smith the protagonist did, they overcame their individuality and learned to love Big Brother.
In his afterword to the novel, Erich Fromm wrote in 1961: "It is one of the most characteristic and destructive developments of our own society that man, becoming more and more of an instrument, transforms reality into something relative to his own interests and functions. Truth is proven by the consensus of millions: to the slogan ‘how can millions be wrong’ is added ‘and how can a minority be right.’ Orwell shows quite clearly that in a system in which the concept of truth as an objective judgement concerning reality is abolished, anyone who is a minority of one must be convinced that he is insane."
The American Ministry of Truth is a creature of radio, television, and the Internet, which can be used to inform, persuade and entertain. They are also used by the majority to repeat ideas that ruin careers, distort government policy, and hide destructive activities.
Think of the times in which the majority was wrong. Until Joseph Welch revealed Joseph McCarthy’s lies and distortions, the majority thought that Communists had taken over the government. Until Alexander Butterfield revealed that the Nixon White House had tapes of conversations held in the oval office, the majority of Americans believed that Richard Nixon had not been involved in the Watergate break-ins. Until the US invaded Iraq, the majority of Americans knew that Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction, and until September, 2006, the majority of Americans knew that Hussein and Osama bin-Laden had plotted the attack on the World Trade Center. In all these cases, the truth was what the majority said, and the minority was shouted down and vilified as being unpatriotic.
Despite the number of times the majority is proven wrong, we Americans continue to seek out popular public figures who express popular opinions that mirror our own prejudices and ignorance. We revel in radio and TV talk shows that feature shouting opinionizers who are retired military officers, political activists, think-tank scholars, government officials, and columnists who role-play as liberals and conservatives. The George Will and Sam Donaldson Act is a favorite among the majority of Americans who prefer vaudeville to journalism.
The information we receive from each of them is biased toward the views that we already hold, because we avoid programs that do otherwise. We find comfort in the "fair and balanced" doctrine, which simply means that a liberal and a conservative sit in front of a microphone and camera to shout at each other for our benefit. When our favorite scores a point, we cheer; when the other guy does, we boo. We are entertained, but are neither persuaded nor informed.
Celebrities know what their audiences want to hear. Thus Rush Limbaugh tells his audience: "Remember, now, the Alinsky rule: ‘You speak within the realm of your audience's experience.’ The American people want to hear children motivated to be good, to do the best they can, to work hard. Okay, so go out and use the language and use the philosophy that makes your audience comfortable with you when your objective is the exact opposite of what you say. Barack Obama wants as many of these kids in school to grow up needing government services as he can."
Limbaugh uses the Alinsky rule, and then tells his followers that Obama said something that he didn’t. I do not believe that Obama wants kids in school to grow up needing government services. Nor have I seen any evidence of actions taken by his administration that demonstrate Limbaugh’s assertion.
However, if I were to get all my political and economic information from no one but Limbaugh, I would whoop with delight every time he insulted a government official in the Obama administration. I would repeat the latest Rushism to my fellow believers in conversation or via e-mail and ask them to send it on to their friends. Thus I would become an instrument of the American Ministry of Truth.
I have to give Limbaugh credit; he uses language very well, and he is in Don Rickles’s league when it comes to insults and put downs. The difference between them is vast. Rickles is an entertainer; Limbaugh is a thrice-divorced, recovering drug addict posing as an advocate for American family values. And pretending to be a Christian-American’s Minister of Truth.
The Ministry of Truth also uses e-mail to repeat untruths. (Look up my blog of December 27, 2008, which examined the lies spread by someone posing as a historian.) A recent e-mail, which has been making the rounds, uses a good cause to assert a religious prejudice. It uses all capital letters to show its indignation and heart break. I have left it in its "flaming" format for full effect.
"RECENTLY THIS WEEK, UK REMOVED THE HOLOCAUST FROM ITS SCHOOL CURRICULUM BECAUSE IT ‘OFFENDED’ THE MOSLEM POPULATION WHICH CLAIMS IT NEVER OCCURRED. THIS IS A FRIGHTENING PORTENT OF THE FEAR THAT IS GRIPPING THE WORLD AND HOW EASILY EACH COUNTRY IS GIVING INTO IT. IT IS NOW MORE THAN 60 YEARS AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR IN EUROPE ENDED. THIS E-MAIL IS BEING SENT AS A MEMORIAL CHAIN, IN MEMORY OF THE SIX MILLION JEWS, 20 MILLION RUSSIANS, 10 MILLION CHRISTIANS, GYPSIES AND 1,900 CATHOLIC PRIESTS WHO WERE MURDERED, MASSACRED RAPED, BURNED, STARVED AND HUMILIATED WITH THE GERMAN AND RUSSIAN PEOPLES LOOKING THE OTHER WAY! NOW, MORE THAN EVER, WITH IRAN, AMONG OTHERS, CLAIMING THE HOLOCAUST TO BE "A MYTH," IT IS IMPERATIVE TO MAKE SURE THE WORLD NEVER FORGETS. THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED TO REACH 40 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE!"
There are indeed people who deny the occurrence of the Holocaust, the President of Iran being one, and Roman Catholic Bishop William Richardson of the UK being another. However, this e-mail seeks to inflame hatred of Islamic people by claiming that Muslims forced the British Education Ministry to remove the Holocaust from its curriculum. Which is not true.
There was a controversy in a town in Northern England (both BBC and The Guardian have stories about this on their websites), where Muslims wanted a local council to remove the Holocaust from the curriculum. But it wasn’t removed by the local council; nor, I repeat, was it removed by UK’s Ministry of Education.
Another similar e-mail said the same thing about the Kentucky public schools, but it wasn’t true either. Both are being circulated by that party of Americans who believe that Islam is evil. However, what they believe, in this instance, is a lie.
The Ministry of Truth of the United States of America gets its ideas from prejudices—that shadow world of narrow minds and mean spirits who transform reality into something relative to their own interests and functions.. They have made themselves instruments of circulation and repitition, because that is the only way the flimsiness of their reasoning can appear solid. After all, if a million people believe it, how can it be wrong?
At that time, the Democratic Party wrongly complained about Bush’s agenda and even investigated the money that was spent to broadcast the speech. Yes, wrongly, since nothing illegal was done. The whole incident made the Democrats look silly. Yet during the last few days, the Republicans, instead of learning from the silliness of the Democrats, blustered about Obama’s lust to preach the doctrines of socialism to schoolchildren, his desire to set up a personality cult, and his abuse of presidential power.
Before Obama gave his speech, a forthright conservative parent worried that Obama would turn public schools over to some socialist agenda. A guest on Rush Limbaugh’s radio program compared Barak Obama to Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong-Il. Another radio pundit, fearful for his child’s safety, said, "I wouldn’t let my next-door neighbor talk to my kid alone; I’m sure as hell not letting Barak Obama talk to my kid alone." These assessments of Obama’s speech appeared in The New York Times on Friday, September 4, 2009, four days before Obama spoke, and three days before the text of the speech was released.
I would think that these concerned citizens might be embarrassed now that Obama’s speech has been delivered. Some others might even expect these good people to admit they were wrong and support Obama’s statements to American schoolchildren. But they cannot and they will not. Without realizing it, these folks have themselves become indoctrinated by the American version of the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s novel, 1984.
The Ministry of Truth was run by the Party, which was divided into the Inner Party and the Outer Party. The Inner Party was in complete control of all economic and political activity. It also broadcast news of glorious military victories and increased manufacturing production. The data was repeated again and again. And again.
The Outer Party’s members, who obeyed all rules promulgated by the Inner Party, had to listen to the news everywhere, in the street, in restaurants, in train stations. Even in their homes, where television sets, installed by the Ministry of Truth, could not be turned off. The uninterrupted news distracted them from the rusty plumbing in their flats, their utter dependence on the Inner Party for employment, and the ever-diminishing vocabulary that they were allowed to use. Their world was a vast echo chamber of ideals preached by the Inner Party.
Members of the Outer Party never thought of examining the data they were told; to do so would have been a thought crime, punishable by public humiliation, torture and maybe death. So, they repeated the data to each other in conversations that became ever more restricted in subject matter. There were no discussions of sex, politics and religion, only the repetition of data and the three principles of the Inner Party: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
Repetition and more repetition taught them the truth, and they believed it because their fellow members of the Outer Party believed it. As a matter of fact, it comforted them and, as Winston Smith the protagonist did, they overcame their individuality and learned to love Big Brother.
In his afterword to the novel, Erich Fromm wrote in 1961: "It is one of the most characteristic and destructive developments of our own society that man, becoming more and more of an instrument, transforms reality into something relative to his own interests and functions. Truth is proven by the consensus of millions: to the slogan ‘how can millions be wrong’ is added ‘and how can a minority be right.’ Orwell shows quite clearly that in a system in which the concept of truth as an objective judgement concerning reality is abolished, anyone who is a minority of one must be convinced that he is insane."
The American Ministry of Truth is a creature of radio, television, and the Internet, which can be used to inform, persuade and entertain. They are also used by the majority to repeat ideas that ruin careers, distort government policy, and hide destructive activities.
Think of the times in which the majority was wrong. Until Joseph Welch revealed Joseph McCarthy’s lies and distortions, the majority thought that Communists had taken over the government. Until Alexander Butterfield revealed that the Nixon White House had tapes of conversations held in the oval office, the majority of Americans believed that Richard Nixon had not been involved in the Watergate break-ins. Until the US invaded Iraq, the majority of Americans knew that Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction, and until September, 2006, the majority of Americans knew that Hussein and Osama bin-Laden had plotted the attack on the World Trade Center. In all these cases, the truth was what the majority said, and the minority was shouted down and vilified as being unpatriotic.
Despite the number of times the majority is proven wrong, we Americans continue to seek out popular public figures who express popular opinions that mirror our own prejudices and ignorance. We revel in radio and TV talk shows that feature shouting opinionizers who are retired military officers, political activists, think-tank scholars, government officials, and columnists who role-play as liberals and conservatives. The George Will and Sam Donaldson Act is a favorite among the majority of Americans who prefer vaudeville to journalism.
The information we receive from each of them is biased toward the views that we already hold, because we avoid programs that do otherwise. We find comfort in the "fair and balanced" doctrine, which simply means that a liberal and a conservative sit in front of a microphone and camera to shout at each other for our benefit. When our favorite scores a point, we cheer; when the other guy does, we boo. We are entertained, but are neither persuaded nor informed.
Celebrities know what their audiences want to hear. Thus Rush Limbaugh tells his audience: "Remember, now, the Alinsky rule: ‘You speak within the realm of your audience's experience.’ The American people want to hear children motivated to be good, to do the best they can, to work hard. Okay, so go out and use the language and use the philosophy that makes your audience comfortable with you when your objective is the exact opposite of what you say. Barack Obama wants as many of these kids in school to grow up needing government services as he can."
Limbaugh uses the Alinsky rule, and then tells his followers that Obama said something that he didn’t. I do not believe that Obama wants kids in school to grow up needing government services. Nor have I seen any evidence of actions taken by his administration that demonstrate Limbaugh’s assertion.
However, if I were to get all my political and economic information from no one but Limbaugh, I would whoop with delight every time he insulted a government official in the Obama administration. I would repeat the latest Rushism to my fellow believers in conversation or via e-mail and ask them to send it on to their friends. Thus I would become an instrument of the American Ministry of Truth.
I have to give Limbaugh credit; he uses language very well, and he is in Don Rickles’s league when it comes to insults and put downs. The difference between them is vast. Rickles is an entertainer; Limbaugh is a thrice-divorced, recovering drug addict posing as an advocate for American family values. And pretending to be a Christian-American’s Minister of Truth.
The Ministry of Truth also uses e-mail to repeat untruths. (Look up my blog of December 27, 2008, which examined the lies spread by someone posing as a historian.) A recent e-mail, which has been making the rounds, uses a good cause to assert a religious prejudice. It uses all capital letters to show its indignation and heart break. I have left it in its "flaming" format for full effect.
"RECENTLY THIS WEEK, UK REMOVED THE HOLOCAUST FROM ITS SCHOOL CURRICULUM BECAUSE IT ‘OFFENDED’ THE MOSLEM POPULATION WHICH CLAIMS IT NEVER OCCURRED. THIS IS A FRIGHTENING PORTENT OF THE FEAR THAT IS GRIPPING THE WORLD AND HOW EASILY EACH COUNTRY IS GIVING INTO IT. IT IS NOW MORE THAN 60 YEARS AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR IN EUROPE ENDED. THIS E-MAIL IS BEING SENT AS A MEMORIAL CHAIN, IN MEMORY OF THE SIX MILLION JEWS, 20 MILLION RUSSIANS, 10 MILLION CHRISTIANS, GYPSIES AND 1,900 CATHOLIC PRIESTS WHO WERE MURDERED, MASSACRED RAPED, BURNED, STARVED AND HUMILIATED WITH THE GERMAN AND RUSSIAN PEOPLES LOOKING THE OTHER WAY! NOW, MORE THAN EVER, WITH IRAN, AMONG OTHERS, CLAIMING THE HOLOCAUST TO BE "A MYTH," IT IS IMPERATIVE TO MAKE SURE THE WORLD NEVER FORGETS. THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED TO REACH 40 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE!"
There are indeed people who deny the occurrence of the Holocaust, the President of Iran being one, and Roman Catholic Bishop William Richardson of the UK being another. However, this e-mail seeks to inflame hatred of Islamic people by claiming that Muslims forced the British Education Ministry to remove the Holocaust from its curriculum. Which is not true.
There was a controversy in a town in Northern England (both BBC and The Guardian have stories about this on their websites), where Muslims wanted a local council to remove the Holocaust from the curriculum. But it wasn’t removed by the local council; nor, I repeat, was it removed by UK’s Ministry of Education.
Another similar e-mail said the same thing about the Kentucky public schools, but it wasn’t true either. Both are being circulated by that party of Americans who believe that Islam is evil. However, what they believe, in this instance, is a lie.
The Ministry of Truth of the United States of America gets its ideas from prejudices—that shadow world of narrow minds and mean spirits who transform reality into something relative to their own interests and functions.. They have made themselves instruments of circulation and repitition, because that is the only way the flimsiness of their reasoning can appear solid. After all, if a million people believe it, how can it be wrong?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)