So, back to 'conspiracy'. If you would accept that it would mean to breathe in harmony, then there is no greater conspiracy than government. And that set of mighty lungs needs ribs of iron to cage the occasional wayward gust. An aside: I find breathing an interesting metaphor, as it is regulated by the autonomic nervous system, yet can be controlled by conscious thought.
Just like any government that wigs out over socialism (there are inherent traces of socialist tendencies within any form of government, some recipients just being more select than others), a government that complains about 'conspiracy theories' just highlights its opacity and inability to supply its people with information. After all, really, why does any noble government have to hide its breathing cycles?
One such screen of opacity has been the television. It has crafted psychological space for decades now, and the results are literally terrifying. It is the same one-to-many format that the religions use (access your spiritually only within sanctioned, sanctified space), and those who watch it report on it as reality. It's drugging effects do not stop there, under-publicized research (ie. you won't have watched the report on TV) indicate that your brain undergoes RADICAL effects. Hemispherical dominance shifts from left hemisphere (in general, the 'critical' side) to the right ('emotional')... which ain't so bad, other than the fact that we're watching REALITY here. Further, brain waves splutter into sluggish alpha rhythm, 8 to 12hz, which if intended to happen, can be brilliant for your health. But because it's not, isn't. The adage is that people in comas experience greater brain activity than someone in front of the TV.
This was the new morality we were supposed to accept. Even genius shows like the Simpsons, which critiqued this form of representation by getting a cartoon TV family to feedback to real TV families, couldn't bust that mold. Again, please witness McLuhan's 'medium is the message' to 'medium is the massage' (to 'tedium is the masses'?)
But what's wrong with the one-to-many system? Well, at best it's representative democracy, which is closest to an elected oligarchy. And cogni-neurologically speaking, there's Dunbar's number to account for politician's dissociation from their constituency and association with each other. Even the most valiantly discerning, critically purposed politician will represent their culture - which is exactly how their morality was obtained. The worst thing we can do is allow these people to be in the same room as each other! By some abstract distillation process, these people will BE the country or nation under who's banner they collect.
The one-to-many has been GREAT for the hegemony. Prior to TV, there was the pisser of having Gutenberg's press permit widespread education outside of the strictures of authority (church). Divine authority and hereditary rule suffered a blow.. the dissembling of the priest caste gave rise to that of the merchant - corporations began in the shape of shipping and trade consortiums. But that just rearranged the matter of distribution, really, as geographical and temporal constraints still remained. Information was available, but what could be done with it?
Enter the internet! This is the lauded many-to-many representation. Categorically created to circumvent censorship and lies ('errors', or nodal corruption are rerouted and corrected). The old tricks of TV geo-politics begin to fail, as everyone is now a pirate broadcaster. Morality - or representational truth - has irrefutably changed, and what's amazing about this, is that people are generally ok. The 9/11 cover up by the wackiest conspiracy theory ever told (19 suicide hijackers, 5 of whom are still alive etc.) - it is now touted as the first mass-marketed failure of TV to successfully implant reality.
Consumer devices, such as self-phones and digital cameras have also contributed to the civilian production of DIY media. With the distributive powers of the internet, it's a perfect storm for the beaches of sanctioned reality.
And so, the hegemony has been astounded and indignant that people are shaping their own realities. This idea simply cannot be understood by them, as it corrupts the belief that props them up. Sophistry is trotted out, and diversionary (and divisive) tactics locked and loaded. The economies have been purposefully detonated so as to best reign in all possible alternatives available to the middle class. Brute authority has swaggered back in, 'for our protection'.
But why would they collapse the very system of illusion that gave them dominance? Mainly because the many-to-many model now allows for DIRECT governance. A democracy no longer dictated by spatial constraint.. people can circumvent the power-matrix and are able to vote directly, without any cause for delay, without any need for 4 year terms of governance, without any use for false party dichotomies, without political representation by someone who will only get assimilated. Every single bill or referendum can be examined by the population, and voted on BY them. This is the true revolution, and it's being deferred for as long as possible, so that the hegemony can raise as many swords to drop if things go poorly for them (which they will).
Accountability will be actualized.
Phew! Glad to have THAT off my chest, I can breathe freely!
A web translation for 'No cow too sacred' gave me this: nullus vacca nimium augustus. Assuming its veracity, it's a bit too lumpy for a heraldic crest... but I'll chew the cud and perhaps it'll prove digestible.
No comments:
Post a Comment