someperson
02-12-2010, 04:33 AM
I just thought I'd expand on this topic. It may be tl;dr ;) but I hope someone reads it and at least considers the ideas. It's my opinion on the political manipulation of individuals by the media.
--
The individuals in the media have convinced many that they are biased. I believe, however, that they aren't biased toward any of the philosophies that appear on a typical political graph. Liberal, conservative, neoconservative, socialist, democrat, republican, libertarian, and all of the rest; the media is not promoting any of the philosophies behind these labels. The media is promoting the philosophy of collectivism.
Their modus operandi is similar to that employed by the ancient war profiteers. These ancient ones would find a geographically convenient collection of individuals. Within this collection, they would typically manufacture a dichotomy, each side with its own label. In this way, group identity is slowly emphasized over the individual. Group strength and superiority becomes more important than the well-being of the individual.
Once this destructive principle is accepted by both sides, the concept of war can be rationalized as something other than the obvious mass-murder of individuals that it is. It is rationalized as beneficial for the greater good of the group. With the foundation of collectivism in place, conflict is instigated by the third party profiteers between the manufactured dichotomy of individuals. Weapons are sold to both sides, and both sides become dependent on and indebted to the profiteers. The individual is defeated.
This old strategy is employed by the media (and others), today, however, the goal is no longer direct, financial gain; the goal is now policy control. There are several dichotomies, trichotomies, and other divisions that have been manufactured using various group labels: right <-> left, liberal <-> conservative, democrat <-> republican, religious labels... there are plenty more.
The profiteers care not which label you accept for yourself, as long as you accept one. The idea is to create an emotional attachment between every targeted individual and at least one label. If you haven't been convinced to label yourself, by pressure from peers, schools, and family, the media will attempt to force you to accept a label by presenting "a problem" and, conveniently, two groups offering "real" solutions. One group is pushed as the "good guys" and the other as the "bad guys." Sadly, it seems that most individuals opt to accept the label of the "good guys" if only to avoid being labeled as supporting the "bad guys." The players in these theatrics may change roles every few years, but the false dichotomy remains the same. It's so pathetic, as to be insulting, that this game still goes on.
Once emotional attachment to a group label has been established, as in the past, group identity is slowly emphasized over the individual. Group strength and superiority, once again, becomes more important than the well-being of the individual. Individuals begin to irrationally defend "their" group and those who purport to represent "their" group, and attack other groups, even when such activity is self-destructive.
In order to attack, individuals seek weapons. The weapons being "sold" by the profiteers of today are no longer bows and arrows; they are talking points and sound bites. The media "sells" these to both sides of the many dichotomies, in the hope that individuals will use them to attack each other. Individuals become dependent on the profiteers to continuously resupply them with "ammunition," with which to attack other groups. The profiteers control the flow and strength of "weaponry" to each of the dependent groups, in order to manipulate outcomes. The individual is defeated.
I'll add that I don't believe there's a conspiracy where individuals like Sean Hannity and Chris Matthews get together to coordinate talking points. As is the case with the two main political parties, two wings of the same vulture, I believe it's the leaderships of the major media organizations that share an agenda. The smaller media outlets, in order to remain relevant, typically compete by presenting the ideological debates as framed by the major media organizations, rarely looking past the many false dichotomies promoted.
What can be done about this? I entreat you to reject the use of labels. Define yourself by your philosophy, your ideas, by you; reject group identification. Without the group labels, the philosophy of collectivism, and the disastrous policies it leads to, cannot take root. Labels persist with use. If individuals resist the temptation to label themselves, and reject the desire to label others, I believe collectivism will falter. I am an individual who believes in non-interventionism, individualism, the NAP, and liberty.
--
The individuals in the media have convinced many that they are biased. I believe, however, that they aren't biased toward any of the philosophies that appear on a typical political graph. Liberal, conservative, neoconservative, socialist, democrat, republican, libertarian, and all of the rest; the media is not promoting any of the philosophies behind these labels. The media is promoting the philosophy of collectivism.
Their modus operandi is similar to that employed by the ancient war profiteers. These ancient ones would find a geographically convenient collection of individuals. Within this collection, they would typically manufacture a dichotomy, each side with its own label. In this way, group identity is slowly emphasized over the individual. Group strength and superiority becomes more important than the well-being of the individual.
Once this destructive principle is accepted by both sides, the concept of war can be rationalized as something other than the obvious mass-murder of individuals that it is. It is rationalized as beneficial for the greater good of the group. With the foundation of collectivism in place, conflict is instigated by the third party profiteers between the manufactured dichotomy of individuals. Weapons are sold to both sides, and both sides become dependent on and indebted to the profiteers. The individual is defeated.
This old strategy is employed by the media (and others), today, however, the goal is no longer direct, financial gain; the goal is now policy control. There are several dichotomies, trichotomies, and other divisions that have been manufactured using various group labels: right <-> left, liberal <-> conservative, democrat <-> republican, religious labels... there are plenty more.
The profiteers care not which label you accept for yourself, as long as you accept one. The idea is to create an emotional attachment between every targeted individual and at least one label. If you haven't been convinced to label yourself, by pressure from peers, schools, and family, the media will attempt to force you to accept a label by presenting "a problem" and, conveniently, two groups offering "real" solutions. One group is pushed as the "good guys" and the other as the "bad guys." Sadly, it seems that most individuals opt to accept the label of the "good guys" if only to avoid being labeled as supporting the "bad guys." The players in these theatrics may change roles every few years, but the false dichotomy remains the same. It's so pathetic, as to be insulting, that this game still goes on.
Once emotional attachment to a group label has been established, as in the past, group identity is slowly emphasized over the individual. Group strength and superiority, once again, becomes more important than the well-being of the individual. Individuals begin to irrationally defend "their" group and those who purport to represent "their" group, and attack other groups, even when such activity is self-destructive.
In order to attack, individuals seek weapons. The weapons being "sold" by the profiteers of today are no longer bows and arrows; they are talking points and sound bites. The media "sells" these to both sides of the many dichotomies, in the hope that individuals will use them to attack each other. Individuals become dependent on the profiteers to continuously resupply them with "ammunition," with which to attack other groups. The profiteers control the flow and strength of "weaponry" to each of the dependent groups, in order to manipulate outcomes. The individual is defeated.
I'll add that I don't believe there's a conspiracy where individuals like Sean Hannity and Chris Matthews get together to coordinate talking points. As is the case with the two main political parties, two wings of the same vulture, I believe it's the leaderships of the major media organizations that share an agenda. The smaller media outlets, in order to remain relevant, typically compete by presenting the ideological debates as framed by the major media organizations, rarely looking past the many false dichotomies promoted.
What can be done about this? I entreat you to reject the use of labels. Define yourself by your philosophy, your ideas, by you; reject group identification. Without the group labels, the philosophy of collectivism, and the disastrous policies it leads to, cannot take root. Labels persist with use. If individuals resist the temptation to label themselves, and reject the desire to label others, I believe collectivism will falter. I am an individual who believes in non-interventionism, individualism, the NAP, and liberty.