You're Freedoming Wrong

More Equal? 

 

 Pennsylvania was the state where both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were signed. Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell are great symbols of the nation that are both in Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, PA State Representative Rick Saccone (R -39) apparently doesn't understand what that the whole Freedom thing (you know, the Bill of Rights?) doesn't mean that one group gets more freedom while other get less.

Saccone has proposed a mandate requiring state public schools to display the motto "In God We Trust."  He argues that it is to honor the 150th anniversary of the motto being displayed on American coinage. (Interesting that the motto isn't as old as the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, isn't it).

In fact, the motto was only added to our paper money in 1957, and it first appeared on our coins during the Civil war. What was so significant about 1957 that prompted Congress to approve putting a religious motto on our currency? It just happened to be the culmination of McCarthyism and the Red Scare. 

The lesson should be that the motto has been used as a mark of solidarity that reassures those fighting against a clearly defined enemy that there are on the side of right. In short, it is propaganda.

Harry Potter vs God

“It's displaying our national motto. So they can have Harry Potter on the walls, zombies and witches on brooms but not the national motto?” Saccone said. “It would just be posted in the building somewhere so the kids know what the story is behind it. It's about teaching history.”

I agree. Let's put it in our schools as a cautionary tale, right next to a display honoring other religious and moral quests --like the Crusades and pogroms throughout history.

"In God We Trust" is the passive-aggressive version of Christians yelling "Die Infidels!" And our schools should certainly teach history that includes what wars have been fought and why, how propaganda has alienated ethnic groups and cast them as a unifying enemy as an excuse for would-be conquerors to exploit the fears of the masses.

As far as I know, Harry Potter has never been used to justify a war or the slaughter of those who believe differently.

The Supreme Court was split on allowing a depiction of the Ten Commandments on federal property. Perhaps we cold take note that children are more impressionable and our public schools are meant to be an open, educational system, not a pulpit where one set of beliefs is treated as "right" while the others are just something students need to learn about.

When religion starts to run a country, it usually means less Freedom. I wonder if Rep. Saccone learned the history of the American colonies and how they were populated groups of persecuted religions?

Public schools do have to teach  students who are Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu. And if we ever gave children an excuse to treat them as "wrong," nothing could possibly go wrong.

The 5 Most Pointless Things from the Shutdown Coverage

Now that the doors of the government have reopened and the country can pay its bills -- for a short while at least-- here are my 5 least helpful things from the news coverage.

5. Shutdown Clocks 

 Because it really matters that everyone knows to the second how long it has been since Congress officially stopped working -- unofficially, well it has been quite a bit longer.

4. Did anyone fact-check the "reasons" the some republicans were against increasing the debt ceiling?

There used to be a school of thought that journalism meant telling the truth. Obviously, that isn't the top strength of the politicians. Hence, the idea of the Fourth Estate, another check on the government. Or we can just report whatever they say, but it is true that they did say it.

So if a Congress person says they don't want to raise the debt limit because it adds to the deficit, maybe, just maybe, a news station could mention that it really isn't the case (I'm looking at you CNN and Fox). Even Yahoo got this one right.

3. CNN's "Blame Both Sides" Fail

In an effort not to alienate any viewers from either party CNN tried to slam some democrats for not compromising and letting the shutdown take effect. Here is one problem with that. Here is another. CNN has become the middle child between MSNBC and Fox News. Instead of being non-partisan, CNN is trying to be dual-partisan, which is a fail.

2. Being Stupid or in Congress is News?

Ok, the shutdown drama was good for ratings. I get that. But reporting on people being stupid, just because its related to the shutdown is not how I imagine the media could foster bipartisan debate.
Being upset or outraged when the Federal government shuts down, and national parks close is like bombing McDonald's and then being upset when you can't get a BigMac.

Kudos to Senator Cruz and Sarah Palin who protested the shutdown of memorials after they pushed for the shutdown of the government -- in a crowd of veterans (neither of them were in the military) and someone waving a confederate flag.

Stupidity or false outrage just to get on TV - that's why we have Jerry Springer.

The # 1 reason why the shutdown coverage was pointless:

Nothing got solved, the media soaked up the ratings and rejoiced. And there is a good chance we get to do it all over again in a few months.

Oh, and there were no PandaCams.

So let me extend my thanks for all of the great coverage that really informed me about what really mattered during the shutdown.

C U Next Time we Shutdown!

Chomsky and "Red" America

The government shutdown has stilled the hallways of the Smithsonian and closed memorials and national parks across the country - and the media loves it. Big, elaborate graphics with dire overtones fly in to introduce a news segment on the shutdown, a clock ticks away the seconds in the corner of the screen, letting the viewer know with exactitude how long it has been since the government was opened (it has been a lot longer since the legislative bodies have functioned).

This article in the NY Times discusses how the people consume news in a way that resonates with their own personal beliefs, instead of gaining a big-picture understanding of current events.

This is a great observation, but it needs to go a step further: why doesn't reading or watching or listening to the news provide a comprehensive picture of the world. Why is everything either slanted to the left or the right?

This shutdown, whatever the effect on the general populace, is good business for the media. It doesn't really matter if coverage of the shutdown is accurate, because the news outlets realize that people only want to hear what reinforces their already held beliefs and not be challenged by inconvenient truths.

It's got to be true, I saw it on the news. 

 

The news media is controlled by just a few central, very wealthy, very politically influential corporations - and the news media serves the needs of the for-profit corporation, not the viewership or society in general.

The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda.

Excerpt from "Manufacturing Consent" by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman.

In other words, the media's job is to make the population behave, not the politicians. The media actually has, at times, a vested interest in not reporting "just the facts and nothing but the facts, ma'am."
 
Why? One of the main reasons that the media works to keep the populace in check and not the other way around is because the media system is concerned with profit.

According to Chomsky (from a compilation of his interview answers):

The major decisions over what happens in the society -- decisions over investment and production and distribution and so on -- are in the hands of a relatively concentrated network of major corporations and conglomerates and investment firms...

They are also the ones who staff the major executive positions in the government. They're the ones who own the media and they're the ones who have to be in a position to make the decisions. They have an overwhelmingly dominant role in the way life happens.

This is propaganda -- not to support a tyrannical autocrat, but to keep the plutocrats happy. To keep the populace tuned in, susceptible to the blandishments of advertisers- that is what the media wants.

  Socialism is the new red. 

One of the most powerful mechanisms in place that supports the propaganda of the media giants is (in dramatic echoing tones): the fear of communism.

It bears repeating that communism is the antithesis of capitalism. Communism is the antithesis of capitalism. (Repeated).

Put another way, communism is bad for profits. Our government has had some very lucrative dealings with dictators over the years. But communism is government dispersing profits, it is others reaping the fruits of your labor (theoretically, you would also be reaping the fruits of their labors, but it never seems to work out like that in our minds).

But, we haven't been worried about the Reds since the fall of the Soviet Union and McCarthy's witch hunt, right?

Except that, the media and their political mouthpieces and their ideologue talking heads don't always call it communism. They call it "entitlements" and "socialism." It doesn't matter that socialism and communism are vastly different. If it can be made to seem like social welfare programs are communist in nature, the inculcated masses will have no choice but to go back to the ideal ways of the benevolent capitalist overlords. Which is what our friend, the creepy, finger-raping Uncle Sam puppet, reminds us - don't let the socialists take our profits.

All hail to the capitalist overlords--or get puppet finger-raped.

Bonus excerpt from "Manufacturing Consent":

The essential ingredients of our propaganda model, or set of news "filters," fall under the following headings:

(I) the size, concentrated ownership, owner wealth, and profit orientation of the dominant mass-media firms;

(2) advertising as the primary income source of the mass media;

(3) the reliance of the media on information provided by government, business, and "experts" funded and approved by these primary sources and agents of power;

(4) "flak" as a means of disciplining the media;

(5) "anticommunism" as a national religion and control mechanism. These elements interact with and reinforce one another.

The raw material of news must pass through successive filters, leaving only the cleansed residue fit to print. They fix the premises of discourse and interpretation, and the definition of what is newsworthy in the first place, and they explain the basis and operations of what amount to propaganda campaigns.

The Optics of Symbology

Following up on last week's post about the failings of "simple" solutions, this week's topic is symbology (or "sssym-bol-ism"-- see clip below) and how symbolic actions offer "simple" solutions.

Many of the headlines in the news this week have a personal irritation because they affect some people who are very close to me--in a very human, personal way that could not be more distant from how the debate is being cast in the media.

I am talking, of course, about the government shutdown. More specifically, I am talking about the fact it solves nothing and changes nothing.

For those who think that the shutdown will get rid of a program that they don't like, they are wrong. The shutdown does not directly affect the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. The ACA has been debated for several years, going through the forms of representative democracy (Congress, Senate and Presidential Signature). Then, when challenged, upheld in the Supreme Court.

Thanks to aatp.org for this image

I am not writing about whether or not the ACA or "Obamacare" is good or bad for the nation.

It is a futile gesture. It only provides a symbol. Sure, throwing the boxes of tea into Boston Harbor was a symbolic gesture, but this shutdown is like holding the priest hostage after the wedding is completed and everyone is at the reception.



The Affordable Care Act has been held up as a symbol of President Obama and his democratic party values. The optics of opposing the ACA are very important to some congresspersons.

It has a semiotic value that has nothing to do with the actual wheels and gears that make it work as the law of the land. It is a symbol of government oppression. A symbol of the resentment of a person who believes that their hard work is supporting the indolent takers, the dregs of our society.

And there is a face given to these takers: the poor, those with limited education opportunities, those who have fallen on hard times. They are now a symbol of the "moocher class."

It doesn't really matter if these things are true or provable (or not intended to be factual statements).

The rhetoric of the message is much stronger than facts. 

Actions have become more important for their symbolic value, the semiotic meaning that has been assigned to them, than the actual pragmatic consequences of said actions. The consequences that permeate from any action fade from the public consciousness, dwarfed and obscured by a monumental mythos that has become material monolith.

In other words, the semiotic nature of these actions--the symbology-- means that my sister and children, my niece and nephew, have very little with which to support themselves in one of the most expensive cities in America. As a contractor to the government, my sister will not even be eligible for back pay if approved by Congress.

That is your symbolism right there. A eight year-old and a six-year old whose mother has to make plans for how to feed them in case this shutdown drags on.

Good luck with the symbolic action, I am sure the optics of the real consequences are great.