Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Not clear on the concept...

Greetings good citizen,

How does that old saying go, “there are none more enslaved than those who THINK they are ‘free’’…or something like that.

In retrospect, I am ‘down’ on a number of institutions in, er, ‘this society’ (since most of us are ‘victims’ of our rulers I hesitate to call this society ‘ours’.)

I am down on political parties (if we’re all in this together then who the hell is the ‘opposition’?) as I’m down on ‘voting’ (as it is currently practiced. Voting is a decision-making process so voting for who will make decisions for you without EVER consulting you is more than a bit illogical.)

I am also down on ‘protests’. While we see ‘high profile’ protests in other countries most of the time protests go without media coverage (unless hundreds of them are arrested for ‘civil disobedience’.)

Sadly, this ‘petitioning the government’ over (both) real and imagined grievances produces zero results.

So when I encountered this article in my morning reading I selected it as the subject for my own peculiar variety of ‘contrary’ reasoning.

The article ends thus:

Progressives need to offer an analysis that gives citizens the confidence to challenge the economic policy of Wall Street. At the same time, we need to provide an inspirational vision of the kind of society we are working to create. And we need to seriously plan how to achieve that vision by fighting for and winning transformative economic change that redistributes wealth and power. We can restore an arc of history that bends toward justice, equality and greater opportunity for us all, if we have the courage to challenge the most powerful and together take a step closer to the promised land. Otherwise, we may soon watch 100 years of victories disappear.

My readers are aware that recent events in the Middle East are NOT the ‘cry for democracy’ our bought and paid for corporate media would have you believe.

These mostly African nations are revolting against the corrupt governments they have no say in. While US supported ‘democracy movements’ are claiming responsibility, the ensuing riots have more to do with economic hardship and perceived government, er, ‘incompetence’ than the publicized desire to ‘imitate’ their Western oppressor.

While the writer is correct in stating we need to, er, ‘insist on’ our goal of a more equitable society, a protest is just as likely to get you shot as participating in a riot will.

In fact, the Sixties proved the only way to ‘get noticed’ was for ‘demonstrations’ to turn violent…much the same way our great grandparents did when protesting for fair wages and a more humane work week.

If it bleeds, it leads…which says something mighty pathetic about the people in charge of our ‘public information systems’.

In fact, information is, in my opinion, too precious to be ‘comodified’, especially by sensationalist hucksters.

But I digress.

Is the writer calling for ‘confrontation’ or is she merely seeking people willing to ‘peacefully’ rally around progressive causes?

Because even the suggestion that people unite less than peacefully is a crime.

How sad is it that only confrontation will draw the necessary attention to the issues at hand BUT advocating confrontation is a crime!

Not that it should matter, the way our affairs are being mis-managed is a crime too!

And it’s high time we start prosecuting those crimes.

Which is to belabor the obvious, we can hardly expect the criminals to prosecute themselves. They also have an annoying habit of ‘pardoning’ both the perp as well as those who ‘masterminded’ the crime.

Something that won’t stop until we put a stop to it.

Call it ‘blowback’ but some (relatively innocent) parties are going to suffer ‘retribution’ due to an ‘unfortunate choice of career paths.’

One would hope they’d all get a ‘fair trial’ but you know how ugly mobs can get…

Not to be mean but this sort of talk is already percolating through the affected industry.

Naturally, those who feel offended by being tarred with the same brush the ‘more guilty’ of their profession have attracted, scorn the ‘unfairness’ of such threats.

Sadly, protesting alone achieves nothing.

The unfairly judged will be compelled to fight fire with fire…if they can pull it off.

But I once again digress.

This is about the ‘effectiveness’ of protest. Due to the criminality of advocating violent protest, we can only ‘read between the lines’ and ‘fill in the blanks’ for ourselves.

I am down on protests, conversely, I am the first to endorse ‘confrontation’ as the only effective means of instituting ‘change’.

Even if those ‘changes’ are the ‘cleaning out’ of now corrupt regimes that infest public office.

As the Egyptians are learning, throwing out one despot and replacing him with his right hand man is, er, ‘beyond useless’.

Which is to say that a ‘clean sweep’ is useless if we fail to modify the process used to replace that which has been swept clean.

Again, not what to think but something to think about…

Thanks for letting me inside your head,


No comments:

Post a Comment