Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Coup de Constitution

Expand Messages
  • rubster cruiser
    The power of the press resides in the fact that every individual who serves it feels only slightly pledged or bound to it. He usually gives his opinion, but
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 1, 2004
      "The power of the press resides in
      the fact that every individual who serves it feels only slightly
      pledged or bound to it. He usually gives his opinion, but sometimes,
      in order to help his party or the politics of his country, or even
      himself, he does not give it. Such little misdemeanors of dishonesty...."
      mary jo,
      dont u think u are being slightly harsh?
      first off, u will find several people who bravely and sometimes brazenly voice their opinions in the media business. its at least true for where i live(india)
      second off, u have to realize that if every one gets out wid their opinions, true opinions i mean, then how will the dirty bearaucracy survive??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!here i am just taking a dig at the administration(s).
      on a more serious note(here i will start including bill's reply to ur mail), i suppose the press is bound. the phrase "freedom of the press" is merely a romanticized image, it isnt really true. for instance, for ages now, the press worldwide has been screaming abt dear Mr.Bush(if i told u wat i think abt him, i wud be asked to leave existlist) who was going on and on abt WMD(a figment of his imagination, perhaps a bit of undigested mustard or bread). there are no WMDs. we all knew that. i do not know wat the press said there. but i believe(i cud be wrong) that there were some demonstrations. but after iraq was destroyed, there was a general feeling of support to Mr. Bush.
      the point i am trying to make is that these "little misdemeanors of dishonesty" go beyond the picture presented to us. the press does have to take political matters in consideration. they need to live u know.
      but in general, i will say this for the press, they are generally out to get the maximum breaking news. and if it isnt breaking, they will lose out, wont they? and the part wwhere u menitoned that one line more or les doesnt matter, i disagree. sometimes i cant help but feel they are out to divulge as much as possible, and do max damage.
      excuse my terrible typing.

      Mary Jo <alcyon11@...> wrote:
      When the leaders in power fear or find inadequate the Constitution,
      they are not patriots or good existentialists. Put American citizens
      on trial in a court room, not the media. Put your money where your
      mouth is. Either it works, or it doesn't. Jose Padilla is an American
      citizen. If he wasn't, I don't give a shit if they lock him in a
      snake pit forever. I'm starting to think perhaps Trinidad is right.
      There's another agenda here that nobody wants to come out in a public
      trial. It's betraying itself daily, or maybe it's just a hanging
      chad. Dubya and his bro Jeb pulled off a helluva coup de tat.


      Making use of petty dishonesty.� The power of the press resides in
      the fact that every individual who serves it feels only slightly
      pledged or bound to it. He usually gives his opinion, but sometimes,
      in order to help his party or the politics of his country, or even
      himself, he does not give it. Such little misdemeanors of dishonesty,
      or perhaps only of dishonest reticence, are not hard for the
      individual to bear; and yet the consequences are extraordinary,
      because these little misdemeanors are committed by many people
      simultaneously. Each of them says to himself, "For such petty
      services I live better and can make my livelihood; if I refuse such
      little acts of discretion, I shall make myself impossible." Because
      it seems almost a matter of indifference morally whether one writes
      one line more or less, and perhaps even without a signature�anyone
      who has money and influence can transform any opinion into public
      opinion. Whoever realizes that most people are weak in small matters,
      and wants to attain his own purposes through them, is thus always a
      dangerous man. - Nietzsche


      In examining the media's role in indoctrination, Chomsky says
      that "the media's institutional structure gives them the same kind of
      purpose that the educational system has: to turn people into
      submissive, atomized individuals who don't interfere with the
      structures of power and authority." Similarly, democratic governments
      use propaganda and "the manufacture of consent" in place of violence
      and force to control the masses. "Indoctrination is to democracy," he
      philosophizes, "what a bludgeon is to totalitarianism." This
      atomization of individuals, this breakdown of independent thought,
      and this general depoliticizing of society together create the
      perfect environment, in Chomsky's view, for a charismatic, fascist
      dictator to seize power. "I think that's one of the reasons why I'm
      very much in favor of corruption.... A corrupt leader is going to rob
      people but not cause that much trouble.... Power hunger is much more
      dangerous than money hunger," he argues. - Noam Chomsky

      Q. You have said that "propaganda is to democracy what violence is to
      the totalitarian state," which, of course, relates to what you are
      saying here.

      A. And, in fact, there's a very intriguing line of thought in
      democratic theory that goes back certainly to the seventeenth-century
      English revolutions�sort of the first major modern democratic
      revolutions. There's been a recognition which becomes very explicit
      in the twentieth century, especially in the United States, that as
      the capacity to control people by force declines, you have to
      discover other means of control. Harold Lasswell, one of the founders
      of the modern area of communications in the political sciences, put
      it this way in the 1930s in an article on propaganda in the
      International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences: "We should not succumb
      to democratic dogmatism about men being the best judges of their own
      interests. They're not. We're the best judges." In a military state
      or what we would now call a totalitarian state, you can control
      people by force; in a democratic state you can't control them by
      force, so you'd better control them with propaganda�for their own
      good. Now this is a standard view; in fact, I suspect this is the
      dominant view among intellectuals. - Chomsky


      And what rises above it all, hovers above the head and shoulders of
      all the philosophical and sociological struggle? What is the light
      that shines? The Constitution of the United States. The most
      liberating thought presented to humanity as a standard to date. Why
      do we have politicians who think that it's not the important issue?
      It's the only important issue. Without it there is no arguably
      ethical moral reason for the United States to exist. They give it lip
      service and do assault daily, a subtle terrorism. This is what
      they're SUPPOSED to be protecting and defending. Who are the
      terrorists? Neither the U.S. nor the world has moved very far past
      1776 at all. It's time to go forward or lose. Use it or lose it.

      Mary Jo

      Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

      Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

      Do you Yahoo!?
      Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.