Hysteria. His or ours?
Sunday, August 26, 2012
How do we escape the hysteria that threatens to erode public debate? | Peter Beaumont | Comment is free | The Observer.
The linked article by Peter Beaumont cheered me up immensely. If the control-freaks of the left-wing press, so intent on setting every possible parameter of public debate, fear that;
The blogosphere, increasingly fuelled by toxic language, is hindering honest engagement rather than encouraging it
then we political bloggers are doing well. To quote (as I have not done in such style since my misguided Communist youth) from Chairman Mao:
It is good if we are attacked by the enemy, since it proves that we have drawn a clear dividing line between the enemy and ourselves. It is still better if the enemy attacks us wildly and paints us as utterly black and without a single virtue; it demonstrates that we have not only drawn a clear dividing line between the enemy and ourselves but have achieved spectacular successes in our work.
The truth is that the elite Beaumont calls "opinion formers" feel threatened by electronic democracy. They had long ago managed to infiltrate and subvert the old media to present a consistent statist view that has been acquiesced to, but never truly accepted, by what Mao would have called "the masses" and I just think of as "us." We express this division of reality by the term "politically correct". If it wasn't different from that which is merely "correct", there would be no need for the qualifying adjective.
Beaumont considers any view that is not politically-correct as "hysterical", but I think the only hysteria here is his. True democrats seek to serve the people, not mould them. They certainly don't despise them, fear them and regard their use of language as "toxic". I only wish I could be as optimistic as he is pessimistic that his game is up.
"Opinion formers" everywhere are seeking to manage the internet. Communist China employs legions of trolls to contradict every anti-government view expressed online in an advanced form of electronic agitprop. The corrupt elites of the world will fight to keep their thieving hands on the levers of power. They will seek every possible way to hinder the resistance of those they regard as their lawful prey.
Reading the article. It does seem like so called Journalist self identified opinion formers jelous of their imagined influence.
They maybe don't like that the internet is often a bit more strident "in your face" less repectful and has trolls out there under the bridges. They don't like the rough and tumble.
I guess I also mostly do prefer if we keep it polite and civilised tho. That we have some rules and conventions. I think they are developing.
The internet really does give "a voice to every one not only those marginalised by the elite of opinion formers (most of us) dominating the media and politics."
It is just the elite opinion formers can see it now, and don't like it. They can't fool themselves they are everyman any more. It makes them a little less influential and important. It brings up other opinion formers, new ones also.
Maybe it is the sites I visit, but there seems to be lots of healthy argument, not just bunches of people agreeing that train timetables are the besist thing everrrr.
Posted by: Moggsy | Tuesday, August 28, 2012 at 11:46 AM