The Sloth
13th April 2004, 13:36
I've only recently been getting into radical politics, so please excuse this if it sounds a little elementary. Anyway, these are some of my observations...
When I was reading George Jackson's Blood in my Eye a few months ago, there was a section on fascism, and then another section calling America "fascist." He argued that, in America, we are exposed to the most sophisticated, the most evolved form of fascism ever devised. Back then, when I wasn't really interested in radical politics, it kind of only went over my head a little bit, and I just dismissed it.
But, by now, it makes more and more sense to me. I'm sure many individuals realize that America is pretty much run by the corporations that it harbors...they control domestic issues, foreign policy, public opinion, etc.
The hierarchy of large corporations, also, have very limited mobility. The individuals at the bottom can make suggestions, propose to do certain things, etc. but they do not have any democratic control because, in reality, slaves can also make the same identical suggestions but it is never insured that the calls will be heeded. The bourgeoisie purposely keep unemployment constant because the second a company has 100% employment, every employee must be listened to, or a fraction will be able to quit and they will never be replaced. But since employment is unstable, and is not at 100%, there are always fears...the insecurities capitalism forces so many to harbor are not only played on, but reinforced with these fear tactics.
On the subject of media control...basically, public opinion is shaped by the media. It is obvious, however, that different parts of the media are owned by different individuals with agendas. Some of these agendas are liberal, some conservative...but seriously, what is the difference between a liberal bourgeois and a conservative one, considering that the issue of foreign policy will be similar (although admittedly not identical) and this reality is camoflauged because less important, more domestic issues are brought to the front instead. This makes the public believe that there is a "choice," but realistically speaking, it's not MUCH of a choice (you see where I'm going with the SOPHISTICATED fascism?)
If a controversial issue is brought to the forefront, and the individual is not speaking popular opinion, then it is silenced. Well, not literally, but consider this: if an individual supports an issue but his opinion is not widely accepted in America (regardless if it's accepted in Europe, for example), then he has to depend on secondary media outlets that aren't as popular. Even if this secondary media outlet (such as Common Dreams) actually DOES reach the masses, usually by that time, the masses are so brainwashed on the issue by the other, more popular media outlets, that they simply dismiss the opinion and form a reason in their head why they dismiss it so fast (such as, "that guy is crazy, etc. etc.")
So, when the corporations control the media, and when the corporations more or less control our government, what is the difference between GOVERNMENT control of our lives versus CORPORATE control of our lives? Just a difference in names, is all it is..."same sh*t, different toilet," as Ras Kass would say.
Really, though, what is the difference? The government currently operates more or less a little bit independent of the public, and corporations operate even more independently...both are relatively inaccessible to the masses, anyway.
Anyway, that's it right there.
When I was reading George Jackson's Blood in my Eye a few months ago, there was a section on fascism, and then another section calling America "fascist." He argued that, in America, we are exposed to the most sophisticated, the most evolved form of fascism ever devised. Back then, when I wasn't really interested in radical politics, it kind of only went over my head a little bit, and I just dismissed it.
But, by now, it makes more and more sense to me. I'm sure many individuals realize that America is pretty much run by the corporations that it harbors...they control domestic issues, foreign policy, public opinion, etc.
The hierarchy of large corporations, also, have very limited mobility. The individuals at the bottom can make suggestions, propose to do certain things, etc. but they do not have any democratic control because, in reality, slaves can also make the same identical suggestions but it is never insured that the calls will be heeded. The bourgeoisie purposely keep unemployment constant because the second a company has 100% employment, every employee must be listened to, or a fraction will be able to quit and they will never be replaced. But since employment is unstable, and is not at 100%, there are always fears...the insecurities capitalism forces so many to harbor are not only played on, but reinforced with these fear tactics.
On the subject of media control...basically, public opinion is shaped by the media. It is obvious, however, that different parts of the media are owned by different individuals with agendas. Some of these agendas are liberal, some conservative...but seriously, what is the difference between a liberal bourgeois and a conservative one, considering that the issue of foreign policy will be similar (although admittedly not identical) and this reality is camoflauged because less important, more domestic issues are brought to the front instead. This makes the public believe that there is a "choice," but realistically speaking, it's not MUCH of a choice (you see where I'm going with the SOPHISTICATED fascism?)
If a controversial issue is brought to the forefront, and the individual is not speaking popular opinion, then it is silenced. Well, not literally, but consider this: if an individual supports an issue but his opinion is not widely accepted in America (regardless if it's accepted in Europe, for example), then he has to depend on secondary media outlets that aren't as popular. Even if this secondary media outlet (such as Common Dreams) actually DOES reach the masses, usually by that time, the masses are so brainwashed on the issue by the other, more popular media outlets, that they simply dismiss the opinion and form a reason in their head why they dismiss it so fast (such as, "that guy is crazy, etc. etc.")
So, when the corporations control the media, and when the corporations more or less control our government, what is the difference between GOVERNMENT control of our lives versus CORPORATE control of our lives? Just a difference in names, is all it is..."same sh*t, different toilet," as Ras Kass would say.
Really, though, what is the difference? The government currently operates more or less a little bit independent of the public, and corporations operate even more independently...both are relatively inaccessible to the masses, anyway.
Anyway, that's it right there.