NationStates Jolt Archive

I found this in an online interview of a major pundit-esque person...

"...It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty. People love the president because he's certain of his choices as a leader, even if the facts that back him up don't seem to exist. It's the fact that he's certain that is very appealing to a certain section of the country. I really feel a dichotomy in the American populace. What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?

Q: You're saying appearances are more important than objective truth?

A: Absolutely. The whole idea of authority—authoritarian is fine for some people, like people who say "Listen to me, and just don't question, and do what I say, and everything will be fine"—the sort of thing we really started to respond to so well after 9/11. 'Cause we wanted someone to be daddy, to take decisions away from us. I really have a sense of [America's current leaders] doing bad things in our name to protect us, and that was okay. We weren't thrilled with Bush because we thought he was a good guy at that point, we were thrilled with him because we thought that he probably had hired people who would fuck up our enemies, regardless of how they had to do it. That was for us a very good thing, and I can't argue with the validity of that feeling.

But that has been extended to the idea that authoritarian is better than authority. Because authoritarian means there's only one authority, and that authority has got to be the President, has got to be the government, and has got to be his allies. What the right-wing in the United States tries to do is undermine the press. They call the press "liberal," they call the press "biased," not necessarily because it is or because they have problems with the facts of the left—or even because of the bias for the left, because it's hard not to be biased in some way, everyone is always going to enter their editorial opinion—but because a press that has validity is a press that has authority. And as soon as there's any authority to what the press says, you question the authority of the government—it's like the existence of another authority..."

I'd never really thought about it in this way before, but it rings true. The fantasy of the "liberal" media has only gained steam. Now, because of the elements mentioned here, anything with the words left, liberal, and democrat, seem to be associated with evil on a level equivalent to Osama, leaving no room for actual debate. Soon enough even calling your left hand "left" will be seen as evil, and all "good, decent folks" will be calling it "my other hand" instead.

Please report to the Ministry of Political Assimilation tomorrow at 9 AM sharp. There you will receive your conditioning, and your injections, and your copies of Ann Coulter's books.

Failure to comply is a violation.

Soon enough even calling your left hand "left" will be seen as evil, and all "good, decent folks" will be calling it "my other hand" instead.
In Biblical times, left handed people were considered evil. Red heads were sluts. Its just the world comming around in the circle of time. Makes sense though, as the Right sure is "aquainted" with the Bible.

It's funny, we used to be more worried about the LEFT for this sort of crap. Passing all of these laws interfering with people's right to be left alone. Some of it was necessary, of course (like compulsory schooling), but a lot of us in the right saw creeping environmental and social control legislation as the thing that would lead to tyranny - "we know better than you do, so do as we say, like a good little drone."

You can just imagine what a lot of the intellectual, non-religious right thinks of George W. Son-of-a-Bush and his Neo-Cons.

I found this in an online interview of a major pundit-esque person...

"...It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty. People love the president because he's certain of his choices as a leader, even if the facts that back him up don't seem to exist. It's the fact that he's certain that is very appealing to a certain section of the country. I really feel a dichotomy in the American populace. What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?

Q: You're saying appearances are more important than objective truth?

A: Absolutely. The whole idea of authority—authoritarian is fine for some people, like people who say "Listen to me, and just don't question, and do what I say, and everything will be fine"—the sort of thing we really started to respond to so well after 9/11. 'Cause we wanted someone to be daddy, to take decisions away from us. I really have a sense of [America's current leaders] doing bad things in our name to protect us, and that was okay. We weren't thrilled with Bush because we thought he was a good guy at that point, we were thrilled with him because we thought that he probably had hired people who would fuck up our enemies, regardless of how they had to do it. That was for us a very good thing, and I can't argue with the validity of that feeling.

But that has been extended to the idea that authoritarian is better than authority. Because authoritarian means there's only one authority, and that authority has got to be the President, has got to be the government, and has got to be his allies. What the right-wing in the United States tries to do is undermine the press. They call the press "liberal," they call the press "biased," not necessarily because it is or because they have problems with the facts of the left—or even because of the bias for the left, because it's hard not to be biased in some way, everyone is always going to enter their editorial opinion—but because a press that has validity is a press that has authority. And as soon as there's any authority to what the press says, you question the authority of the government—it's like the existence of another authority..."

I'd never really thought about it in this way before, but it rings true. The fantasy of the "liberal" media has only gained steam. Now, because of the elements mentioned here, anything with the words left, liberal, and democrat, seem to be associated with evil on a level equivalent to Osama, leaving no room for actual debate. Soon enough even calling your left hand "left" will be seen as evil, and all "good, decent folks" will be calling it "my other hand" instead. Left or Right, it doesn't matter, the portrayal of confidence will win people over. People will listen to the person who speaks confidently and holds themselves with a certain sence of self-confidence.

Left or Right, it doesn't matter, the portrayal of confidence will win people over. People will listen to the person who speaks confidently and holds themselves with a certain sence of self-confidence.
I can't tell if you think this is a good way to run a country or if you're being unbearably cynical.

I can't tell if you think this is a good way to run a country or if you're being unbearably cynical.
You can, however, tell that he's never heard of John Major.

I found this in an online interview of a major pundit-esque person...

"...It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty. People love the president because he's certain of his choices as a leader, even if the facts that back him up don't seem to exist. It's the fact that he's certain that is very appealing to a certain section of the country. I really feel a dichotomy in the American populace. What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?

Q: You're saying appearances are more important than objective truth?

A: Absolutely. The whole idea of authority—authoritarian is fine for some people, like people who say "Listen to me, and just don't question, and do what I say, and everything will be fine"—the sort of thing we really started to respond to so well after 9/11. 'Cause we wanted someone to be daddy, to take decisions away from us. I really have a sense of [America's current leaders] doing bad things in our name to protect us, and that was okay. We weren't thrilled with Bush because we thought he was a good guy at that point, we were thrilled with him because we thought that he probably had hired people who would fuck up our enemies, regardless of how they had to do it. That was for us a very good thing, and I can't argue with the validity of that feeling.

But that has been extended to the idea that authoritarian is better than authority. Because authoritarian means there's only one authority, and that authority has got to be the President, has got to be the government, and has got to be his allies. What the right-wing in the United States tries to do is undermine the press. They call the press "liberal," they call the press "biased," not necessarily because it is or because they have problems with the facts of the left—or even because of the bias for the left, because it's hard not to be biased in some way, everyone is always going to enter their editorial opinion—but because a press that has validity is a press that has authority. And as soon as there's any authority to what the press says, you question the authority of the government—it's like the existence of another authority..."

I'd never really thought about it in this way before, but it rings true. The fantasy of the "liberal" media has only gained steam. Now, because of the elements mentioned here, anything with the words left, liberal, and democrat, seem to be associated with evil on a level equivalent to Osama, leaving no room for actual debate. Soon enough even calling your left hand "left" will be seen as evil, and all "good, decent folks" will be calling it "my other hand" instead.
Freedom fries. Ney, wasn't it?
:rolleyes:

I can't tell if you think this is a good way to run a country or if you're being unbearably cynical.
neither... telling it like it is.

In Biblical times, left handed people were considered evil. Red heads were sluts. Its just the world comming around in the circle of time. Makes sense though, as the Right sure is "aquainted" with the Bible.

Note to self: Find left handed redhead girlfriend.

And yeah; the word "sinister" actually means "left".

I use my left hand for writing and my right hand for everything else; that is the way of satan, oh yes.

Yes.. be afraid. Be very afraid! :eek: :p

for years i've been saying that they are moving worryingly towards orwells vision (though they seem to be doing it in a vague spoof)

in my point of view only the people we lable as mad who have rejected our insane reality are truely sane.

though of course you can't take my word for it.

after all I'm obviously mad.....