Log in

No account? Create an account
10 December 2016 @ 10:20 pm
1) Whether you want to call it the liberal project, or simply the creation of a country in which all the people are free and happy and generally not in danger of want or starvation, it has to be fought for and is always in danger. Too many people in the media and elsewhere seem to think, naievely and in ignorance of history, that once we've got a nice happy country everything will carry on like that.
Whereas a short study of the work it took to get, for example, equal rights for black people in the USA, or health and safety legislation, or schools and hospitals for the entire population here in the UK, or to stop horrendous pollution killing people and ecologies, indicates that such victories are up against perennial factors, like greed, hunger for power etc. So as we see in the USA, the greedy and power hungry have gained control and are planning on doing everything to ensure more money and power for them and their friends, no matter what the cost to everyone else.
See also Russia in the last 30 years for more examples.
The election results in the USA are the result of decades of well funded activity by said greedy and power hungry people to utilise the openness of society against itself, and to encourage divisiveness and all the old evils which too many people assume aren't around any more. I wasn't particularly surprised by the rise in xenophobia and nastiness post-brexit, but too many people in their own little bubbles have been.

2) One of the reasons for the resurgence of nastiness is the media dropping all ideals of honesty and accuracy (Seen with the way they failed to properly compare Trump and Clinton's actual policies and spent more time talking about her emails) and taken an approach which is based on pushing the most red meat high impact stuff they can (e.g. all these stories about immigrants in the Mail etc; note too that the murderer of Joe Cox had a big Mail habit). This has come about under pressures of commercial greed and in the case of individuals, because they want to make as high an impact as possible. And what better way than portraying someone in the worst possible light?
Meanwhile, it turns out, as if any sensible person hadn't already noticed, that twitter and facebook are good for spreading and encouraging nasty ideas and ideals, and also stochastic terrorism. They are also useful ways of keeping in touch and spreading good ideas, but I think all this would balance out.
Except that the mainstream media is bankrupt in every way. So we're left with a fog of poor reporting based on a handful of media conglomerates who basically shape the news to fit their own agendas, whereas in the good old days we did have more variety of sources who were beholden to different power bases, so although many of them lied at various times, there seemed to be a better chance of actually getting the real news out there. Now though, everything is so centralised, that that is impossible.