Centrism certainly is hypocritical stuff, Isn't it? You never know where
yon lemming will stand from one day(/year) to the next. It's
outcome-based.
Of course, you're a centrist, too. Just like Uncle Obama. Your brand of
centrism demonstrates itself at different points in the debate. Most
notably, in the attempts to keep "the middle class" propped up. If this
were a non-outcome-based ideologue, then the attitude would be, "If the
middle class can't survive, without handouts, then fuck them. And, good
riddance". But, "like" the right, this platform carefully crafts its
issues to revolve around the middle class, so that they are the very
definition of any issue. It's always about how those non-productive little
losers are doing.
Minority and bimbo issues aren't exceptions, because the interests of the
middle class are at the true heart of giving those groups a leg up, too.
The middle class not only wants the money, which keeps those groups
subsisting as its personal serfs, to come from the rich, instead of from
the middle class, but, as bourgeois business owners, the middle craftily
figures on cheaply maintaining them as a nice, little pool of cheap labor,
to support its own lifestyle, there in its suburbs and more affluent
neighborhoods, while the uneducated keep going home to its cheap-shit slums
at the end of each day. ...never, improving it's
lot....just....exploited.....by the...."bleeding" heart.....liberal
The middle is willing to invest in (Ie. to exploit) the uneducated, because
they tend to be chump change to the rich. They won't bother with them, but
do want them controlled and out of the way, if only to contain the spread
of crime and disease. But, for middle-classers (especially, college
educated professionals), there's a good return on the investment, in
grooming and hiring these people. And, therefore, a comfortable little
living to be made. The rich capitalist recruits developed-talent from the
middle class capitalist. In turn, the middle (liberal, included) recruits
sub-developed talent from (some of) the disadvantaged groups.
THAT's what BOTH parties are fighting over. There's no magical, or
ideological, "truth" in this. It's a purely pragmatical truth. *Both*
parties are pragmatists. So, so what if, toward the end of the Bush terms
and after the inauguration, everyone becomes anti-Bush/Republican/War?
That's politics. Principles are for ideologues. Americans aren't honest
enough to be ideologues. All that this is, is another plug for some local
alternative media to serve its own business interests.
Well, the Buffalo Coalition for Progressive Media had it's shot. Why did
it go under? Was it expecting the big, evil corporate owned media to start
investing in it (funding it), like PBS, despite itself ...only, to be
(justly) vilified by it? Was it expecting the big, stuffy CEOs to start
snapping their fingers to some background Partridge Family music, while
giving their grass roots brand politics a listen, and it would be like old
times, again ..."partnerships" everywhere?
That's the inherent flaw in propping up the middle class, anymore. They
just don't get it. The whole class is a money loser. They've long been
overpaid and underproductive, on top of being wasteful. And, on top of
that is the fact that they have a pretty cutthroat, class-survival/warfare
mentality, of their own, to compete with the global capitalists.
Soooo... if I was a global capitalist, then, Why in hell would I invest in
some farcical birdshit, ecofriendly, "community" oriented venture, that was
not only criticizing me for working people to death in other countries, for
a dollar a day, and supporting the right wing juntas that destroy their
countries, but - behind the scenes - it's true purpose was to be part of a
pleasant little local market for the affluent local teachers and female
healthcare workers/lawyers, just so that they and their brats could discuss
the evils of it all in some trendy cafe...?
...Because they're the ones who have the money to buy my blood products?
Well, sooner or later, hypocrisy catches up with itself. After everyone
catches on, and they stop giving and start taking, the dirty system breaks
down. That's where we're at now, and Obama's volunteerism isn't going to
reverse it. The do-gooder liberal has never really bettered anyone's life,
but her/his own, and few people have any serious faith left in band-aid
programs. In doing so, she/he has wasted a lot of the greedy investor's
money, who isn't fooled by the materialism behind all of the transparent
"green" hype. (You can't bullshit a bullshitter).
Hahaha! *That's* the truth! You're in DEEP SHIT, Homer and Marge! The
BILL is now due, and there is NO stable, "sound" economy, as Phil Graham
bullshitted you. The *only* informed decision you have left to make is how
you're going to SUCK it... :D
Getting a Grip |
Between the left and right lies the middleby Michael I. Niman |
|
|
The Truth
The motto at WNED, our local National Public Radio news station, is “Somewhere between the left and the right lies the truth—that’s where you’ll find us.” I’ve always been annoyed by this trite bit of self-aggrandizement. It’s not just because it’s silly. It’s because the truth is the truth. And the truth doesn’t reside between the left and the right. The truth is not a political or economic ideology or position. It’s the truth. It’s honesty and accuracy. Period.
This motto isn’t just some innocent stupidity repeated ad nauseam. It’s dangerous. It subtly sends out a loaded political attack message supporting one position, centrism, while surreptitiously dismissing other positions as lies, and their adherents as liars. The fact that this motto endlessly soldiers on over the years means it is largely unquestioned, save for the complaints of a nitpicking journalism professor. It’s accepted. People don’t think about it and they don’t question it.
Lies our teachers tell us
In his now classic book, Lies My Teacher Told Me, sociologist James Loewen examines high school American history textbooks and how they whitewash American history—for example, skipping unsavory bits like the cannibalism at Jamestown and the robbing of Indian graves at Plymouth, while rationalizing wars of expansion and sugar-coating anti-native genocide. But the worse crime the high school texts commit, according to Loewen, is to simplify the dynamic field of history into a serious of simple “facts.” There “were 10 million Native Americans at the time of the Columbian invasion”—not 100 million as many anthropologists argue, or two million as historians once claimed, but 10 million. That’s the answer: Memorize it and spit it back on the test.
Under this pedagogy, history ceases to be a discussion or an evolving set of arguments, but a set of simple facts to be memorized—a truth chosen by a textbook editor from a selection of many convincing arguments. The issue here isn’t whether there were a dozen or a billion people living in the Americas at time of conquest—that argument will continue to evolve. The issue is that students are completely unaware that there is an argument. The random truths, like the outright lies that social studies teachers wittingly and unwittingly spread, are deadly because they short circuit inquiry and critical thinking. History becomes a set of facts. The wrong answers become lies because they go against the conventional wisdom.
Obamamania
Let’s look back on some very recent history—the giddy hoopla leading up to the inauguration of Barack Obama. Corporate news outlets broadcast a daily countdown of George W. Bush’s last days in office. Everyone was on board. When inauguration day came, the media trained their cameras on Bush’s helicopter as it evacuated Washington to the roar of two million revelers. We all supported Barack Obama—always. We all always resisted the Bush agenda. We were all always against the Iraq War. We all knew the economy was a house of cards. We were all always concerned about global warming. We never bought into that WMD story. We never voted for Republicans who promised to make us richer. This is the truth.
This whole celebration, like WNED’s conception of the truth, also annoys me. That’s because if the media actually did their job and engaged in critical reporting and fact-checking, back when it actually mattered, we wouldn’t have an Iraq war. If the people who are so giddily celebrating the end of the Bush era actually resisted the Bush agenda, back when their voices were needed, there wouldn’t have been a second Bush term—nor a first.
If media outlets like WNED actually made space for critical views on the economy, back when it counted, perhaps balancing their pro-investor programming with labor and sustainability oriented content, we possibly would have sobered up before our economy careened out of control into a black hole. But the corporate media didn’t allow for competing truths to collide into dynamic arguments open to both the left and the right. We just got one point of view, one argument, which ironically is the same right-wing economic policy argument the media is now deriding as flawed. The historic massive 1999 “Battle in Seattle” protests against corporate globalization were covered as a sporting event, devoid of any context—cops swinging clubs against the heads of union members and students who appeared in Seattle for no apparent reason other than to be savagely beaten.
Prescient nuts
The problem is that critical voices can only be celebrated in hindsight after being proven right; they couldn’t be allowed to enter the debate at a time when hearing them was crucial. It turns out the peaceniks were right about the war, the lefties were right about the global economy, and the tree-huggers were right about the environment. Who knew?
That’s another problem with WNED’s notion that “somewhere between the left and the right lies the truth.” There is no left on the radio in Buffalo. So what exactly are they saying? When we talk about the left side of the political spectrum, we’re talking about socialism and radical programs supporting social welfare with communist and democratic-socialist variants. When we speak of the right, we’re generally referring to unfettered capitalism with libertarian and corporate fascist variants.
Our mainstream media doesn’t support outright fascism at this junction in history (though the Hearst media chain supported Hitler in the early 1930 and the New York Times and the Associated Press both had a soft spot for Mussolini). Throughout my lifetime, however, it’s been a loyal cheerleader for the corporate capitalist agenda that the new conventional wisdom acknowledges has “suddenly” brought us to the brink of economic and environmental collapse. The mainstream media has made sure to marginalize as “radical” the few critical voices that hang on ghettoized in the “alternative media.” TV and radio is replete with dozens of shows like PBS’s Nightly Business Report—news geared toward celebrating the unfettered accumulation of wealth at almost any cost to society by a small minority of privileged investors. There is no regularly scheduled socialist counterpoint. There are no deep ecologists hosting news shows.
While we might never get to hear them, though, we get to hear about them. They’re ecologists, leftist economists, civil libertarians, feminists, humanists, and other assorted outcasts. They’re not to be taken seriously, even though history has proven them reliably prescient. The media dismisses them as radicals and wackos. They live in mysterious places, like “the left,” where the truth never goes.
So let’s get this one simple fact of physics right. Mike to WNED: Listen up! Somewhere between the left and the right lies the center. The truth is the truth. And lies are lies. And only an informed critical thinking population can sort them out.
Dr. Michael I. Niman is a professor of Journalism and Media Studies at Buffalo State College. His previous columns are at www.artvoice.com, archived at www.mediastudy.com and available globally through syndication.
Reader Comments
Turin 05 Feb 2009, 19:24
Brantwood 06 Feb 2009, 15:48
In the 1920s, two geniuses-of-broadcasting emerged in the English-speaking
world to capture the gigantic potential of the new medium of radio. In
Great Britain, the man was John Reith, and he was a visionary in his grasp
of the fabulous potential for education, civics, edification; in the United
States, the man was William J. Paley, and he was a visionary in his grasp
of the fabulous potential for making money. They were both right. But the
definitive difference between the two nations in 2008 is that in Britain
(the history of television has been essentially the same as radio's) there
is a judicious mix of broadcasting both commercial, money-making,
entertainment AND public service broadcasting of an extremely sophisticated
quality; whereas in the U.S., essentially, we have ONLY money-making
broadcasting. NOTHING will be broadcast that will endanger the broadcasting
corporation's income stream (and that means PBS/NPR "membership" and
fund-raising campaigns, as well as dollars paid for commercials everywhere
else.) THIS - the NEED to make money - is the KEY fact. If the US Corporation for Public Broadcasting (the umbrella for PBS and NPR etc.) had an annual budget similar to that of the BBC (on a per capita basis) instead of an annual budget of about $140,000,000 (One-hundred-and-forty millions dollars) it would have one of about 30,000,000,000 (Thirty BILLION dollars.) Poor old WNED does not have any equivalent in British broadcasting - there are no "local franchises" trying to figure out how much of what is produced centrally by the BBC or Channel 4 (also a public medium, with commercials sold at the going rate) should be shown in Sheffield or Birmingham. Bear in mind, please, that EVERY developed industrial democracy has its equivalent of the BBC. It is a "given" that public broadcasting in such countries as Australia, Japan, Canada, and all the countries of Western Europe, is not an arm of the government. It makes a HUGE difference. And because the difference is huge, it means that an American version of the BBC or NHK or RAI or CBC will NEVER now come into existence. In this matter all politicians - ALMOST all - are the same. Ultimately what the nice people at WNED-TV do is of very little consequence indeed; their choices are very restricted. The GREAT event will be the establishment of a "BBC/Channel 4" for English-speaking people world-wide, with a mission/mandate to provide as much of the truth as can be found on political/social/economic affairs in every country it covers. As far as technology goes, that could happen right now. BUT...
Dane Hewitt 06 Feb 2009, 16:50
It's obvious who's really from the area and who isn't, including who's just
a shill.
Turin 06 Feb 2009, 21:00
A savvy observation ...if I may offer the compliment. But, there's yet another "truth", behind it. The correctness of said observation is due to a dirty little secret: This individual is, actually, someone who has carried his debate with me from another set of forums ...from where he and his professional comrades forfeited a debate. (Which, they were passionate and emotional in regards, too. But, which they were long in the losing). He has no interest in these local affairs. It's simply stuck in his(/their) craw that he couldn't best me without cheating. His intention, here, is really just to step on my "turf", so to speak ...free of commensurate censorship... because he's both a coward and he believes in cowardice as a legitimate expression of Darwinian class warfare. ...That's what's *really* been behind the disruption. ;D
Michael 06 Feb 2009, 23:37
There's no doubt that the days of the middleclass are over. That segment
of society exists off of the fat of empire which is based on exploitation
abroad and lots of class oppression. A leisure class that is so wasteful
needs war to keep the cheap booty flowing back home. But empires die with
their mobs and the third world frontiers needed for exploitation are
becoming scarce. The U.S. simply can't have its luxurious standard of
living anymore and the fat to trim has to come from the middle. This talk
about judiciously subsidizing business oriented culture is private school
horseshit. The fact that Britain has a long track record doing it
parallels the same era of life for middleclass Americans. Both countries
are doing shitty now and if Brits weren't so cultural -unlike Americans-
and the BBS wasn't so deeply entrenched for so many of them then it would
be pulled too. Who would it serve? The people who expect high wages and a
Netflix lifestyle for light work and lots of credit and are driving this
country broke. The idea of partnerships is definitely kaput. The numbers
just don't work.
Albert 07 Feb 2009, 20:14
Albert Einstein: Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth
and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.
Shelly 07 Feb 2009, 20:56
Nice post Michael :)
Byrn 08 Feb 2009, 09:00
Hehehe what a pathetic tactic. Just shut up and stop thinking everyone or
you're fools and will all go to hell for arrogance. The liberals have now
got religion.
Lakiesha 10 Feb 2009, 01:06
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090202_its_not_going_to_be_ok/
Doug 10 Feb 2009, 09:40
A course of action is required. We need to exert sustained pressure on the
local public stations to present leftist programing- namely, Amy Goodman's
Democracy Now. One by one the premier public stations across the state are
adding this and other Pacifica shows. The precedent has already been set.
Buffalo just needs to rise to statewide standards. The NED catchphrase has grated on me since I moved here a year ago. I'm so glad to see it so articulately dressed down. We should put the heat on their programers as of the reading of this article.
Dan 10 Feb 2009, 10:30
_Leftist Humanities Professor Takes Issue with Media Bias_ In an alternative, leftist newspaper this week, leftist professor Mike Niman condemned the local National Public Radio station’s motto as biased. “The truth is not in the center,” Dr. Niman has observed, “It is clearly on the left.” According to Mike Niman, all media appears to have a tremendous pro-right bias when viewed from a stark leftist position. The only difference between Dr. Niman and those with whom he might disagree is that he holds that his political beliefs are unquestionably correct. “Since peaceniks, lefties, and treehuggers have been unequivocally validated in all their political and economic claims, we can all safely agree that the national discourse ought to consist of little more than the prostration of all those holding any opposing viewpoints.” Dr. Niman proclaimed, “The mere persistence of apprehensions of truth dissimilar to mine signifies that moneyed interests are actively seeking to deny the glaringly obvious correctness of my infallible conception of human affairs.” Dr. Niman declined to comment when asked whether such an observation commits the ad hominem, appeal to motive. “I guess I just don’t get it; I have no sense of his ideal positive configurations with respect to governance or cultural configuration,” a local reader remarked, “It seems like he just bitches about everything all the time.”
Jamie 10 Feb 2009, 12:39
The schizo is back.
I♥Obama 11 Feb 2009, 02:58
Screw Amy Goodman. We need state media. State media is the only way to
get the truth and debunk the lies of private media. Private media and
subsidized social pap are both tabloid shit because they're both determined
by self interest. Fuck self interest. Serve the common good and we'll get
truth. State media works every time.
Turin
11 Feb 2009, 16:03
Ain't it...? Most people are getting tired of the status quo, and we're about to see another fundamental change within the establishment. In addition to the petite bourgeois going the way of the dinosaur, there is going to be some fundamental restructuring in the geo-global picture. This will result in a vast improvement. This is major necessary. The societies of our planet are caught within an impasse of stupidity and inefficiency. This impasse is caused by the synthesis of old cultures with technological and organizational (civilizing) advances, which serve as a working system for a few lazy, unambitious classes. The current advances have not been accompanied by the commensurate growth necessary for the social maturity and mental development required to evolve into something more than modern day cave people who are simply banging away, at each other, on keyboards and machines as more sophisticated ways of grunting the same messages at each other that they could do much more effectively with sticks, stones and pagan mating rituals. The most pain in this restructuring will, of course, be for those who are the most primitive among us. The ones who and have carved out comfy little non-thinking existences for themselves ....pretty much, doing little more than using up resources to make more of themselves and to keep change and improvements from occurring for the greater good, using every hypocritical noble cop-out at their disposal. Now, the system is correcting itself in a way that those bottom feeders didn't think could occur, by excluding them via natural selection. ...I've very heartened by this process. I daily look forward to further developments, as they arrive. Leave a Comment:
|
|
Issue Navigation> Issue Index > v8n6 (week of Thursday, February 5, 2009) > Between the left and right lies the middle This Week's Issue • Artvoice Daily • Events Calendar • Classifieds |
Subscribe 