12 November 2010
Santa Ana, CA
So the new rift dividing the informing class and those who are informed by them is the
making and refuting of comparative equality between information outlets - left and right,
and what passes these days for information-as-a-commodity whereby this citezenry is
to be either wisened or worsened. One side is handing out grapes in a bowl (some are
plump and juicy and some are spoiled and overripe if not rotten) but the other side is
handing out pits, stems and dirt clods. The true distinction is between news and
propaganda. Information is neither good or bad, wrong or right - it is either false or it is
true. Those who rely upon truth may use it to their benefit or ignore it to their own peril
when called upon for citation. Those who rely on falsities which reinforce their prejudices
and ignorance deserve only ridicule and shame.
The flash-point for the current debate is The Daily Show's Jon Stewart and how he sees
little if any difference (as an example) between a nationwide tea party town-hall
disruption campaign against Democratic representatives, [motivated by organized
lobbying groups], and a series of Code Pink direct actions against a sitting President
(prosecuting illegal wars and propagating illegitimate legal theories for their justification)
and against his wars admittedly because he wanted to be a 'war president'.
Of course the nation is polarized. Both of the above instances were cited to illuminate the critical issues over which there
would be rational debate in a civil society, but they are in no way equal as to tactical
efficiency, severity of what is being protested and the necessity of such action in this
country at this time given these circumstances. Code Pink was pointing out that the man
sitting in the White House was contemporaneously prosecuting an illegal war, torturing
prisoners of that war and lying at every turn about it - they were putting themselves at
risk of arrest and prosecution to end a series of practices which if done at all constitute
serious criminality at the highest levels of government. Tea baggers were protesting the
government's attempt to provide them (indeed all citizens) with a health care program
which if done correctly would have cost them very little or even save them money once
enacted - they vehemently opposed the state's well-meaning legislative act and militated
against their own best interests.
These weren't the only similarities that Mr. Stewart saw in such dim light, but indicative
of how, in the search for truth, one can hold a lamp out, appear to bear light that others
may see, and remain, (on this issue at least), in total darkness himself. George W. Bush
was and is a war criminal and needs to be (if not prosecuted for it) - reminded of it at
every given occasion. Code Pink has only helped to illustrate that fact. Health care
coverage is a necessity of modern life and the costs - if left unchecked - threaten to
bankrupt us all including the healthy. Tea baggers, because they were organized and
brought to a boil by persons, media and political institutions whose only interest was in
maintaining the status quo on behalf of big money donors to the GOP, only illuminated
their own stupidity and the nation would have been much better served if they weren't so
blissfully ignorant of what they were protesting and whose interests would be served
should they be successful.
If a soldier fires on both sides in a war, a player puts the ball into the goal at both ends
of the court, or a runner cuts across the field and claims victory by crossing the
starting line last, good order and discipline would have that soldier, player or runner off
the team as a rule because he cannot be relied upon to perform the mission to which he
has been assigned. True, you get your comedy from one guy, your news from another
and your vitriol from yet another, but, just because those lines have gotten blurred in
today's media culture is no justification to have them muddled in your own mind. The
standard deviation is between those who would move us all forward (or at least say they
would) and those who would have us all retreat to a time when only a select few could lay
claim to the promises of liberty, equality and justice (even while denying that that is
what they are up to).
If a man is being knifed by a masked asailant, it is reasonable to assume a crime is being
committed. The one with the knife is not being victimized by the one who is being
stabbed. There is no moral or legal equivalency demanding anything other than that the
crime be stopped and that the criminal be prosecuted. The man being stabbed need not
appeal to the better nature of the slasher nor is it not a sign of intellectual integrity to
give credence to the side doing the bloodletting, while the other side is still being bled.
Mr. Stewart has been on television for close to thirty years off and on, comparatively
well paid and does not deserve to be hailed as a hero or derided as a scoundrel unless
that is the role he chooses to play at the time. He is, after all effecting a portrayal of
whatever role his writers have crafted for him. When he is not 'acting' he then is
submitting his words and efforts to popular evaluation and critical analysis. At his rally,
he sought to "restore sanity" by speaking of that which we as citizens have in common
with each other regardless of political affiliation. On his show, he seeks to coax laughter
from his audience over the parodied 'newsiness' of the show's format and the
absurdities as he sees them of our public discourse. But, as a cultural 'player' he cannot
claim neutrality and ideological purity at the same time. For his rally, he should be
applauded. For his show, he should be commended, but for farting in the elevator while
bemoaning the foul atmosphere, he should have his ass plugged for lack of humility,
decency and honesty. That would be true equivalency being objectively and subjectively
consistent showing neither fear nor favor. - Beto
Oops!
Oops, you forgot something.