The opinion makers in our country have never been something that the world envies. Individuals who work in the pay of the parties in order to instill false certainties in public opinion, information, and invented entirely disconnected from reality, aiming only to produce consensus towards this or that political trend. The intellectual dishonesty is sometimes so obvious that it is not even perceived as something wrong and objectionable, on the contrary, some people are even proud to support a partisan, one who openly sided, militant and fanatical. The more you do the more combative and cheering for you, the climate that characterizes the political stage, but not only that, in Italy came to the showdown of the decline. They are intellectuals of nomenclature that were already out of place in the years of the Cold War and that not only persist in the limestone still scene in person, but they opened the doors to the descendants and successors not on merit but based on loyalty to the cause, soldiers are able to carry on the ideological battle until the revolution took place and made history.
There are several ways of fooling the people. For example, surveys are used to exploit the known and natural human tendency to conform to the dominant and adapt to what he considers to be the majority opinion. If you say that 90% think that way, you get the most people deem more appropriate to think so. The surveys are designed to bring out a table for a specific prevailing opinion. Or take ten surveys and publish only those that provide results that give you reason, and others throw them away. The same applies to the statistics. For example, say that only 30% of crimes committed by misshapen dwarfs, and conveys the idea that the deformed dwarfs are good people because 70% of crimes committed by dwarfs is not deformed, but you forget to say that the deformed dwarf are only 10% of the population, which means that the deformed dwarf in reality three times compared to other offenders. Tricks are stupid but they are used every day with impunity. Another way of using opinion-makers to make fun of is to disseminate false information. Or real news from where you draw false conclusions. O interpreted real news in an artificial way. They say for example that there is no evidence that the drug was really drugged, had only smoked grass, there was no pears, and that in any case it is doubtful that he was driving the vehicle that hit the child because the attacker got away without stopping to provide assistance, but also admitted that he was drugged and driving does not mean that all drugs are dangerous to drive. Make these absurd arguments to defend their political views, in this case is not entirely hypothetical, the danger of soft drugs. Or read a story like this: 'Alien life has been found at the bottom of a lake that feeds on arsenic metabolized. "Totally false. They use a real news, a bacterium that lives in an environment saturated with arsenic, and transform anything to support that there is alien life, which can metabolize arsenic.
Then there are the news and ignore those exaggerated in the light of issues used to achieve political consensus. Take for example racism, a topic much used these days to move votes. Everything that happens here is that the specter of racism comes out of this or that, to the point that one shit on the idea of \u200b\u200bbeing accused of racism because they become the target of the pacifist non-racist ready to engage in violence against the alleged racist and no one can accuse them of fascism and squads. This is the perversity that takes place in the Italy of political stage, consensus from fans. It does fit the rage, and if you mess then we will run away so much better than on the dead body of the dead is still hot launch for the political advantage and eat above, throwing gasoline on the fire other. This happens when you do not respect the truth, do not tell the reality, not using your brain thinking about the issues but you prefer to create factions and disarray, fomenting hatred against an 'enemy' created in the table, for example racist in this case but the possible labels are many and varied, racist is only one among many. Turn someone who has committed the only error you do not share your political opinions into a monster that is not only permissible but also laudable target and destroy. Once you have created this uncivilized climate witch-hunt here is that you can magnify the news you are comfortable in and out of those that bother you. Invoke the risk of social conflicts, invoking the threat of violence in the streets when you were just you to encourage and facilitate the use of a dialectic of oppression and suppression, from a position of goodness and reason a priori part of your policy. Staying in the example of racism, if a Muslim slaughters his daughter for wearing jeans can not say anything, even according to some it must be said without adding any Muslim man or his country of origin, because otherwise it means to be racist, contrary to ' integration, xenophobes, fascists, warmongers, and also stupid, crude and ignorant so that we are lawful because even if you insult that insults you're from the political right. Shaking the scarecrow of the danger, the threat to unleash retaliation, with the excuse that you want to avoid unnecessary tensions and violence, he avoids further, it avoids taking positions contrary to those of the more inclined to use the logic of violence to assert political opinion. The civil and democratic debate that characterizes a mature and developed society is essentially abolished by a logic of reason and a priori unilateral typical of dictatorships based absolutist religious or ideological extremism.
There is no denying that there is this climate of subtle coercion media, justified and shared intellectual pressure, propaganda becomes threatening in the way it is practiced outside of the information function of media. The paradox is that this happens in a media landscape owned by the political party that is a victim of this bad habit of creating anti-democratic view that seeks to educate (re-educate) the population rather than to provide tools for rational criticism. The political party which in theory is the master of the media is one that actually suffered the effects of a media machine under total political control of others. If you make a list of opinion makers will easily notice that the list is almost entirely composed of people deployed from same side. Those who do not side with the part is automatically disqualified and de-legitimized, as if only a fool would choose the team for not fans of anyone and not one for which all cheering. But then discover that the silent majority, the one that says nothing and does not write anything 'wrong to vote' (every time I hear this phrase I can not help but be amazed, as we find the courage to tell someone that 'wrong 'to vote and continue to call themselves democrats?), which is immune to all efforts by the propaganda machine to brainwash the masses. Another paradox: the blame for what a kind of phantasmagoric hypnotic wave projected by the mere existence of a private television station, with its broadcasts and tons of junk advertising. And yet it is stated that the key to success is to go from house to house to spread ... what? The program no, no. Perhaps the word religion-church party? Perhaps the list of clues to recognize the enemy? Conformity is a word that scares me so deep, especially when it is insane as what unites our current opinion makers.
0 comments:
Post a Comment