Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Terrorizing The Terrorists
Among the many ambiguous terms in the english language, the term 'terrorist' strikes me as being the most pertinent. The term is never clearly defined anywhere. The term is flooded in the media and gobbled up by ignorant Americans who live in fear. But how is this fear taken advantage of? Any person knows that people in fear are most likely to make irrational misinformed decisions. In the case of the American people, September 11th 2001 has scared the American people to believing anything they are told. People of America have also willingly accepted the complete abomination of the United States Constitution called the Patriot act. Not only does the U.S. government benefit from the Patriot act, it effectively extends it's power over it's citizens to an infinite capacity, benefiting from the fear of the american people. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that what happened on 9/11 is not what the government tells us. It is scientifically impossible that a steel reinforced building was brought down by jet fuel. But this is besides the point. My core point is 'What is 9/11?' 9/11 was a event that stimulated the American people to act on impulse and believe the first explanation they were told. Do your research, something is wrong. But when you take a step back and think, 'who benefits when countries are at war?' BANKS! Banks benefit when countries are at war. So wouldn't it be in the best interest of banks to sustain a warlike state of being? Does anyone remember Vietnam? We all are witnesses of history repeating itself, and are willingly allowing it to happen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I really think this is a great thing to bring up especially in regards to the aspects of the mass communication topic and would even like it to expand into today's subject on globalization. This reflects perfectly into how mass communication is used by those in power to extend their influence, especially when people are scared and vunerable after an event like 9/11. After all a politician once said, "You can't ever let a crisis go to waste!" Mass communication is able to swamp and block out even rational information, or even simply any information that may simply be something different. While the journalists report the news that makes us all afraid while two wars continue and the economy is taking a plunge, no one is aware that certain people are making a killing (sometimes literally), politicians are only planning for their re-election and Soldiers are still stuck in the desert 15 months at a time with no instructions and a bad chain of command. Hopefully I'm not sounding too political, but the point is you can get alot done using certain facets of mass communication.
ReplyDeleteAs far as globalization goes, the USA is of course considered a key player in the broad sense. I know from a military perspective that through the USA's policy of what I've heard refered to as "Globo-cop", brings an interesting type of interdependency to mind when thinking about globalization in the sense that this does not always occur pleasantly, or for the interests of both parties in mind. Look into the past at Japan for example. Globalization was forced upon by America and other nations to open up trade, so yes this is still globalization, but it's almost like saying that being robbed is a form of "donating". This of course to a certain extent can be applied to the continued presence of the US in countries nowadays. Bottom line, it's very interesting to see just how varying some of these terms are, and it is important to see all the aspects and considerations rather than plop onto one general term.
-Ian