Questioner
Senior Member
- Nov 26, 2019
- 1,593
- 85
- 50
- Banned
- #41
You didn't say anything.How silly a conspiracy theory - there's no such thing as "owning power", according to Alinsky, it's what one thinks one has.I believe most if not all mass media is a form of "psychological warfare", and to some extent has always been that way, it's nothing "recent" or "Democratic" - the use of propaganda is as old as the Roman empire.
More intelligent people can read books on their own and not allow "short form" media to be their only source of (mis) information.
I doubt that any serious political philosopher who's written a book, whether John Stuart Mill, Russel Kirk, or otherwise, would think that mass media is anything but dumbed down to the lowest common denominator, and is primarily there because it sells and carries a "brand image", not because it's true, good, or informative.
HISTORY is a a series of short- or long-term social hysteria cases skillfully initiated and nourished by those who own power.
Money, for example, is just paper and metal - in practice, it has less power than a loaded gun, however people have faith in money being worth something, and voluntarily participate in economic exchanges - which is where the illusion of the power comes from.
If people stopped using money, it's "power" would cease to exist and it would be reduced to paper and metal, and a loaded gun or knife would have more "practical" power than a billion dollars - no one is "forced" to accept money at all, and any vendor could deny a purchase if he so wished.
Historically speaking, national currency is a recent invention anyway - in the past states or private businesses would issue their own tender, or even further back, people would trade, haggle, and barter (which is still done today, albeit not in the sense you are thinking - this is where the "super rich" make most of their money - from negotiating deals, rather than working for fixed wages).
That's a silly notion, one can't "realize" worthlessness to begin with, since like money, "worth" is merely what someone attributes to something within the context of voluntary associations, exchanges and so on.The period we are going through is no exception
It all started from the moment when a human being realized his worthlessness, helplessness and felt a need to escape the for a dream world.
Most people wouldn't likely believe that a piece of cheese toast which resembles the virgin Mary is "worth" anything, but to a millionaire with a lot of money to blow on trinkets, he made decided it's a collector's item.
So your argument is silly and contradictory, unless you're appealing to some "inherent" type of worth, like the worth a man might have in the eyes of God.
It is, in itself, a historical narrative in the very sense you describe, not to mention contradictory - since you apparently believe it is "morally wrong" to "escape into a dream world" via history, but if man is simply "realizing his helplessness and worthlessness", or some childish notion like that - then no, there is nothing wrong at all with escaping into a dream world, if it works it works.
So even here, not only are you fabricating a history of man inventing history, but are appealing to some inherent moral principle, in which man "shouldn't" escape into a dream world, or man "shouldn't" hold power, or this or that.
But by the very axioms you assert, then there is nothing wrong with either of these things at all.