Just a quick note this Sunday on the "oddness of things" and what leaders say and what it seems to really mean. Today, I read that President Obama (reported by the AFP) was speaking at Hampton University in Hampton, VA. And in his speech, he was complaining about the age of free information and the technology of the day. He put iPads in with Xboxes and iPods and spoke about how in the light of these technologies (which he says that he does not know how to use), that we are living when information is more for entertainment than for education. He went on to complain how people who really do not know what they are talking about are able to share their erroneous views with the public, and many times they catch on even though they are not true. He thought that this was a threat to democracy. Okay... this struck me as being very odd.
One wonders if he is trying to be the 'CHAMPION OF TRUTH', lifting a standard against those who would dare to lie to us! This is coming from a politician that used every trick known in his Chicago-brand politics to pass a Health Care Bill that the vast majority of the country screamed not to pass. This comes from a man who makes jokes about the laws in Arizona, not taking into consideration the common-place murders, kidnappings (316 in Phoenix alone in 2009 connected to over the border drug trafficking) and mayhem that the drug trade coming over the border is causing there (to the point that until 2009, suspects with less than 500 pounds of narcotics were not prosecuted due to the high amounts of illegals caught). As the Governor of Arizona shared with a video to President Obama, nobody in Arizona is laughing. The Obama Administration is not coming across really as the champions of truth over the lies of others... harrumph... we shall let that one lie where it is, and go on.
Mr. Obama seems to be concerned that information is shared too freely, and that people that the powers that be deem irresponsible are able to actually share their ideas with the world. Uh... this reminds me of something. It was in that "Constitution thing"... the Bill of Rights or something... what was it now? Uh... uh.... Freedom of Speech?!? Oh yeah, that's it!
But honestly, it would seem that freedom of speech is not the only part of the First Amendment that gives some of the "Powers that Be" some concern... but that is the one being addressed today by our president today at Hampton University. Could it be that blogs like this one might not be appreciated by some? Could it be that the real problem is a "lack of control" by the government? Could it be that the free access of information that is not controlled or shaped by the government would help people make a more informed and unbiased judgment on the condition of their world and what is really going on?
I remember when President George W. Bush was president. I need to preface this by saying that I am not overjoyed by the Iraq War myself. I think I have a different take on it than a lot of people, but it grieves me that any way at any time becomes necessary. And it is even more grievous when there might have been a way around war and it is not taken. But that is another topic...
on this one, I noticed this. The press only covered parts of what was happening. And the press told us to hate Mr. Bush. The press told us that even when it was the act of others, it was still Mr. Bush's fault. The press told us that GWB was the root of all evil on Planet Earth and that if he could only be removed, peace and prosperity would come to the planet and the environment would be fixed. Uh... even though I am not exactly a "fan" of Mr. Bush, I found myself defending him at times because people seemed insane in their hatred of him. People blamed him for things that could not possibly be his fault, and it became irrational. I would find myself defending him because their hatred for him was on the insane level, and he could not have possibly been guilty of what they were saying (even though as I said, I was not exactly a fan myself). I recognized that the PROPAGANDA MACHINE was at work shaping the common sheeple's mind into thinking that he was evil... just accept what is offered on the other side when the time comes.
Well, the sheeple did, and what they accepted was a man who has clear Socialist Politics (that was not particularly hidden), and had the most liberal voting record at the time (also a matter of record if you cared to look). People who called themselves moderates and many conservatives voted for him (though they are complaining the loudest right now as he has had record low poll points) because they had been manipulated by the media machine into thinking that this was the way. Mr. Obama is the new messiah (in fact, there was scary connections to the idea of him being some kind of messiah). He has not however, led anyone to any kind of Promised Land.
I think its kind of odd that he would put the iPad (which is basically the future of computers and information connectivity) and the Xbox (which is just a gaming system) together as if they represent the same thing. I suppose they both represent electronics and networking, but the similarities kind of die out after that. And considering Mr. Obama's use of his own Blackberry, I don't think that he is that ignorant of electronic devices. This is not a stupid man. I don't know about his wisdom, but he isn't stupid. I find it difficult that he does not know any better or know how to use them. Oh well, maybe... but I still find it hard to swallow.
What I truly hope is not really being said (and I mean that... I hope this is not what he is really saying) is something like this,
"I am uncomfortable with today's Internet-connected devices that allow people who are not part of our controlled information machine the ability to influence others with their ideas and data that we have not sanctioned."
I most seriously hope that this is not the real message, but it feels a little like it to me. Understand that I am not saying that this was the actual meaning of his speech. I am not saying that I know the man's hidden thoughts or his heart. But it does seem likely that this is the thrust of what is behind his speech. It would seem that he either is thinking this way, or he does not understand what he is really saying, because it does not compute. But I have to wonder sometimes if this isn't the undertone to many of our leaders when they say things like this. I keep reading of those who want to clamp down on the Internet and the ability of people to blog freely and share ideas. It is an attack on Freedom of Speech.
I know that there are "crazies" out there that really are dangerous and promote dangerous things. But there are intelligent, thinking people out there as well. We need to read and learn so that we can discern the difference. Because there is a lot of shaped, non-factual information that is passed off to us as "the news" sometimes, which does not have a lot to do with what is really going on. When news agencies have to shape and reshape what has happened in order to give a particular slant on something, this is not journalism. It is propaganda.
I remember back in the 1990's, we were watching a satellite news feed from a "certain news agency" in Israel. It was the news feed back to their home base in the USA and had raw video on it before it had been edited (back before they were doing more encryption... we were able to pick it up). They literally paid these teenage Palestinian boys to set a car on fire and act like they were angry for the cameras. The sad thing is that the cameras were on them when they paid them. We watched this and then we watched on the network it was shown on, the edited product. And IT IS A PRODUCT, TOO. They reported it as more Palestinian violence as the conditions worsened for them from the "oppressive Israeli government." The truth is that it was a set up drama that was a result of this news agency creating news. I and some cousins of mine witnessed that. That is propaganda, and not news.
I find that I can find benefits from reading many opinions and viewpoints that are far away from my own. I learn from other points of view. It helps me to understand why people believe what they do, even when I do not agree with them. According to the article, Mr. Obama "bemoaned" the pressures that these people who are able to distribute their views as a threat to democracy. I think that there is some shaping of opinions of the crowd against those who would dissent there. But as far as democracy goes, the First Amendment gives us the right to actually complain when we believe things are not right. That really is our right. This is democracy actually. Promoting Free Speech does promote democracy. It isn't a threat to it. That one line is what prompted me to write this.
The Internet and the current electronic age and even blogs and vlogs have open the doors for new points of view to be distributed. YES, we need to use caution in what we believe, and weigh it against the truth that we already have. We need to use self-control and wisdom in distributing our own views to the world, or people will not listen. We need to exercise self-control in our freedom and not use it for an excuse to just hurt others. I understand that balance. But the availability of information via the Internet today has added to mankind's knowledge vastly. It has allowed us to see more of the truth of things if we take the time to look at the sources and weigh them in the balance, rather than just taking the prefabricated version spit out at us at times.
More information allows us to have a more balanced education, and not just a pre-programmed one that tend to make clone-like people who think and speak just alike. We are individuals, and we can learn to grow and enhance our lives through one another.
Oh well... 'nuff said on this one.
Jim
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment