Via RedressBy Lawrence Davidson
12 December 2010
Lawrence Davidson considers the problems of private realities – the fact that ”there are people who do occasionally attain power whose private realities are fantasy driven” and the fact that “most individual realities are ... the artificial creations of a manipulated information environment brought to us by way of the government and its allied media”.
There is a postmodern position that states "reality is a social construct". In other words, individuals and groups have their own realities and, according to the postmodernists, one reality is as true as another.
Certainly, there is more than one way to interpret things. It is because individuals see the world differently and, at least in the American cultural milieu, have such trouble reconciling those views, that US divorce rates run at about 50 per cent. Then there is the inescapable fact that nation states and rival ethnic communities periodically slaughter each other in an effort to disprove the postmodernist assertion that all realities are equal. Thus, we see the competition among groups to assert the reality of the powerful as triumphantly more real than all rivals.
“It is hard to argue with the notion that there are many social, cultural and political "constructs", each a product of its place and time. However, the notion that all realities are equal can quickly take us into a kind of theatre of the absurd.”
It is hard to argue with the notion that there are many social, cultural and political "constructs", each a product of its place and time. However, the notion that all realities are equal can quickly take us into a kind of theatre of the absurd. If you want to see what this looks like, just take a close look at present day American politics.
Recent examples of private realities
Take the issue of climate change. John Shimkus is a Republican member of the House of Representatives from Illinois. He is presently campaigning for the chairmanship of the House Committee for Energy and Commerce.
Last year, during a congressional hearing, he asserted that there is no need to be concerned about global warming because after the biblical flood God promised Noah that he would "never again ... curse the ground because of man..." Shimkus sees this as "the infallible word of God, and that is the way it’s going to be for his creation".
Well, this is an opinion for sure, but it is also John Shimkus’s "reality". As such, is it the equal to the reality posited by the present scientific consultants of the Environmental Protection Agency?
How about the world of John Barton, a House member from Texas who has it in his head that carbon dioxide emissions are not impacting the climate? If someday this gas does have an effect on the environment, Barton tells us not to worry. We will find a way to live with it. After all, according to Barton, man is able to adapt to just about any environment.
Again, what is the worth of Barton’s "reality"? Is it equal to the one posited by those scientists keeping track of greenhouse gases?
Finally, there is Darrell Issa, a Republican House member from California who soon will be the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Issa’s obsession is climate data which, he is sure, has been manipulated by environmentalists seeking the ruin of capitalism. And, he is determined to use his committee’s subpoena power to foil this plot.
Representative Issa has his own "reality". But, beyond his own head, just how real is it?
It is not only with issues such as climate change that American politicians are riding the wave of postmodernism. Foreign policy is also an arena of alternate realities. Texas Republican representative Louie Gohmert took the floor in the House of Representatives last month and stated the following, "I’ve been greatly concerned with the hypocrisy of this [Obama] administration telling Israel ‘just let Palestinians build illegal settlements and take over areas that are not theirs. Just let ’em take over’."
Mr Gohmert has his world, his "reality", but I think we can say definitively that it is less real than that of a new born Palestinian babe in Hebron.
Then there are all those US politicians whose "reality" includes Iran’s drive for an atomic bomb, and the reality of all US intelligence agency experts who say Iran is doing no such thing. Are they equal?
Americans are not the only ones subject to impaired or wholly false "realities". A recent report prepared for NATO by the International Council on Security and Development revealed that most Afghans in two hotly contested provinces, Helmand and Kandahar, "are completely unaware of the 11 September attacks on the United States and don’t know they precipitated the foreign intervention now in its 10th year". The report concludes: "The lack of awareness of why we are there contributes to the high levels of negativity toward NATO military operations..."
These particular Afghan citizens live in a remote and technologically poor region of the world. This remoteness makes their outlook more understandable than that of all those "modern" Americans cited above.
But what about the world inside the heads of the people who prepared the NATO report? If we assume that their conclusions are an accurate picture of how they see reality in this case, we can only conclude that they too, like the Afghans, are suffering from an impaired worldview.
It would seem that somehow they have forgotten, or suppressed, the fact that when, after 11 September 2001, "President George W. Bush demanded that Mullah Omar ... turn over Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants or face the full brunt of US military might, Mullah Omar asked to negotiate, and Bush refused. Instead, the United States invaded Afghanistan..." The Taliban leader had asked the Bush administration for proof of bin Laden’s involvement in the 9/11 attack and those in the White House, aided by the Pakistanis, could have probably supplied it. However, America’s leaders did not bother.
This also is part of the picture that should be given to the remote peoples of Afghanistan so as to make their notion of what is real more complete. Thus, the reality of the Afghans of Helmand and Kandahar is different to that of the NATO commanders and their consultants.
Are they equal? And, are either truly real?
Israeli picture of Middle East reality
The above examples are from our immediate past, but there are similar ones in our immediate future.
For instance, we can look forward to a new Israeli "advocacy campaign" scheduled for Western Europe early in 2011. The Israeli Foreign Ministry under the leadership of the Avigdor Lieberman, a man whose notion of reality is quite openly racist, has instructed Israeli embassies in all major Western European capitals to hire "professional advocacy and public relations experts" as well as to recruit up to 1,000 local Zionists per country to promote Israel’s official view of "reality" in the Middle East. This comes after a relatively successful effort by both Israel and the United States to suppress the picture of reality put forth in the UN’s Goldstone report.
The Israeli picture of Middle East reality, and its role therein, has been eroding in the minds of many Westerners. That is why this effort is being made. The source of the erosion is the demonstrable difference between Israeli behaviour and Israel’s publically promoted image of reality. As long as the gap between these two is a yawning one, the Israeli effort to restructure reality for the citizens of Europe is likely to be no more than a rear-guard action. On the other hand, one should not underestimate the impact of such efforts. Public relations campaigns, advertising, and the like obviously do work. They are capable of making you passionate about new cars and new clothes, and they are capable of making you a supporter of the invasion of Iraq because you are convinced that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction are real.
Conclusion
We all live lives that are relatively local and, in terms of an understanding of outside (foreign) events, we rely on the reports of others. That means, except for our immediate experience, our realities are heavily influenced by our media environment. That environment might entail serious and objective research or it may consist of daily doses of Fox TV. In either case that, in part, is how the universe inside our heads comes about and it, in turn, motivates our behavior. The whole process can bring us down to earth or send us into the realm of fantasy.
In the end we are confronted with two problems. One is that there are people who do occasionally attain power whose private realities are fantasy driven. As noted above, the House of Representatives seems to have an increasing number of such people. The second problem is that, unlike the postmodernist claim that we are all living in equally valid private realities, most individual realities are not private at all. They are instead the artificial creations of a manipulated information environment brought to us by way of the government and its allied media. And both of these problems are sure to lead to on-going tragedy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian
No comments:
Post a Comment