swht at clear.net.nz
Wed Mar 15 17:14:16 AEDT 2017
On 15/03/17 16:28, Alan Sondheim wrote to "the US has no experience of
the fabrication of popular truths to support political regimes."
> */This just isn't true; during the Vietnam war tne 'Pentagon' was
> consistently lying, not only about actions, but also about body
> counts, etc.; Fire in the Lake, I believe, has covered that in depth.
> We've had our share of fake news all the way along - even the
> onslaught years ago by the tobacco lobby.../*
... yes, I put that badly, sorry. What I meant was the fabrication by
totalitarian orders of an atmosphere where the truth is a consensual lie
and the difference between the two is in the (potential) force applied:
I'll say it is so, as long as it what 'most' people agree, despite
knowing, with 'most' people, it is a lie popularised by the regime...
and if tomorrow it changes, with 'most' people, with whom I happen to
agree, I will say yesterday's truth was a lie. But here the force that
is applied is a kind of consensus from which has been removed every
impurity, in the evidence of force, in the evidence of any evidence, of
fingerprints or any human contact, of it having been manipulated, or
wrongdoing, ... it is as clean as data, clean as an algorithm. (And here
perhaps enters <<empyre's>> other theme, of a mediated digital culture,
of one being maintainable or conceivable.)
The question of what Alan calls "critique-in-opposition" is of an
immanent critique: the truth (of the opposition) will not puncture the
bubble (of the consensus) but is a part of its swirling phantasmagoria.
More information about the empyre