Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. … In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” - Edward Bernays – Propaganda
Stand up that person who said ‘Rubbish – I know what I know and I make up my own mind’. To you I say: ‘You are totally correct, Sir/Ma’am. But it is important that all of us recognise that we don’t know what we don’t know! That, surely, is self evident.
For example, when you place your baby in front of a voyeur-vision machine, you don’t know who created the programmes and images that are beamed into your child’s eyes and mind. Possibly, you don’t even think about it.
Similarly, when you kiss goodbye to your child on its first day at school, you trust everyone connected with education, from the Secretary of State for Education (of any political party) right down to classroom assistants, but you don’t know what they will do to your child’s understanding of the world. You don’t even know them. But, possibly, you don’t even think about it.
When your child is old enough to be given an i-phone or a computer and takes it to bed at night, you don’t know who is filling their mind with what. But, possibly, you don’t even think about it.
And when there is a hue and cry about the damage being done to the minds of our children because of what they see and hear on so-called ‘social media’? What then? Judging by the news media this week the immediate call is for regulation. I could weep.
Let me create a picture in your mind. You and I are standing together and I’ve just asked you to hold out your hand. You do as I ask. Great. Then I produce a cigarette lighter and ignite it right below your hand. No guessing what happens next – you pull away your hand.
Oops, sorry. I didn’t mean to hurt you. Tell you what, let’s do it differently – let me use your other hand. ‘No way’, I hear you say. Why? Because you’ve learned not to play with fire. You didn’t have to think about it and no one needed to legislate for it.
So, tell me, what is so very different between fire burning your hand and the contents of social media burning your child’s mind? I suggest, not a lot. Maybe the solution is for the child not to go there rather than for its parents to demand restrictive legislation and allow them to continue to go there.
You still don’t know what you don’t know. You tell me again that you’ve never thought about it like that. Be encouraged. THINK ABOUT IT. Don’t wait for your child to be burned. It’s called ‘being responsible’.
What was that you said? ‘My kids wouldn’t put up with that’. So be it. That just means you’ve lost already and the propaganda people in social media, in mainstream media, in education, in government, win the cigar. We lose.
* * *
“People who judge authoritatively what their liberties are, retain all the liberties they wish to enjoy. This is Liberty.” – Kenn d’Oudrey – Democracy Defined, The Manifesto.
* * * *
Media this morning suggested that the Prime Minister ‘could call a June General Election’ and, according to the headlines, ‘vows to battle for Britain’. Hmmm.
A General Election means that backroom boys in political parties write manifestos for public consumption designed to attract positive attention – for example, votes in favour of said party. The manifesto consists of promises and aspirations of all the things the party hasn’t yet done but, because they want your vote, they think might appeal to you and win your vote. If you vote for them you are entitled only to take all or nothing at all. Take it or leave it.
How different might this country be if we, the people, could vote on a manifesto on a line by line basis? How different might this country be if we voted for our own chosen and known-to-us local constituency candidate instead of someone chosen by a small group of local party members, endorsed by a national head office? How different might this country be if, after 12 months in Parliament, an MP could be recalled for performance assessment (just like any other employee) and either returned to Parliament to continue representing his constituents or else replaced?
You think that’s revolutionary? Not really. Not so very long ago it was considered a revolutionary idea to pay MPs! Today we pay them £74,000 a year from day one for up to five years, plus expenses/allowances, plus perks. No experience required but compliance with party rules preferred. AND WE VOTE FOR THEM! And they refer to each other as ‘Honourable’.
Worse, if they have reliable experience (according to government requirements) they could qualify to become a government minister, for extra pay, of course. Wow! As some Americans might say: You must be out of your cotton pickin’ tree!
On top of that, if the elected person declines to take an oath of allegiance to the Crown, as happens with representatives of Sinn Fein, the government makes a contribution to party funds.
I have little more to say other than it would be unfair to tar every MP with the same brush. Undoubted, some truly want to represent their constituents and will remain back benchers as long as they can. But it seems to me that they don’t validate the partisan system which is forced upon us. WE validate the party system by voting for it.
I believe there are two possible solutions.
1. Passive. Don’t vote at all and for five years put up with whatever result is called.
2. Active. Find and support a person (or BE that person) who is willing to stand as an Independent representative for your constituency, and vote for him/her.
It isn’t rocket science.
* * * * *
PS: I'm too old to be active any more.
No comments:
Post a Comment