Outrage
So, the other night scarlettina and I were discussing outrage, and I need to refine my thinking. Her feelings were that she no longer could bring herself to the levels of outrage cable TV wants her too (that's right, right?). And this was a program whose views she agrees with.
My feelings are that the anger on cable TV - however much you may agree with the position - is largely a ginned-up outrage circus. The issues discussed almost never get resolved, and even if they are, they never seem to address the underlying structural problem with our government.
Now, what I'm trying to avoid here is the notion of the crank saying "oh, you're angry about that?? Here's what you should REALLY be angry about!!!" I don't want to go all Uncle Conspiracy on this. But the fact of the matter is that the 24 hour cable news networks are not in the business of solving political problem; they are in the business for jacking up the ratings. The more they preach to the angry choir, the more they can charge to advertise Suger Wackys. It's a circus.
I know people who go to bars as part of an organized event precisely so they can yell at the TV of the "opposition" party's response to, say, the State of the Union. Do you really think this does any good? I ask. Talk about futility.
Meanwhile, the "government" is a duopoly in whose best interest that absolutely nothing gets done and that people are angry about that, but blame the other guy. And why is it exactly in a society that prides itself on Freedom and freedom of choice (certainly in the commercial sphere), the third most populous nation on Earth, 350 million people, has only two sizes of politics to fit all???? And don't mention some "third" party like the Libertarians and the Greens. Under the current system, they have about as much chance of being elected to higher office as I do being crowned Miss America.
A few years ago I heard a great NPR interview with Sherman Alexie, and the interviewer, in pro-forma leftie NPR fashion, said "of course we don't have free speech" to which Alexie, stopping her, said "Oh, no - we have free speech in this country. Nobody listens to us, but we have free speech.
My feelings are that the anger on cable TV - however much you may agree with the position - is largely a ginned-up outrage circus. The issues discussed almost never get resolved, and even if they are, they never seem to address the underlying structural problem with our government.
Now, what I'm trying to avoid here is the notion of the crank saying "oh, you're angry about that?? Here's what you should REALLY be angry about!!!" I don't want to go all Uncle Conspiracy on this. But the fact of the matter is that the 24 hour cable news networks are not in the business of solving political problem; they are in the business for jacking up the ratings. The more they preach to the angry choir, the more they can charge to advertise Suger Wackys. It's a circus.
I know people who go to bars as part of an organized event precisely so they can yell at the TV of the "opposition" party's response to, say, the State of the Union. Do you really think this does any good? I ask. Talk about futility.
Meanwhile, the "government" is a duopoly in whose best interest that absolutely nothing gets done and that people are angry about that, but blame the other guy. And why is it exactly in a society that prides itself on Freedom and freedom of choice (certainly in the commercial sphere), the third most populous nation on Earth, 350 million people, has only two sizes of politics to fit all???? And don't mention some "third" party like the Libertarians and the Greens. Under the current system, they have about as much chance of being elected to higher office as I do being crowned Miss America.
A few years ago I heard a great NPR interview with Sherman Alexie, and the interviewer, in pro-forma leftie NPR fashion, said "of course we don't have free speech" to which Alexie, stopping her, said "Oh, no - we have free speech in this country. Nobody listens to us, but we have free speech.