The post-truth world threatens both democracy and a healthy citizenry
I used to wonder about the relative importance of the
literary theme, “appearance versus reality,” as it applied to the various
novels, plays, poetry and even the short stories that found their way into the
curricula of high school English classes. At the time, character and plot and
setting did seem to be more obviously significant, and would, by inference,
trump “appearance versus reality”.
Today, on the last weekend of 2016, I no longer wonder
about the relative importance of the appearance versus reality theme.
Holocaust deniers, for starters, have always made my
head shake, and my mind go numb. How is it possible to deny the deaths of six
million Jews, and the maiming and wounding of scores more by people clearly
identified as members of the Third Reich, including the Fuhrer himself? So
indisputable are the facts that even Germany’s reputation has been forever
tarnished by the legacy. Nevertheless, even today, more than a half century
later, there are still court cases being waged by “holocaust deniers” whose
apparent contempt for Jews subverts or buries their conscious perception and
their receptivity to facts of history.
And, of course, there are among us, in every country
and especially in the new Trump administration, “climate change deniers” whose
intransigent clinging to economic arguments to generate and to protect “jobs”
(translate: profits for their corporate friends and funders) once again
subverts or buries their recognition of the massive mountain of evidence that
human-generated carbon dioxide is destroying the ozone layer and directly
impacting the world’s temperatures and threatening the survival of the
eco-system as we know it.
In each and every dispute, there is always the
“he-said-she-said” combat between different “realities” through which only a
third party, dispassionate, detached and somewhat objective, can navigate and
facilitate the process of a settlement. This is especially “true” when the
levels of anger, betrayal and contempt are near the “ten” on a scale of 1-10.
In other places in this space, the case has been made
focused on the generation of a massive new industry, the information/public
relations/message doctoring/marketing/propaganda machine, statements from which
have to be read, heard and dissected with increasing scepticism and even
cynicism. So dominant and apparently conventional and integrated into the
social consciousness and culture is this “machine” that much of what passes for
“news” today is lifted, often without even the benefit of thoughtful and
balanced editing, and then broadcast over formal news outlets, as well as a
galaxy of websites. Governments, for example, have at least two versions of
their formal acts: the legal/legislative/budgetary version and the
political/public/vernacular/headline-focused. And the difference between the
two “poles” is often so disparate that an interested and concerned citizen can
be excused for mis-apprehending the import of the “facts”. So “clouded” or
“encrusted” with what we call spin, depending on the source and its bias are many
of the ‘stories that pass for water-cooler talk about public issues that one
wonders if the public is not so taken for granted that public officials depend
on both short memories and distorted perceptions of their “audience” to create
and to maintain their public reputations and their public ‘stature’ such as it
is.
And then there is the recent presidential campaign in
which facts were so irrelevant and replaced by blatant ad hominum attacks to
generate “emotion” (both positive in supporters and negative in enemies) that
the public literally became lost in the cloud of dissembling.
However, there is still a world order to maintain. And
that world order depends for its stability upon a mutual sharing of a precise
and indisputable compendium of information, which “vault” will be increasingly
under threat from the various contenders for world power and influence.
Currently, the U.S. intelligence, supported and reported by sources like the
New York Times, tells us that Putin and the Russian intelligence apparatus
cyber attacked the information systems of the United States for the purpose of
interfering and influencing the presidential election. Obama, after
considerable pressure, has deported 35 Russian operatives living in the U.S.
and closed two “estates” in which they lived and worked. He has also imposed
sanctions on close contacts with Putin, while Russia has persisted (supported
and reported by Trump and his ‘gang’) in pleading for “proof” of the validity
of the U.S. charges.
On a different front, we see similar behaviour coming
from the Obama administration and Netanyahu’s government in Israel over an
abstention by the U.S. in a vote to condemn settlements in the West Bank. The
administration maintains that their abstention is completely in line with the traditional
position of American administrations back to Ronald Reagan, while Netanyahu
maintains that the abstention is a stab in the back by its “ally” the United
States. Allan Dershowitz, for one, the legal scholar and Israel advocate, who
supported Obama’s two elections, expresses profound anger and betrayal by Obama
for this latest decision. Just as in the Obama/Putin dispute, so too in the
Obama/Netanyahu conflict there is the dynamic of statement-followed by denial.
And, once again, the public ( in its various complex and disparate component
parts) is left to ponder “truth versus spin”….just another way of “positioning”
appearance versus reality.
And, not only are there disparate versions of reality
on the surface, there are also the underlying and frequently unstated motives
that prompt the public statements. Legal scholars have attempted for centuries
to preclude any consideration of motive from the “evidence” considered by a
judge and/or jury. However, a penetrating interpretation of the empirical evidence
can and often does point to the “mental state” of the accused at the time of
the occurrence. Speculation, or interpretation, or what some would call an
“informed opinion,” is usually considered a reputable source for explaining to
the public the various statements and acts of political actors. They too,
however, all have personal opinions, often referred to as ideologies, depending
on the situation, including and perhaps especially Supreme Court justices. So
even in the reflections and the debates among jurists there are and are
expected to be deep divergences of opinion, while, the justices, we believe,
adhere to an agreed statement of fact.
It is this ‘statement of fact’ that is missing from
more and more of the public concentration on public issues. And its absence,
and the expectation that it will never be part of our collective consciousness,
that does and will continue to cause deep angst. And our urgent pursuit of the
“facts” amid the tidal waves of distortion, dissembling, lying, and statements
from Orwell’s Ministry of Truth (1984), (the public ‘organ’ dedicated to
telling the people what to believe, and possessing the ability and the
responsibility to change their story at the behest of their “bosses”)….
With the election of Trump, America, and consequently
the world, has taken a giant step toward a state in which propaganda replaces
facts, in which facts themselves no longer are even an important component of
the decision-making process of political leaders..(perhaps they never were and
we were being seduced all along, although we certainly fought that potential
with all our might for centuries). And this demise of a shared body of facts
comes at a time when the news “reporters” are being shovelled out of major news
rooms to reduce operating costs around the world as their corporate bosses
watch the out-going tide of revenue from advertising.
And the resulting convergence of the dropping number
of “fact” reporters and the dismissal of facts from our public discussions is a
panorama of his dreams for people like Trump and Putin, never wanting to be
constrained by the truth.
Truth-tellling, after all, is so restricting of a
demogague’s dream of supremacy, of “making America/Russia/Phillippines/North
Korea/Iran… (pick you country and your demogague) GREAT AGAIN!
And the critical observations, punditry and even
water-cooler conversations based on a reasonable grasp and representation of
the facts is one of the most important, if not the most important, weapons to
preserve a public order that puts the elected officials dependent upon the will
of the people.
Our will, informed by the facts, and our assessment of
the motives of our ‘officials’ constitute the cornerstone of our national and
international world order. And as we watch the flying charges and
counter-charges of something proposing to be “fact” in a tornado of propaganda,
we are losing our bearings.
It is as if our ship of state is and will continue to
founder in a sea of storms, with each wind coming from a different source and
all of them competing for our “trust”….and the ship’s radar, along with its
connection to “mainland” have gone AWOL. The sky too is also charcoal black,
leaving no cosmic reference points out of our conundrum. If we do not know
where we are, and we do not know which direction we are facing, and we have no
stars or moon helping us to reconnoitre in a universe whose control levers have
been placed (somewhat by our own actions and failures to act) into the hands of
the Putin’s, Trump’s Duherte’s, Kim Jung Il’s, Assad’s and whatever the Supreme
leader in Iran, just to mention a few of the obvious “state” demogogues,
without even making reference to the avowed terrororists, little wonder there
is a global angst.
And, to think that the flow of “information”
(verifiable and verified facts) in each of these realms has either completely
dried up or is quickly drying up, we can only imagine the glee in the minds of
each of these dictators, now beyond the reach of penetrating investigative
reporters, with respectable podia from which to broadcast their nefarious
plots. We may like social media, and we may be entertained by fake news, but
make not mistake, when Trump says ‘computers have made it so that no one really
knows what is going on’ (in reference to the reports of Russian hacking to
influence the U.S. presidential election) he is consciously and deliberately
adding to the ubiquitous campaign (both overt and covert) to sabotage the flow
of legitimate information.
Without the constraints of an informed public, and an
incisive and relentless army of truth-diggers in every country, and from many
countries so that nations do not have to depend on the “controlled” and
manipulated media of their own country, at least in the short run, the field
will have been vacated, leaving the imposters (insofar as their commitment to
anything but their own agenda and not to the public good) free to roam like the
dinosaurs they are.
Never in my lifetime have news organizations like
National Public Radio and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, both funded by
private donations and government policy respectively, been more important to the survival of access
to reputable and trusted information.
And with the announcement that Barack Obama will
dedicate his time after leaving the White House to the issue of re-districting,
commonly known as gerrymandering, that process that Republicans have used in
too many states to restrict voting among minorities and poor voters. This issue
is just another threatening the full scope and depth of a thriving democracy.
And for Obama’s commitment, in conjunction with his former Attorney General
Eric Holder, the outgoing president will continue to make a positive impact on
his nation, long after his formal departure.
Perhaps, with some of his ‘friends’ the two-term
president might persuade the presidents of the various media conglomerates in
his country, and those in similar offices around the world. Of the imminent
danger to good governance, and to democracy from the atrophy of valid and
verifiable information.
It is not only cyber security that threatens our
democracy. We are also facing a scarcity of information, linked to a tidal wave
of mis-information, that renders the concept of “engaged and informed citizen”
eunuched, if not a relic of history. If we are going to be serious about never
accepting the validity of the Trump presidency, and for many of that, that is
really the only starting premise, we have to wage an all-out campaign for a
vigorous and relentless access to independent public information.
The lies, exaggerated and bloated promises,
mis-information campaigns and the masking of the truth, by calling voter
restriction an initiative to counter voter fraud (when there is no voter
fraud!!) to cover the bigotry that is its source, have been the primary, or perhaps
exclusive offering on the menu of too many people magnetizing the news channels
and the newsrooms.
Power corrupts not only the individuals “with power”
but also the sycophants who consider personal tweets as significant as policy
statements, and the confusion (conflation) is not either incidental nor
insignificant.
In another life, I recall a Liberal “truth squad”
sitting at the front of every campaign speech uttered by their Progressive
Conservative opponent, John Diefenbaker, because the prairie courtroom lawyer
was exaggerating his promises, and the bases for his policy positions. Both
Liberals and Conservatives of that time would be rolling over in their graves
at the prospect of fake news and leaders impunity in deploying their epic
distortions. Not yet rendered grave-bound, we too would do well to take a page
from their song-book, and roll not only our eyes, but our minds to confront
what is a shared and malignant enemy of our mutual truth.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home