Day 6 in America. What happened to Days 1 to 5? Oh come on. Don't bring maths into this. I'll give you a recap later.
Just arrived in San Diego. Watching Family Guy. Not new Family Guy of course; no such thing exists. Thanks a lot, AMPTP. You ruined everyone's Christmas.
Sorry, was just distracted there by one of those classssic quotes: "Coming up next: A pig that refuses to eat Jews?"
Ah, they don't make 'em like they used to. Especially when they don't make 'em at all.
The reason I felt a sudden urge to blog was this: political propaganda. In the midst of the election campaigns beginning to flare over here, one candidate sparked my eye. Barack Obama? No. Although I'm really confused about the commercial I saw the other day: "Barack Obama and the black vote: what it means to us". Who's us? Do you like him, or what? No wonder a guy like Bush can win elections: the media is convoluted as hell.
The candidate I'm interested, in reality, isn't actually a candidate at all. I'm not even sure what he is. But it's evident he hates the world today. Ladies & Gentlemen, Mr. Lyndon LaRouche. Proud author of seminars such as "Save the American Republic from the British Empire!", or, even more interestingly, "Is The Devil in Your Laptop?"
See, where I'm from, "The Devil" doesn't hit home like it apparently does here. I really couldn't care less if someone thought the devil was in my laptop. But it does provide some rather entertaining reading with topics when the introduction claims that "There is a mass-based fascist movement on college campuses, today," and this is the "greatest threat to the survival of [the US]". Even more fun when the 3 ugly heads of evil in this case are:
1. Myspace
2. Facebook
3. Computer Games (ie. "homicidal maniac versions")
I might be inclined to agree that myspace is at least some kind of evil, but more in the "cultural garbage" kind of way. But hey, I'm biased, and not a 14 year old emo kid. To each their own.
Similarly, some kids shouldn't go anywhere near violent video games until they've had enough social conditioning to know that violence is bad, (mmkay). But once you get past that, GTA is the most fun game I've ever played. And I certainly never felt like going out and stealing a car and running over hookers with it.
But the big one for me was: Facebook? Maybe "potential breeding ground for stalkers", but "Tombstone"? As in, thing to tell people where you're buried? Eh?
Sorry, got distracted again. Ad for Viagra. Not that I'm keen, but what caught my attention was that half the ad was telling you the side-effects and usage warnings. "May cause abnormal vision." Yes. As may really good sex.
So, what does Nick Walsh, author of the Facebook-is-evil article and loving disciple of LaRouche have to say? Well, he says Facebook is less of a "social graph", and more of a "mind control site, now directed by mass killer enthusiast Bill Gates". Generally, the article, and the whole propaganda pamphlet itself is saying that "globalisation" is bad. So me having contact with my mates around the world - whom I probably would never get the chance to chat to or call again - is satanic rot, and I should go wash my soul with heavy duty hermitage soap.
Facebook is bad because a few times some weird people met some gullible people (who were also probably a bit odd) and then someone got killed. This also happens at bars, on street corners, and even occasionally in movie theatres. Somehow I don't think it's Facebook's fault that screwed-up people want to abuse it.
Some other fellow in this Youth Movement pamphlet goes on to tell me that Wikipedia is bad because Jimmy Wales (founder) once ran a soft-core porn site. I dispute the evidence, but even if I saw decent proof, I don't think I'd care. Soft core porn is not the "greatest threat to the survival of our nation." And even if you think all that's a bit evil, wouldn't you say that going on from soft-core porn to a free global information database, was a bit of a recompense for past sins? If I was of that kind of belief, I'd say he's earned his "forgiveness".
They go on to say Wiki is evil because it trashed their idol, LaRouche himself. Wikipedia certainly gets a little subjective when it comes to people or political organisations. But I think they try hard to present at least most of the facts, certainly more than I'd expect from daily newsgroups, let alone conspiracy theorist propaganda.
Quite possible this kind of senseless drivel is commonplace where you're from, but I'm used to most people having a little more liberal sense. It gets me angry and makes me laugh at the same time, but at the end of the day, it just makes me feel so much smarter than so many people in the world. Ego-trip aside, they do get one important message across: Don't believe everything you read.
No comments:
Post a Comment