The Shock Doctrine - Short Film By Alfonso Cuaron

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Text

This is a short companion piece to a book written on the same subject, which scratches the surface on the topic of our government using crisis to pass legislation or impose policies on an obedient public. The biggest modern example is undoubtedly 9/11, which has been used to pass a multitude of legislation to the detriment of civil liberties, and was used to sell a war that has rapidly increased the size and cost of our military operations without merit.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,910
238
106
Using guilt and FUD to propel an agenda goes back to the beginnings of mankind.
 

XMan

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
12,513
49
91
Originally posted by: MadRat
Using guilt and FUD to propel an agenda goes back to the beginnings of mankind.

Exactly.

Best way to get something done is to say it's for "the children", or its a "crisis."
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
The danger here is in being too suspicious, seeing everything as a groundless powergrab or manipulative attempt to push some agenda. While there are certainly cases of an overhyped "crisis" being use to advance a position, we shouldn't forget that there are times when there is a real crisis that calls for real change. As XMan said, "the same could be said for global warming". Which is true, in fact the same could be said for virtually ANY major issue of the day...but the fact that we could say the same thing doesn't mean that they all ARE the same thing.

Republicans will tell you that the real crises are terrorism, social security and monogamous gays. Democrats will tell you that the real crises are the state of our public schools, our impact on the environment and a callous disregard for civil liberties and human rights. And both sides will try oh so hard to convince you that the crises of the other side are all invented nonsense to manipulate you into doing something you otherwise wouldn't. It's hardly a coincidence that the example of manipulation, as expressed by a liberal P&N poster, was 9/11...while he was almost immediately followed by a conservative poster suggesting that maybe global warming was a better example.

But the idea that either side has a monopoly on the truth and more importantly, that every issue is absolutely one way or the other, is stupid,. Listening to some liberals, 9/11 was really just some pilots who got lost, and every time ANYONE brings up fighting terrorism, it's to advance some fascist police state agenda. Listening to some conservatives, on the other hand, might convince people that pumping billions of tons of shit into the atmosphere every year, not to mention rapidly depleting our finite supply of fossil fuels, is no problem at all, and anyone who says otherwise is trying to just trying to make a quick buck (possibly the only time conservatives have ever been opposed to that particular endeavor).

The whole idea is to make you stop thinking and just start listening to what people tell you. The LAST thing most political folks want is for everyone to look at every issue, right, left and center, and figure out...for themselves...whether it's something worth worrying about or whether they're being fed a super-size serving of bullshit. If I was more clever, I'd come up with a term to describe the crass political approach behind trying to sell "The Shock Doctrine" as the playbook of the other guys, but suffice it to say...that name is out there. The MOST IMPORTANT strategy for any dyed in the wool partisan is to convince the masses that the other guy doesn't really believe anything so much as he's trying to manipulate them. The fact that this is a tremendously hypocritical strategy has in no way prevented it from working disturbingly well.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,446
7,508
136
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Republicans will tell you that the real crises are terrorism, social security and monogamous gays. Democrats will tell you that the real crises are the state of our public schools, our impact on the environment and a callous disregard for civil liberties and human rights. And both sides will try oh so hard to convince you that the crises of the other side are all invented nonsense to manipulate you into doing something you otherwise wouldn't. It's hardly a coincidence that the example of manipulation, as expressed by a liberal P&N poster, was 9/11...while he was almost immediately followed by a conservative poster suggesting that maybe global warming was a better example.

So because we don't favor throwing money at the issue, we don't care about public schools?

Terrorism is a problem, but I do believe it is less of a problem than the handling of our government structure. Throwing infinitely more money and power at it will destroy this nation faster than a million fanatics hiding in caves. I don?t care what the issue is, giving a centralized authority further money/power is the wrong answer if you care about basic human freedoms.

Perhaps on that we can agree?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,435
6,091
126
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: XMan
Same could be said for global warming.

Even if that were true, (and I don't think it is) why does that matter?


Are you crazy? Have you no fear of the Weather Industrial Complex?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Why do you think we have a War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Terror? War indicates crisis and gets people to act.

 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Republicans will tell you that the real crises are terrorism, social security and monogamous gays. Democrats will tell you that the real crises are the state of our public schools, our impact on the environment and a callous disregard for civil liberties and human rights. And both sides will try oh so hard to convince you that the crises of the other side are all invented nonsense to manipulate you into doing something you otherwise wouldn't. It's hardly a coincidence that the example of manipulation, as expressed by a liberal P&N poster, was 9/11...while he was almost immediately followed by a conservative poster suggesting that maybe global warming was a better example.

So because we don't favor throwing money at the issue, we don't care about public schools?
I believe there are many indicators that some Republicans don't care about schools, public or otherwise, a refusal to "throw money at the issue" hardly stands alone in that regard. But my point wasn't to attack anyone on any issue, my point was that if you ask Democrats and Republicans what crises we're facing today, you'll get very different answers.
Terrorism is a problem, but I do believe it is less of a problem than the handling of our government structure. Throwing infinitely more money and power at it will destroy this nation faster than a million fanatics hiding in caves. I don?t care what the issue is, giving a centralized authority further money/power is the wrong answer if you care about basic human freedoms.

Perhaps on that we can agree?

I think we DO agree on that, but again, my point wasn't about the specific issues so much as the tactics used by both sides. I happen to think the "danger" of gay marriage is a ridiculous joke, I happen to think the danger of global warming is dramatically understated by all but a few people, and I think terrorism isn't as minor a problem as the left thinks or as major of a danger as the right fears. My point was that thinking of individual problems on their own merits is the LAST thing anybody in politics wants. You're a pretty huge conservative, if you don't mind me saying so, and the Republicans would like that to translate into unthinking acceptance of ALL the crises that help advance their causes. I'm a pretty big liberal, and the Democrats would like ME to do the same thing on their side of the issues. The last thing anybody wants is people reacting to the word "crisis" with anything other than brainless acceptance or instant rejection based on who's doing the talking.