Read on Twitter
CN: a rare foray into American politics
It's been really... interesting... to watch the media report on the Orange One as though everything were normal these past three years. Kasparov puts into words something I've had a hard time articulating, but that feels deeply familiar. https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/1178350853322919938
It's been really... interesting... to watch the media report on the Orange One as though everything were normal these past three years. Kasparov puts into words something I've had a hard time articulating, but that feels deeply familiar. https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/1178350853322919938
Also CN: abuse
One of the things I learned as a kid was to make the distinction between the official line and what was actually going on, because in my family, the two often didn't match up. Learning that crucial distinction was a survival strategy.
One of the things I learned as a kid was to make the distinction between the official line and what was actually going on, because in my family, the two often didn't match up. Learning that crucial distinction was a survival strategy.
What they *say* is what they want the story to be. What they *do* is what's actually true. As a kid, I really wanted the story to be true, even when it harmed me or said I was bad, because it meant I could trust my parents and that was like... baseline? For most kids, I think?
I was quite young when I figured out I had to choose between my parents' stories and actual reality. The alternative was to believe them and quite literally go insane (when versions of reality clash, something's gotta give). I had enough survival instinct that I chose reality.
Interesting how the American president reminds me of my abusive parents not because of actions (though he and his cronies have committed countless harmful actions) but because of the persistent attempts to rewrite reality - and the media's perpetuation of those stories.
The media may disagree with him, or criticize him, or fact-check him, but in doing all this they're still affirming that he has authority and says things worth discussing. And on some level I guess you have no choice but to report on what the President says and does. But.
They don't have an alternate model. They don't know how to opt out. Even when the story-spinning is detached from reality to such a ludicrous level that it a hundred years from now people will be laughing about how anyone ever took it seriously.
For me, there came a point where it was smarter, healthier and *much* safer to leave home as a teenager (after being kicked out and taken back multiple times) and to support myself on minimum wage while going to school than to remain in harm's way.
If I had continued trying to live inside other people's story - a story that pretended violence was normal parenting and neglect was care (see that spin?) - I would not be here today.
Now, I understand it might be harder to "leave home" when it comes to a government. And yet...
Now, I understand it might be harder to "leave home" when it comes to a government. And yet...
...the media persists in reporting on the spin. And yes, also the facts. But always giving airtime to the spin, which maintains its authority and the potential for its truth. I don't pretend to have the political expertise to say how else exactly to handle this, but I can say -
that taking the spin seriously in any way does not help. Somehow, we need to find a way to start from the premise that the President's words are meaningless & do not merit attention. A facts-only approach. A clear acknowledgement that this thing is broken & we need a workaround.
This is not just about disagreements, different opinions. This isn't even really "conservative" vs "liberal" (or "Republican" vs "Democrat"). The problem is that the people who are supposed to be running a country are actually engaged in a completely different project.
There needs to be some way to acknowledge that. To say "We refuse the premise that this is normal." And from there, to investigate what else to do. What happens when you opt out & find your own way as a news outlet? What would it mean to take emergency measures in news reporting?
How could the mainstream news frame a story about American politics that does not reify the legitimacy of the current government? That openly acknowledges everything it does is corrupt, and *start from there* in telling the story? Anything less is a failure to report on reality.
I don't have specific solutions to propose, but this shift in framing feels very necessary. Survival-level necessary. Right now people still seem to believe the mechanisms of the government can fix the government (i.e. impeachment). I'm not sure that's true. Maybe it is.
But if it's not, then what? Like what if he just refuses to step down, whether upon impeachment or failure to be re-elected? He said at the election itself that he wouldn't respect the results if Hilary won. Are we looking at a dictatorship, like a literal one? Will there be war?
These are the questions I have been asking myself as I read American news for three years now. But I don't see them being discussed *in* the news. I just see a constant re-hashing of hopes, attempts and plans within the existing system.
But the fact that news outlets are not asking these questions or thinking in these directions has zero bearing on whether or not such things will happen. It just means that every time the next system breakdown occurs, reporters act surprised all over again.
This government doesn't *care* about the system, except insofar as it can be subverted, ignored, corrupted, weakened, employed to their personal ends. Start with that. Ask questions from there. Look at reality. Report on facts, not on press releases and tweets.
I'm sure others have more finely tuned analysis on this, or more concrete solutions. Other countries have experienced this, are experiencing it now; and we can learn from history too. I just wish I saw more media doing this work, and doing less of "the President said X today."
At some point you have to stop arguing with the spin and start putting your energy elsewhere. Start attending to the on-the-ground problems. For me, as a teenager, I had to find a way to refuse to engage. To prioritize my safety. Get a job. Find an apartment. The practical stuff.
Make a life plan that didn't involve depending in any way on abusive people so invested in their own version of reality that they'd willfully ignore concrete facts about the harms they were doing. What would it be to do that on a country level? I have no idea. But we have to ask.
With parents, you don't really get to switch them out every four years or less. With the American government, you can - at least so far. But what if that changes? What then? And what in the meantime? Something's gotta give.
/end thread
/end thread
