A modest proposal for Aneristic Illusions

[Cain]

So, I've been thinking....and well, maybe this is something that just bugs me, but AI is a little too much like most other political boards on forums out there.  Maybe a little better, in term of content, but there's a lot of what, well, what I would consider irrelevant crap.

I'm responsible for this as much as anyone.  In fact, possibly more.  What do I mean by irrelevant crap?  Well the kind of "he said she said" manufactured outrage, conventional liberal/conservative baiting nonsense that passes for much of the existing political discourse.  "Stupid Republican Says Stupid Thing" is nearly "dog bites man" in terms of newsworthiness, in terms of relaying information about the world in which we live.

Look: we all accept, on an intellectual level, that party politics is 90% a sham, a show for the rubes, a distraction in short.  Yet we seem to bother ourselves with it an awful lot, which suggests, at some gut level, as a site, we haven't yet quite internalized that belief.

What I would like to see, for this subforum in particular, is a focus away from the day to day events of politics, something which is almost always tied to party politics, and almost always a distraction from the long-term trends and events with which we should truly be concerning ourselves.

What should we be focusing on, instead then?  What things truly matter, in a political sense?

I would say, first and foremost, the economy matters.  What the large investment banks are doing, that matters.  The number one threat to global stability and personal security at the moment right now is the world economy.  Governments are being toppled, peoples lives are being destroyed and the underlying causes of this are rarely acknowledged, let alone actually being dealt with.  Throw in secrecy to add to the political power of these major economic actors, and you have potentially very dangerous people - unaccountable, but with vast influence.

Secondly, geopolitics matters.  What is geopolitics?  At its most basic, the interaction of geography and politics.  More usefully, however, think of it in terms of energy resources, trade routes, choke points, military basing and grand strategy.  The competition between Iran and Russia on one hand, and Europe and the USA on the other, can be attributed at least in part as to who will control the routes of gas and oil into Europe.  In the Congo, conflict was fuelled by the demand for certain materials in the mines there, materials vital to the burgeoning electronics and internet industry which underpins the modern global economy.  Things like the establishment of new military bases, such as the Marine base in Australia as part of the "Return to the Pacific", increased Japanese naval spending, new Chinese weapons tech...stuff like that is important.  Globalization is a failing model, and geography will return, with a vengeance.

Thirdly, conflict matters.  Not just the mostly bloodless strategic manouvering and posturing of the Great Powers, as described above, but actual wars, insurgencies, assassinations and similar.  Usually the Great Powers are involved in such conflicts, but covertly.  Only through correctly discerning their actions can we come to understand their motivations, and thus their vital interests.  For instance, there are constant rumours that the Sinaloa Cartel are in a tacit alliance with the Mexican and US government against the other cartels.  Could this explain the Fast and Furious program the White House has authorized?  Are techniques from Iraq, where the "Sunni Awakening" involved siding with former Sunni insurgents against Shiite militias (and siding with elements of Shiite militias, such as the Golden JAMs, in their internal disputes), be at play here?  Why the Sinaloa, instead of other cartels?

Fourthly, internet freedom matters.  We are seeing a massive, multi-party, multi-state pushback against internet freedoms lately.  Not so much copyright related issues, though that is part of it, but corporate spying, disinformation, cybewarfare, hacking and so on.  This kinda relates to number 2, though it can also relate to the first issue, as we saw with the HB Gary business (they were being financed by the Chamber of Commerce, recall).  It can also relate to the third, as hacking can be part of the "invisible influence" of the state in supporting its proxies.  Russia is especially noted for this, though of course it is not the only state to engage in such practices.

Fifthly, we should concentrate on anything the powers that be do not want us to know.  This will likely involve all of the above four, and several topics besides.  This topic would run the course from covert action to funding of political parties, pressure groups and "grassroot organizations" such as the various Tea Party organizations, to lobbying and PR.  The invisible webs of power, as it were.  I do not want lunatic conspiracy theorizing, which should be relegated to the High Weirdness subforum, but real secrets - things like private military company personnel being arrested for being where they shouldn't be, with weapons they shouldn't have.  Or historical links between intelligence agencies and terrorist organizations.  Or personal links between Bush Jr and the House of Saud (Prince Bandar as Bush's informal international politics tutor, for example).

Sixthly, we need more political theory.  Not the dry and drab theory I was taught in classrooms necessarily, but things like Machiavelli, Assange's "State and Terrorist Conspriacies", political psychology...heuristic models which can help us to understand political activities and actions and put them in some kind of framework.

Finally, we should also keep a close, if critical eye on resistance.  By this I mean groups like Occupy, like Anonymous, like Wikileaks...people who can do things we broadly approve of.  Both in order to keep ourselves informed, and to help them if possible, but also so if they start doing things which are...strategically sub-optimal, we can help advise them on how to get back on track.

So does this sound like a plan, or do we really want to talk about John Boehner's blubbering?

[Rumckle]

I think this is a good aim, especially considering that the amount of party politics talked about by the news (and other political boards) is likely to increase closer to the 2012 election. Easier to get our talks on more constructive tracks now.

[LMNO]

I also like Cain's suggestion.  My only problem is that I'm more or less completely ignorant of the above topics, at least from a point of view of coherently posting about it.  I find this subforum incredibly interesting, as it gives me a lot of information I would never come across otherwise, but I always feel like a dummy when I try to respond.

But, yeah.  Less network news, and more Spider Jerusalem.

[Telarus]

Your opening is solid, will read the rest after coffee.

[Cainad (dec.)]

I also like what Cain is suggesting here (basically, I concur with LMNO on all points).

I'm especially keen on the geopolitics angle. Even if my role in such threads would only be to ask questions and do google searches so I know what's going on, I would still be learning something. The "Return to the Pacific", for example. That's something which involves so many states, big and small, on multiple levels that trying to piece together the implications and possible consequences blows my mind. I take that as a sign that I should probably get me some edumacation.


Day-to-day politics are still a source of great lulz, and are worth looking at if only to see what the politicians of the day think they need to do to secure voter interest. However, I heartily agree that it is, by and large, a circus performance more designed to distract and obfuscate than anything else.

There's more to say, but I should probably go to class now.

[Cramulus]

I think these are great points. Here at PD, I feel like a lot of us have benefited from exposure to that skeptical, horrormirth, trickster tone we have here.. it makes it a lot easier to talk about things like religion, philosophy, and other ephemeral topics.

What Cain's talking about is consciously developing a similar tone for politics - something that keeps us oriented on the things that matter, and stop getting distracted by the Two Man Con.

What I think will be difficult - is that the two-man con politics are often amusing as hell. Or frustrating as hell. Either way, they're evocative -- that's why they take the center stage! So I think it will be impossible to not post about santorum's latest gaffe (and other political horrormirth), but yeah, let's hold that at arm's length in terms of what's actually important.

[Cramulus]

Cliff notes version of the OP


What things truly matter, in a political sense?

• The economy - The interplay of investment banking, government, and economic actors that are essentially unaccountable


• Geopolitics -  the interaction of geography and politics.  Think of it in terms of energy resources, trade routes, choke points, military basing and grand strategy. Globalization is a failing model, and geography will return, with a vengeance.


• Conflict -  actual wars, insurgencies, assassinations and similar. 


• Internet freedom - corporate spying, disinformation, cybewarfare, hacking and so on. 


• Anything the powers that be do not want us to know - ie covert action to funding of political parties, pressure groups and "grassroot organizations" such as the various Tea Party organizations, to lobbying and PR.  The invisible webs of power, as it were.  No lunatic conspiracy theorizing.


• Political theory - Machiavelli, Assange's "State and Terrorist Conspriacies", political psychology...heuristic models which can help us to understand political activities and actions and put them in some kind of framework.


• Resistance - groups like Occupy, Anonymous, Wikileaks

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

100% agree. While it's still (and will always be) true that Politicians Say The Funniest Things, I definitely think that by focusing on the blundering of Republicans and the Tea Party as if we are on the Democrat's "side", we are letting ourselves get sucked into the Two-Man Con.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

100% agree. While it's still (and will always be) true that Politicians Say The Funniest Things, I definitely think that by focusing on the blundering of Republicans and the Tea Party as if we are on the Democrat's "side", we are letting ourselves get sucked into the Two-Man Con.

This.

However, the thread is about what WINGNUTS say, and as I was reminded yesterday, there's wingnuts on every wing.

And I LIKE reading what the monkeys say.  I think we've just been spending too much time concentrating on one of the Punch & Judy dolls, because let's face it...the ones on the "right" are funnier in terms of sheer humor.  You have to have a finely developed sense of horrormirth to get the gags coming from the "left".

[Cramulus]

Video related:

Judge Napolitano.How to get fired from Fox Business in under 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fOaCemmsnNk

Judge Napolitano, of Fox News announced that next week will be his last show. Then he started spitting truth about the two-man con.

He does throw in a little Ron Paul support in there, but it's only one or two sentences towards the end.


One of the videos which helped accelerate the Occupy movement was that charged up "Get the money out of politics" rant by Dylan Rattigan. It perfectly articulated the frustrating things about current system and the channel through which positive change could come.

I think we need similar memes which express this thread's OP. Like, when a friend posts some political claptrap on facebook, I wish I had a tight image I could use to reply -- to the effect of "You have been distracted".

[P3nT4gR4m]

Look: we all accept, on an intellectual level, that party politics is 90% a sham, a show for the rubes, a distraction in short.  Yet we seem to bother ourselves with it an awful lot, which suggests, at some gut level, as a site, we haven't yet quite internalized that belief.

Couldn't agree moar. I'd rather not have to trawl through posts by people who profess to know better, acting all surprised because some talking head hasn't done what they said they'd do or otherwise lived up to some "expectation" especially when no one in their right mind would harbour that expectation in the first place.

I suck at commenting on the good stuff and my comments on party politics are restricted to mockery and trolling on general principle but this board is how I stay educated so I'd rather not have to wade through pages and pages of political soap opera to get to the good shit.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Well, I guess I'll go get my political humor elsewhere.

[Elder Iptuous]

are we to put the politically oriented fluff in AT, then?
like Roger, i enjoy the slant that is put on political humor among this group. And, although you may find the jokes or links or whatnot on another site, you're not going to find this gaggle's response to it anywhere else...

[Junkenstein]

Video related:

Judge Napolitano.How to get fired from Fox Business in under 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fOaCemmsnNk

Judge Napolitano, of Fox News announced that next week will be his last show. Then he started spitting truth about the two-man con.

Fuck me. That was unexpected. The rant, not the inevitable sacking.

More of this kind of thing. If every newscaster decided to do something similar people might start realising what a joke any political system is. Who knows, they may even figure out who can actually change it. Clue - It's the same person who prevents forest fires.

Back on topic, I'd suggest that a focus on geopolitics is worth considering. Current tensions in Iran for example, have very little to do with the political structure but a lot to do with the potential (And subtle threats) to disrupt oil flow. 

Spreading the relevant information behind decisions could be as important as what the decisions actually are, if not moreso.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

are we to put the politically oriented fluff in AT, then?
like Roger, i enjoy the slant that is put on political humor among this group. And, although you may find the jokes or links or whatnot on another site, you're not going to find this gaggle's response to it anywhere else...

Well, sure.  The right makes political statements straight out of the old Weekly World News, and the left spends all its time either ignoring the right, or - more often - queuing up to lick the right's pimply arses.  The right gets more attention - at least from me - because they are in a horrible spiral of extremism, and I find that funny as hell.

It should get old...But for me it never does, especially in an election year.  I view the whole charade as cheap slapstick vaudville, and as long as it's kept in the wingnut/Arizona threads, I don't see the harm.