Thursday, October 23, 2008

I know you are but what am I?

.
.
While perusing politically-themed videos on YouTube, we've noticed an interesting little development: the insertion of the words "(liberal activist)" after the names of journalists who've refused to cover their interview subjects in whipped cream and strawberries and ask only puffball questions of anyone representing the right.

"Sarah Palin interviewed by Katie Couric (liberal activist)"

"John McCain responds to Jon Stewart (liberal activist)"

"Gwen Ifill (liberal activist) is bored at Republican convention"


What's most interesting here is that, by adding those two words, the uploaders behind the clips are being conservative activists. But they would never agree, because this is how dominant ideologies — or ideologies that like to think of themselves that way — operate. Labeling everything that doesn't fit their doctrine and agenda, they never label themselves. After all, they're the normal and rational ones, while all counterviews are suspicious and dangerous. Why would something that sees itself as being in charge of identifying take time to identify itself?

Apparently the goal is a nation with one party, one ideology. But that sounds like Orwellian totalitarianism to us.




No comments: