Path: news.cac.psu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!dns.city-net.com!async2
From: [email protected] (Sourcerer)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Dystopia, at last...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 95 10:42:00 GMT
Organization: The Grimwit Factory
Lines: 53
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: async2.city-net.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Omar Haneef '96) wrote:
>Sourcerer
>(1) Stupid is the how the rich elite describe the masses
>(2) Activism is pretty much useless talking
>Is this a correct assessment?
Activisim is a conspiracy of the elite to oppress the masses. The activists
consider the social power inefficient in that oppression, because it leaves
the masses discontented and under-utilized. which inevitably leads to social
disorder which disturbs the security of the elite in their compounds and is
bad for biz (recollect David Rockafeller's assessment of the Sandanista
regime -- "a bad credit risk"), plus the condition of the masses offends the
aesthetics of the sensitized.
The activist dialogue is with the social power (thus the conspiracy of the
elite). The masses (the lumpen) are not permitted a voice because they
aren't bright enough to appreciate the activists' sense of irony, and would
only embarass themselves. In their stead, "representing" them, are the
ideals of the activists.
Activists should not be confused with workers in the field, although I make
a distinction between politicals in the field (who sacrifice their resources
for a time) and the religious (who sacrifice their futures) who assist the
masses.
The masses are not stupid. They are very adept at surviving the
depredations of the social power and have a bare-faced realistic appraisal
of the elites. The elites do not understand the masses "sense of irony" or
it terrifies them, if they do.
The difference in a nutshell: Back when Solidarity was barely hanging on
agaisnt the Polish state's infiltration and sabatoge, someone wrote an
analysis of the Solidarity posters and those of unions in the US (this was
in an art, not a political, magazine). He noted two distinguishing
characteristics between them: In the Solidarity posters' depictions of
people en masse, the people had individual well defined faces, and the
banners and signs they carried had legible text of the movements' slogans.
In the American unions' posters, the faces were all "generic" and
cartoonish, and the banners and signs were just squiggles and marks
indicating "text" -- 'bus advertismenet art' (or 'PBS art') I call it.
I see no reason to dignify this scam of the elites by associating it
with actual social revolution...although liberal humanists are
occasionally useful in the short term.
(__) Sourcerer
/(<>)\ O|O|O|O||O||O "I'll string my whips with scorpions"
\../ |OO|||O|||O|O -- Webster
|| OO|||OO||O||O The Duchess of Malfi
[Next appendix] | [Return to index for Appendix A4] | [Return to index for Appendix A]