Sunday, September 23, 2012
“A representative Argentine community bound together by memories, historical conditions, and a shared narrative of the past named the period 1976–83 simply the dictatorship, all in lowercase. Later in the 1980s it was called the Process.
Dirty war was the name proposed by the military junta, which sought to give the government’s terrorist violence the guise of an internal war, even as its systematic methodology of detentions, tortures, disappearances, and kidnappings of children born in captivity was practiced in clandestine detention centers.
In the politics of names, dirty war invokes the theory of the two demons, a narrative that ideologically and politically interprets this period as a war between the dictators and “subversion.” In this theory, the “demon” of subversion has to be countered by demonlike tactics by the dictators to maintain security. Or, according to another version of the past, the terrorism practiced by the de facto government is a patriotic act against the illegal violence of the guerrillas. Human rights organizations have argued that the Comisión Nacional sobre la Desaparición de Personas(National Commission on the Disappearance of Persons, or CONADEP) and the military-juntas trial alike participated in the theory of the two demons. This theory may have had the effect of acquitting those factions of civil society that enabled the coup d’état and the repression that followed.” – Mirta Alejandra Antonelli. .
“As the global Occupy movement has shown, words can move entire nations of people — even the world — to action. Occupy Language, as a movement, should speak to the power of language to transform how we think about the past, how we act in the present, and how we envision the future.” – H. Samy Alim. .
Since the emergence of the Occupy movement, public language is slowly being democratized and liberated. There is a rebirth of the free market of ideas. How we think about and interpret present government policies, recent political events, and the history of the past century is radically changing.
The totalitarian press in the United States and the West is finding it harder to ridicule dissent and colonize the public mind with the use of language because it is no longer the dominant information vehicle through which citizens come to understand reality and the world.
The global alternative media has injected new ideas and new knowledge into the public mind. What has been an intellectually sterile public debate about the history of the last century and the development of the world in the 21st century is fast becoming very competitive.
Even the most authoritarian ideologue in the media who wants the public to believe that the official story of the 9/11 events is the truth is forced to recognize that the totalitarian term “conspiracy theory” has lost its magical quality in the post-Occupy world. Occupy broke the spell. America’s political awakening is unstoppable. The Western wall of taboo and denial is breaking down.
What new totalitarian term is the declining mainstream media going to use to try to marginalize the 9/11 truth and justice movement? It looks like they don’t have one. Their propaganda gun is out of ammo. They are firing blanks. Plus, our psychological vests are bullshit-proof.
By suppressing scientific evidence that shatters the 9/11 myth, the mainstream media committed itself to an ahistorical role that is increasingly hard to defend as the 9/11 myth collapses into cosmic dust.
The rapid decline of the influence of the mainstream media to define reality is a healthy process and it will accelerate. It is a good thing that the mainstream media has lost its ability to monopolize public discourse and thereby control public perceptions of reality.
Priests hid behind the cloak of God and the religious shield of the sacred temple when public knowledge of their scams increased; what holy space and transcendent idea will journalists, newspaper editors, and media pundits hide behind when the mythical world they’ve upheld comes crashing down on them and all of us? Will they too rationalize their totalitarian propaganda by pointing to divine authority? And do they expect us to believe them?
1. Mirta Alejandra Antonelli. “State Terrorism, Clandestine Language: Notes on the Argentine Military Dictatorship.” PMLA, Volume 124, Number 5, October 2009, pp. 1794–1799. The quote appears on page 1794-1795.
2. H. Samy Alim. “What if We Occupied Language?” The New York Times. December 21, 2011.
Originally appeared at The Excavator.
This article was posted: Sunday, September 23, 2012 at 2:31 am