According to a poll this morning in the Amsterdam Metro, a Dutch tabloid, 84 percent of the respondents believe the moon landing was a staged Hollywood special effects shoot. What does this say about: 1. Trust in what America says; 2. Trust in science; 3. The credulity of the Dutch; 4. The incredulity of the Dutch (take you pick)?
I find that rather scary Bodmin. It suggests that in future, when this epoch of history has passed beyond living memory, it may be difficult for historians to tell the truth and be believed. It reminds me of Holocaust denial and other forms of historical revisionism.
I saw the moon landing live on television and know of no reason to suppose it was faked. I think post- 9/11 history is anachronistically influencing people's perception of events that took place decades before the administration of G.W. Bush with all its corruption and mendacity.
I don't necessarily reject all conspiracy theories out of hand, but I think people are too prone to them these days. It reflects a form of credulity, not skepticism or critical thinking.
Certainly with the massive lying that governments have done in the last decade to justify their policies - particularly the WMDs and Iraq, but not just that and not just the Americans: for the whole of the Blair years in England the safest way to know what was really happening was to assume the truth of the absolute opposite of what the government was saying - they have brought the doubt on themselves. Most recently, as Goldman Sachs and other NYC megabanks are suddenly reporting record profits again, six months after we were told they were at death's door, I've been hearing more and more people opining that there was no economic crisis, only a well orchestrated and highly successful campaign by bankers to grab several trillions from our pockets. What can one say, except to reiterate Marx's analysis that capitalism is inherently prone to crises like this, and maybe it was real? The manipulation of public opinion about sex, from the missing children on milk cartons to the hysteria about pedos on the web and sexting, is only a small footnote. And healthy skepticism about 'seeing is believing' (at least when the experience is mediaised) is also a good thing. Granted that at least those who worked with photography always knew that it was in no way an objective depiction of reality like everyone seemed to think, with digitised images and computer manipulation (Photoshopping) being in the hands of more people, more people are now realising that. The problem is that most people don't make the effort to apply their doubt - political or visual - critically enough.
5 comments:
That blew MY theory! LOL
According to a poll this morning in the Amsterdam Metro, a Dutch tabloid, 84 percent of the respondents believe the moon landing was a staged Hollywood special effects shoot. What does this say about: 1. Trust in what America says; 2. Trust in science; 3. The credulity of the Dutch; 4. The incredulity of the Dutch (take you pick)?
I find that rather scary Bodmin. It suggests that in future, when this epoch of history has passed beyond living memory, it may be difficult for historians to tell the truth and be believed. It reminds me of Holocaust denial and other forms of historical revisionism.
I saw the moon landing live on television and know of no reason to suppose it was faked. I think post- 9/11 history is anachronistically influencing people's perception of events that took place decades before the administration of G.W. Bush with all its corruption and mendacity.
I don't necessarily reject all conspiracy theories out of hand, but I think people are too prone to them these days. It reflects a form of credulity, not skepticism or critical thinking.
Certainly with the massive lying that governments have done in the last decade to justify their policies - particularly the WMDs and Iraq, but not just that and not just the Americans: for the whole of the Blair years in England the safest way to know what was really happening was to assume the truth of the absolute opposite of what the government was saying - they have brought the doubt on themselves. Most recently, as Goldman Sachs and other NYC megabanks are suddenly reporting record profits again, six months after we were told they were at death's door, I've been hearing more and more people opining that there was no economic crisis, only a well orchestrated and highly successful campaign by bankers to grab several trillions from our pockets. What can one say, except to reiterate Marx's analysis that capitalism is inherently prone to crises like this, and maybe it was real?
The manipulation of public opinion about sex, from the missing children on milk cartons to the hysteria about pedos on the web and sexting, is only a small footnote.
And healthy skepticism about 'seeing is believing' (at least when the experience is mediaised) is also a good thing. Granted that at least those who worked with photography always knew that it was in no way an objective depiction of reality like everyone seemed to think, with digitised images and computer manipulation (Photoshopping) being in the hands of more people, more people are now realising that.
The problem is that most people don't make the effort to apply their doubt - political or visual - critically enough.
Sydney,
You had me scared for a moment.
Post a Comment