A False Sense Of History
It comes down to which version of history you want to believe. The one currently being championed by the likes of Palin or one based in material reality (historical materialism, if you will)?
The same Republicans who throw Bill Ayers and the spectre of "the 60's" out into the public arena would be quick to name-drop MLK and declare him representative of their ideals.
This conventional right-wing interpretation of history that Palin represents supports the myth that first and foremost; this system is self-correcting. 'Have faith in it because it will get better on its own.' Secondly and in addition, the second prong of this paradigm states that only non-violence is acceptable and only non-violent means are needed to prod along this well-intentioned system.
All of the above is false.
The reality of this system is that it only caves in to progressive demands when they threaten to expose the fundamental flaws of the system or threaten to bring it all crashing down. In the current public dialogue, forced by Palin and the McCain campaign, this is represented by Bill Ayers. Bill Ayers was part of a movement that sought to overthrow the current system. Obviously, this goal was not accomplished but the threat of it (as represented domestically by the likes of Weather Underground, Malcolm X, Black Panther Party, and countless others) was enough to 'encourage' the system to introduce lesser changes to appease enough people so as to avoid a systemic change.
This is how history works! To buy into the fearmongering of Palin's vague but insinuating charges against Ayers is to buy into her false version of history.
As Chomsky called it:
"a trap deeply rooted in the intellectual culture generally - a trap sometimes called the doctrine of change of course, invoked in the United States every two or three years. The content of the doctrine is: "Yes, in the past we did some wrong things because of innocence or inadvertence. But now that's all over, so let's not waste any more time on this boring, stale stuff."
The doctrine is dishonest and cowardly, but it does have advantages: It protects us from the danger of understanding what is happening before our eyes."
The same Republicans who throw Bill Ayers and the spectre of "the 60's" out into the public arena would be quick to name-drop MLK and declare him representative of their ideals.
This conventional right-wing interpretation of history that Palin represents supports the myth that first and foremost; this system is self-correcting. 'Have faith in it because it will get better on its own.' Secondly and in addition, the second prong of this paradigm states that only non-violence is acceptable and only non-violent means are needed to prod along this well-intentioned system.
All of the above is false.
The reality of this system is that it only caves in to progressive demands when they threaten to expose the fundamental flaws of the system or threaten to bring it all crashing down. In the current public dialogue, forced by Palin and the McCain campaign, this is represented by Bill Ayers. Bill Ayers was part of a movement that sought to overthrow the current system. Obviously, this goal was not accomplished but the threat of it (as represented domestically by the likes of Weather Underground, Malcolm X, Black Panther Party, and countless others) was enough to 'encourage' the system to introduce lesser changes to appease enough people so as to avoid a systemic change.
This is how history works! To buy into the fearmongering of Palin's vague but insinuating charges against Ayers is to buy into her false version of history.
As Chomsky called it:
"a trap deeply rooted in the intellectual culture generally - a trap sometimes called the doctrine of change of course, invoked in the United States every two or three years. The content of the doctrine is: "Yes, in the past we did some wrong things because of innocence or inadvertence. But now that's all over, so let's not waste any more time on this boring, stale stuff."
The doctrine is dishonest and cowardly, but it does have advantages: It protects us from the danger of understanding what is happening before our eyes."
posted by shane at 7:08 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home