symbolism of control

[not systems]

John Fraim

'What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention, and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it.'
Herbert A. Simon. Nobel Laureate Economist

'Images chosen and constructed by someone else have everywhere become the individual’s principal connection to the world he formerly observed for himself.'
Guy Debord. Comments on The Society of the Spectacle

There is the strong relationship between symbols, communication and control. In fact, the history of symbols is the history of communication and control. This common history has involved an evolution from the visible to the invisible, from message to medium, from content to context.

...
While the change from visible to invisible symbols of communication and control has involved a long evolutionary process, the founding of America greatly accelerated this evolution. In fact, one could argue that the incredible rise of America was brought about by its key position at the intersection of contentual and contextual symbols. The two great symbol dualities had been present in other nations. But it was in America that they both became embedded into the two paradoxical ideals of the new nation: freedom and equality. The visible symbolism of content was behind the idea of American freedom while the invisible symbolism of context behind the idea of equality.

The original expression of these duality symbols in the American system aligned society with freedom and government with context. The original founders realized this duality. As Thomas Paine observed in Common Sense (1776):

'Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher … Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.'

While America’s founders saw the duality in the conflict between society and government, the government realized this duality was dangerous: it was too visible to the populace. It therefore set about to discover ways to move away from this content and towards an invisible context.

The technique American government eventually employed was based on moving the contextual symbol of equality into society and making it a contentual symbol. There, it would do battle with the other contentual symbol of freedom. One might say the change was one from a vertical duality between government and society to a horizontal duality between the two key groups in society, one group based around the symbol of freedom and the other based around the symbol of equality.

...
The result that government and its symbols of communication and control have retreated to the unseen context while society is constantly distracted by battles between the two parties. The hidden agenda of the two party system is to distract attention of society away from government, away from the duality the Founders saw between government and society. In effect, it is to make society focus on content rather than around at the surrounding context. The two political parties, the dualities of content, are constantly at war with each other on a playing field while the government sits up in the context of the stands observing the battle without anyone looking up from the battle on the playing field to observe them.

It is one of the most important yet hidden challenges of American government to perpetuate this battle between contentual symbols within society. Keeping the battle within society avoids recognition of the original duality seen by the Founders between society and government. In this sense, it matters little what symbol of society is in power, freedom or equality, Republicans or Democrats. As long as the battle can be framed as a contentual, horizontal one between societal elements rather than a contextual, vertical one between society and government, government and the symbolism of context will remain in power. As long as the dual party reigns in America, the true controllers will always be just a little outside of sight, at the top of the pyramid. They happily watch the two groups do battle knowing that they always remain in control no matter which side wins.

...

[In Truth We Trust]

1. Excellent read -Kick for truth

[evermind]

2. Interesting read. Thanks. (Oh, and a link ...)

... since I was intrigued enough to google for the full article:

http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/foamycustard/fc050.htm

which concludes:

But ironically, the rise of greater freedom makes contextual symbols of control less and less visible. The modern symbol of freedom is not manifested in a spiritual freedom but rather a cultural enslavement caused by an increasing number of contentual symbols in the form of products and information. As Nobel Laureate Economist Herbert Simon notes 'What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention.' One might add, poverty of attention to controlling contextual symbols.

In all of this, freedom becomes more and more illusory. It becomes the consumer’s mantra of 'shop until you drop.' Society is given more and more things which more and more the same and less and less different. This applies to entertainment, brands, media and certainly political choices. As Bruce Springsteen once lamented, '500 channels and nothing on.'

With the growing segmentation of society it becomes increasingly difficult to see a common enemy.

And it is just as difficult to find a common hero.

Can't help being reminded of "father of modern advertising" Edward L. Bernays (Goebbels' favourite author) and his book, Propaganda (1928), which opens with:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized."

Interesting that Bernays seems to have got a lot of his ideas after doing his spell in the Creel Committee (a huge US government propaganda effort, designed to bolster popular support for American involvement in the 1st world war, where, incidentally, they invented the phrase "making the world safe for democracy"!)

(Full story on Bernays at http://www.everything2.com/?node=edward+l.+bernays )

[not systems]

3. Forgot the link. Thanks.

Don't know what I was thinks.

[bemildred]

4. "Pay no attention to the little man behind the screen." nt