I see more and more evidence the US is moving towards "Fahrenheit 451" and "Idiocracy".

[DetlefK]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451
"Fahrenheit 451": A novel where the government oppresses ideas by burning books. The end of the novel reveals that this dystopia didn't come to be because of some evil conspiracy: It came to be because people lost interest in books and movies that make them think.

------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy
"Idiocracy": A movie about a dystopian future where people are more stupid than now. How did it come to be? The movie's intro suggests that stupid people out-breed smart people, but please note the permanent corporate misinformation ("Brawndo&quot , the habit of rituals replacing substance (law-enforcement, judicial trials, politics...), and that the most popular TV-show is "Ouch, my balls".

-------------

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/who-needs-algebra-fox-news-panel-debates-whether-math-should-be-required-in-school/comments/#disqus
US-students suck at algebra, compared to students from other countries. The solution? If algebra gives kids bad marks, get rid of algebra.

-------------

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/05/north-carolina-wishes-away-climate-change
The lawmakers of Carolina passed a law in 2012, detailing what kind of mathematical methods may be used to make forecasts about rising sea-levels.

-------------

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/louisiana-state-senator-insists-science-has-proven-creationism-over-evolution-and-hes-a-democrat/
A lawmaker furiously insists that recent scientific research has proven that the biblical creation-story is correct.

-------------

http://www.salon.com/2016/04/01/i_dared_criticize_fox_news_and_speak_up_for_samantha_bee_this_is_how_the_right_roared_back_at_me/

Take this example. I recently wrote a piece that described a Fox News comedy show’s failed effort to slime Samantha Bee’s “Full Frontal.” In addition to explaining that Bee’s show had immediately drawn the ire of the right, I pointed out that she had been called vulgar anti-Christian, vile and an actual witch.

In response for mentioning that Samantha Bee was insulted for making satire, the author received threatening messages that combine every racist, bigoted and offensive insult you can possibly imagine.

The Hebdo case may be extreme, but it does point to another side of satire. This is the side where the person not only doesn’t get the joke, they threaten violence over it.

Here at home we have the example of Michael Moore who likely wins the award for most violently threatened satirist. He suffered a series of attacks, including a failed attempt to bomb his house. He even had Clint Eastwood threaten to kill him. Twice.

-------------

Remember when Elizabeth Warren was attacked for being a Professor?
Remember that Jeb Bush believed that, instead of scientists, the solution to global-warming would come from good-old-boys tinkering with something in their garage?

-------------

Just this week I read an article I really, really, really wish I had bookmarked. The article talked about 2 political commentators who were well-regarded in the mainstream-media... until 2012. In 2012 they committed the unforgivable sin of saying that Washington isn't broken because of partisanship, because of Democrats and Republicans not getting along, because of "both sides do it".

The unforgivable sin of these commentators was to put the entire blame for the political dysfunction on the Republicans.
And how did the mainstream-media react to that?
These two guys were no longer booked for interviews and no longer cited by any major TV-outlet.

Because "both sides do it" is a good story you can milk for years, while pretending to be an innocent witness.
"One side does it" is a bad story that is bad for profit.

-------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html?_r=1
Donald Trump, the least-qualified and least-substantial of all presidential candidates, received the most media-attention.
For free.
Because primary-elections aren't about finding out who's a competent politician.
Primary-elections are about ratings and profit.

--------------










There is no big, bad conspiracy to blame and fight.

Thinking is hard.
Thinking is inconvenient.
Facts cannot be manipulated or oppressed. Facts are scary.
Being presented with facts makes people uncomfortable.
So instead of showing people things they don't want to see and don't understand, why don't you show them things they want to see and things they do understand?
You get good ratings and make good profit, the people are happy, everybody wins.

There is no big, bad conspiracy to blame and fight.

There is no conspiracy.


The situation reminds me of this sci-fi-book:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17162842-rx
The hero faces the villain and shouts into his face that he will tell everybody about his crimes.
The villain retorts: "Tell whom? The information has been publicly available for decades! Whistleblowers like you leak this every few years! And there has never been a noteworthy public outrage! The people just don't care!"

[denbot]

1. K&R

Good post.

[Capt. Obvious]

2. You interrupted me while I was watching, "Ow My Balls."