Have to say I am out of the conspiracy zone aided in no small part by reading/listening to Andrew Bacevich, Noam Chomsky and Richard Wolff (BCW). While conspiracists seek to unveil machinations behind the scenes I feel that BCW highlight concepts that stand in the open but are easily brushed aside or not given popular attention. They – BCW – highlight concepts that require a little introspection: heck, even require just being less of a consumer (go ahead and say it). They provide analysis of the foundation of the American way of life be it the economic, political or moral aspect.
It is as though conspiracy guys know this – they know something ain’t right and in some cases have documents to back up what they say. Unfortunately, the veil they pull aside is a self-made one, not the one woven by corporate-capitalist propaganda. Listening to or even reading Chomsky for five minutes will provide a person with enough shocking, hidden-in-plain-view facts to perhaps permanently alter their perception. His facts are grounded in reality: which will always seem quotidian held up against x-files which he doesn’t dabble in.
What of pioneering and intelligent Dr. Steven Greer? An extra-terrestrial audience was present to view the first moon landing? There you go: he said this. He does have sources but often they are off the record. However, a lot of his quotes are from testimony and many of his testifiers have legit provenance.
His take – that suppliers of traditional forms of energy do not want a free, clean energy to become available even though it could be made available – is definitely far-out when considered from an everyday person’s perspective. The examples (for free energy) he brings out seem like they are the products of scammers if for any reason than they countervail scientific orthodoxy (which has shored up its defenses most solidly). Greer states that one man’s invention was covered up, the inventor killed. Greer and others often refer to Tesla.
Used as a though experiment, yes, if we had free, clean, sustainable energy, we should switch to it – if we listen first to counterarguments for its restriction. It seems a safer choice – free energy vs. climate change-inducing petroleum – but consequences so often prove to be unseen.
For the thought experiment though, let’s be fortune tellers and say it will live up to its promise and provide energy for everyone which has the effect of greatly reducing suffering around the globe while even mitigating global warming. Are corporations – say Exxon-Mobil, BP, General Electric, etc. – so evil that they would perpetrate a cover-up of a thing that would put them out of business? Dang it if I want to say yes.
Taken as a thought experiment, Greer’s take on things reveals a venal group of people that do have very great power. In the end the concept of free energy may be taken as a metaphor for seeing the need to change the way we live on earth but wanting to keep our level of material well-being while also removing first-world guilt by letting everyone else join our club.
The real cure is harder. We listen to Chomsky and Wolff and recognize the need for collective, popular demonstration/action. Even Bacevich would appreciate this. But then Occupy, as a significant, visible actor is on hiatus. But still, the United States has a history of people organizing and fighting hard to stand up for themselves.
I think, though, of what Chomsky calls the new spirit of the times: people being selfish and living in a way that embodies the consumer ethos. Bacevich understands this to a fault saying that morality may only mean working hard and being a good family member – no involvement in mass social movements required. Ah, what to do?
No comments:
Post a Comment