0 votes

How Credible is the Narrative Put Forth by the Government and the 'Mainstream' Media?

Mind you that while I acknowledge that the government and the 'mainstream' media often report many verifiable facts, the veracity of which can be (and should be) independently corroborated by such faculties as alternative internet media, it is the overall narrative put forth that is often almost pure "spin" (aka "lying"). For example, take the recent "bailout" of Wall Street welfare queens. We were told by most of the grandiose mentioners in the 'mainstream' media and the government that we just had to "do something" otherwise the imminent collapse of the entire economy would ensue. But I think that it is fair to say that the vast majority of we who love liberty and favor a return to constitutional government (like Ron Paul) saw through the spin and made the clinical, dispassionate analysis that the "bailout" and associated nationalization of business and industry would be a very bad thing for the economy.

The "bailout" is of course only one example. We could add to this list almost ad infinitum. We are also aware, I would hope, that the government and the 'mainstream' media also ignore a host of other potential problems and problems that have taxed our country for decades upon decades. These omissions become part of the narrative since you cannot address or debate a problem if you do not acknowledge that you have a problem. Things like the 'Federal Reserve' and the American Empire are never adequately discussed or debated in the 'mainstream' media (in fact they are typically given the status of merely benevolent institutions).

The theory of Global Warming™ and the events of 11 September 2001 are largely treated as sacrosanct in the government and the 'mainstream' media. To question the official explanation of either of those subjects in almost any sense will garner you the pejorative labels of "conspiracy theorist" or a denier of "scientific knowledge" respectively. Yet because of these things (9/11 and Global Warming™), our constitutional republic is being put through the shredder in favor of an authoritarian, socialist/communist form of government at an accelerated pace.

It would seem that some of the uncloseted intelligence veterans who have pointed out that 80% of the truth appears in the 'mainstream' media have a valid point. It is the 20% that is left out and the overall narrative of American exceptionalism that perpetuates the status quo.

So the only thing that I can think of is that to restore constitutional government, we must clinically and dispassionately investigate and analyze the government and 'mainstream' media, the veracity of the facts that they report, and the narrative which they put forth. In fact, that is what a lot of us are here doing. That means no holds barred. That means pursuing the truth about all matters. That means disposing of the irrational predisposition of those who unquestioningly believe the narrative of the government and the 'mainstream' media to ad hominem arguments, strawmen, red herring and a priori reasoning. That means dispensing with conceit and irrational presumptions and presuppositions and beginning from the beginning.

"If we want to live in a free society, we need to break free from these artificial limitations on free debate and start asking serious questions once again." -Ron Paul

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You hit the nail on the head.

One thing about the "mainstream" set up is that it is very slick. That 80% gets presented with graphics, multiple camera angles, flyover shots, statistics, scrolls, etc. and this sort of stuff, along with the well-trained hosts, more or less hypnotizes the minimally aware who are watching the literal "programming".

Due to this, the 80% becomes "reality" and the 20% is the land of the "fringe". Now, this, again, is not good or healthy. It is bad and debilitating. For when a social grouping cannot analyze the collective problems of the unit, it is as if the group as a whole is marching blindly over a cliff. It's almost like the smooth, slick "mainstream" is keeping the people destructed as they march right along over the edge.

For me, most people involved in the process are "useful mediocrities". These are people, usually very professional but NOT INDEPENDENT, who are just doing their job and often very well. There are only certain folks who are actively pursuing an "agenda" and they utilize the useful mediocrities via well honed methods. If The People care to be free, they MUST be very aware when certain aspects of the debate are not allowed to be shown through the semi-official organs, or are denounced without proper rational debate. More often than not, this indicates that some body's "interests" are being encroached on through said debate and indicates an agenda.

Clearly to succeed as a people, against whatever odds, we must enlighten via a complete willingness and INSISTENCE to approach the world seeking truth all the way to the root. That 20% that means so much, MUST be dealt with rationally and honestly.


My liberty-minded home base of thought:



Freedom - Peace - Prosperity


...the psychological construct of the 'mainstream' is a collectivist's dream come true.

It is as if there actually is some mysterious zeitgeist out there that defines the norms and mores of the collection of individuals who constitute the population of the united States. It is a self-reinforcing model that tends to deemphasize the individual in favor of the "greater good" and labels dissent as "fringe". How many times did they use that very word to refer to Ron Paul during the primaries.

Why did they label Ron Paul as "fringe"? Because he dissented from the authoritarian powers that be. Because he opposed the Fed; because he opposed the American empire; because he favored a truly limited government.

But we have state worshipers here on the DP literally apologizing for the illegitimate government in Washington, D.C., actually explaining that literal government propaganda is a good thing (and a facet of "national defense"). Pretty pathetic folks.

"An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it. Truth stands, even if there be no public support. It is self sustained." -Mahatma Gandhi


"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy

The propaganda was actually

The propaganda was actually believable to the naked eye until recently, but now they are blatantly ignoring large chunks of facts and ideas that are crucially important to any argument they make. It's like watching a childrens program. This is especially the case when talking about anything financially.