A “Twitter controversy” broke out on Christmas Day after leftist Drexel University professor George Ciccariello-Maher tweeted out, “All I Want for Christmas Is White Genocide” to his 11,000 followers. The tweet–since deleted–was a play on the white supremacist myth of a “White Genocide,” a canard that whites are under threat from interracial dating and diversity.
Thanks for explaining what "white genocide" means, I didn't know the back story. Can you explain what he meant here? Or did he really not write this?
"To clarify: when the whites were massacred during the Haitian Revolution, that was a good thing indeed"
Though Adam Johnson has revealed other false messages by the press in the past, this example is very good at showing how the corporate media undermines the Left (and the 99% in the process) even if no proof exists. The problem is that we don't have an educated public (60% of readers don't read beyond the headlines?!?!) that can regularly A) recognize the distortion and B) understand how such an article serves corporate interests. Even though most Americans are suspicious of the MSM, most also believe that we have a "liberal" media as in some mysterious cabal of wealthy communists that secretly control the media to undermine democracy. Yet when those same Americans are told that the media is actually a right wing cabal of wealthy corporations that work in tandem to undermine democracy, many feel that this response is a 'conspiracy theory' to be immediately dismissed because the messenger has fallen under the spell of the liberal conspiracy.
It is quite frustrating (as every reader on Commondreams knows) trying to convince the average person that the media manipulates mass consciousness for the purpose of undermining our collective strength. After generations of corporate propaganda, can we be hardly surprised? Yet true change in our government requires a deep understanding of how we are played by our government, our media and by those select few who dictate the messages to be delivered to us. Democracy only works when a society has an informed public.
This is what happens in a society that lacks reading comprehension skills. I suppose a lot of idiots today would read Swift's "A Modest Proposal" as sincere.
Being able to read written words is only the first part of being "literate."
I think Jon Stewart nailed it with his comment on bias in the news media, saying that they're biased toward laziness and sensationalism. Start looking for it and you'll find both of those things everywhere. This is a good case in point.
"..Cover the controversy, rather than critically investigate it..."
That is the Captured Media (press, print, broadcast, TV etc.) leading up to and including 2017.
^^^ This. Absolutely this. And this was the sort of thing Edward R. Murrow warned about decades ago.
Corporate media only serves as yet another example as to why democracy and capitalism are mutually incompatible. We can have one, or we can have the other, but we cannot and will never have both. Capitalism consistently seeks to undermine democracy in every instance -- it must do so in order to thrive (or more to the point, for the ruling class to thrive at the expense of everyone else).
Insofar as corporate media continues to misinform (either deliberately or by error, or, all too often motivated by rating$) what we call "democracy" in the US is a sham. What good is being a citizen participating in his or her society if it is all based on distorted information?
But the pretense must be kept up -- and almost invariably the word "democracy" is used by the ruling class as a bait-and-switch: where the government talks of "Making the world safe for democracy," what they really mean is "Making the world safe for capitalism."
The sooner we recognize the mutual incompatibility between democracy and capitalism, the better.
He is a tenured professor. He can say whatever dumbass thing pops into his head.
" Fake outrage long enough and it becomes real outrage."
Noam Chomsky has called it " manufactured consent".
Goebbels also put it this way, to paraphrase: Make the lie big; keep repeating it in the media; and eventually the German people will believe it as true.
Excellent example of corporate media's laziness and lust for sensational stories, true or not.
Another example would be the new one, "Russia hacking our electrical grid", which the media ran with, then offered a small print correction that the laptop Russian malware was found on was not connected to the electrical grid at all.
The malware can be purchased on the web and just because it was Russian, they said it was Russia that did it. Ridiculous, but hey, they want to gin up a stand off with Russia, even though Clinton didn't get to do it, it marches on.
No proof Russia hacked the DNC but to hear them tell it, we are at war with Russia.
I think it important to recognize that what goes on here is much older than the media.
In the book Facing West: The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating and Empire-Building , the author outlines how the very first colonists landing in the Americas wrote sensationalized accounts of the "savages" that resided there and the massacres they committed against the peace loving Colonists. Popular works of fiction and poems wrtten during these times and distrubited referred to the Native Americans as devious and cunning, murderous and barbaric. This same type of thing went on for the next few hundreds of years when describing the black africans, the Mexicans in the Mexican American war, the Spaniards, the Japanese, The Communists, The Arabs and now the Russians again.
The Media is just the voice of the 1 percent. They have rarely been a check on their power but rather an extension of it tasked with conditioning the masses to accept the dictates of that 1 percent as a truth. This is true in every Country on this earth. Now there are certainly exceptions and certainly those in that media that truly want to reader to get to the truth but they are the exception and not the rule. The media is not some noble body of people trying to inform the citizen as to what goes on in Government. They are the tool by which those in power deliver their lies and have always been , which is why those in power allow them to exist.
No, even tenured professors can get sacked if they cross certain lines. Witness historian Joel Kovel, a distinguished tenured professor of history at Bard College whose sharp criticisms of Israel and Zionism got him fired from that famously "liberal" institution (whose most generous patron is George Soros).
I don't necessarily believe that democracy and capitalism are incompatible. In more developed countries than the U.S., such as many European countries, capitalism exists and the populace feels that they have a vibrant and functional democracy. However because these countries have a more representative democracy, the benefits are far more evenly distributed amongst the general population than here in the U.S. Even next door in Canada, a very capitalistic country, the people have top quality universal healthcare, better social benefits and are even experimenting now with a UBI (universal basic income). What is not compatible with democracy is when special interests undermine political offices at the expense of the public interest. No where on the planet have corporate entities been so successful at high-jacking government as here in the U.S., so it is natural for many citizens to assume that capitalism and 'democracy' can't co-exist. And even in countries where capitalism is kept in check by a functioning democracy, government can never let its guard down as the corporate capitalist will always work overtime to subvert that same democracy if given the opportunity.
I used to feel the same way up to a few years ago, but I no longer believe capitalism is a beast to be compromised with -- without the state, capitalism could not exist. Even other developed nations, as much better as they are than the US (no disagreement there!) the ruling class is doing their part to erode things in the name of "austerity." This is why Marx is so important -- much he got wrong, but his critique of capitalism is on target because there are internal contradictions which inevitably lead to oppression.
This article articulates the inherent problem with capitalism better than my own ranting:
But that's me casting a wider net -- and sadly I'm a pessimist at heart which likely has more to do with our difference on this point (you are one of my favorite posters here) -- More on topic (I have a tendency to stray!), news networks and newspapers, so long as they are capitalist ventures, will continue serve their own corporate interests at the expense of informing the public -- which consistently undermines democracy (a democracy can't function if people remain mis- or dis-informed). A CBS CEO pretty much sums up the dilemma when he bluntly admitted: "[Trump] may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS."
"White Genocide" = Nazi Stupidity
The term, originated and used by Nazis to mean the supposed elimination of white people through procreation with black people, is the reverse of what would happen.
I once had a client who was a college biology professor with a PhD in genetics. She told me that, since it is the gene for dark skin that is recessive, procreation by mixed couples would in fact, and in the long run, end with the disappearance of black people. The Nazis have it exactly backwards, as we would expect.
Nice whitewashing. But it was a shitty, racist comment. Especially when he followed it up with a specific example of a slaughter of white people, apparently along race-based lines. Which gets ... zero mention here, because you're either not about the truth or not ready to handle it.
Didn't know about all that, but in any case it was certainly extremely poor judgement. The apologetics of this article is compounding the error.