Doubt is a weapon loaded with the future

 
Doubt is a weapon loaded with the futureThe totalitarian illusions of capitalism, at the end of the twentieth century, soon became nightmares of extermination, denial, racism and misery.

By: Juan Alberto Sánchez Marín (*)

Economy, politics and media: the fearsome trilogy of power. Three hollow beatitudes and a single true evil: the order that disrupts the perimeters that it nests. The doctrine that turns spurious what it touches.

Just, perhaps, takes advantage of the ability of people and societies to dissect with scalpel the peculiar accounts of power and identify without magnifying glass the codes of each political and media narrative.

The totalitarian illusions of capitalism, at the end of the twentieth century, soon became nightmares of extermination, denial, racism and misery. The glory was hardly glorious for a few, and, on the other hand, it was an anguish for the vast and growing swathes of population of developed countries, middle classes in decline, lower classes always below. And, of course, it was an ordeal for the excluded inhabitants of peripheral countries.

At the top of the global fair, the big media of the big capitals played a central role. They promoted each and every one of those itinerant events of possessing and possessed plutocracy: the philosophical (postmodernity), the ideological (the debacle of communism), the historical (the end of an endless story), the economic (capitalism to its wide, neoliberalism throws at the ready) and the politician (the specific government of a few pillos as the ideal democracy).

INDISOCIABLE

These media continue to play a decisive role in the consequent social despair, that of the present, strengthened with the digital hatching, internet and other magnificent and chilling technologies that encourage hatred of one another, exacerbate fears and prejudices, or tempt with departures of emergency that they give to the abusive and dictatorial regimes of the extreme right, of Trump and his accomplices to Bolsonaro and his, for example.

Thomas Piketty (2013), the French fashion economist makes five years, includes the media as one of the sectors (along with education, health and culture) in which the main organizational and property structures someday do not they will have a lot to do “with the polar paradigms of purely private capital (such as the model of the joint stock company, totally in the hands of its shareholders) or of purely public capital (with an equally top down logic [from top to bottom] in whose in case the government sovereignly decides what investment to make) ”.

The organizational and capital forms that combine both "polar paradigms" to varying degrees have been an exercise in neoliberalism, and are the first step in the absolute deregulation or modeling of companies that, rather than mixed, are a mixifori. Tricks of the establishment, and of the corporate and financial autocracy as a tangible body of democracy invariably in the making.

Surely, as Piketty argues, new types of organization and governance will emerge later. Even, let's accept it, new forms of collective intervention will probably break down and there may be true accounting and financial transparency. But it is laborious that this in itself translates into economic transparency and democratic control of capital, as it indicates towards the end of Capital in the 21st century.

No, as long as state policies and the orientation of those sectors mentioned continue to be borne by those who defend cape and sword (that is, with juicy pay) the interests of capitalism that they should control. The revolving doors on the cusp. When the problem is consubstantial, even the most significant transformations are no longer accessory.

Never, as long as the big media, the extended networks and the technologies in permanent progress do not build the other necessary stories (to which Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie refers), but the parallel realities that mislead the course of societies. Above all, when they believe them in blind faith and inhabit them for life.

The fact is that the elites in the West, since ancient Greece, two and a half millennia ago, maintain representative democracy at the waist, as well as their fateful derivations and harmonizations, thanks to the control of government positions and the mafia struts of blackmail , dependence, cohesion above and the splitting of peoples and citizens below.

 It is clear that economic and political developments are inseparable. It was like that in the preceding centuries, it will be until who knows when. And, for some years and with a momentum on the rise, another component appears linked: the media. The tripod of power where the elements are already indissoluble and act in unison in the configuration of the unbalanced world we occupy, and that has nothing fictitious.

INVENTORS

The oppressors have invented all the mechanisms of domination and empires. History indicates that they have done relatively well, but, also, it is conclusive to show that everyone, with their commands, armies, riches, colonizations, atrocities, finally, have a fixed term, and that a greater conviction of imperial perpetuity The decline is closer. The thousand-year-old Nazi empire lasted twelve.

Wars, weather, pests, accumulated debts, fiscal excesses, of course, are factors that contribute to the sunset, but no calamity as definitive as tranquility. Eternal Rome did not collapse with the screams or the looting of the Visigoth barbarian Alaric because he had been on the ground for a long time. The collapse accompanied the triumphant celebrations of wars that were not won, the deep social inequalities that nobody attended, and the sharp and continuing financial depressions similar to recent stock market speculations.

The oppressors forge the contraptions with which they project power, and neither are true. The shaman became an essential guide, devising them to make the tribe who tamed the forces of nature believe; the Greek Ayax used Olympic gods and legendary heroes to convince the elusive royal subjects of his reign over kings; the liberal flooded democracy with institutions and political speeches, and thus gave body to the word and could dispense with meaning. A "meaningless language," the Englishman Thomas Hobbes resoundingly stated in his Leviathan.

The powers of our time, how could they not convince us that the sneak pact between a few cretins from three or four developed countries is the valid and full international consensus? Or how are they not going to make us believe that the global financial architecture is not their lordship and that almost all (minus one percent, obviously, that they are) of the island and mainland inhabitants are not the slaves of their plantation monetary?

IRON SCRIPT

We parade along the tightrope of uncertainty, between the particular "passion for the real" of Badiou and the inexorable "desert of the real" of Žižek. We debate between the bland intimacy of the isolated room and the insubstantial sociality of virtual environments. We deny belonging to the noisy street, and in impertinence there is no reaffirmation. We are freedoms figured in the computer universes, which so many times are nothing but worlds reflecting the particular noisy street that surrounds us.

From the global collective to the local community, freedom roams premeditated; intelligence is excessively correct; the imagination as another imagery of common sense. In the convergence of uniform concerns, reality is sanded and achieves a lustrous finish, which dazzles and, simultaneously, disorients us.

The contents disguise the intense persuasion. The arguments overflow with inaccurate figures and biased data, erroneous citations, incorrect allusions, deliberate discredit. Once there were spaces with their own identity and defined genres: the news contained news; the debate was the controversy; The soap opera was the melodrama.

From the Lumière, Flaherty or Dziga Vértov to Chris Marker, Agnès Varda or Santiago Alvarez, the documentary gravitated with some fortitude around what the eye of the camera saw, at least, more than on the nonexistent. Neither formalities are required.

Entertainment attracts attachments, with its drawer fees attracts us. The first newsletters activate the social suggestion they think. Value judgments abound without toning nor are they. The likelihood of the speech is adjusted and rationed for an audience predisposed to admit it without a squeak from the nursery.

Not accepting it would imply that provocative form of courage that is critical thinking. "Even an opinion is a kind of action" (Greene, 1955), reflects the narrative character of The Immovable American, journalist otherwise. To manifest, which is to resist and refute, that is, to act, which is to face. And it hurts the fall from delirium thought of as Paradise: the comfort of the disengaged put in trouble by the stir of knowing, that is, of asking, and, in the violent profile, of doubting.

 Something that does not conform to the residual aesthetics of the show in which we live; the heroes, wicked, and only the antihero may redeem us. All as part of a staging that does not end, in which the script of the events to occur is iron.

OTHER VOICES, OTHER AREAS

That is why the emergence of other possibilities, different perspectives from new viewpoints, is due and valuable; contrast the monochrome view, counteract the vision back division. Because it is not only the false sense or the exposure without context, the altered image or the voice that someone distorted, but the same decomposed daily life, which is assumed, superficially, as authentic, and, in the essential and more dangerous, as unquestionable.

We speak of a mediocre subsistence, petty, even more serious, assumed at ease, or with resignation or indifference, by the injured societies and by the individuals who will be immolated. When that happens, and more than we think happens, the story told by the winners is not reviewed, the thesis lacks antithesis. Prominent criminals conform to the law. The speculation is conclusive; the evidence, circumstantial.

Let's forget the independence of independent media. They cannot be if they point you in a sensible way to the confrontation of hegemonic discourse. They are dependent on atypical but elementary postulates, which are called equity, justice, honesty. Never of their simulated environments.

Let us skip objectivity, that phlegmatically Anglo-Saxon urban myth that American journalism turned mathematical obsession; universities, nonsense, and the Creole media another hypocrisy. And now it's just one more of the pieces of the trap.

Let's put aside the idea that alternative means are alternative. The dominant media differ, which are also gross and irrelevant. Substantially powerful communication lies lying in the sun in neighborhoods, communities, towns, with their jargon, powers and daring. That is why she fears it so much; for this reason it is denied, fragmented: incommunicado.

The media at the service of elite supremacies, although underpinned by advanced technologies and undeniable penetration capabilities, warn of fragility, and in the main supply lies at the same time its greatest lack: the fallacy.

The big media lie because they require it. They are not the instruments of communication that they claim to be nor hold the social purpose that according to the illusory jurisprudence they should have. They demand the lie because they are the flank of influential interests. The excessiveness contains an advertisement; A serenity intensifies the propaganda.

They are committed to financial, monetary, commercial, strategic and geostrategic, political and geopolitical weavings, and have been subject to underlying logic of control and manipulation. They are another compartment of the eaten frame of the system.

FROM THE SOUTH

The intended seriousness does not face what it looks like or the story of objectivity with third deception; Nor is the impartiality of the imposter countered by fervent preaching or allegations. Before any of the tricks, the truth is useless, which, like any statement, implies its refusal.

Just, perhaps, takes advantage of the ability of people and societies to dissect with scalpel the peculiar accounts of power and identify without magnifying glass the codes of each political and media narrative. We must interpret what is coming and the background: the character, the props and ties of the event. Then, it will show the disposition (the attitudes) to transform it. Marx's warnings cannot be set aside.

Economy, politics and media: the fearsome trilogy of power. Three hollow beatitudes and a single true evil: the order that disrupts the perimeters that it nests. The doctrine that turns spurious what it touches.

Between the equanimity shaken and the coherence in patches, the words free of corporate pennants, the communication without flags of attachment become essential: a collective and popular expression, contrary and disputing, anticipated to distrust the certainty that is repeated, but willing to give The face of hope without mystification.

A strange world in which fairies do not love, but doubts, about what is heard and seen, is professed and learned. Another transparent region, not as defined as the high metaphysical valley of Anahuac for which Don Alfonso Reyes asked. But, after all, Carlos Fuentes (1958), his compatriot and proselyte, replied: «We were touched here. What can we do. In the most transparent region of the air".

Another one in the midst of the insufficient ones that resist imperial ambitions, colonial charges, American depredation, where villages with houses with mirror walls once dreamed by José Arcadio Buendía will no longer be feasible, and that we now inhabit in the supernatural resonance of the South.