Anyone who has ever used the internet in the past few months will know what I am talking about when I speak of online advertising.It comes up in many forms, including, but not limited to; popups, web banners, spam e-mail, etc. Most of the time it is just plain annoying. It is so common that you no longer recognize the main ones, especially if you see them over and over again on a website you visit often. Accidentally hover your mouse over one? Yeah I want to start shooting the computer too.
This brings me to my conceptual metaphor of "Capitalist Fascism". The main and chosen few who control all the wealth decide to form a party to oppress the people. They bombard them with propaganda, and other acts to prove their loyalty to the people and to demand the same in return. They control the one thing that can be used to manipulate people: Money.
The propaganda I use in this example is the online advertising. It is the rich CEOs demanding your loyalty and obedience to the their up and high class(or party) of wealthy individuals consumed with utter greed.
Can you blame them? Of course not. As everyone is in pursuit of survival and happiness, wealth just happens to be one of those things to nirvana. Everybody wants it, everybody needs it.
Truth is, in this economy, acts of generosity are extremely rare and valued. And if conditions might allow it, the path we tread may lead to Karl Marx's Communist Revolution. If I had said that forty years ago, I might be dead right about...now.
Then again, what do I know? I'm just another equality loving socialist who believes in an achievable utopia.
I'd like to thank Fate for the First Amendment.
You have a style in which you do this fast-forward thing, pushing one big idea right up against another in rapid succession. Your last two paragraphs here are a good example of that. Normally, I'd be telling you to sort of "smooth it out" and make sure that you leave an easier trail to follow for your readers. But--against the odds--I think maybe you're pulling this style off. But it all depends on the type of relationship you want with your readers, right?
ReplyDeleteLet me put it this way: The effect your has on me anyways is that you're challenging me to RECONSTRUCT the ideas you're putting on the table. And the ideas you're drawing on are all interesting enough to me that I accept the challenge...which is a long way of saying, you make me think for myself.
But whether I add it all up (Marx, the first amendment, rich CEO's not to blame for their greed, online pop-ups) in the same way you do...well, inevitably I won't. So the risk your style takes is that the messages you put out there might not reach your audience in the same form you intended. If you don't care about that or if it's what you're after, then go for it. This can be a really powerful strategy, as long as people are willing to accept the challenge.
But if you are trying to present a more cogent "statement" of your beliefs (rather than making me question mine), then this writing is less successful. (Again, that's just my personal reaction.) I'm thinking, "How does he expect to drop so many huge bombs in just a few paragraphs and expect me to walk away with anything specific?"
Hope that makes sense, and is helpful. Just tryin' to hold up the mirror, so to speak.