There are certain words that get tossed around frequently which essentially have no meaning. Words such as homophobic and reverse-racism are obvious examples, but some words are a bit more obscure. The context in which people use the word "establishment" begins to demonstrate how this word has lost all real meaning and is really just a laughable concept.
At one point I am sure that there was an establishment that some counter-cultures (another contradiction-in-terms pseudo-word)felt that they were against and as such they were outside the establishment... I would accede that at this point the word establishment did apply and people who were against the establishment or the machine were legitimately using those words; however, a person who exposes a snake oil salesmen by giving false information and false promises... is a snake oil salesmen himself... he cannot call himself a counter-snake oil salesmen, he cannot say he is against the snake oil salesmen ethos, he is - a snake oil salesmen.
To this end, every congressperson, every "news" reporter, everyone who is working in the mainstream or is attempting to enter said stream cannot be against the establishment... he or she ->is<- the establishment, we are the establishment, we the people... are... the state.
The problem that some people enter into when they are attempting to convey a distaste for the current state of the state is that our system is designed to be malleable, we are able to change the direction of our will, we as a country are able to have a difference of opinion without it leading to auto-destruction. Thus, as an individual from within the state, expresses distaste for the current state of the state, he or she is part of the state and is not outside of it; herein lies the error, no congressperson can be against the establishment, no congressperson can be against the state, one can only express dissatisfaction and posit a change in policy.
1 comment:
I agree that many of these terms have no meaning in that they are so oft repeated that they lose meaning, but semantically we know what people mean when they say them.
In terms of your message though, I agree that fighting the system from within the system, makes you a part of the system. (what a corny term, "system")
That's why I prefer removal of moral sanction from the system as an act of counter-whatever, protest, etc, to violence or in political situations, voting.
I understand also that reacting to the system makes it the prime mover, and just by recognizing it, you are a part of it.
You can't fight unprincipled action with unprincipled action and say you're different from the "bad guys."
I disagree though that you "are the establishment" by participating in it. Maybe there's just a semantic difference, and there needs to be a different word, but I think we all know what we're talking about when we talk "establishment vs anti-establishment."
Post a Comment