An inconvenient truth｜ The media follow the consensus. War ・ Global Warming ・ Nuclear Power ・Infectious disease
Distributor: fs free Astrology Picture：Related pictures
The media follow the consensus view.
When you hear those words how does it make you feel?
What exactly is the job of the mass media in the first place? What form have they taken?
Are they for justice? For humanity? For profit?
The original concept of the media: a desire to transmit the truth vs. the current situation where you cannot raise a profit unless you think of the sponsors…
I get the feeling that the media of any era transmits the news whilst facing similar circumstances.
The sponsors are the large medium and small companies which the citizens of the country work for. Their subcontractors and business partners are also influenced.
There are many people who say “The media must transmit truthful information without being influenced by money!” but the media must also earn money as a successful business.
Businesses use many different methods to make money. If they only used attractive methods, the truth is that their income would not go up.
Because of this the truth is that the majority of them do nothing more than follow the consensus opinion, if the people, the consensus, demands worthless information, in order to increase circulation or viewing figures, worthless information will be produced.
If there are many people who revel in and look forward to scandals and the failures and mistakes of others, that will become the top news. If circulation and viewing figures don’t go up, they will use over-the-top language to fan the flames, and give the story an exaggerated title.
This value system, based upon capitalism, is becoming normal in the non-media business world too.
In order to reduce the cost of raw materials, they put pressure on sub-contractors. Illegal price fixing. False labeling. Haphazard employment which doesn’t correctly value employees and staff. People who shamefully cheat. Conceited people who cause problems for others, and who don’t care as long as they are fine. The normalization of paying no mind to the weak and instead chasing after your own profit.
Nobody reaches out their hand to the weak, they have no consideration for those around them, only chasing after their own profit; is the mass media pushing for their own profit any different?
I’m not aiming to refute the idea of capitalism, but we are in a social environment where capitalism has gone too far and damaged the order of society.
Every company is doing the same things, just about staying on the right side of the law.
“I just work in the office so I don’t know.” “I’m just a middleman so I don’t know.” Everyone pretends not to see or know what is going on.
It’s an inconvenience so people avert their eyes, the many people who can’t face up to the truth become the foundation. And if citizens pretend not to see, then the country also pretends not to see.
In the midst of this age of busyness, it is incredibly difficult to take an interest in political, social or natural problems.
But the government, the mass media are nothing but a mirror which reflect the nature of that country’s citizens.
At the same time as saying that the media have no righteous purpose, there is the inconvenient truth that society also has no righteous purpose.
In this present capitalist society where money takes precedence, individualism is running wild and we’ve lost sight of the things which are right in front of us.
Exactly who is it that refuses to look at those problems which need to be faced up to? Along with the media, equally the citizens.
Especially with respect to the nuclear power problem, to what extent are people raising their voices? How about with relation to global warming?
People who have no interest because they feel it is nothing to do with them. People who understand but who say nothing. From now on what kind of thing will this result in…
The inconvenient truth is that the proportion of people who can’t face up to problems is increasing.
It’s quite likely that the thing that must really change is the citizens.
On this point, one thing that must be corrected is the idea that democracy is an ideology where things are decided by numbers.
That is a misunderstanding many people have. The original idea of democracy was not that things were to be decided by the majority. The idea was to change society with input from both sides, from those who agree and those who disagree. It wasn’t a case of everything being decided by the majority, that “the opinion with the most people is always right.”
Still, unfortunately, the thinking that the side with the most votes is “correct, normal, common sense” is becoming the normal, and the sad truth is that it is becoming increasingly difficult to find people who are trying to make society better.
Due to profit chasing in the capitalist society, war becomes just one more business… how many centuries have passed with this same process being repeated?
Currently, the world is moment by moment proceeding along the road to the Third World War. Firstly, I want to look at Japan, which since the second world war, has followed a path of peace.
From 2013, the Japanese government set up the Japanese NSC, and began the export of weapons to be used for war. They are also proceeding towards a recognition of the right to collective self defense.
Japan is thinking of increasing its military strength due to military pressure from China, but the idea of “exporting weapons to be used for war” is against the “3 principles of arms exports”, part of Japan’s peaceful constitution which has existed up to now.
Why are they trying to export weapons to be used for war?
Further, they are trying to extend this idea to the extent of removing mines from the Straight of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf in the Middle East. Of course, it is said that this is in order to secure the supply of oil from the Middle East, but these ideas are completely contrary to previous peaceful actions of Japan.
On the other hand, what about the American government which is a major participant in the affairs of Asia?
The American government understands Japan to be one of its closest allies, and Japan feels the same way.
But why Japan? A country without natural resources and poor land, plagued by earthquakes – what value does this country have?
The value lies in a geographical advantage.
―Japan is Asia’s gateway to the Pacific―
China has been aiming, since the end of the war, to create an environment where they can at anytime exit into the Pacific. A country with 1.3 billion citizens, it is natural that they should seek the ocean’s resources including the fishing industry. At this point in time, it is important that there is give and take within Asia, I sense that a mentality which allows sharing is important. Rather than conflict with Japan, cooperation will more easily allow for activity in the Pacific.
But, the American government doesn’t like that idea. That is why Japanese politicians who work to lead Asia are swiftly crushed. Ichiro Ozawa is a good example of this. The reason for the American government to place bases in Okinawa, Guam and the Indian Ocean is that they wish to keep the Asia down and under control. That has been their plan since before the Pacific war.
By simply controlling Japan, they can secure an encirclement of China and Russia.
In this kind of environment, it is inevitable that China will have conflicts with the surrounding countries. With respect to a “Pro-America” Japan, for these 50 years, China must have built up quite a few grievances.
But, at this stage, if America were to face up squarely to China America would have to make some considerable sacrifices too.
We’re in a situation where China or Russia could start a war at any moment. The American government must also know this.
The American government’s true aim, is firstly to create internal disorder within China. Secondly, they plan to have Japan and China to crush each other, then when the time comes, they plan to secure China under America’s control. They also plan to have Japan take the burden for America’s military budget in Asia.
One major question is, if China, which is now a great consumer, was crushed, wouldn’t this cause great problems for Japan, America and the EU?
But the aim is to boost the military business and the reconstruction business, and the control of the world.
The only reason why politicians are concerned about the level of the stock market or the economy is because it will lead to a fall in support for their government. Even if war caused a slow down in the world economy, the politicians will not be going to the war zone and it isn’t going to effect their lifestyle.
Quite the opposite, if they have a good chance of winning the war, the plan to use it to increase profits.
Currently, China has gained enough power to be a rival to America and also has a large economy. It is linked to securing resources and the control of the population. Then there was the post-war reconstruction work. This was a public works program across the whole country, and it was setup so that lots of money came in from America and the EU. I suspect that the plan was to use this to keep China under control.
That was the same plan as for post war Japan.
The so-called shock therapy, and there is a theory that the disaster of 3.11 was a man made earthquake, is a method whereby a temporary difficulty is created and then used to stimulate the economy, and from that, create more profit. When large city-destroying disasters occur, or when there are man-made disasters, people fall into a state of panic, and it becomes easier for those businesses which violate the law., to do business. The idea that “On the other side of the Olympics is war”is becoming standard.
From the perspective of those who wish to control the world, a population which is too large may result in the over-usage of resources.
Food shortages, housing shortages, water shortages, lack of employment, lots of problems will occur. It’s probably correct to say that they are already occurring.
War, man-made disasters, at first glance it appears that they would damage profit, but that is only from the perspective of ordinary people.
Basically politicians are pushy people, not Gods or Buddha. They are no more than those chosen by the citizens who have the right to choose.
If you look at the trading of stocks you can see, that people will buy the stock of a company which sells bad goods, if they expect the stock to rise, in order to turn a profit. In the present age, nobody actually judges the value of the work the company does before buying. And when electing politicians nobody thinks to elect a true politician; they elect those who they think will give economic growth.
Those politicians, they were the ones with a strong desire to assert themselves who were chosen from among the ordinary citizens in the middle of this capitalist system.
In a competitive, capitalist, society, its not a matter of what you believe, it’s a matter of “how can I outdo my opponent”and “how can I get ahead of him.”
In the current society, money is the ultimate drug.
The struggle that is war, has occurred countless times in the past. In the present in exactly the same way as in the past, countries increase their territory though war and secure resources. This is a point in common amongst most developed countries.
“The person who controls the Pacific controls the world” from the viewpoint of the modern capitalist, I think you can say that this statement is true.
But, it’s important to remember that after decades of scientific advance, in comparison to the wars of half a century ago, the weapons of the present age are in a different dimension.
The current age of scientific and technical progress has weapons, which, if used, would lead not just to the destruction of people, but of all animals and plants too. If it comes to a Third World War, it think that inevitably nuclear and biological weapons will also be used.
It’s entirely different to the age of fighting with swords and iron shot.
Most prophets, holy men, producing strong warnings about the disasters and wars which will occur from no on, say that the earth itself will become uninhabitable for humans.
No matter how much you oppose war, if there are supporters, we can still continue down the wrong path. I truly hope that the world doesn’t proceed into an unrecoverable position.
However, having said that, there are countries (people) where reform has taken place, without giving in to the pressure from the nation and foreign countries.
The prime example is Nelson Mandela, who died in 2013. He aimed to destroy the slave system of Apartheid and pushed this miraculous reform forwards.
I wonder what result Mandela would get if he was now working for reform in the developed and developing countries of the world.
There are politicians throughout the world who have worked up to now for reform, but many, receiving no support from the wider public have ended up being crushed.
It is not as if Nelson Mandela acted alone to destroy the slave system of Apartheid. The “public sentiment” which supported his reforms helped push those reforms forward.
Those who seek to turn the tide of the world, to reform, are knocked down, whatever the country. However, despite this fact, there were strong people who continued to support Nelson Mandela. I feel that these are the true democrats.
Don’t forget that once the streets have turned into a battlefield, it will be too late to repudiate war. It will be an experience quite unlike the war you see in movies.
“Fools learn from experience, wise men learn from history.”
In the present age, where few people have experienced war, we can only learn from the mistakes of the past found in history. It is often said that history repeats itself, but it is surely true.
Is foolishness being viewed as a virtue?
You must understand that you will have only regret for yourself if you make decisions without thinking, if you live with indifference to the world around you and allow your own life to be swept in a bad direction.
Global warming… infectious diseases…nuclear power… war…
Please, each and every one of you, ask yourself, in your own heart what exactly is the right thing to do now.
Most of the media isn’t transmitting the reality of “now”, what they transmit doesn’t go beyond the conventional wisdom.
※The America referred to in this article is not the whole of the American people. It is referring to the American government institutions which operate through the financial world.