Log In | Register
For all of its "Matrix"-like convolutions and "Alice in Wonderland" allusions, the new film "Inception" adds something significant to the ancient ruminations about reality's authenticity -- something profoundly relevant to this epoch of confusion. In the movie's tale of corporate espionage, we are asked to ponder this moment's most disturbing epistemological questions: Namely, how are ideas deposited in people's minds, and how incurable are those ideas when they are wrong?
The deception of real-world "Inception"
Seeded on Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:43 AM EDT
Article Source: Salon.com- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (12)
This paragraph from the movie review/essay is spot on:
The conservative media dreamland, for instance, ensconces its audience in an impregnable bubble -- you eat breakfast with the Wall Street Journal's editorial page, you drive to the office with right-wing radio, you flit between Breitbart and Drudge at work, you come home to Fox News. The ideas bouncing around in this world -- say, ideas about the Obama administration allegedly favoring blacks -- don't seem like propaganda to those inside the bubble. With heavily edited videos of screaming pastors and prejudiced-sounding USDA officials, these ideas are cloaked in the veneer of unchallenged fact, leaving the audience to assume its bigoted conclusions are completely self-directed and incontrovertible.
- 3 votes
#1 - Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:45 AM EDTJust listening to Limbaugh and Beck on the radio every day is probably enough to turn many of them into raving lunatics.
- 4 votes
I've tried listening to them for extended lengths and it's a real strain on my brain. They're scary.
- 3 votes
I've tried listening to them for extended lengths and it's a real strain on my brain.
You get that a lot from people who have no understanding about what they(beck and Limbaugh) are talking about..Freedom..a foreign concept brought over by men of faith and principal and given to a people who embraced it..not allways totally but the major precepts of the idea and then passed it down to liberals who sought to destroy the concept with their progressive nonsense which has nothing to do with being progressive at all as a matter of fact..It is regressive..a wolf in sheep's clothing if you will
You sound like Limbaugh and Beck when you say things like "liberals" (scary, bad, bad) seek to "destroy the concept' [of Freedom]. You need a serious reality check, mister.
Get out of propaganda-induced daze and realize that the very essence of Freedom is thoughtful debate over ideas. That can't occur with one side always boiling its argument down to "liberals bad, they hate freedom" soundbites.
- 1 vote
"You need a serious reality check, mister."
Every hear the phrase one man's freedom fighter is another man's revolutionary...you sound as if you have been imprisoned by the the propaganda induced fog that will be the Obama Legacy..I listened to Limbaugh for 10 years before I began to understand his philosophy, and I rather thought he was arrogant upon first hearing him...then I began to listen to Mark Levin who by the time I had heard him was a breath of fresh air.
speaking of a serious reality check..
"Try not to confuse me with your marxist buddies "mister"
Runaway Taxes, Runaway spending, Lack of promised transparency in Government, Unrealized promised fix to unemployment.(Census job are not long term unemployment)..An Alinskyite president fostered by a belief in Gramsci's principals school of marxist thought
Antonio Gramsci was a transformational Marxist. As laid out in the above linked article, what Gramsci advocated was the transformation of a society to the communist state via gradualism — the gradual erosion of old ideals, replacing them with the new. As opposed to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini, Gramsci advocated the quiet revolution.
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/stuter-quiet-revolution.htm
That can't occur with one side always boiling its argument down to "liberals bad, they hate freedom" soundbites.
No show I know does that...they give back up arguments to their reasons for why the liberals are the party of big giveaways and higher taxes
Joe,
If you think I'm a Marxist, or Socialist, or whatever other crap Limbaugh, etc., have filled your mind with, we have nothing more to say.
I'm sick of playing the Right's game: Defending myself against totally off-the-wall allegations just because they don't happen to agree with my politics.
Wallow in your swill. But don't expect me to wallow with you.
- 1 vote
This is nonsense. He is essentially saying there is to much information. The fact that people reinforce their biases is not new, nor is it any worse than it ever was. I would go so far as to say that the subtley subversive idea the writer is trying to plant is that censorship would make things better.
- 1 vote
#3 - Sun Aug 1, 2010 3:53 PM EDTEd Wood,
I don't see how you get the idea that the reviewer is making a pitch for censorship. He's making a pitch for people to get out of their "media dreamland ... impregnable bubble" (see #1.0). He wants them to expand their intake. How's that, in any way, a call for censorship?
By the way, your movies are a hoot! (Sorry, couldn't resist. I'm sure you get that all the time, just as I do with a name like Bill Gates.)
Well, in the first place it's not a review, it's a comment on society and media using the conceit of the movie as a starting place. In the movie the smallest emotional idea has the ability to flower into a greater ideal. While the commentator did mention NPR and the rest of "mainstream media," he spent a whole paragraph describing Beck, Fox, and right wing radio. I submit the first paragraph you chose to post, in 1.0 as evidence for the kind of effect this article will have on many.
Now, in the movie, the subject of the Inception would change the way he ran his father's business based only on the implanted idea that his Father wanted him to be his "own man." The writer of the article similarly forwards his agenda by emphasizing the sins of the right while soft peddling the sins of the MSM and not mentioning the far left at all. Now I'm not saying there aren't sins on the right, but when one puts this in the context of times, where the left seems to be the loudest voice for limiting speech, add to this that Salon famously leans left, plus, as evidenced by what appeared to first stand out to you and was echoed immediately in 1.2, one has to at least be suspicious of the writers motives. Fairness Doctrine anyone?
Now it is possible that he was trying to be ironic. Even so I disagree with his entire hypothesis. There is more information, coming from more viewpoints then ever in the entire history of man. I believe this is a good thing. We are going through a bit of a volatile time right now so biases are frequently spotlighted. Remember, though, the spotlight only illuminates a small part of the stage.
In any case, I believe the writer invited this kind of scrutiny by using the film as his starting point, whether he intended to or not. Inception is a story about paranoia and reality, and perhaps finding a balance. Had his article tried to be a little bit more balanced and been placed in a different context I might not have come to the conclusions I came to.
By the way, it is a very cool movie, that can be interpreted many different ways.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
