HyperNormalisation

[OneFootInTheGrave]

For those with access to BBC iplayer, or some other nefarious method, it is the latest BBC documentary by British filmmaker Adam Curtis.

It's an interesting take on the last fourty years or so and how various developments and their effects shaped the world we live in today.

It's one of the better ways you could spend an afternoon or split it into a few evenings in the run up to the possible election of the Donald in the USA.

We live in a time of great uncertainty and confusion. Events keep happening that seem inexplicable and out of control. Donald Trump, Brexit, the War in Syria, the endless migrant crisis, random bomb attacks. And those who are supposed to be in power are paralysed - they have no idea what to do.

This film is the epic story of how we got to this strange place.

[C0ckney]

looks interesting. i shall have to take a look. thanks, onefoot.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Happy to be of service

[Bereta_Eder]

youtube removed it because of breach of copyright
I went to bbc iplayer and it says it only works in the UK

.

There are more nefarious means indeed
That noone should eever use

[OneFootInTheGrave]

If you read reddit thread...

[Bereta_Eder]

watching it now it's 3 hours long OoOOo

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Yes, there are several chapters, so there is time for a break.

[Bereta_Eder]

It's very interesting

[Bereta_Eder]

I wondered where to place this video, here looks ok

[C0ckney]

just finished watching the documentary. it's very interesting indeed, and it contains some fascinating details. i thought in general, leaving aside a few quibbles, the historical analysis was solid and perceptive.

if i could make one criticism, i think it rather overplayed the suicide bombing. i think i'll post a little about it tomorrow.

anyway, it's certainly a well spent few hours, and i would encourage polytubbies to watch it.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I never read much about the history of suicide bombing, and what was understood about the history of the method, but I think this event is considered as the start in the middle east during 1980's. The idea spreads from there in the ME... but looking forward to your post.

[C0ckney]

so, a slightly longer one now. on the suicide bombing, i think it's fine to use it as a symbol but considering it as transformative in itself is problematic. militarily, although suicide bombing has a purpose, and in fact the islamic state has been quite innovative in its use on the battlefield, it's basically something done when other military options are not available; it's a weapon of terror rather than of war. the effect of a suicide bomber or a car bomb, etc. on a civilian population are much the same.

moreover, there was so much going on in the middle east at the time, much of it related to arab nationalism (in fairness the documentary does touch on the end of pan-arab nationalism), which itself was a reaction to the post-colonial situation and the need to create nations within the confines of arbitrary lines, and the changing role of islam in the political sphere, that it's impossible to pinpoint one thing.

another aspect that i found interesting is the role of social media, in the sense that it cocoons us from reality. it's certainly true that social media creates a self-reinforcing bubble, and indeed is designed for just this purpose, but it is also something that has given the public an ability to record and disseminate and thus counteract the official message. a trivial example of this is angela eagle's window. the official line, reported dutifully by the media, was that someone, presumably a corbyn supporter, had smashed her window. all it took was a citizen journalist to go there and record the scene to show that it was all a lie, and that the journalists who reported the story must have known it was all a lie but reported it anyway. if it had happened 20 years ago, even local people who might have known it was a lie would have found it almost impossible to transmit that to the wider public; and no one would have been any the wiser. but then of course it's also easy to spread lies and hoaxes using the new media; only the number of potential liars and hoaxers has increased.

i also though it was funny the way the documentary said that journalists were immune to trump because their mission was to discover the truth. (perhaps a little joke from the filmmaker?)

but overall, a very interesting documentary.

[giblets]

I thought the BBC was government funded? Why do they need to be so protective of intellectual property?

[C0ckney]

it's taxpayer funded through a direct levy, but yes it's very tight with its IP. i'm not sure why. i can listen to the bbc radio here for example, but i cannot watch any of its television programming.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

ahhh... lost the post - in short, I do largely agree. The different perspective this film gives is unique, and helps put the "regular" feed we get from the media on a daily basis in context.