It's kind of hilarious that libs can't make the leap from "state media is inherently untrustworthy because it will only tell you what the state wants you to hear" to "private media is inherently untrustworthy because it will only tell you what capitalists want you to hear."
It's the real magic of it all. It's baked in. Private media doesn't even try to hide it. Every conversation about war or healthcare is punctuated with ads by Raytheon and GE.
The liberal conception of the state truly renders them powerless. The state is anything enumerated in the constitution, or anything created by act of congress. No more, no less. No consideration of power, influence, or the functional role institutions play in society takes place whatsoever. You could have an entire country filled with company towns and sugar plantations and they would call it free because it isn't the "state" who's doing the oppression.
it's because they think that capital is some sort of counter to the state, like capitalists and the state are opposed forces with opposed interests, thus why just having private media and state media around is some sort of theoretical guarantee of free press, because they keep each other in check or some stupid fantasy like this. if only they knew that the state exists because capitalists need some sort of body with a monopoly on power to ensure private property remains private and thus share common interests.
It's kind of hilarious that libs can't make the leap from "state media is inherently untrustworthy because it will only tell you what the state wants you to hear" to "private media is inherently untrustworthy because it will only tell you what capitalists want you to hear."
It's the real magic of it all. It's baked in. Private media doesn't even try to hide it. Every conversation about war or healthcare is punctuated with ads by Raytheon and GE.
The liberal conception of the state truly renders them powerless. The state is anything enumerated in the constitution, or anything created by act of congress. No more, no less. No consideration of power, influence, or the functional role institutions play in society takes place whatsoever. You could have an entire country filled with company towns and sugar plantations and they would call it free because it isn't the "state" who's doing the oppression.
it's because they think that capital is some sort of counter to the state, like capitalists and the state are opposed forces with opposed interests, thus why just having private media and state media around is some sort of theoretical guarantee of free press, because they keep each other in check or some stupid fantasy like this. if only they knew that the state exists because capitalists need some sort of body with a monopoly on power to ensure private property remains private and thus share common interests.
"Except the BBC, which is impartial and fair because... It just is, okay?!"
:us-foreign-policy:
economics isnt politics! :liberalism: it isn't america told me it wasnt!