Fistfights in the Street as a Credible Alternative to Modern Politics

British politics has rarely been in a more shambolic and fumbling state than it is right now. Sure, we’ve had fuck-ups, corruption and catastrophically stupid decisions in the past but I don’t think the mechanisms behind them have ever been so exposed. We basically have a government that is one step away from fistfights in the street. Frankly, it’s pathetic.

I may not agree with the Coalition government I want to at least know they have a plan. I may not support the opposition but I want to hear that they are standing vigilant. I may welcome a fringe party if they are cognitive and considered. Governing isn’t just about policies, it’s about providing the public with a sense of trust that at the very core of whomever is in power is a promise to makes people’s lives better.

What I see right now is a political class that can barely function as grown adults. These aren’t merit badges they’re playing with, it’s people’s lives, and they need to start behaving as if they are capable of organising themselves so as to at least appear in control. So much division does make the public feel better, it does not inspire trust in the system, and then things fall further apart.

Basically, I don’t want a government who use Premier Inn surveys to dictate education policy. I don’t care if your plan is to turn schools into sweatshops for Primark, just don’t use a fucking Lenny Henry promoted brand to justify it.

Throughout the past 3 years I’ve waited for Labour to gain some kind of momentum as a force for good. This is a nasty government often flying against public opinion and yet no credible opposition has appeared. Never before has one leader inspired so little in so few – Ed Miliband is vacuum, barely registering as present let alone liked or disliked. Labour were once the party of the working man and surely a little firebrand heralding of support for the people would be all it needed?

The Coalition government has marginalised the poor, the unemployed, the sick and the vulnerable - how can a party that was once of the people not seize this opportunity to bring a sense of protection back? Why weren’t Labour at the front of the marches, at the protests? Standing up for the values which are meant to be at their core? They shouldn’t have been doing it for future votes, but to remind everyone that’s there’s still, theoretically, a party which hasn’t forgotten them.

The same argument stands for the EU debate. To leave would be idiotic, and every politician with a sensible mind knows that, but now the debate has gone public it has become uncontrollable  What was once a sure-fire doozy of a no-vote has now become a lot more precarious.

At least UKIP have brought a bit of character and drama back. Backward, vaguely racist character and drama maybe, but at least you know where they stand. The Lib Dems have also made their position known although, really, who listens to a word they say anymore?

The benefits of the EU are now so familiar we barely think of them as benefits, and so the argument always turns to the negatives. There is no clear and concise information in the public realm that isn’t tainted. I don’t feel qualified to vote on our membership to the EU, although I do know that they hate the size of our milk jugs and want to ban bacon butties. Newspaper headlines have painted the EU as the villain for so long it’s hard not to accept BARMY EU MADNESS as the default.

I want some clarity. I want to know where they stand. I want to know that all sides have some faith in their chosen direction. I want to know that they actually have the interests of their people at heart. I want to know that they’re not all morons.

If none of that is achievable then I will accept fistfights in the street.

I’m afraid we’re not currently recruiting

Time: Wednesday June 6, 2012 at 10:36 pm
IP Address: xx.xxx.x.x
Contact Form URL: https://dmreporter.wordpress.com/about/

Name: James XXXXX
Email: XXXXX
Website: XXXXX

Dear Paul,

How do i submit my CV and work samples to be considered for the Daily Mail,

My masters is in broadcast journalism and i have six years experience in radio and tv in the US, UK and Ireland and feel i can bring a more video and audio role to the Daily Mail as well as my print and online work.

James
Principle Target of Hatred: Fat Cat Bankers

Poe’s Law

‘Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.’

Arthur C. Clarke  – Profiles of the Future, 1973

‘ Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing. ‘

Nathan Poe – Creation & Evolution forum // Christianforums.com , 2005 – Poe’s Law

In 1992 Tim Robbins directed his first feature ‘Bob Roberts’ – a political comedy following the campaign of a fictional senatorial hopeful. The character is a folk singer with political aspirations who cynically exploits his fame for political gain. Tim Robbins (and his brother) recorded several songs for the soundtrack aping the style of, amongst others, Bob Dylan with titles such as ‘The Times They are a Changin’ Back’.

Robbins, being an accomplished musician, made sure that these songs were truthful to the morally dubious character of Roberts without being outright parodies of the ultra-conservative southern folk singer stereotype (the film never explicitly states if Roberts is Democrat or Republican) or even it could be argued, any element of parody at all. Because of the songs’ inability to be distinguished from the real thing out of context, Robbins decided to never release a soundtrack to his movie; fearing that they could be used in ways directly opposite to their intent.

Tim Robbin’s was well aware of the effects of Poe’s Law before it had been given that catchy sobriquet, that snappy tweet friendly shorthand of what is a multi-faceted and  complicated concept.

The law was originally coined by Nathan Poe in response to ‘trolls’ on Christianforums.com, people who would deliberately post outlandish opinions just to get a rise from genuine visitors to the site. He observed that no matter how extreme or fanciful a concept somebody posited, without clear acknowledgement of its own disingenuous joke it would always be read as if genuine. Originally applied to traditional fundamentalist viewpoints, Poe’s Law works with any number of heartfelt subjects that fuel obsession in people.

This leads to a couple of interesting variations.

We all have prejudices whether innate or socially constructed and this can lead us to take things at face value. Sometimes I forget that, as an Englishman, some parts of religious America are as foreign to me as polytheistic areas of Hindu Asia. Yet because superficial similarities of shared race and language differences are heightened I’m more prone to mock the Bible belt than I am to ridicule someone who honestly believes in a blue elephant headed god because of those very prejudices .

Which leads us to The Landover Baptist Church Forum.

It took me a long while to workout that this was indeed a fake forum, yet one that was populated in part by users ignorant of its true purpose; both believers and otherwise. It is a perfect case study in Poe’s law as it demonstrates the two essential elements:

  1. People opposed to viewpoint not getting the irony.
  2. People who are sympathetic to the viewpoint not getting the irony.

The LBC forum is a near perfect parody of fundamentalist Christian beliefs which also, whether by design or by accident, highlight non believers attitudes towards people of faith. Take this “Down’s Syndrome is a lifestyle choice” thread -   – quite obviously a joke, but it evokes responses of indignant rage and incredulous accusations. Anyone on that forum agreeing with that particular original post I can only assume is in on the joke but the site is littered with many taking sides with the outrageous claims or even backing them up with further scripture .

While clearly set up to parody fundamentalism, the LBC forum brings out a kind of knee-jerk response from a lot of liberal users, Christian or otherwise, who are more than willing to accept that there are genuine lunatics out there who really believe that Down’s Syndrome is a choice . Both parties expose themselves to ridicule, and yet the forum was initially set up to spotlight the inherent insanity of fundamentalism. It ultimately shows that we’re all as biased and an uninformed as the next person. People’s readiness to take offense at something says more about them than those who they believe they oppose.

The perpetrator of the deceit is like the arsonist – that most easily captured of criminals – who must be present to observe the effects of their crime for it to have meaning. If no-one knows it’s a joke, then it didn’t happen and it just got lost in the white noise of on-line unfiltered thoughts. Even a Poe’m (yeah I just coined that, deal with it) as beautifully staged and internally self affirming as LBC still has tell-tale sign of fraud; it must, or it would just be the very thing it tries to expose. Something that Tim Robbin’s songs could easily have become.

The problem isn’t when a Poe’m is misinterpreted as the real thing but more if the genuine article is considered to be fraudulent; the flip side of Poe’s law is also as likely. The Moon landings have often been bound up in conspiracies saying that they were faked, and the Holocaust of WW2 is often denied – both examples that are so unlikely that, as with the reactions to fundamentalist points of view, they are  immediately met with skepticism.

A long-held belief shared by us at the DMReporter is that ‘no joke is funnier’ – that is to say the more deadpan and straight-faced you are, the more conceptually perfect the joke is. This is why the first Naked Gun movie is better than it’s sequels – the character of Frank Drebin never realises that he’s in a comedy, but by the third in the franchise he’s a gurning buffoon deliberately playing up the laughs.

We’ve long abandoned the premise that we are in any way a legitimate news source or in any way affiliated with the Daily Mail. One reason for this is that there are only so many templates for that format we can use to mock the Mail, the other was that the sheer number of people not ‘in’ on the joke began to mean that what ever underlying point we were making would often go unheeded. It’s also sometimes hard to compete.

Satire eventually defangs itself as it becomes to more and more similar to the real thing. Case in point is the movie Forrest Gump. Is this a tale of a disadvantaged young man with learning difficulties who overcomes the bad box of chocolates that life gave him to triumph in the face of adversity and become the embodiment of the American dream? Or is it a cracked reflection of the lost hopes of a nation that repeatedly tries to deny the horrors of its own being? Is America made flesh as a retarded cripple or a good ol’ boy and true hero? I still haven’t worked out what the film maker’s intentions are; if truly a satire then it’s the most perversely insidious misinterpreted example of the form.

Lines can still be blurred even more – recently we tweeted a fake headline during the final minutes leading up to the verdict of the sensationalised Amanda Knox trial. We used a reliable comedy format of posting both possible outcomes, one for guilty and one for innocent, and then asking that tweeters to only read the appropriate one as and when.

Twenty minutes later the real Daily Mail jumped the gun and put up a story saying that Amanda Knox had been found guilty when she clearly hadn’t. Their article had interviews with people commenting on the verdict which could only have been fabricated. We’d anticipated that they would have pre-written both outcomes rather than have reported the events – but not to the degree that they did. No matter how hard we try to make it obvious that we’re primarily just trying to make people laugh and maybe take a swipe at a right-wing institution, the reality of the situation keeps catching up with the parody.

Even with a knowing wink, it is impossible to distinguish parody from the real thing.