During an interview of Jeremy Paxman by Guido Fawkes, the accusation is thrown down that Guido's desired situation and black-and-white attitude is a gratuitous oversimplification of the way things work.
He is, of course, correct. But as ever in the world of complexity he neatly sidesteps the point. As complexity is the root of deception, so simplicity leaves it nowhere to hide and it is the search for honesty that leads Guido to the quest for simplicity.
It is, of course, a battle for moderation: namely the flag that the minds of men plant in the sand between the extremes of opinion presented to them. This boundary has gradually been stretched out to the point where it is acceptable to tell an outright falsehood with impunity... words designed to be both factually correct and utterly misleading. There is the growing perception that those charged with holding such bounders to account are now in their pay, be it the payment of money or the payment of favour (or rather the absence of being out of favour). Carrot or stick, we cannot help but suspect there are mules here.
Is that position truely any more reasonable or moderate than Guido's? We assume that, dwelling in an era of moderation, the current state must naturally tend toward the moderate... but if it has come to pass that we have fallen from that height, how would we see it unless by getting perspective. By taking a ludicrous position it is intended to shake people's beliefs until they think about them... and set a new flag of moderation between posts that include two extremes, not just one.
Quis Custodes ips Custodii? Guido Custodes ips Custodii... and they must learn that to battle him it is not enough to brand him false: they must make what he is saying untrue.
No comments:
Post a Comment