He's quoted in a recent college commencement address as saying, "With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, -- none of which I know how to work -- information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation."
Information = distraction not empowerment
Then further down in the same article he's quoted as saying, "What Jefferson recognized... that in the long run, their improbable experiment -- called America -- wouldn't work if its citizens were uninformed, if its citizens were apathetic, if its citizens checked out, and left democracy to those who didn't have the best interests of all the people at heart.
"It could only work if each of us stayed informed and engaged, if we held our government accountable, if we fulfilled the obligations of citizenship."
Information = preservation of democracy
So which is it? Does our government really want its citizens to be informed? When we try, we are either blown off (think broken campaign promise to post major legislation in time for the citizens to read it BEFORE it's put to a vote) or else we have to defend ourselves against charges of domestic terrorism. (Tea Party supporters, for example, are regularly targeted for criticism by the White House.)
When we ignore our government (to our own peril, I might add) we are accused of being lackadaisical, ignorant, apathetic.
A lot of Americans, myself included, would love to hold our government accountable for its myriad of foolish choices, excessive spending and complete and arrogant disregard for the will of the people.
Problem is that when we try, our cries fall on deaf ears.
Makes me wonder . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment