‘The tartan truis or trousers date back to 1538 as a medieval style of woven tartan cloth trousers as a garment preferably used during the Highland winter where the kilt would be impractical in such cold weather. The word is triubhas in Scottish Gaelic. Truis or trews are anglicised spellings meaning trousers
Tartan trews shared the fate of other items of Highland dress, including proscription under the Dress Act of 1746 that banned men and boys from wearing the truis (“Trowse”) outside of military service. The Dress Act lasted until 1782 when it was repealed under the reign of King George III.’
It seems that Russell Brand is hanging up his multimedia ‘Trews’- at least for the foreseeable future. Russell informed followers that the time has come to devote himself to sequestered learning in order to deepen his understanding of the profound changes that are taking place in the world.
In other words, Russell has realised that it might be helpful to actually study in depth what he has been talking about for the past couple of years.
Russell ended the last episode of ‘The Trews’ by assuring the world that he will be back at some point in time to continue the battle, but to tell the truth, his assurances seem a little forlorn.
I suspect that recently Russell has come to at least partially, recognise the true significance of the media onslaught that he has faced over a couple of years of battling the neo liberal corporate press. Primarily that he is one voice against many and that the enemy will come at him again and again, not as ‘single spies but in battalions’. So long as things go on this way he can’t win.
And surely this is part of a much bigger picture. We have seen endless round after round of systematic corporate media attacks on Tsipiras in Greece, Jeremy Corbyn in England and even Donald Trump in the race for the Presidential nomination in USA.
It doesn’t matter if you agree with what Brand, Tsipiras, Corbyn or Trump says, you understand that the corporate media is making concerted efforts to control the narrative and political outcome of each of these political conflicts.
The fundamental characteristic of this system is that these battles are permanent and unwinnable. No-one will ever be allowed to make a point against the order advocated by corporate media and then move on. The corporations simply wait out any insurgent offensive and then return to the attack. It is a matter of principle to make sure that opponents will not be seen to win even a minor point.
If you ever do manage to take a point against the elite you better be prepared to defend it from now until the end of time.
This is not about dialogue and it is not about give and take. And never will be. Because at a fundamental level the battle is not about what you think or even what you do- it is about who you are and who they are.
Now that we know a little more about why the elite does what it does we can have a look at how exactly it does what it does.
Name and Shame
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
The power to name is the power to determine the terms of reference, and the terms of reference, more than any other factor, determines the outcome of the debate.
‘Financial instruments’,‘ quantitive easing’ and ‘austerity’ are not just random words picked out of the ether. They are specifically designed tools created to control the way that debate is structured.
If you accept these tools you have accepted fundamental building blocks of the discussion that are neither impartial or offer insight, but that serve the interests of one particular side of the argument.
With this in mind we can see that such familiar terms as:
‘the left’ and
‘the right’ and
‘the free market’
are not neutral technical ways of describing the world, they are constructed embedded mechanisms to control the way that politics and economics is discussed. ‘Austerity’, ‘derivatives’ ‘financial instruments’ have worked very well in ensuring that the way that the credit crunch is discussed conforms to the purposes of the elite.
As well as a monopoly on violence and a monopoly on creating money, the establishment elite has tried to establish and defend a monopoly on creating new word concepts. They don’t take well to anyone challenging that monopoly.
Once you understand this it gets really interesting.
Because a couple of decades ago group of people emerged in the ‘west’ who really began to understand the importance of naming. These disparate groups began to challenge the elite monopoly on naming. And their challenge to the naming monopoly, since it was introduced into a monopoly, almost immediately had a significant effect.
The naming elite initially had no effective response to this emergent challenge and in fact after two or three decades still have not managed to conclusively deal with it!
This Naming Subversion has mounted the single most effective challenge to elite methodology in nearly a century.
So are they and their achievements celebrated and emulated by all those who wish to challenge the elite power structure?
Of course not, they are vilified and hated. Probably, even by you.
Who are these people then?
You know them as the ‘Political Correct’; you know them as ‘Cultural Marxists’.
‘Racism’ ‘sexism’ and ‘LBGT’ etc. are all relatively recent creations in the social discourse. And they have entered completely into the mainstream. They are components of a conceptual framework that has been completely absorbed by the Germanic world.
As a consequence of this absorption, the mainstream is continually forced to try to incorporate these terms and the conceptual framework they represent, into its rhetoric. And this process of forced response has changed the elite from what it was to what it is now. This is the technical reason that the post war Protestant consensus collapsed.
All of this achieved simply by employing the power of naming.
Of course there is a terrible ongoing danger for the elite here, since they can only adapt so far. As time goes on the cumulative effects of adapting to naming subversion are that the elite loses the prerogative of ruling. In other words if you stop acting like the elite, you stop being the elite. And you stop acting like the elite when you stop exercising your monopoly on naming.
An elite response to subversive naming had to be found. And the response was inevitably an attempt to control the debate by- elite naming. The elite response was to call Subversive Naming ‘Political Correctness’ and to call Subversive Namers ‘Cultural Marxists’ and to call all this type of politics ‘Identity Politics’!
And of course we all know how terrible these things are. And we all know how we instinctively recoil when we hear these terms. So now the elite have programmed an almost endless army of wind up toy soldiers to attack not only ‘PC’ but more importantly the principle behind PC.
Just like they produce an endless army of soldiers to attack Brand, Corbyn, Trump etc.
So it worked didn’t it?
(if you doubt the power that the elite naming monopoly has, try coming up with an original new name for a political phenomenon yourself)
Next time: Marketplace of Ideas