Dispatches from the Dictatorship of Reason

[felis_ultharus]

Image

In a society devoted to image, the image assumes three more or less dangerous forms.

There is the image that the creator knows to be untrue, but expects to convince the public is true. This is a straightforward lie and can be dealt with because it is precise. A pin stuck in at the right moment and it deflates or explodes.

There is the image that the creator knows to be untrue and does not expect to fool the public; just to distract or disorient them. This can be dangerous because it suggests that meaning does not matter. It is increasingly common, feeds off technology and makes a mockery of the idea of civilization and language.

Finally there is the image in which the creator comes to believe. Whether the public is taken in or not, this is the most dangerous sort because it inolves the denial of reality by those who have a direct impact on reality.

--- Humanist philosopher John Ralston Saul

I'm trying to figure out which of these three categories Harper's public image fits into. We've been sticking pins in at every possible moment, and it's not the first category.

I think it's in the second one. I think the moderates (non-evangelicals) voting Conservative know, on some level, that everything being said about Harper's agenda is true, and that's the reason they deny it so passionately -- the reason they refuse even to entertain the possibility.

If they're distracted or disoriented, is it even possible to bring Harper moderates back to equilibrium before Monday?