politics, simulacrums and perception

8/14/2019 Politics, Simulacrums and Perception

1/3

Politics, Simulacrums, and Reality Perception:

Whats Wrong with this Picture?By Michael McCurley

Working with and studying computer simulation modeling has given me a healthyrespect for reality. What surprises me is how perfectly rational people can confuse their

most untenable perceptions with incontrovertible truths. One thing is a personal sensory

based experience, another is the consumption of ready made perceptions that have beencreated for us. Although we watch television programs that are reported to be fair and

balanced promising that you are there with no spin objectivity, the actuality of what

we observe is usually quite distant from our perceptionsbut what we have become used

to makes such an observation invisible. We are accustomed to artificial observations. Weabsorb international problems from local vantage points so far away that there is no

possibility of actually connecting more than a small fraction of what we observe with our

own experiences. We are not directly, emotionally, or physically involved. And yet these

things seem to be here and now on our laptops, and in our homes. They becomevicarious, virtual parts of our lives. Its no wonder we have difficulties making

distinctions between simulacrums and reality. A simulacrum is a representation of realityusing symbols and signifiers that are identifiable or understandable to usthese may

come from common codes or sources such as sound clips, video, images, expressions,

commentaries, texts, blogs, books, radio or television shows, but they are NOT a direct

experiential part of the world we actually live in. You may have heard words fromPresident Obahma, Hillary Clinton, or Scott Brown. But if you have never met them, do

you really know these people?

The perceptions we form about the politicians (or simulants) we watch in

government are quite different from who those people really are, what they represent, andwhat they will do at any time in the future. Should we be surprised when these politiciansare not what we expected? While we listen to first hand accounts, which bring us up to

the minute news in our nation and around the world, we trust a proxy extension of our

senses, mixed with the subjective viewpoints of strangers who are multimedia performers, often accepting them as our own. When we identify with our favorite

commentators, using some of the same capabilities we developed to suspend disbelief as

we watch movies, our faculties to distinguish between illusion and reality may become

blurred and distorted. How much of what we think (or feel) is actually a result of our owncareful consideration and observations? How many ideas are borrowed from mental

models and emotions (or emulations) that have been provided by others? We may be

getting the wrong picture if we arent doing some real thinking and analysis forourselves.

Some people are becoming lazy thinkers, just as others have become lazy readers.They mistake the relative sophistication of technological innovations with cosmopolitan

fashion and culturewithout any real input or effort of their own. And they dont

examine critical issues with real first hand perspectives. What results they get are laced

with rhetoric and pre-packaged ideologies. And that may be all thats needed to create


2/3

societies of sophisticated savages (pardon my gross, politically incorrect faux pas). So I

will NOT apologize until more people are willing to assume personal responsibilities for

their own conclusions. It makes no sense to subjugate our minds to thought peddlers.

While I do not question the potential anyone has for competent rational analysis, I

do criticize a general laziness that many people have for not thinking on their own, fornot reading and examining controversial issues, and for generally accepting simplistic

televiewer pabulum provided by specially sponsored experts who have been paid to tell

us what to believe. Are we actually so nave that we would willingly expose ourselves tothis senseless form of brainwashing?

The irony of it all is that there is no wizard hidden in the wings or behind the

curtain. Theres no actual global conspiracy group that has carefully mapped out a planfor world order and domination. Instead we may become the incidental victims of smaller

and larger power brokers who are jostling against one another and competing to survive.

I see no advantage in being relatively ignorant by allowing my thinking to be implanted

by special interests, which are not my own. And many people accept this by default,because thinking on this level requires self-awareness, and an important amount of effort

and time. As we know, there are people who are convinced they cannot afford thatluxury, or that it is, in fact, a waste of time. That conception is a lie. Most people cannot

afford NOT to think for themselves, but the ignorant who are unaware or are actively

against this, are the ones who cede their minds without purpose. All of us can benefit by

thinking more carefully and clearly.

A tragedy of American politics is that so much of what we admire in our

democratic system is actually subject to a mindless reactionary pendulum cycletheincreasing public disapproval of a current political system and the growing attraction of

an opposition that offers to change the system. General public opinion grows more

unfavorable towards any (or all) government systems, which do not rise to ourexpectations, as hopes grow that a renovated opposition will do what the government up

to that point has been unwilling or unable to do. The mindless part is the (unfounded)

hope that the opposition will somehow be different than it was the last time the cyclebetween the two major opposing parties began. Eventually the incumbent party will be

thrown out, the opposition will be voted in, and the cyclic process of moving from favor

to disfavor will begin again, when a new administration lags behind heightened

expectations, until the new opposition rousts out the incompetents of government whohave again failed to follow the will of the people. And so on it goes, generation after

generation. The American tragedy continues. Democrats, republicans, or even the

socialists, it makes no difference! We vote them in, and then we vote them out. Why?They were not what we hoped for. The programs, platforms, and candidates were

simulacrums, the modeling of promises that were supposedly real, but not actually

practicable.

This is not to say that simulacrums are entirely fictitious, but there is a vast

difference between a vision and the reality of an application. It is sad to think how

politics would fare if it were a software company, where the success or failure of


3/3

software products would be determined by consumer satisfaction and demand. Politics

has not yet been accurately measured in terms of success, because time delays allow

candidates to make emotional appeals that move voters to cast their ballots more on thebasis of gambled future hopes, than on performance standards that would be applied for

using machines, say, like computers. Politics is not sold like other commodities, though

perhaps it should be. We vote for people who later charge us through taxes, and who latermay or may not deliver what they promisethus the forward value of the simulacrum

and the regressive results of the actual process. The time delays often reveal startling

discontinuities that tend to repeat rather than resolve themselves. The pendulum processis oscillatory. Again weve fooled ourselvesuntil (we promise) the next election comes.

We may blame others for the simulacrums, but we actually created or accepted them

ourselves.

Whats the problem with business as usual in Washington? It happens to be the

only business we know. And it will continue to be just that until we change the structure

within our political system, which is also the only picture we knowin this case the

American simulacrum as a whole is a program that determines our political realities.Forget about the town halls, tea parties, political campaigns, and the disgruntled blogs of

dissatisfied citizens. A real change would call for another social upheaval as great as thefounding of our nation. But so far, the 2010 simulacrum for the shot heard round the

world, which was the 1775 battle cry from my home town of Lexington, Massachusetts,

is still a long way from becoming another American Revolution.

For further Reading see Jean Baudrillards Simulacra and Simulation (Michigan:

University of Michigan Press, 1994)

This article may be shared for personal or educational purposes only. It may not be

reproduced for any other reason without express permission from the author.January 2010

About the Author. Michael McCurley is an alumnus of Massachusetts Institute of

Technologys Guided Study Program in System Dynamics for Education that wasoffered through the Internet. He lives in Liberia, Guanacaste, Costa Rica.

politics, simulacrums and perception

Documents