Journalism: the Art of Intellectual Prostitution

Just for once, I would like to read a mainstream news article that was not whining about other people while pretending to be news. Yet it seems whenever I look at a mainstream media outlet I am hit with a ridiculously childish rant disguised as an editorial. Footballers getting drunk in public, the President getting a blow job and the Prime Minister nursing hurt feelings about the opposition leader’s implied misogyny is not news, it is gossip. It is the kind of petty behaviour that would have embarrassed professional journalists back in the day when they actually cared about informing the public about an issue instead of name-calling. What is wrong with journalism today? Why are they so petty and narrow minded? I will tell you my opinion on this subject and I will run you through an example of an article I read this week and then you can decide for yourself if I have a point worth taking on board.

Why are journalists no longer professionals?

I trace the disastrous collapse in journalists’ ethics to the moment the government became involved in funding tertiary level education. In the past universities were privately run, elitist institutes and financially independent of the government. Once the government started offering cheap loans to students the number and size of universities increased to unrealistic proportions. With this came several changes. First they had to get rid of elitism because the purpose of higher education was no longer to create an elite class of exceptional people with exceptional responsibilities and duties in society, it was merely to make money and churn out as many graduates, not people, as possible. Since most people do not have an elite level IQ they had to dumb down the university curriculum and lower their passing standards so anyone with only half a brain can graduate now and act like a pretentious elitist snob, also known as a hipster, simply because they have an almost worthless piece of paper on their wall. Secondly, the universities are now effectively employed by the government, who are paying their income so they had to change the course material to be pro-totalitarianism so as not to upset their new customer, thus the universities have become a de facto branch of government. Finally, because foreign students are worth so much money to universities they had to axe all nationalist course materials and promote a globalist, communist and anti-white curriculum so as not to upset their new non-white customers from the third world. In short: universities are now communist indoctrination centres that churn out idiots, statists and self-hating whites.

This would all be fine, except university graduates go on to work as lawyers, psychologists, teachers and journalists and that is when they start to cause massive damage to the fabric of society spreading communist propaganda, ideology, anti-white racism and the belief that the government should be all-powerful and worshiped. If what you just read is making you furious, then the odds are you are a university graduate and you should ask yourself how come after spending so many years in a university learning to broaden your mind, you still are not mature enough to handle a difference of opinion without getting excessively worked up about it?

Journalists are the most dangerous people to have compromised with communist indoctrination, because the mass media have incredible powers to influence and shape the minds of other people. Now these journalists are for the most part decent people, they are not sociopaths and they sincerely believe in the messages that they put out to the general public. But they are dangerous because they do nothing but encourage people to think and behaved in childish and irrational ways. Now I shall move on towards giving you an example.

If there is one theme that is constant in communist propaganda, it is pinning the blame on everyone else. Communism is after all a philosophy based around fostering childish jealousy and resentment in a population, generally the poor, the ethnic minorities, the sexual minorities and the women and then encouraging them to whinge and moan about their problems until they feel like entitled victims bold enough to take what they lust for by force or voting for others to take it for them by using force. Politicians and their unwittingly brain washed friends in the media can then exploit the victim complex they have created to rile people up over false moral crises. Simply because there is nothing an immature person likes to do more often than to get on a soap box and proclaim their moral superiority over other people because they feel self-righteous. Sentimental moral outrage is one of the most exciting drugs depressed people take these days, to self-medicate their self-loathing, it makes them feel smug and superior to everyone else. Think about this the next time someone tells you off for not being vegetarian, atheist, homophiliac, global warming alarmist, multicultural, socialist, feminist or whatever they think makes them morally superior to you at the time.

This week in The Age, the flagship newspaper of cultural Marxism (or communism) in Victoria, Australia, we could see yet another calculated attempt to stoke misdirected rage and resentment. A Mr. Tim Colebatch published a piece about how “Millionaires snub taxmen“. For those of you who are already libertarians, this is going to tell you nothing new, but for those who do not understand libertarian philosophy consider this analysis of this article to be an exercise in learning how to see the world through libertarian eyes as opposed to the distortions of communism that are constantly fed to us in mainstream media outlets like The Age.

The first line of Colebatch’s article opens up with a loaded statement about how the rich are exempting themselves from paying taxes. However, when one examines this line, “If you earn enough money, paying tax can be optional,” one can see the bias of statism. Statism is the belief that the government is entitled to exempt itself from all the of the rules it expects you to live by. One of these rules is that you can not forcibly take from other people because that’s stealing, yet the government engage in taxation which is exactly the same thing as theft or the protection money the Mafia expect from people and businesses living in “their” district. And yes, the Mafia also claim to be offering people a welfare service in exchange for their protection money. So when people argue that taxes are taken to be spent on services like education, health care and retirement funds, point out to them that wouldn’t it be better if you kept your own money and spent it on education, health insurance and investments for your own future? It would be better because you would not have hundreds of thousands of government bureaucrats eating a slice of your money before it is spent on the services you purchase directly. Remove taxes and you remove the completely unnecessary and overly expensive government middle man who produces nothing himself. Schools would be cheaper, health insurance would be cheaper and retirement would be a lot easier if you could have bought your house in your 20s with your greatly increased tax-free income. Also think how much easier life would be if you did not have to worry about tax returns. The fact that taxes are not optional is the real issue and the mainstream media do not want you to think about that because they have their own agenda: big government, also known as communism. It is quite childish to complain that some people are simply smart enough and/or have enough self-respect to not pay someone for services they do not need or use.

Governments have rewritten the law to exclude themselves from it.  This is not a case of granting extra powers, this is a perversion of justice.  The government should be equally subject to the law as any individual is.

Governments have rewritten the law to exclude themselves from it. This is not a case of granting extra powers, this is a perversion of justice. The government should be equally subject to the law as any individual is.

The central point of Colebatch’s article is the assertion 70 millionaires earned a total of $194 million between them, paid $33 million to lawyers and accountants and ended up reducing their total income to less than $20,000 so they were exempt from paying tax. The reader is encouraged to feel outraged that these people have avoided paying to tax and not the far more important question of, “if they do not need to pay tax, then why do I?” Which is a very good question considering that of those 70 millionaires, only 30 of them paid that $33 million in accountants and lawyers suggesting 40 of did not even need to try hard to get those tax exemptions. Avoiding paying tax must be so easy to do it makes everyone paying them a sucker for doing so. However, these millionaires did not actually avoid paying tax. They merely avoided paying income tax, these millionaires still paid plenty of GST, petrol taxes, stamp duty taxes etc… because it is impossible to avoid paying tax. Hence it really is not a big deal what they actually do not pay income tax because so long as they spend their money they are still contributing more to tax revenue than anyone else with a sub $100K salary could even imagine. The rich are not getting away without paying taxes, they are merely reducing the amount they are paying by a few percentage points overall in the big picture. They are also paying lawyers and accounts who in turn pay taxes so the government is still getting its cut of revenue, so do not worry about that. The focus should not be on who is paying taxes or how much, but why are we paying them at all if the government can not deliver any quality services with the hundreds of billions of dollars they collect from us.

However, one thing that constantly bothers me is if taxes on cigarettes and on alcohol are put in place to discourage people from smoking and drinking, then what do taxes in earning money do? They do in fact discourage people from earning more money because they get diminishing returns thanks to progressive taxation systems. I know plenty of single mothers and under-employed who deliberately reduce the number of hours they work so they can keep getting government benefits. Why not simply cancel the benefits and remove their taxes at the same time? Sure, that is going to put a lot of bureaucrats out of a job, but then they can go and produce something useful like goods or services instead of stealing other people’s money only to waste it on the very poor quality government services they mismanage.

Another question Colebatch failed to raise is why such massive holes in the taxation laws exist allowing hundreds of a millions of dollars to be exempted so easily. The answer is because these millionaires are either politicians themselves, or friends and relatives of politicians. Politicians know about the loop holes in their own laws because they fully expect to exploit these loop holes themselves or for their friends and families to. This is the problem with giving power over to anyone: power corrupts. The corruption is simply in the core of the human condition to believe oneself to be a good and responsible person and therefore the law does not apply to them. This was nicely summed up by Plato, “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.” What was implied with Plato’s statement was that good people would find laws unnecessary and insulting to their dignity. So the fact is, anyone who has self-respect is going to assume they are a good person and exempt themselves from their own rules. Think how many people set themselves rules for their diets and relationships and then break them because they are insulted by the very notion of rules constraining them as though they were bad people. This is the libertarian position that no one can be trusted to have such power to organise or manage other people’s lives because it is in human nature to not obey the very rules we set for others.

Of course, if you obey the same rules you set for your children, then my argument is invalid. Remember to be in bed by 7pm though or you will not get any dessert.

This is the crux of rule making: rules are made only for people who are not responsible enough to run their own lives. The government, whether Labor or Liberal or Green or National all believe we the people are not mature, smart or educated enough to run our own lives and spend our own money the way we wish to and so the government pass these laws telling us how much we are allowed to earn, where we are allowed to go to school, what we are allowed to learn about, what books, websites and movies we are allowed to read and watch, what we are allowed to buy, what food we are allowed to eat and and what kinds of houses we are allowed to live in. It is hard to understand why a person who objects to sharia law would feel uncomfortable in our nanny state as it continues to assert its privilege to dictate who we are allowed to even marry. Unfortunately, those in power obviously do not feel threatened by sharia law and I have to wonder if it is not because they want to impose their own version of sharia law via the nanny state. No one would tolerate a busy-body neighbour telling them how to organise every aspect of their life, so why do people tolerate a busy-body government telling them how to organise their lives?

So there you have it, I have offered you my opinion on this situation and explained it in detail with justifications for my point of view. You will never read an article like the one you just read in a mainstream newspaper because the communists with all of the journalism degrees have an agenda they want you to adopt. See, communism is a cult, they want everyone to think, feel, act and live the same way they do and they are terrified of change and individuality. So they only tell you ideas that they agree with or feel comfortable with you knowing, because they think you are all children and need to be told by them, the “adults” what to think and believe. By not sharing with you alternative points of view they are narrowing the discourse and reducing your ability to think and decide for yourself. It is more important what they do not tell you than what they do tell you, because these days with all the gossip passing off as news they are effectively telling you nothing at all.

I do not care what you believe, as long as you read this article I am satisfied. If after reading this article you can no longer stomach the pointless mindless dribble that passes for news these days then I will be happy. If you share it with your friends then I will be elated, as it will help me earn more money to contribute to my taxes. Think of it as community service, but at least I am honest about my agenda and I am only being greedy, I think you should be more worried about people who do not have such a simple agenda as I do, these people actually do it because they think they care and want to rescue you from yourself. Examine them more closely: they are just as greedy and self-interested as anyone else you will meet, but what makes them dangerous is that they believe that they are actually selfless.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Beliefs, Morals, Education, Politics, Law

Author:Jason Sutherland

Resist the temptation to assume that you're always right or wrong. Never succumb to thinking you're so insignificant to trust your own thoughts and feelings. Always be responsible and listen carefully to others before passing judgement. Don't trust governments bearing stolen goods.

Subscribe to Intentious

Be notified by email whenever new pieces are posted by the blogging team tackling controversial current events or issues.

5 Comments on “Journalism: the Art of Intellectual Prostitution”

  1. May 9, 2013 at 5:21 pm #

    People should be more outraged that the ‘news’ is little better than some entitled clique masturbating to it’s own gossip.

  2. Roxanne
    May 9, 2013 at 5:41 pm #

    First, I’m so glad I get the new Intentious articles to my email, I love reading your articles, and find that they tend to reflect and push further a lot of things that I think about in passing, but haven’t quite developed to the point that you have. So thanks for that!

    This part “Think about this the next time someone tells you off for not being vegetarian, atheist, homophiliac, global warming alarmist, multicultural, socialist, feminist or whatever they think makes them morally superior to you at the time.” also made me think of the mum superiority complex that seems to be going around lately. Like having a baby suddenly makes them an enlightened being and makes me want to roll my eyes at them.

    And this “So they only tell you ideas that they agree with or feel comfortable with you knowing, because they think you are all children and need to be told by them, the “adults” what to think and believe” reminded me of an interview on the news where a politician said that they wouldn’t put gay marriage to a referendum because the public might vote ‘no’. I mean how ridiculous!

    Anyway, I’ve always questioned the need for governments but never been able to articulate why, I think this has spoken to me a lot about the ideology that must be going on in the back of my head without my full understanding :) I’ll stop blabbing on now lol. Thanks again

  3. May 10, 2013 at 4:32 am #

    Nevermind the mindless distractions published as news to occupy the public mind, squeezing out column inches and airtime from real issues. These days, as you alluded above, every story, even that reporting on a subject of widespread impact, is being reduced to a human interest/gossip piece that would have never made the A section or 6 o’clock news 30 years ago, with a juvenile, banal perspective that would have had a reporter demoted to the mailroom back in the day. Back then, the point was to get to the real story. Today, the point is to miss the story by deflection.

    Of course, when you have not an an hour-and-a-half on air, or maybe 50 pages in a daily, but rather 24/7 and all the website your server/harddrive/bandwidth can handle, you damn sure better find something to fill it quickly, and that drives editors from a position of discriminating to a position of scrambling.

    Case in point, straight from today’s headlines: http://www.newser.com/story/167381/who-will-be-americas-next-top-gerbil.html.

    I’ve been in America for decades now, and I never had the slightest clue until today that the United States ever had a top gerbil, or that it was ever a pressing issue or interest to the American public. And this comes from Newser, a website commissioned specifically to cut out the dross and give you only the news that matters. If this is news, for goodness’ sake, what didn’t make the cut?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. The Cold Dead Heart of Modern Art | Intentious - May 14, 2013

    […] we have a distortion of the cultural supply and demand.  Also, importantly, as discussed in my previous article, the universities are not centres of learning, but communist indoctrination centres that destroy […]

  2. The Cold Dead Heart of Modern Art | Radio Liberty Earth - May 14, 2013

    […] we have a distortion of the cultural supply and demand.  Also, importantly, as discussed in my previous article, the universities are not centres of learning, but communist indoctrination centres that destroy […]

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: