5th Assignment:
4) What do the authors mean by the social production of
confusion?
The authors point to the mixed government response towards
the plight of the Flammable Shantytown as an example of a new deceitful
government tactic of labor of confusion. Here, the main goal is to not outright
deny the allegations being lodged against the authorities, but to somewhat
validate them while at the same time doing nothing. Similar to customer service
at a retail job, the point is NOT to give free things or provide a service, but
to keep the customers busy while they fume away. Sure they will launch every
expletive under the sun towards you, but that's perfect. "Sorry Corporate
policy" and "sorry unable to" are just some things to throw out
so that the customer feels validated in their complaint.
However, this case takes the retail position to a much more
nefarious level by making sure that there are actually some actors in play that
actively support the inhabitants. Similar to a "good cop, bad cop"
routine, where one actor appears to be on your side and the other one appears
to be your enemy. The residents are encouraged by the support they receive from
random lawyers pressing for a "possible" case against the Yacimientos
Petrol Fiscales (YPF). Yet in reality, their troubles have been somewhat
acknowledged, while at the same time being completely ignored.
This labor of confusion can also be seen in today's social
media age. Often there are tons of varying opinions about a subject/topic
online. Yet despite all the talk and the back and forth pledges of support
nothing gets done. Perfect, just the way the establishment likes it. Lots of
empty fluff discussion, but no real actual change.
5th Assignment Discussions
Khan An Nguyen
I agree with the idea of misinformation being used as a
weapon. With so many conflicting ideas on a topic, it can get confusing to try
to fully understand the issue; Especially for folks struggling to make the bare
ends meet. The confusion and misinformation becomes so confusing that often the
result is inaction.
This mirrors a lot of online Internet forums where the topic
becomes so muddle in different supporting opinions that the truth can be all,
but impossible to discern.
Anthony Shurigin
This opens up the question of who is responsible for the
resident's environmental condition. In the case of the Argentinian shanty town,
there is a clear culprit of the petrol companies. However, in cases like
hotspots around residental housing that is already decades old who is to bear
the main burden? Of course, city government is supposed to step in to relieve
the conditions. But, how else are the residents to extricate themselves from
this harmful environment? Can't move, because of the risk of homelessness.
Can't clean up the toxins or heat without funds.
What is to be done?
No comments:
Post a Comment