pull down to refresh
They're about the landscape in which those things happen. The fiction illustrates the logical conclusion to those circumstances, so when intervention happens and that intervention is perhaps ugly it is in contrast to the alternative outcome in the fiction.
Leave the world behind, Civil War... two recent movies that show threats. With those threats in the public mind, intervention of those becomes more acceptable.
hmm. The ending of the EO is not what I'd call "pretty" but it is conclusive.
I have a different idea for why we don't see the ending like the book has but the tragedies only. It has to do more with human nature and what it has faith in.
I understand your points, though, about "priming" a population.
about "priming" a population.
Yea and I wouldn't even conclude these activities to be nefarious. People generally assume any state secrets to be nefarious inherently, but I think that's naive. Project Mockingbird, the Church Committee etc are just samples and associated with propaganda. A lot of that is CIA, which has a terrible record.
For every nefarious or scandal cover-up psyop, there's also a benign preparation of public acceptance for national security efforts (Top Gun re: Iran nuclear reactor bombing etc). Could paint that as MIL/DIA as juxtaposed to CIA.
What I'm saying is that after a thing happens, everyone calls it predictive programming or soft disclosure. Instead, I think it is more a kind of collective wish-fulfillment that people allow to play out by inattention. The ending of this work, for instance, so far hasn't happened. I wonder why that is?