The OJ metaphor Bill McKibben used in his article 'The Attack On Climate-Change Science' caught my attention. For years i've agrued that people's various views of the OJ verdict were determined by the historical and cultural perspective of the viewer. OJ's lawyers communicated their arguement to everybody, everybody who followed the trial cast a silent vote. The media painted the schism between people's opposing views with the race brush. 90% of blacks supported the verdict, 90% of whites opposed it. Seems obvious enough, but by looking from a different perspective, one of class not race, the dynamic shifts. More blacks are poor and the poor of all races understand from first hand experience what many cops are capable of. The difference in viewpoint wasn't determined by skin pigmentation it was socio-economic class. We are to easily divided by red herrings like race, religion, nationalism, etc. The corporate owned MSM shines it's light on the truth it seeks and the OJ verdict was no different.I've seen the police be brutal, i've seen them be kind. Police are just people and we are a mixed up and convoluted bunch. We all see events through our unique eyes, our conclusions more a reflection of our prejudices than of objective observation.
The wealthy love solutions that limit resources by price. The powerful will never voluntarily give up their perch. The poor are divided by red herrings. The middle class still wants to believe in the god of 'more' but understands, unconsciously at least, that they've been decieved, that there really are only two classes, the fat cats and us. There's two solutions as I see it: one has the proletariat rising up to overthrow the uber class [a very long shot indeed] the other is an economic collapse, a leveling of asset values to zero, allowing real wealth, not materialism, to dominate our future worldview.
