Page 50 - Darko Štrajn, From Walter Benjamin to the End of Cinema: Identities, Illusion and Signification. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2017. Digital Library, Dissertationes, 29.
P. 50
from walter benjamin to the end of cinema
of specific political cultures in different regions and countries could be cit-
ed, it seems that a general apprehension of the term of extremism does not
differ across the boundaries. Therefore, it appears that the political extrem-
ism represents a breach of a consensus on a broad combined definition of
democracy and civilization.
Such an assumption is obviously mirrored by the local as well as global
media. However these reflections and representations of extremism, which
make it omnipresent, and at the same time shown so as to be more or less
on the same level as natural and other disasters, may raise doubts about the
simple distinction between “normal society”, politics as usual and a po-
litical extremism. The manifestations of especially some kinds of extrem-
ism – more than others less recognisable as such – are usually amongst
the more prominent news that attracts the media interest worldwide. We
can remember some advice about a necessary and needed reduction of the
scope and emphasis of news on events attributed to the work of political
extremism. Nonetheless, so far the media, especially television, have not
resisted the opportunities to add dramatic features to an attractiveness of
their news programmes. According to the distinction elaborated by Rich-
ard Rorty (1989: p. XVI) in a context of the question of how the media might
contribute to the building of solidarity, the violent manifestations of polit-
ical extremism are more or less strictly treated as a doing of “them”, a kind
of aliens. The drastic representations of the manifestations of political ex-
tremism, i.e. terrorism, are simultaneously objects of a mass voyeurism and
the demarcations within the established society. The very term “extrem-
ism” therefore functions as the demarcating discriminatory gesture: not
only neutrally marking the difference between “normal and insane”, but
also inducing a sense of radically total “otherness” of those who commit
extremist acts. Hence, extremism is re-produced into a mystically self-gen-
erated threat to the entire society. Almost day after day in the media rep-
resentations of the extremist manifestations, the established society is ac-
quitted from its complicity in the causes of the phenomenon.
Far from asserting that the media are masterminds behind extrem-
ism, they certainly at least present the state of affairs, expressing and prop-
agating the dominant views and attitudes, in other words, the ideology. As
such, the functioning of the media importantly reflects a collective histori-
cal experience of which the media as agents and mediators of “truth” them-
selves play a part.
48
of specific political cultures in different regions and countries could be cit-
ed, it seems that a general apprehension of the term of extremism does not
differ across the boundaries. Therefore, it appears that the political extrem-
ism represents a breach of a consensus on a broad combined definition of
democracy and civilization.
Such an assumption is obviously mirrored by the local as well as global
media. However these reflections and representations of extremism, which
make it omnipresent, and at the same time shown so as to be more or less
on the same level as natural and other disasters, may raise doubts about the
simple distinction between “normal society”, politics as usual and a po-
litical extremism. The manifestations of especially some kinds of extrem-
ism – more than others less recognisable as such – are usually amongst
the more prominent news that attracts the media interest worldwide. We
can remember some advice about a necessary and needed reduction of the
scope and emphasis of news on events attributed to the work of political
extremism. Nonetheless, so far the media, especially television, have not
resisted the opportunities to add dramatic features to an attractiveness of
their news programmes. According to the distinction elaborated by Rich-
ard Rorty (1989: p. XVI) in a context of the question of how the media might
contribute to the building of solidarity, the violent manifestations of polit-
ical extremism are more or less strictly treated as a doing of “them”, a kind
of aliens. The drastic representations of the manifestations of political ex-
tremism, i.e. terrorism, are simultaneously objects of a mass voyeurism and
the demarcations within the established society. The very term “extrem-
ism” therefore functions as the demarcating discriminatory gesture: not
only neutrally marking the difference between “normal and insane”, but
also inducing a sense of radically total “otherness” of those who commit
extremist acts. Hence, extremism is re-produced into a mystically self-gen-
erated threat to the entire society. Almost day after day in the media rep-
resentations of the extremist manifestations, the established society is ac-
quitted from its complicity in the causes of the phenomenon.
Far from asserting that the media are masterminds behind extrem-
ism, they certainly at least present the state of affairs, expressing and prop-
agating the dominant views and attitudes, in other words, the ideology. As
such, the functioning of the media importantly reflects a collective histori-
cal experience of which the media as agents and mediators of “truth” them-
selves play a part.
48
