I would put a different title on this podcast. “More War” is not the point. How about: The CIA curriculum will give you an Edge in Life! Truly. The CIA has plumbed the depths of human behaviors. Andrew Bustamante was a great student; he is a great teacher.
The CIA curriculum reminds me:
Nothing IS, but the THINKING makes it so. Shakespeare (Hamlet) figured it out.
And so, I have a strategic advantage the better I understand HOW you think. Right?
I think it is APPLIED thinking – – – talking about in the REAL world
APPLIED economics
APPLIED philosophy
TO ME THIS MEDIUM, A PODCAST, IS a juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar
to distract the watchdog of the mind (using the words of MARSHALL MCLUHAN)
Our Mediums (print, radio, film, TV, internet, . . ).
Concerning the title of his book, Marshall McLuhan wrote (thanks to Wikipedia):
The title “The Medium Is the Massage” is a teaser—a way of getting attention. There’s a wonderful sign hanging in a Toronto junkyard which reads, ‘Help Beautify Junkyards. Throw Something Lovely Away Today.’ This is a very effective way of getting people to notice a lot of things. And so the title is intended to draw attention to the fact that a medium is not something neutral—it does something to people. It takes hold of them. It rubs them off, it massages them and bumps them around, chiropractically, as it were, and the general roughing up that any new society gets from a medium, especially a new medium, is what is intended in that title“.[9]
. . . McLuhan argues that a “message” is, “the change of scale or pace or pattern” that a new invention or innovation “introduces into human affairs”.[10]
. . . the message of a newscast about a heinous crime may be less about the individual news story itself (the content), and more about the change in public attitude towards crime that the newscast engenders by the fact that such crimes are in effect being brought into the home to watch over dinner.[12]
In Understanding Media (published in 1964), McLuhan describes the “content” of a medium as a juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind.[11] This means that people tend to focus on the obvious, which is the content, to provide us valuable information, but
in the process, we largely miss the structural changes in our affairs that are introduced subtly, or over long periods of time. As society’s values, norms, and ways of doing things change because of the technology, it is then we realize the social implications of the medium. These range from cultural or religious issues and historical precedents, through interplay with existing conditions, to the secondary or tertiary effects in a cascade of interactions that we are not aware of.[12]
Oh Dear! There are lots of people (including politicians, apparatchiks, police, judges, . . ) whose “real people” come through the television set in sound bytes.
Andrew Bustamante, broadcasting chapters from the CIA Curriculum with clarity, comes through a medium that is IN-DEPTH – – what are the social implications of that? I’ll leave to you! /Sandra