OBJECTIVITY, in Digital Cyberspace

All we observe about the world beyond our immediate, perceptual field, are reports by other humans, processed to be viewed on screen or paper, or listened to, in our immediate environments. Almost all of this “information” is now digital at some stage.

Anything digital can be counterfeited, faked, warped at levels of sophistication (given resources, time & talent). Even trusted reporters can be hacked. Authentication processes can be hacked or faked.

We (activists for a better humanity) must remain alert and critical of all reports; yet, reports are THE source of what is happening beyond our small, personal domain.

EXAMPLE: RUSSIAN HACKING OF 2016 ELECTIONS IN THE USA.

At the time of this writing, 12/22/2016, there are two sets of reports about whether Russia “hacked” and whether it determined the election of Trump. Both sets have political motivation and neither set can be trusted as “objective”.  Further, this debate may be a distraction from more relevant happenings.

OBJECTIVE FACT: The election of Trump as POTUS was fraudulent, independent of who were the actors. Given the “close”, “objective” vote count, any “fake news” against Hillary would have been enough to sway the election. The election WAS stolen in favor of Trump: who & why remain queries. It is not necessary to “objectify” the material actions to conclude: If the American population had been permitted to vote on  their (distorted) assessment of the issues, they would have chosen Hillary over Trump. That Trump WON was due to hacking the system.

This is not saying that Hillary’s message wasn’t deceptive, or that any electoral process with an uninformed voter population should be considered valid. Claims by Trump supporters that we all must accept the “democratic” results are deceptive. Trumps didn’t win by a landslide.

What to make of the debate about Russian Hacking?

It was to Russia’s benefit that the hacking occurred, whether they were the material authors or not. Both the Russians and other leaking info may have occurred.  BUT, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. It is not valid to claim that Trump’s election was LEGITIMATE, and thus to oppose any “review” of the election. To permit Trump to become POTUS is to accept the electoral process as valid, when it wasn’t.

Claiming Russian hacking, is a political technique by those attempting to Stop Trump, an expected operation. Some may fear a Hillary administration, re potential war with Russia, and favor the Trump Deception for that narrow reason.

I don’t know where I am going with this sem. I am very concerned about the changes a Trump POTUS will implement. I view pundit commentary as naive, at best.

Using the possibly “objective fact” that Russia didn’t directly release the Clinton emails to attribute legitimacy to The Trump Phenomenon, is not a wise move.

 

 

 

Author: nuet

01/24/1935. BS-physics RPI 1956; MS-physics UofChicago 1958; PhD-physics Yale 1965; PhD-Edu Psy Uof MInnesota 1970. Auroral Research Byrd Station, Antarctica 11/1960-02/1962. MINNEMAST curriculum dev 1964-68. Woodstock. faculty Pima Community College, Tucson 1974-1997. Transdisciplinary scientist, philosopher, educator, futurist, activist. PC user since 1982. "Wife". daughter, 2 grandsons. 5 dogs & 7 cats. Lacks mental imagery in all sensory domains.

0 comments