Finally got to the end of watching David Icke: Live at the Oxford Union on Netflix. Ive dismissed him as a fool for many years without ever watching him speak, mainly based on second-hand sources. So I thought I should find out. Wasnt quite what I expected. No lizards were mentioned. (He did claim to have once spoken to Ted Heath and to have seen his eyes go entirely black for a moment, but he didnt expand on that, unfortunately.) He got a lot of pyramids out, and he did say Wake up! a few times, but on the whole the first half of the lecture was a broadly agreeable (if entirely uncharismatic) critique of the division of wealth and knowledge in most human society (specifically the west, actually) and how this spans the power structures of church, state, and fruity clubs. Needs no ghost come from the grave ..., and I still think he credits the richest and most powerful with more unity than I imagine they could ever maintain, but... you know, this stuff was basically 90% self-evident. Considering his insistence that the truth is at first ridiculed, then violently opposed, then accepted as self-evident, I was surprised to find the vast majority of his findings to be self-evident. Wheres the HIDDEN truth??? I did find his outright dismissal of science to be a bit odd, especially as he basically lumped it in with religion and government as a false authority driven by selfish and shady powers. I always thought there was a bit more to the word science than one prescribed school of thought; but I guess I can see how if you take science to mean pharmaceutical companies you could reach that conclusion. But he also hates global warming – or the idea of it being a real thing. His only defence for this position (not that he counters any stats or anything) is that Al Gore is a crook. And I’m pretty sure Al Gore (crookedness or vested interests notwithstanding) didn’t invent the idea of global warming. Im definitely predisposed to doubt folk who diss the government, voting in general (as though the act of disenfranchising yourself in itself is empowering), the EU, the UN, the IMF AND the World Bank - without actually having anything even close to resembling an alternative suggestion for any one of these things. And without even tackling the question of whether what we had before all of these was better or not. If you think it was, say it; if not, come up with even the loosest most hypothetical suggestion for another way for human beings to realistically organize themselves on a mass scale. David Ickes obsession with all things Orwellian all but states a belief that human society is on a downward trajectory; but he never discusses or broaches the reality of life for common people in other times. Passion with no direction is frustrating. For his listeners (for me, I guess) this is true; I can only assume he feels the same. Anyway, Icke began to lose me when he suggested the transition from paper money to digital currency was inherently fascistic and NWO. He suddenly revealed himself (or perhaps gradually, but Id been giving him a sympathetic hearing) to be a quintessential mid-twentieth-century conservative at heart; a technophobe, a stuckist, and an indignant codger. The clues were all there: he thinks technology controls us; he is overly impressed with the Matrix, years after its admittedly decent tech aspect has become outdated, and he takes on board its philosophy, scene-by-scene - indeed, he seems to feel the movie was made for him (for all of us) by some inexplicably benevolent anarchic force. He never says anarchism; hes careful to avoid aligning himself with any isms, because isms are so easy to swat aside, and so difficult to defend. Hes shit at PowerPoint; embarrassingly shit at PowerPoint. To the point where it looks like he cant afford an assistant. Which he must be able to afford, otherwise... I guess this isnt a racket. He actually is just really passionate about this stuff. You can tell it when he dwells for far too long on the philosophically interesting, but ultimately unenlightening and really quite useless, notion of holographic reality and mass hypnotism. Ickes science is entirely non-practical and akin to other peoples dreams or LSD trips: fun for them - maybe even fun for you for five minutes - but ultimately not so interesting to hear in depth; and of no practicable application. After reeling off (for the whole lecture) the sort of quotes automated Twitter accounts churn in ever-echoing volumes (Orwell, Bill Hicks and Ghandi for good; Adolf Hitler and George Bush for bad), he has a sort of mini-fit, chastising the sheeple of the world (I dont think he said the word, but he did show an picture of a weird fantasy humanoid sheep creature on the OHP) for not rising up and declaring they aint going to take this shit anymore. He is angry with us for repeating what we learnt at school. He is adamant that by disengaging with educational institutions and self-educating (a path that surely suits some, but cant bring the best from all; and, moreover, has strikingly similar but usually less outstanding results to the former) he has beaten the system and risen above the repeaters. Meanwhile he repeats the most widely accepted modish mouthpieces for general (Western, contemporary) ideas of good. Following a punishing two hours of this well-meaning but really poorly executed lecture, it all boils down to a nice but totally uninspiring trio of David Icke unquotables: We need to do what we think is right, not whats best for us in the moment. We need to stand up for the rights of everyone. We need to choose between fear and love. Everything he has said or thought that was useful or well-meaning is either common-sense, or the widely espoused common ground of the very society he admonishes. All of his values are common to Humanism and the major world religions. All that is left is holographic cyberpunk sci-fantasty, techo-fear, and armchair anarchism. David Icke is nothing but a useless hippie.
Posted on: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 00:10:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015