Instead of doing Brexit related watching I've sent the past three hours watching 'Hyper Realism' on my laptop.
It is simply brilliant. It is what journalism should be. A look behind the government narrative and into those things that lie beneath the surface.
It is a very difficult watch but one that is incredibly rewarding in the end. It is a dive straight down the rabbit warren. And then back out the other side, into the here and now. Things make more sense having watched it.
It very much chimes with my world view. That is, look at what you are told, look for what you are not told, look for the missing elements, look for the contradictions, question motives and then come out with your own 'truth'. You'll never fine the 'truth' as there is no such thing as a single truth, but you might be a bit closer than merely buying into someone else's version of the truth and that in itself is a powerful force and collectively is a counterweight to the stuff of Orwellian nightmares.
I remember one lecture I went to, in my 1st year after all these years. (This is 20 years ago now). In it we were shown unbroadcast BBC and were asked, how do you make the decision about what you show and what you don't show. It was graphic footage of the 1st Iraq war. It made you realise just how sanitised western life is and how protected from the world we are. People are only just waking up to this reality as first Al Jazeera pushed the boundaries and then the internet pushed these standards. Now, I'm sure that most of the footage I saw in my lecture would be broadcast on the BBC news as the editorial policy has changed. Of course this shift distorts reality in its own way, leading to the view that the world is more dangerous and more brutal. Its more than we have simply been so protected from it - in part to control our revulsion of it.
I can't help thinking whilst watching Hyperrealism and how it sort of makes this type of point about reality and a constructed reality in which we have lived, about how Gove. He was the one who made moves to cut the amount of media studies places and he went to great lengths to criticise them and devalue them so much in the minds of the general public as being 'pointless'. Given he has been so much of the champion for post-fact rhetoric and this is clearly part of government strategy and ongoing, that a man who understands the power of media as a columnist - and has a close association with Murdoch - just how much was this a conflict of interest?
Only last week there were calls for him to be investigated by the commons select committee because of this relationship.
I had written a piece about how I started to view post-fact politics within my own little bubble of the world. I abandoned it, as I started to think 'bloody hell, this is me starting to sound like some kind of crazy conspiracy theorist in my own right'. Having watched Hyperrealism, I'm not so sure. I won't go into it now, but its made me think maybe its not so crackers afterall.
Hyperrealism is bleak and I think you could very easily come out of it thinking there is no hope and the politics of anxiety and fear have won out.
I personally don't believe that. I believe that there is something deeply human in all of us that will eventually win out against these forces. I think the mood is for a such for this and a search for something else. Its just that very few have worked out what the something else is - and they are vulnerable to being exploited as a result. Therefore the way out is to find that something and make it a tangible idea. There are people out there starting to ask the right questions and I think there are a lot of younger people who think very differently to the way of thinking that has been ongoing for the previous generation.
May, I suspect, may be trying to do that in her own way but by means which will not achieve this utopia as she lacks understanding of certain things and you can not work completely against the forces of the outside world - simply it totally lacks proper pragmatism and doesn't address the core issues there. Nor is she connected to the youth of today who are thinking in very different ways.
The more I start to think about it, the more that I feel that whilst fighting for liberal thought, you also have to find a way out for people who have voted Leave to save face and find their 'own truth', so they too are able to say that the way they voted was right (even if Brexit is wrong).
It is not wrong to feel anxious about anything - but you need to look at what's fuelling that properly, who is fuelling it and is it real? - just like anyone who suffers from anxiety. It might be illogically and irrational, but there might really be logic and rationality in there which is not illogical or irrational! (The great anxiety head fuck!)
There were also the Leavers who accused the Remainers of being afraid of change and trapped within their bubble of reality. Yes, I do think this has great truth in it. Yet also pragmatism and acceptance that revolutionary change is frankly frought with dangers which yes, should be recognised and coping strategies developed for them.
Yes something has to change. The question still remains, 'change what'. It must be framed as that. 'Leave the EU' is not the full answer.
Most people are not obsessed by power and simply want a life fear from fear and anxiety. This is essentially what the whole Brexit debate was about. Head versus heart when you start talking about it as simply national anxiety, makes way more sense than arguments over whether the facts were right or not. Its how you deal with anxiety.
Taking back control is seen as just one 'solution' to that.
Yet what as someone who suffers terribly from anxiety myself, 'taking control' is usually regarded as pretty much the worst thing you can do, as it merely feeds the anxiety. You just become trapped within ever closing walls of fear where you have to control the situation more and more.
Instead the solution to that is not to let yourself to be controlled by the anxiety and instead step back from the ever increasing desire to control more and more in a downward spiral.
I'm starting to waffle a bit now, and it probably won't make any sense at all, unless you watch Hyperrealism which will challenge your understanding of the world.
Anyway I'm off to go and do something utterly mindless and brain straining.
One final thing. The High Court said they would use the full force of the courts on anyone who tried to intimidate people challenging the government over a50. It will be interesting to see if they take action against certain newspapers or elected representatives if they continue in the vein some of them have.
Oh and David Allen Green is saying that the case could still go either way and is finely balanced but he has been pretty scathing of the government's defence.