Notes in the Margins: Amnesiacs in the Land of Oz, or a Note on Celebrity Happenings
In the fourteenth installment of 'Notes in the Margins', Roberts takes a look at two different 'celebrity happenings'; the random spike in anger towards Susan Sarandon, and the curious case of Dr. Oz
To the people who have decided that, with everything going on, that Susan Sarandon is a worthy target for your frustrations, I feel nothing but annoyance. You tell me your bread and circuses are the divine feast of the sacred, but I will always point out the mold on your crusts.
As always, when the liberal center finds itself unable to grapple--or I should say, unwilling--with their slightly different conservative compatriots, they turn on the members of their party who push for important changes. People like, oh I don't know, socialists. The Property Party is yet again desperate to convince that a plane with two right wings is not spiraling out of control, but rather making progress to its destination.
Right now, while awaiting the ruling of a Supreme Court that has been filled up with conservative appointees because every liberals favorite judge-hero RGB decided legacy and arrogance meant more than preserving the future, the liberal Twitterati and their oddly in-tune anti-fascist contrarians (I say this after watching a self-proclaimed anti-fascist claim that Sarandon is 'an over privileged karen who read too much Marx' and should be criticized) are going after the actress Susan Sarandon for her support of Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton....back in 2016.
I am the first to criticize actors, as they tend to be the monkey grinders at the corporate circus, but in this case, I say leave Susan Sarandon alone. She voted and campaigned with her conscience, which is more than I can say for reed-like liberals and conservatives who let the winds of corporate politics blow them whichever way it wants. I do not write this because she particularly needs defending either; she is very capable of doing so on her own. Not to mention that her positions are, relatively, not that radical. They are just not adherent to corporate winds. They have a trunk, instead of a weak stem.
Gore Vidal (an old friend of Sarandon, I should add) and his contention of America as a nation of amnesia continues to prove itself over and over again. The sad irony of this, given their friendship, does not scrub from my mind that this is something manufactured. The Twitterati cyberspace is little more than a place for reactionary reach-arounds and a masturbatory style of analysis, all focused on the takes being hot but without any sort of substance. It is the junk food of analysis, and who loves junk food more than we, here in 'freedom's land'?
Controversy, once again, rules the day, confused for its better half, subversion. Lets not consider the Epstein trial--not that it will change anything, whatever the verdict--and lets not pay attention as the 'social spending bill' comes up in Congress. And let's not push ourselves to finally engage with a system that needed major reforms long ago and is now turning its sights on the people through its inadequacies. Let us, instead, fantasize about a race that took place four years ago, given to distorted dreams and absurd prejudices.
Arthur C. Clarke was right when, in his book 2001: A Space Odyssey, he noted the following: "The more wonderful the means of communication, the more trivial, tawdry, or depressing its contents seemed to be." And one day, when our empire joins the others as a place for relics and tourism, the future archaeologists will sort through our remains, our buildings, and our documents. But what will shock them the most, at this stage of our empire, will be our diet.
How did we live, they will wonder, on content so tawdry, trivial, and depressing?
***
Recently, I was encouraged to begin watching a TV show of yester-year, called Oz. It surprised me, however, by just how good it is--so far, anyways. As I watched the show, fantastical as it is in depicting prison life, I could not shake the feeling that I had seen this sort of pettiness--tied to major consequences for others--somewhere before. And then it hit me. I have seen this in Congress! What is Congress, really, but prison for people with money? Most of our congressmen are there by a series of accidents, leaving behind a trail of misdemeanors and petty theft, and are placed with others of a similar tendency. Once on the inside, these people break off into gangs--I'm sorry, 'caucuses'--and attempt to maintain power over their fellow members through fear, intimidation, and bribery.
All this, though, preceded the news that Dr. Oz--anointed saint of the schnucks--announced he plans to run for Congress in Pennsylvania. And I am left asking myself, in a minor sense of bemusement, how will Oz do in the Land of Oz?
An article in Reason magazine--yes, I peruse the sad world that is libertarian journalism from time to time--calling into question whether Dr. Oz is 'fit' to be a Congressman. Written by Ronald Bailey, one of the more interesting writers at the libertarian flagship, the article focuses on calling out Dr. Oz for his problematic, charlatanry in which he went from doing some minorly pioneering work on minimally invasive surgery techniques to being a favorite 'doctor' on The Oprah Winfrey Show. Relating this to Dr. Oz using the pandemic as an explanation for his recent decision to run, Bailey undercuts the expression of fealty to capitalism by saying that, sincere as he might be, Oz has a dubious relationship to science, and thus is unfit to be in office.
My response to this is going to be Mencken-esque; being a charlatan does not make one unfit for office, it makes them prepared for office--especially to be a Republican. Dr. Oz has been doing, his whole life, what Republicans have done with climate science since it became a major issue. He fits perfectly. And, after going onto Hannity and giving his fealty to capitalism, he is going to be yet another stooge for the ruling class, since he also has the trust of all the fools and day-time suburban soccer moms, Circle Queens who peddle mis-information between their spouting of nonsense about herbs and healing crystals.
What does this mean for the health of the Republic? Well, the health of the Republic has been in a sickly state since the Reagan Administration, when it became the norm for politics to be show business with consequences. The president, and increasingly other aspects of the government, are becoming mere muppets for the corporate lobbyists.
And for someone with a name like Mehmet Oz, it seems that his ass fits the hand of corporate America like a glove.