Does obsessive moralism breed spatial morass, intellectual malaise, laziness, and spatial shrinkage. Consider the marketplace, which needs controls, either from the buying audience, the makers, or regulators, such as lawmakers.
I mean spatial in terms of definitions, extended or sensed. America, for example, is a wandering border, growing, shrinking, moving with its birthright across mapped borders. In many ways I fear a shrinkage of that space. Will the rising crop of thinkers depart the country seeking more liberalized territory in which to study genetics and other sciences that rub others the wrong way.
I try to read what researchers and thinkers and makers say about climatology, genetics, physics, and art. I rarely listen to people who assume to interprete the ideas for political reasons. For me, it seems a squandering of time for CNN to ask people if they think that this political season will be the worst one in history. What does it matter, for example, either way? The question, while geared toward a loose definition of audience interaction, reflects an attitude of “keep them busy with dumb questions while we make up their minds for them.”
The question has no thought; it’s mere cognitive interlude; it’s perpertual night. As McCarthy would claim it, the night will never end. Radio pundits want to nail down the truth of things; they know all the answers, or speak as if they do; they know the science better than the scientists. They give the impression of smallness.
We need open space. Blakespace.