Society has created norms with the strong help of corporations and governments that make the public adhere to circumstantial normality. For instance, to demonstrate a low-level example, let us consider a teenager drinking a litre of orange juice walking down the halls at his/here public school. The person in question, despite the taste/nutrition of the juice will receive some strange comments and gazes, whereas if the same person were seen drinking a litre of Coke, it would be entirely different. Because of the media we think that drinking a litre of Coke, which is relatively unhealthy, lacks any nutrition, and does not quench thirst, no one will think twice about this kid drinking this much Coke. This is a very basic example of manipulation from corporations. Let us consider two popular youths that are turning sixteen. If one of the youths decides not to buy a car it may be seen as strange, despite the fact that forty years ago teens rarely owned their own car and the fact that an automobile costs an exuberant amount of money. The one who buys a car will be seen as cool, even though that person becomes poorer, lethargic, and contributes actively to the destruction of the planet. This trend is a forced one, as cars have made people live further and further away from their places of work and their friends, so the invention of the car has been a self-fuelled growth industry. And to get away from the youth aspect (which contains the most sizeable amount of media manipulation because they have the largest amount of spending money amongst the classes), suppose that fifteen years ago a man wore jeans to his office instead of slacks. He would be seen as unkept and untidy, but now the same man would be called nothing because it is the acceptable trend. There is no reason for noticing differences such as the prior let alone mentioning something other then trying desperately to fit into groups whose trend are dictated by either corporations or governments. Corporations, of course being more so as the years go by and the government s lose power.

Despite the government losing this control to business, the reigns on public control have tightened. The spectrum consists of a few highly tolerable points of view which closely coincide. To quote a friend of mine, "the debate over Nicaragua in the 1980's; the "hawks" argued that we should have crushed them with force, while the "doves" decided that economic strangulation was the best option. Nowhere was there a suggestion of simply leaving them alone." The two main views in American politics are Democratic and Republican, which are said to show the entire spectrum of views. The death penalty for instance, one side says we should kill people for killing others, while the "conservatives" say that we should lock up murderers until the day they die, because they feel killing is wrong, but suffocation is right. Nothing is ever done as to propose a cure, or change the system that creates these "monsters", simply pointless debate with the two sides. The main reason there are only two parties is not because they are the best, simply that there has been incredible smear campaigns against such views as communism and socialism in the past that it has become bred into the public view that these ways are wrong. Anyone who presents a communist point of view is cast off as a college stereotype, and rightfully so because anyone who wishes to progress past college must either adopt popular views or become non-existent save a few of the more influential students. On the most part leftist groups are simply allowed to exists in order to create the illusion of debate, when in fact their viewpoints are never allowed to surface, simply slanderous generalizations. The system has done a wonderful job of ensuring no one will question anything or promote change because the public would dismiss such an attempt as unenlightened college overthinking and whining. The problem with credibility is this: anyone who has no credibility doesn’t get the opportunity to express their views to the mainstream population, and anyone with credibility has obviously been around for a long time, and in order to be around a long time the person must have adapted their in order to survive in the system. Because the public is rarely exposed to truly differing views, when one arises is dismissed as inane and unimportant.

The reason that this mindset is so strong is because the socialization process of rejecting all but is mainstream begins at birth. Recently companies have bought birth lists from hospitals and are sending products and advertising to new mothers, who if they grew up on the product themselves will just reinforce the notion of using them on their child. If the mother wasn’t weaned from the corporations then sample packs and nutritional studies will lean her towards starting, and starting a habit with child rearing in a family is much, much easier than ending a habit. Case in point McDonald's. Twenty years ago McDonald’s target audience was children, so the kids’ meals were made to attract them. The parents would like the idea of not having to cook, their kids having fun, and most of all not having to look after the child while they were on the indoor playgrounds. This easy way out for parents worked incredibly because the parents rarely gave any thought to the nutritional values of the food their children were eating, the precedent which was set by eating at McDonald’s (not only for their children who enjoyed going there, but also for their children seeing their parents eating it and aping them, and in turn taking their own children to McDonalds because it is thought of as the normal thing to do) for many years to come. Anyone now who doesn’t allow their children to eat at McDonalds is seen as strange, and the children will start eating there as a form of rebellion if the parents don’t allow it. With the population firmly in their grasp, McDonald’s has focused slightly more on an adult audience to increase frequency of visits, thus again setting the standard for children eating there frequently. Another ploy that McDonalds has used is 1) having prices so low they strangle out competition and rarely make a profit, as well as changing portions. When McDonalds first opened their drinks and fries were much smaller and their burgers were larger. The meat is more expensive than the pop or the potatoes, so over the years, yes, the burgers have gotten smaller; meanwhile the portions of drinks and fries have increased. People were once full after eating what was then large fries and is now regular, they added a much larger large, which was at first a huge portion for the general public but after a few years of existence was increasingly easy to finish. Then just a few years ago supersized was introduced, because bigger is better. Few could finish this portion, but now it is easy too, and in 2003 McDonalds is supposed to come out with a larger portion. Not only is this cheaper than feeding people meat, not only are salty snack foods easier to get people addicted to, but people are full when they leave which creates the illusion of satisfaction. Now there are McDonalds toys available in toy stores that are bought for kids which furtherly makes them life long consumers. Many argue that the reason kids meals are so inexpensive is because it lures the adults in, when in reality it is because of repetition and socialization. The adults spend little money, and the restaurant makes little money off any visits, but more importantly it creates life long consumers from frequent visits to the point that it becomes habit. If it weren’t for PepsiCo owning Pizza hut, KFC, Taco bell, and to a point Burger King and the appearance of Subway, McDonald’s would be the only fast food restaurant in existence, their plan was and is superb. The same can be said for television. When TV first came out, it was a luxury, but now anyone who doesn’t have one is seen as weird. If parents don’t own one the child rebels by watching it somewhere else and becomes hooked that way, but if parents do own a TV it far too often assumes two roles, the baby sitter is replaced by this box which was once only there to entertain. For parents, again, it is the easy way out and cheaper than hiring a nanny, so has begun the cycle. The children will grow up thinking that TV is a suitable baby sitter, and if they don’t then they will surely allow it to be out of convenience. Thus millions of children are taught morality and raised by networks and corporations. The children are programmed to be life long viewers and consumers. The earlier this process of programming is started the easier it is to keep control because there is no other way known to the person in question. This also accounts for our extremely uniform opinions and the lack of deviance, because in the past we were raised differently, but now we all have the same teacher.

One may and most likely will ask themselves why nothing has been done, or even why no one notices. To this the answer is because anything that disturbs the flock mentality scares us. In defense, we use slander and hatred. The una-bomber for instance got our attention, but his viewpoints never saw the light of day. It is difficult to say his views are incorrect, but that doesn’t matter because we can with much more ease dismiss him as insane and make jokes. People get scared when the truth is slanderous and they realize they are self-destructive sheep. In reaction they defend themselves with slander instead of evaluating their position. Not only is this easier than changing, but it also boosts self esteem in contrast with admitting that our system will consume itself, so to speak. This is why even my writing this is met with slander from my "friends". Many feel unintelligent when smart conversation or writing is brought up, so they insecurely respond with making fun of the deviant behavior. This very instinct is one of the largest contributors to the fact that the system cannot change, it will either continue or explode. When change occurs the public will either mock the system, or more likely mock the people suggesting change. When concretely confronted with issues of change and not amongst peers a person will often feel their back against a wall and get frustrated. The bottom line is that for one reason for another, it is simply easier not to think about it. We live in the ultimate convenience based society in which change can never truly occur as far as I am concerned until the system collapses and we haven’t a choice. Everything we do must be made easier, such as "miracle" weight loss pills, remote controls, microwave ovens, computers, etc. What must be attempted to do is show that easier is in fact bad. It creates laziness, ignorance, slothiness, and worst of all depression. Until people realize that they are destroying themselves by not paying attention and allowing themselves to be manipulated we can never progress. But of course, the situation must first be recognized.

So I seem to have recognized some of the many problems we are faced with, that part is easy. But what can be done to change it? The answer is far too complicated to imagine, because every step depends on the next. For example, to change public opinion and have people even recognize the problems we are faced with we must take power away from corporations, change the attitudes of parenting, and use more common sense and less popular sense. But for this to happen we must have people genuinely concerned with the situation or else they will never care to change it. For them to be concerned enough to want to change the system we must take power away from corporations, change the attitudes of parenting, and use more common sense and less popular sense. But for this to happen they have to be concerned. This paradigm is the situation and the roadblock to undoing the problems we are faced with. The only way to do this is to reach enough people before they become part of the active system, or around post secondary. That way when we want to take action the intelligent public will be familiar with the problems and we can act. Until this happens we must be contempt with the occasional debate, new Chomsky books, or special new burgers which are only available at McDonalds for a limited time.

By Shane Barter