Propagandocalypse

For most of the Christian West’s history, prophecy of the end of days has held latent within it the promise of redemption.  As the story of Revelation goes, each man, woman and child will stand before his creator and, possessed of the correct brand of faith and forgiveness, be judged amongst the valiant who will be granted eternal life in God’s Holy city of New Jerusalem.  “Jesus Saves” proclaims the ubiquitous bumper sticker – and the non-believer is condemned to endless torment in the maws of Hell.  This myth has held sway for the best part of two millennia.  But as the locus of our society has moved away from the guiding concept of piety and divine redemption and ever more towards atheism and self-determination (and the endemic selfishness that has flourished in their wake), popular visions of the closing of time increasingly are spawned from the latter viewpoint – a viewpoint where “salvation” is glaring in its absence.  As the ominous 2012 date draws closer, these two myths and their deeply invested proponents (many if not most of our political leaders are professed believers in the coming End of Days) are doing battle for the hearts and minds of the people of our world, in what amounts sort of virtual prelude to the fever-dream tribulations Revelation promises.

This entry was posted in Sam Barnes, September, September 14 and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Propagandocalypse

  1. Grecia says:

    I haven’t seen this movie yet, but it seems to be connected to the movie I saw, Knowing because the end of the world in both comes as a result of a change in the Sun. In this movie, that connections seems a bit more relevant because the date 2012 is attached to Mayan calendar based on the Sun. I am not very sure if I want to see this movie, the elite surviving is a bit off putting. Maybe I am jealous that I cannot afford the 1 billion-dollar ticket to salvation. )I thought buying salvation was done during the protestant reformation.)

  2. jonrossi says:

    This is a brilliant analysis of the movie, and I loved it. What blew my mind in particular was the pointing out of the lack of concern for public welfare. That is, the lack of information given to the general public, though I do understand why a government might do this. There are moral negatives on either side of the equation – on the one hand, tell the public and watch panic ensue, which seemingly ends in disaster anyway (though perhaps people can figure their own way out, a la Cusack’s character, though his actions on a wide scale would have doomed all the ships and thus all of humanity), or let the people live calmly, since the disaster will come anyway. It seems awful to have to make the choice, but I think the governments ultimately made the right one.

    • Sam Barnes says:

      Thanks for your comments, Jon and Grecia. My issue and my fear is not, ultimately, with the lack of information given to the film’s fictional public – it is that, as we approach this actual date, millions upon millions of impressionable eyes have already seen the “end” go down this way. Funded and produced by the Hollywood elite (they would have tickets on those silly arks), 2012 promotes a reflexive complacency. It seems more and more likely that some sort of solar-inspired shift will indeed be occurring in the next few years (if it is not already: 2010 to date is the most seismically active year in over 400 years), and the decision to inform the mass of humanity should not, I believe, be left to figures who have an interest in saving themselves and their power before their the lives of their constituents. We’ll talk more in class! I’m looking forward to it.

  3. Hi Sam,

    Can you edit this post to place it in the appropriate categories (your name, and the week of the response)? This will help us keep everyone’s work in order.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *