Grammatizing the Eschaton

GRAMMATIZING THE ESCHATON

American history is now totally corrupted by the accumulated contradictions to its official*narrative, as spun by the 24/7 news cycle. Too many know too much about too many crucial things for it* to continue. Whatever is asserted by a politician, government official, even military man must be negated (taken back, apologized for) as soon as it is said.

This is a minimal generalization from reading Jesse Ventura’s “AMERICAN CONSPIRACIES: Lies, Lies and more dirty lies the Government tells us.”

Ventura’s excellent accounts expose many inconsistencies between what has become the Official Narrative of the “American Conspiracies” he considers, from Lincoln’s assassination, to Wall Street and The Secret Plans to End American Democracy, (Chapter 14) …(between these) and specific facts, as well or better attested to than those the O*N are based on. It’s one hell of an ass kicking book.

(Philosophical note. On a formal meta-language for neutral discussion of the issues in context.)

Ventura’s prose is the vernacular of American folk-talk of the ‘10’s. “Jesse The Body” is everyman’s everyman. Here’s Willie Nelson, …many from the old crew rising, let it be. How we talk it is how it is.

In constructing a formal grammar for discussing the incidents he takes up, and what we are left with in considering them, I shall use these abbreviations:

****
BMT*(S*ii O*N (<= S*iA*H)) This expression is synonymous with:
*Big Media Tokens predicating on the Official*Narrative resulting from Actual *Happenings. Asterisks mark psychosemiotic juxtapositions within the same sign-meme.

It is needed as a schematic to represent the levels of discourse, with the gaps between them grammatically bridged (“predicated on”, “<=”) to constitute a new unit available for further use. Such constructions, though complex, allow accuracy in repeated recurrence of the same ideas, memory loops, in the narrative content of “America”.

****
This work establishes a divergence between two streams of “how we talk”, two grammars of Sign-use. Here is a "double" that puts them together squarely: "We* prefer to be lied to ably, than told the truth, boldly," (Sheff’s acute phrasing.)

The split is glossed over in the media of mass communication by sign-uses Freud called “compromise formations”. (cf “reaction formation”; ‘formations’ being S* complexes mechanically repeated in situations, as in memes, mantras, rhyms and rythms). These “bridge the gap” between people’s different “takes” or understandings by conjoining all content with its negation (sarcastic, mocking, scornful).

Ex.: “Truthers”, “birthers”, “nutjobs”, “leftists,” loonies,” “extremists”, “dangerous conservatives”, “blathering idiots” and the like)

Perhaps the best touch of sarcasm is Chapter 10: “But what’s important in this whole thing is that tour policy has always been consistent…” –Oliver North, PBS FRONTLINE interview )


PSYCHOSEMIOTIC FORM => FRAME OF INTELLECTUAL (brain 1) PERCEPTION This organizes intuition of form in communication

***
note to above

S*i for “the Official Narrative “ (S*i(O*N)<= “S* stand in place of O*N salva vertate throughout TokenSpace. S*ii for a distinct, but psychosemiotically related, sign use for “Contradictory Fact” (C*F). Thus: S*i & S*ii represents the conjunction of Official Narratives and Contradictory Facts, for these incidents.

Common discourse has yet to coin a term for Big Token Incidents*, Ex. “JFK’s Assassination” – those S* carried in all the mainstream media of communication so psychologically shocking to the normal flow of process* that they become assimilated as “We” content of the collective grammar. Constituent of the American Group-process, whatever other narratives are constructed. I token them here “BTI*”. Thus, alongside the BTI* Ventura considered could be included, through similar research; the OKC bombing, Columbine, the anthrax poison letters following 9.11, and a host of other stock examples all other various historical narratives must include. “We” content, for the American Group-Process, whoever participates. But now split as (S*i & S*ii)