Having watched the imposter-Thomas Paine's "Second American Revolution" video, I would like to express some of my thoughts on the imposter's oratory.
In general, I was surprised that I found myself quite engrossed in what the imposter was saying. I immediately found myself ignoring a large part of the content of his speech, and rather, simply listening to the passion in his voice and the manner of its delivery. What was interesting was that the first thing he mentioned was the idea of establishing English as the national language, which we spent a few days discussing a while back. Although I am not sure if I necessarily agree or disagree with his views, I can say that I was impressed with his ability to rattle on about a most unusual, unexpected, or even ridiculous topic. After all, who among us honestly believes that it is time for us to engage in a Second American Revolution? Does he (the imposter) even truly believe this, or is he simply seeking attention on YouTube and on the news? Do you think the man honestly believes that he will have an effect on the American people?
Interestingly enough, his repeated use of the question, "Is it common sense...?" actually caught my attention and made me eager to hear what he had to say. Yet at the same time, I acknowledge that he is but a random man who I know nothing about and who, therefore, may not even be worthy of intellectual praise. However, I still watched the entire video and felt as if I had been given a decent speech after it ended, but I am not quite sure why.
What are your opinions of the video?
(Janet Lee)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I was greatly impressed with the content of the video. Obviously the points of view expressed are those inspired by a radical revolutionary of the 18th century, but I feel the majority of points were valid.
He addressed the outrageous Obama stimulus package passed by a clueless Congress. This disgusting misuse of taxpayer money would have outraged those cut from the cloth of Thomas Paine, as it does to almost everyone with good business sense and understanding of the economy today. The bill of billions of dollars spent in bailouts and buyouts is being footed by an unwilling public, whose so called "representatives" did not even read, let alone understand what they were doing. Paine(as I shall from hereon address the actor) rightly equated this to taxation without representation.
He went on to address illegal immigration and other government injustices which I don't have time to comment on, but overall I agreed with most of his views about America's complacency and ignorance to what our government is doing.
(Steve Szumski)
First of all, I believe that we actually may be viewing two different videos, as I saw both and it seems we are talking about both of them.
Here's the one I watched:
www.doiop.com/beck1 (I think Janet watched this one)
instead of this one:
www.doiop.com/beck2. (I think Steve watched this one)
Anyways...
This is not a "modern day" Thomas Paine. This is a modern day conservative, telling us his beliefs in the guise of a "18th century American revolutionary." Despite the actor's constant reliance on the phrase "Is it common sense that...", many of the beliefs he espouses are not common sense, and saying that they are certainly does not make them so.
The actor condemns multiculturalism and tolerance in America, stating that there is only one culture and implies that all those who refuse to understand that are un-American. He condemns immigration, entitlement programs (in the second video), and what he calls "hyphenated Americans." Never do I recall reading such sentiments in Paine's actual writing. The impostor's words are merely those of a modern day conservative pundit pretending to be Paine.
Of course, this false "Paine" is certainly entitled to his opinions. I just wish that he wouldn't deceptively disguise his opinions as ones of "common sense" that Paine himself would have adopted.
-Eric W
-On an interesting side note, I sense that Steve and I hold different political beliefs, resulting in two rather different responses. He eventually started referred to the actor as Paine, while Janet and I continued to called him an "impostor."
It seems as though our reception of this false "Paine" relies a lot upon personal political beliefs, while the real Paine from over 200 years ago has transcended party politics in our eyes.
-Eric
As Eric noted, it seems that the reactions to this video rely heavily on political views, and I agree with Eric that the real Thomas Paine seems to have transcended modern party politics in the eyes of US history students.
"This is a modern day conservative, telling us his beliefs in the guise of a '18th century American revolutionary.'" --Eric
It would be interesting to take a look at the Paine of the revolutionary era. Yes, this actor is a modern-day conservative dressed up as an 18th century American revolutionary, but as much of a right-wing conservative as he is, wasn't the real Paine just as radical as him, if not more so? What was "common sense" to Paine wasn't necessarily "common sense" to the British. So why should we require that what this modern-day Paine considers "common sense" be "common sense" for all?
"I just wish that he wouldn't deceptively disguise his opinions as ones of 'common sense' that Paine himself would have adopted." --Eric
I don't think that this is necessarily the point. I don't think this actor is necessarily saying that these are the ideas Paine himself would have held, but it seems this actor is taking his views and challenging his audience to evaluate theirs, just as Paine did.
Emily T.
I don't know... I don't think the actor was trying to copy Taylor Pain's opinions/thought process. However, I think that at the same time, he was aware that people were viewing his speech in such a way. Generally, people know Thomas Pain as someone who's thoughts contributed greatly to our country's development. Therefore, I think that the actor created the illusion that these were truly similar to the thoughts of the real Thomas Pain in order to attract a wide audience and get others to start thinking like him. After all, he did dress up in that get up for some reason.
As Janet pointed out, I think that his presentation greatly affected how we perceived his speech. I was also having a hard time concentrating on what he was actually saying, even though he was so passionate. I also noticed that later in the video, the specific points he was making showed up on the screen next to him. Could this be another part of his plan? I think that the actor may have realized that his audience may not be able to pay attention to all of his points. I think that he is aware of the advantages involved in addressing his audience with this type of media.
The actor definitely made points similar to those made by Thomas Paine during the American Revolution, but it is doubtful that Thomas Paine would say the same things if he were here today. The actor talks about forcing congress to truly represent the citizens of America. He also talks about abolishing the electoral college, and thereby having the President elected through popular vote. These seem to be ideas that Thomas Paine would agree with, seeing as Paine was a staunch advocate of "extending franchise to all freemen, beyond the bounds set by colonial elites".
However, just because Paine urged people to revolt during the American Revolution does not mean that Paine would urge them to revolt in the current situation. The circumstances are vastly different, and the enemies in both situations are different. The application of Paine's principles in the current situation is not necessarily logical, but it may help make the actor's point.
(Arvind Kalidindi)
Although the actor's narrow views shocked me, the end almost seemed..ridiculous. We talked about propaganda used by influential leaders of the colonies. But have we become such a clueless people that we need blatant advertising as displayed by the imposter. Since when have toll free numbers solved ANY problems?
After reading Paine's writing in the Neoclassicism packet, I sensed his nationalism and his discrimination against the Tories. Yet, I never imagined that his views would be so harsh in present day terms. In colonial America, the Tories were openly against the colonists faithful to the upcoming nation, yet the groups of people that the imposter mentioned as being "traitors" are not necessarily threats to anyone or anything. Wasn't this "Paine" exhibiting racism? I'm not sure if that's an appropriate term for what was in that video, but he did commonly reference a unicultural nation as representing "common sense".
(Sam Maliha)
After watching the video originally, I felt almost disturbed. Not simply because of what "Paine" was saying but moreover by the sense of ethos that people seemed to view him with. This "Paine" is a random actor. He has no true legitimacy but has instead tried to create some by dressing in colonial clothing and making puns about "Common Sense". The frightening thing for me is that people are eating it up. Based on the comments on the youtube videos in addition to the hundreds of references to "Paine" on different blogs and websites, it seems that many people are not only receptive to his ideas, but believe they are receiving verifiable information from an authority.
This is a completely unknown man who's sentiments do not even remotely relate to Thomas Paine's philosophy. I am admittedly, biased in analyzing his speech since I tend to be quite liberal but I think it's a legitimate threat to our society that people believe anything they hear. I'm sure "Paine" would have difficulty converting anyone to his ideology that is not already conservative leaning but people are receptive to him. Is his costume really so effective that people will believe whatever comes out of his mouth?
It seems to me that he put on the persona for two main reasons. First, to stand out among the thousands of pundits and recieve some attention. Secondly, and in my opinion, more importantly, he wanted to frame the argument in a revolutionary setting. If he represents Thomas Paine, he also theoretically represents our Founding Fathers as a whole. Being in opposition to his ideas is meant to seem like going against the original American values. In a time when people are desperate for solutions to the nation's problems, it seems to have been fairly effective to harken back to simpler times. If the argument is framed 'Original American values' (as represented by him) vs. the enemy, it seems easy who to choose. The problem of course being that "Paine"'s arguments have nothing to do with the beliefs of the founding fathers and the enemy seems to be vast, everyone from congressmen to any "hyphenated Americans."
Honestly, the whole thing makes me uneasy. If so many people accept unquestionably a speech like this, what will they dispute?
(Molly Dunbar)
After reading Molly's comment, I seem to be confused about something. Wasn't the actor trying to speak from Paine's point of view, had he been a citizen of present day life? He was against Tories ("traitors"). Has he classified those of different ethnicities as traitors? It's sickening.
(Sam Maliha)
To me it seems that the man doesn't honestly believe that he is truly a modern resurrection of Thomas Paine. Maybe in that he is drawing attention through the use of logic and rhetoric to modern issues much like Paine brought attention to his contemporary issues. However, he is not truly trying to model his arguments on the viewpoints of Thomas Paine.
In fact, all I feel this really is, is a gimmick. By dressing up as an 18th Century patriot and wearing a wig and a colonial outfit this man is trying to get attention. It seems to be working to, if he ha just stood there and spoken like any other political activist, we would probably never have seen him. Also, the amount of views his videos have gotten would probably be much lower. He isn't really considering the viewpoints of Thomas Paine, but trying to get his voice heard.
Connor Tweardy
Post a Comment