[Industrialblog,
March 27, 2007]
24: Jumped the Shark, and the Unthinkable
I abandoned watching the television show 24 midway through last episode that the show is officially deeply retarded.
People do things that make no sense, over and over again. In one scene, a woman betrays Jack Bauer and gets his whole unit killed, except for Jack. After one sharp exchange with her, he drops it. Entirely. In fact, a few minutes after that (in real time), she's refusing to help him save others unless gets her terms. And Jack negotiates with her ... huh?
Remember, the show is in real time, yet they act like an entire week has gone by instead of one hour.
But there's also been something else, and that's been a creeping political correctness. The Middle Eastern terrorist wants peace, but [white] White House aides attempt a coup d'etat through a terrorist bombing. A Middle Eastern aide at CTU is tortured, but she's innocent of course — it's the white guy working for a Halliburton-like company that's betrayed everyone. There's a Middle Eastern terrorist, yes, but he's working at the behest of a Russian general, and besides, the whole thing has been accidentally set in motion by a corrupt, evil American corporation that's engaged in a massive coverup.
Then there's the moronic responses of the White House. The VP wants to fire a "warning shot," a nuclear strike on a Middle Eastern country, but in a sparsely populated area. This is supposed to send a message.
Clue: There's probably no way to seem less serious than a "measured" nuclear response, and God help us if anyone suggests such a thing. That doesn't mean a limited response, in the sense that everything has limits. But if we have people in high places that suggest we respond to nuclear terrorism by a "warning shot" nuclear strike, then we've gotten friggin' idiots in high places.
Yes, I know this is fiction ... but the scary thing is I can see our country doing such a moronic thing, a tit-for-tat strategy. Perhaps that's what bugs me. I can see such fecklessness happening for real to nuclear terrorist act. I mean, basically, 24's saying if we get nuked by a terrorist, there isn't a lot we can do about it. Because any response is destined to fail.
And 24's gone on and on like this all year. Done with it.
*****
But a question remains ... what about nuclear terrorism? I'm beginning to think, perhaps 24 is right. Maybe there isn't anything our nation-state could do against a nuclear terroristic act. Perhaps what we could witness in this century is the obsolescence of the nation-state. Or at least the limited nation-state.
I imagine that what we'd see post-nuclear terrorism is a RFID- and GPS-powered police state. Which is a very scary idea.
People do things that make no sense, over and over again. In one scene, a woman betrays Jack Bauer and gets his whole unit killed, except for Jack. After one sharp exchange with her, he drops it. Entirely. In fact, a few minutes after that (in real time), she's refusing to help him save others unless gets her terms. And Jack negotiates with her ... huh?
Remember, the show is in real time, yet they act like an entire week has gone by instead of one hour.
But there's also been something else, and that's been a creeping political correctness. The Middle Eastern terrorist wants peace, but [white] White House aides attempt a coup d'etat through a terrorist bombing. A Middle Eastern aide at CTU is tortured, but she's innocent of course — it's the white guy working for a Halliburton-like company that's betrayed everyone. There's a Middle Eastern terrorist, yes, but he's working at the behest of a Russian general, and besides, the whole thing has been accidentally set in motion by a corrupt, evil American corporation that's engaged in a massive coverup.
Then there's the moronic responses of the White House. The VP wants to fire a "warning shot," a nuclear strike on a Middle Eastern country, but in a sparsely populated area. This is supposed to send a message.
Clue: There's probably no way to seem less serious than a "measured" nuclear response, and God help us if anyone suggests such a thing. That doesn't mean a limited response, in the sense that everything has limits. But if we have people in high places that suggest we respond to nuclear terrorism by a "warning shot" nuclear strike, then we've gotten friggin' idiots in high places.
Yes, I know this is fiction ... but the scary thing is I can see our country doing such a moronic thing, a tit-for-tat strategy. Perhaps that's what bugs me. I can see such fecklessness happening for real to nuclear terrorist act. I mean, basically, 24's saying if we get nuked by a terrorist, there isn't a lot we can do about it. Because any response is destined to fail.
And 24's gone on and on like this all year. Done with it.
*****
But a question remains ... what about nuclear terrorism? I'm beginning to think, perhaps 24 is right. Maybe there isn't anything our nation-state could do against a nuclear terroristic act. Perhaps what we could witness in this century is the obsolescence of the nation-state. Or at least the limited nation-state.
I imagine that what we'd see post-nuclear terrorism is a RFID- and GPS-powered police state. Which is a very scary idea.
And technology is advancing to the point where we'll soon be able to surveil and curtail in ways that would make George Orwell's 1984 seem like kindergarten. My own brief science-fictional take on that is here.
The WMD threat makes the question a bit harder to answer.