In this post Miles Mathis does a very good analyses of the 2016 BBC documentary HyperNormalisation by Adam Curtis. Adam Curtis discusses in some detail the fact of modern life being untrue, in his own unique style. From Wikipedia ---- “Curtis argues that since the 1970s, governments, financiers, and technological utopians have given up on the complex "real world" and built a simple "fake world" that is run by corporations and kept stable by politicians”.
The documentary is 2 hours and 46 minutes. I first watched this in the summer of 2017. But, after reading Miles's analysis, I watched it again. Very interesting to watch and understand of what I had missed the first time. Yes, the hyper-normalisation as said, could really be hyper-abnormalization. That is, this unusual energetic process, bringing something to a normal condition, could really be an energetic process of deviating from what is normal, in most cases in a way that is undesirable.
Quoting in part Miles Mathis:
“My guest writer claimed that it was admitted in the documentary that the alien project was just that—a project. This is correct. That is one of the truths the documentary slips in amongst two and a half hours of spinning.
Surprised? You shouldn't be. After all, this is the BBC and one of its in-house people. Did you really expect to be told the truth? No, you will be told a few things that are partially true to hook you, and then be viciously spun on the rest. We see that first in the title HyperNormalisation. My title HyperAbnormalization
is more accurate, isn't it? Have things gotten more normal in the past 50 years? No, they have gotten ever more abnormal. So why would Curtis lead with an upside-down title?
Because you are going to be hung by your heels for two hours and forty-six minutes, and he needs you to have the proper orientation from the start. One of the keys to the film comes in the second half, when Curtis introduces us to Vladislav Surkov, Putin's primary ideologist. At minute 2:22:30 Curtis admits Surkov was from the theater world, and tells us that what he did “was take avant garde ideas from the theater and bring them into the heart of politics”. In other words, everything could be manipulated. Reality could be created to suit any purpose. True enough, but remember, we can say the same of Curtis. Everything Curtis accuses Surkov of in this section, we can turn around and accuse him of. This entire documentary is a Surkovian magic show of flashing lights and fast hands under the table.”