See… We have to constantly question & challenge the entire narrative/dialogue put forth by corporate-owned media. How do we define “world” when we say “the world is in danger”? For blacks, #NAACPBombing represents a “dangerous world.” Clearly the dominant media disagreed. Likewise, terrorist group Boko Haram slaughtered hundreds in Nigeria this week. That received little coverage & is not part of this “world is in danger” dialogue that’s happening on the news. Who is part of “the world”? How do we define that? Is the world limited to the racist western imperialist establishment? That seems to be the mindset, which explains the difference in how acts of terror are reported. For example, the terror certain communities experience at the hands of police forces can not in the eyes of the state qualify as terroristic acts. In this mindset, “the world is in danger” ONLY if the threat is towards the establishment. If, instead, “the world” includes ALL people, then violence itself is the threat to the world & both the oppressive establishment & the terrorist groups are perpetrators of it.
