Lions, Tigers, and --Zombies?!?! Oh my!

Conspiracy rhetoric and Zombies from me to you:

So we all know that the popularity of zombies in our media-television shows, movies, and books-is prominent. There have recently been a rash of stories about people eating people or gnawing the face off of a homeless man.

The following are some links to these stories to get you up to speed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/07/cannibalism-addiction-karen-hylen-psychopaths_n_1570470.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/30/bath-salts-health-cannibal-rudy-eugene_n_1555493.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/alexander-kinyua-cannibal-mental-hospital_n_1609056.html

But what got people extra riled up was the fact that the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) showed up. This occurrence is a common marker of a zombie film. The military and the CDC are generally mentioned as having been ineffective or attempted to cover up what was really happening in the initial scenes of the outbreak. These institutions are even mentioned in how the Government will cover up a Zombie outbreak in Max Brooks' book The Zombie Survival Guide. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/01/cdc-denies-zombies-existence_n_1562141.html

So this, and having read the Zombie Survival Guide recently, got me thinking: Do people really believe in the possibility or happenings of prior Zombie outbreaks? Is this simply mistaken cannibalism?  

Google the phrase "The Lawson Tapes" and you'll find this link:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=138506

There seems to be some debate out there on the inter webs at least and there are a slew of [what I'd call] fake, low budget "authentic" zombie footage reels on the You Tubes. There are debates about authenticity in the comment sections of a few of the videos I checked out there. 

Richard Hofstadter argues that mass media has influenced and aided in the success of paranoid style discourse, which I believe is at the root of what is happening here in the internet forum (6).He says, "It is the use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people that makes the phenomenon significant" (Hofstadter, p. 1). I am intrigued by the anxieties exemplified in the zombie culture and suspicions. Especially the suspicions that the Government is hiding something from the American people. Instead of preparing them or allowing them to know the truth so they could better prepare for the inevitable zombie outbreak, the American people are being left in the dark. 

So we have stories about zombies instead of preparedness. Walter Fisher call humans "homos narrans" and claims that "Humans are essentially story tellers" (p. 6). What story are we telling with these zombie tales from Hollywood and from amateur film makers on line? Are they the same stories? In a post-9/11 world these anxieties may be a way to fixate on something. A buoy to attach our fears to in the storm and chaos of an unsure destiny amidst the War on Terror. 

Tiara has bias too! So much...

Here is my list of biases that I know I will exhibit in my writing and comments on rhetoric i see. I am a perspectival creature and have many quirks. My list of why I have these particular biases is too long so hang with me. Patience please but do feel free to alert me if I am incorrect or have said something out of turn.

1) I have mixed political views and I am rather naive about proper terms. My education is lightly political so I know a tiny fraction of what a politics major would know. I will certainly misspeak about this at some point but I try to look terms up before commenting/using them.

2) I am not religious and, like the political stuff, I try to look things up before I comment. I may not be sensitive about it so apologies in advance. Also, I may miss references in the text or shiny rhetorical thing I am commenting on. Please feel free to point them out if I leave them unnoticed as they are culturally relevant and assist in deeper understanding. 

3) I was raised from humble beginnings and as a grad student I am still not even remotely affluent. I will likely rail against really rich politicians making out of touch statements with almost no grounds but my own boot straps. 

4) Morally flexible-you'll find me taking the side of the opposition on things to feel out their arguments and "walk a mile in their shoes," if you'll allow me the expression. I am not hard and fast about "good" or "evil" because I realize that most of my leanings are arbitrarily based and rooted more in my socialization rather than any deeply pondered and/or committed stance. 

5) As a side note: I have made up words that I put into practice from time to time. They tend to be hyperbolic or completely made up so I will try to add a definition or a feel for what it means if used. 

I am a rhetoric nerd through and through. I hope I can say something that will make you think or at least make you believe that rhetoric is cool. 'Cause it is my bread and butter.

Cheers!