Past can be entirely rewritten, radically altered, recreated

One aspect of the disappearance of all objective historical knowledge can be seen in the way that indi­vidual reputations have become malleable and alter­able at will by those who control all information: information which is gathered and also - an entirely different matter - information which is broadcast.

Their abilit y to falsify is thus unlimited. Historical evidence which the spectacle does not need to know ceases to be evidence. When the only fame is that bestowed by the grace and favour of a spectacular Court ,  disgrace may swifdy follow. An anti-spectac­ular notoriety has become something extremely rare. I myself am one of the last people to retain one, having never had any other. But it has also become extraordi­narily suspect. Society has officially declared itself to be spectacular. To be known outside spectacular relations is already to be known as an enemy of society.

A person's past can be entirely rewritten, radically altered, recreated in the manner of the Moscow trials - and without even having to bother with anything as dumsy as a trial. Killing comes cheaper these days.

Those who run the spectacle, or their friends, surely have no lack of false witnesses, though they may be unskilled - and how could the spectators who witnes the exploits of these false witnesses ever recognise their blunders? - or false documents , which are always highly effective. Thus it is no longer possible to believe anything about anyone that you have not learned for yourself, directly. But in fact false accus­ations are rarely necessary. Once one controls the mechanism which operates the only form of social verification to be fully and universally recognised, one can say what one likes. The spectacle proves its argu­ments simply by going round in circles: by coming back to the start, by repetition, by constant reaffirrma­tion in the only space left where anything can be publicly affirmed, and believed, precisely because that is the only thing to which everyone is witness. Spec­tacular power can similarly deny whatever it likes, once, or th reeti mes over, and change the subject; knowing full well there is no danger of any riposte, in its own space od any other.

Guy Debord

Comments on the society of the spectacle