A cultural elite that rejects middle class values and censors debate - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-22-2009, 10:38 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Is this US or Canadian TV you are referring to? Is the Canadia media largely left leaning? I have the impression it is much more so than in the US.
It's the same in Canada. In Canada we have CBC which is like the BBC. The U.S. has much more conservatives in talk radio and we don't have the equivalent of Fox News here.

The artist community supports the left because many can't make money with art that people will actually pay for so they naturally want government sponsorship. My Dad knew a guy making homemovies for family and friends and getting 50k per year off the dole. Total bull!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
It does, but it also gives us a lot more unchecked drivel that needs to be sifted through...
I agree the only problem is who sifts it and for what purpose? I use the internet more precisely because it allows me access to news reports all over the world and I don't have to wade through as many commercials to get to it. The downside is many people like all the pornography and organized crime so it's a double edged sword. Communication can be used for good or ill depending on the person using it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
So what are your issues with mass legal immigration Oscar?
Using the world "legal" is supposed to mean that you read the article as a guy who is against legal immigration? To my mind mass immigration and "legal" are not synonymous. Nice try Mr. Socialist in trying to reel me into a "racism" debate. .

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
That would be like saying Oscar's, Rush, and Hannity's constant calling anyone outside the right as being socialist as censorship by framing and associating them with the bad guys. Yet I haven't heard a single cry of censorship.
Yeah like the "Fairness" Doctrine?
__________________

__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:39 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Weeeelll.... I always find myself wondering why this massive leftwing apparatus seems incapable of wielding political power where it counts, on the government benches. Mass immigration, in itself, I would have thought is yet another part of the anything-in-the-name of commerce mentality which seems to run society nowadays. I thought the Right welcomed all that freedom of movement, when it came to capital anyhow.

The decline of marriage, society, culture, and racial purity can all be sheeted home to the mindset of modern government which values markets above community (at least pre 2007, jury is still out on the present and future).

There. That's my inflammatory rant.

As for The Sun, its politics are, I thought reliably populist-right-wing, just like its longstanding Australian cousins. Not ideological, just, you know, kneejerk.
__________________

__________________
Kieran McConville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:46 PM   #18
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
But, why is it that the Daily Mail has a circulation roughly four times the amount of the left wing Guardian and Independent put together? It seems to me that when traditional conservative opinions are presented, a large element of the public does seem to agree with them.
In my observation the right needs media that speaks directly to them moreso then those that lean left. It partly has to do with the fact that some of the issues couldn't be covered by real journalist with a straight face, i.e. creationism in science class.


Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
That said, the moronic Murdoch rag the Sun, which is essentially soft porn and has no political views that I can discern, has an even higher readership than the Mail. This leads me to the depressing conclusion that the Sun constituency of amoral layabouts and ne'er-do-wells is larger than the Mail constituency of the middle class. I would argue that the underclass are cleverly exploited by globalists like Murdoch and, on the other hand, patronised to by the liberal left.
This is a joke right? Tabloids are bought by all. I guarantee you that a big portion of your so called "pro-family" folk are buying this smut just as much as everyone else, if not more.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:56 PM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
Weeeelll.... I always find myself wondering why this massive leftwing apparatus seems incapable of wielding political power where it counts, on the government benches.
Social welfare benefits and the huge % of young people in the UK and France that rely on them might be an argument against this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
Mass immigration, in itself, I would have thought is yet another part of the anything-in-the-name of commerce mentality which seems to run society nowadays. I thought the Right welcomed all that freedom of movement, when it came to capital anyhow.

The decline of marriage, society, culture, and racial purity can all be sheeted home to the mindset of modern government which values markets above community (at least pre 2007, jury is still out on the present and future).
Agree completely, but not all critiques of globalism emanate from the left.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
As for The Sun, its politics are, I thought reliably populist-right-wing, just like its longstanding Australian cousins. Not ideological, just, you know, kneejerk.
In the '80's certainly, but not recently. They went all lovey dovey with New Labour circa 1997 onwards. The proles had to be directed in a new way of 'thinking'.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:58 PM   #20
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
The artist community supports the left because many can't make money with art that people will actually pay for so they naturally want government sponsorship. My Dad knew a guy making homemovies for family and friends and getting 50k per year off the dole. Total bull!
Care to explain?



Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Using the world "legal" is supposed to mean that you read the article as a guy who is against legal immigration? To my mind mass immigration and "legal" are not synonymous.
You're joking right? If it was illegal immigration, he would have fucking jumped on using that word. Nice dodge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Yeah like the "Fairness" Doctrine?
You cannot be serious??? Not even Hannity uses this shit anymore. NO ONE has tried to bring it back, I've asked you at least a dozen times to try and find me one person trying to bring it back and you fail every time. Drop it, Hannity has. You never even could explain how the doctine was censorship.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:04 PM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
The artist community supports the left because many can't make money with art that people will actually pay for so they naturally want government sponsorship.
Too simplistic by half, to be honest.

An artistic sensibility is a way of looking at the world. Few artists are genuine believing socialists. To me, it's almost contradictory. Of course, artists may support left policies for tactical or self-interested reasons. Artists are no more or less moral than the rest of us.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:07 PM   #22
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Too simplistic by half, to be honest.

An artistic sensibility is a way of looking at the world. Few artists are genuine believing socialists. To me, it's almost contradictory. Of course, artists may support left policies for tactical or self-interested reasons. Artists are no more or less moral than the rest of us.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:08 PM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
person trying to bring it back and you fail every time. Drop it, Hannity has. You never even could explain how the doctine was censorship.
Arguably, it is indeed soft censorship because it essentially fixes the rules of the game. Of course, oligoloplistic ownership of media interests also fixes the rules of the game. I'm all for a genuine free market, if ever we could actually have one, but it demands very strong anti-trust legislation and enforcement.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:12 PM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Just on the matter of social welfare programs, financeguy, I'm not sure what else you would have happen? They had their origins in left-of-centre political thought, probably in some countries have acquired a more contemporary 'work house' aspect influenced from the Right, but in either case... another thing that contemporary market society does is throw people on the scrap heap, routinely.

Just quietly, without those social welfare programs, as unappetising as many of the individuals who live on the dole might be, you'd have heads on sticks.
__________________
Kieran McConville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:14 PM   #25
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Arguably, it is indeed soft censorship because it essentially fixes the rules of the game. Of course, oligoloplistic ownership of media interests also fixes the rules of the game. I'm all for a genuine free market, if ever we could actually have one, but it demands very strong anti-trust legislation and enforcement.
This I agree with to a certain point, but it obtained to all not just AM radio, yet no one else hated it. Rush and Hannity hated it because they couldn't cut off the voices they weren't informed enough to debate with...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:17 PM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I'm generally somewhat pro-free market and anti-welfare, but one of the reasons I tend to look the other way in regard to government support for the artists is that the artist welfare scheme of the UK Conservative government in the early 90's actually fostered Britpop. A few of the musicians from that era have said that if they had been forced to go out and get a 9 to 5 job, it's unlikely they would have had the time to form bands and do music.

Of course, there is also the artist exemption scheme in Ireland, which I am sure was a help for U2 in the early years when there was not a lot of money coming in.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:22 PM   #27
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
Just on the matter of social welfare programs, financeguy, I'm not sure what else you would have happen? They had their origins in left-of-centre political thought, probably in some countries have acquired a more contemporary 'work house' aspect influenced from the Right, but in either case... another thing that contemporary market society does is throw people on the scrap heap, routinely.
I read some article a few years ago that the % of 18-25 year olds in the UK that were neither in employment, nor studying, was absurdly high. This was pre-recession, when jobs were available for the taking - I certainly wouldn't begrudge unemployment benefit for someone that has lost their job due to a recession.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
another thing that contemporary market society does is throw people on the scrap heap, routinely.
And so does Gordon Brown style socialism. So did the Labour party in the 1970s, with its unrealistic demands for ever increasing wages and ever increasing strikes, all the time while competitiveness was reducing and entrepreneurs were screwed and thrown on the scrap heap by 70% taxes.

It is important that lessons are learned from the credit crunch to avoid boom and bust scenarios in the future.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
Just quietly, without those social welfare programs, as unappetising as many of the individuals who live on the dole might be, you'd have heads on sticks.
Well, yes, but there are already heads on sticks, in Ireland, the UK, and I'd assume, Australia, because some of these unappetising individuals spend their benefits on drugs and then go out and shoot each other.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:40 PM   #28
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Care to explain?

I'm not purpleoscar, but I'll explain.

For starters, the 50k per year to make home movies sounds to me like an urban legend perpetuated by some angry conservative. No one here receives money to make personal home movies, I can assure you.

Next, the Canadian government does subsidize arts and culture here, but for very good reason, IMO. Before these subsidies became available and our Canadian content rules for radio and television came into place, we barely had an entertainment industry. I can remember this from when I was a kid in the 70's, the music industry growing from a handful of homegrown artists (who almost always had to achieve fame in the US before they were even noticed here), to what we have now, a diverse, thriving music scene, one that could be the envy of almost any nation.

One of the main reasons that subsidies were needed to get our entertainment industries off the ground is our geographical proximity to the behemoth US entertainment industry - it's established, it's popular up here, and it's all through our airwaves. The subsidies were needed to give Canadian artists a chance to present themselves to the public, to become viable, and to allow the Canadian arts culture to grow -- to allow us to have an arts culture representative of us, and unique from the US, period.

The right tends to bitch and complain - it costs unnecessary tax dollars, let them rise on their own merit, blah blah blah - but the bottom line is, it is culturally and artistically important to Canada, and we'd be poorer as a nation without it.
__________________
VintagePunk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 11:52 PM   #29
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:13 PM
Thank you, VP.

You gotta love urban legends
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 12:07 AM   #30
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Someone on another forum posed the question 'what benefits has Ireland had from the mass immigration in recent years?'. I was hard pressed to think of any, quite honestly.
I'm assuming 'recent years' includes before the recession, when most of your immigrants were presumably filling available jobs at the lower end of the wage scale, as immigrants everywhere usually do.

What constitutes a 'benefit'?
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
That said, the moronic Murdoch rag the Sun, which is essentially soft porn and has no political views that I can discern, has an even higher readership than the Mail. This leads me to the depressing conclusion that the Sun constituency of amoral layabouts and ne'er-do-wells is larger than the Mail constituency of the middle class. I would argue that the underclass are cleverly exploited by globalists like Murdoch and, on the other hand, patronised to by the liberal left.
I'm going to agree with BVS here--I think people aren't reading the Sun (which I'm familiar enough with) for the same purpose they're reading the other papers you mentioned. It's sensationalistic, gossipy, entertaining, eye-poppingly colorful, demands little concentration of the reader...in short, the perfect light read for when you have neither the time nor the inclination for a more challenging take on the news, and as a bonus it does after all have some 'real' news, so you get to feel at least a little virtuously 'better informed' after reading it.

In the US, generally speaking there's a sharper dividing line between 'real' newspapers and what we call 'tabloids,' which are basically straight scandal rags which don't make even the faintest pretense at covering 'real' news (and are usually weeklies anyway). But, even so, for many years now the 'real' paper with the widest circulation here has been USA Today, which has little discernible political slant but, more importantly, is a colorful, photo- and graphic-packed paper (lots of 'What Do You Think?' public opinion polls), written for a lower reading level than most of our major papers, and with a far greater amount of its bulk taken up by the 'Life' (read: entertainment) and 'Sports' sections (actually pretty good) compared to the competition. So, same principle, nice easy unchallenging read, and you still get the pleasure of feeling at least a little better informed after reading it. Just not as much outright garbage as a lower-end British newspaper would have. And yes, people of all social classes and political views read it.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com