Amusing ourselves to death

[Ariovistus Maximus]

Hey guys!

I wanted to bring up for discussion a trend in society that I see often. This disturbs me greatly.

I don't know about the condition of Europe, but in the States this has nearly become the norm, so it would seem.

But first I will sum it up with a few quotes:

"The best argument against democracy is a 5-minute talk with the average voter."

"Any society that would sacrifice a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

"Under a democratic government, the citizens exercise the powers of sovereignty; and those powers will be first abused, and then afterwards lost, if they are committed to an unwieldy multitude."

This last one hit it on the head for me. It's from Edward Gibbon.

It seems to be saying that this sovereign power of the citizenry will turn law into a mere reflection of the mood of the day; that policy is based on the fad of the moment.

And truly it seems that this is what politics has become. It is the reflection of the whims of the moment. It seems to me that most of today's politics is centered on buzzwords.

Today, everybody's worried about "greenhouse gas emissions." What about tomorrow, when everyone's bored of "global warming?" What happens when they get tired of seeing that in the news?

Suddenly global warming won't be a problem. What fad will we move on to next?

To cite a few examples:

I am disturbed when I see the President's popularity polls. Have you noticed that his policies are losing popularity, but his personal approval rating is as high as ever? People don't like his politics, but they still love him anyway?

I am disturbed when a politician's smile and demeanor is of greater moment than his politics.

It is an insulting commentary on our nation that anyone would vote based on color, one way or the other.

People who refuse to vote for a black man are disgusting bigots, and people who vote for a black man because he's black (or a woman because she's a woman etc) are foolish and shallow.

Experience? Bah! Who needs experience as long as you look good and talk pretty? When did past performance indicate anything about future performance?

Now that I've said som things that may be considered anti-Obama, I will say some other things.

I also think that it's an insulting commentary on the general public on how they have behaved in politics these days.

When Bush won by a narrow margin, people cried "foul!" and drove around with bumper stickers reading, "Not MY President!"

But now that Obama won, I see bitter Republicans running around making waves about how Obama isn't a citizen blah blah blah. Come on, people! GROW UP! This isn't the 5th grade, arguing about who gets which sandbox toys!

The man is elected. LIVE WITH IT. You don't have to like it, but I think that he at LEAST deserves respect as the President of the United States of America. If WE don't respect him, why should any other nation respect him? And if nobody respects him, they certainly won't respect the United States itself! So we'll act like children because we feel slighted that someone disagrees with us?

Rush Limbaugh. The guy WANTS our President (that's right, OUR President) to FAIL?!?!? Ummm, if he fails, I think it logically follows that the nation fails by and large...

The man actually compared it to a FOOTBALL GAME!!! Are we so stupid, so shallow, so careless, so irresponsible that we think of our nation as a big football game???

HAS ENTERTAINMENT SO BECOME OUR GOD THAT WE UNCONSCOUSLY THINK OF POLITICS IN TERMS OF GAMES AND AMUSEMENT???

OUR SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE IS NOW THE LATEST HOLLYWOOD MOVIE. "Well, it happened on "x" show, so it must be right, right?"

OUR WISE MEN AND PHILOSOPHERS ARE OUR ACTORS AND MUSICIANS.

Now, I'm not saying that we should be bobbleheads and always agree with everything our great leader says (I don't agree with the majority of it myself), but honestly.

Lawsuits. It's the American way.

We have taken "personal liberty" so far. If someone looks at you wrong, it's a "hate crime."

It seems that these days, freedom means that if someone does something you don't like, you throw a fit about it.

Ok, I can understand the American Revolution of 1776. That has some legitimate cause.

But now we riot, strike, sue, you-name-it over anything that dares displease us. We really are a bunch of little kids in big bodies.

I am upset that, while killing babies is fine with us, that we stand aghast when our neigbor throws away his pop cans instead of recycling them. "You're destroying our environment!!!"

Well, if society keeps going on this track, I don't think we need to worry about the earth melting in another million years.

Have you noticed how many concience salves we have today? Who cares if you drink yourself to death, ruin your marriage, ignore your kids, and sit at home collecting wellfare when you could just as easily work? At least you use paper, not plastic. Oooooh, or maybe YOU use cloth! Wow.

Also, the recent Bernie Madoff case sheds some light on our judicial system.

You could have guaranteed that he would get the full 170 year sentence before it was pronounced on him. Why? Because it was an emotional case. What he did makes people angry.

Another concience salve, by the way. At least I'm not like him. People feel so righteous when they scoff at murderers and embezzlers.

Madoff was booed when he entered the courtroom, and the audience cheered when he recieved his sentence.

The whole case was like a spectator sport! You knew that Madoff would get the full sentence because people felt sorry for his victims and upset by the story.

Yes, I think that Madoff's actions were aweful. But you can see quite plainly that the court's ruling had more to do with the feeling of the audience than the letter of the law.

You didn't need to know the technicalities of the law to know that Madoff would get 170 years. Needless to say, it would have been a life term even if he'd only gotten the 12 years. He's an old guy. But it made people happy that he got 170 years; it made them feel just, and made them feel like they were upholding the rights of the underdog.

I can go murder a fat white guy, and I would get in trouble, sure.

But a LOT of a LOT of a LOT of murderers have gotten off with WAY less than Madoff is getting.

"Well, what's one life compared to millions of dollars?"

Is this really our attitude today?

[The Devil's Sergeant]

Here is a bit o friendly advise, pick one topic and expand on it. This is a go nowhere thread.

[Ariovistus Maximus]

Yeah, I suppose it isn't exactly debate material. But I wanted to get this off my chest for one thing, and then just to see if anybody else has seen this, and what they think about it.

Anyways, it was nice to get it out. I do think it is true though.

Thoughts, anyone?

[Frédéric Bastiat]

Or the OP could've just said "read Huxley's Brave New World and Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death."

[Ariovistus Maximus]

Or the OP could've just said "read Huxley's Brave New World and Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death."

Oh yeah I forgot to mention the source of my title. Yes, read the book.

But how many people would read the book because I said to?

[LittleGrizzly]

With the Madoff thing you have to look at the extent of the damage he has done. People lives destroyed, people have commited suicide...

170 years seems OTT to me to... but think about the punishment you recieve for other types of fraud, calculate the money gained (or lost to other people) through this deciet and then mutliply that figure to get it up to Madoff's figure, then mutliply the sentences by the same amount...

Not that that is a scientific way to do it but it puts the sentence in perspective...

I agree with the whole personality being so important in politics... its crap i agree but people are easily lead...

Remember the complaints about wooden Al ?

Unfortunately it works alot of the time... one candidate can have better ideas and be the far better candidate but if the other has more charisma hes probably going to be more successful...

Edit: Just to note im not saying Gore was nessecarily a better candidate than Bush (well i think so but thats not what i was sayinng) just that personality usually does win whatever the idea involved...

[Frédéric Bastiat]

I just finished Postman of few days ago. Huxley I finished last week. So yeah, I know where your angst is coming from.

[Ummon]

Most humans are little machines governed by forces they ignore. Machines do not have a say on their own future, unfortunately.

[Denny Crane!]

So your saying democracy is a joke....yep.

[Ummon]

I am saying people should reclaim themselves from themselves. Does it ring a bell? Vindica te tibi.

[S.L.I.G]

I ignored the majority of your ramblings, because I want to focus on this one point: Rush wants the president to fail. No. Rush said if Obama's intent is to socialize the economy and grow the size of Government, he wants him to fail in that endeavor, and such policies to be unsuccessful. Thats common sense. Liberals wanted Bush's policies to not be implemented, or for the American people to disagree and boot him out of office. Thats the nature of politics. You represent a particualr ideaology because you think its the best way forward. Only an idiot savant shrugs his shoulders and says its A.O.K if the complete opposite of everything he beleives in is enforced in his society.

And of COURSE Democracy is a joke. Its an extremely flawed system. Its BAD. Unfortunately, its also the best we've got.

[2-D Ron]

I ignored the majority of your ramblings, because I want to focus on this one point: Rush wants the president to fail. No. Rush said if Obama's intent is to socialize the economy and grow the size of Government, he wants him to fail in that endeavor, and such policies to be unsuccessful. Thats common sense. Liberals wanted Bush's policies to not be implemented, or for the American people to disagree and boot him out of office. Thats the nature of politics. You represent a particualr ideaology because you think its the best way forward. Only an idiot savant shrugs his shoulders and says its A.O.K if the complete opposite of everything he beleives in is enforced in his society.

And of COURSE Democracy is a joke. Its an extremely flawed system. Its BAD. Unfortunately, its also the best we've got.

I prefer to look at it the way John Wayne does, "I didn't vote for the Guy, but he's my President and I hope he does a good job"

[S.L.I.G]

I prefer to look at it the way John Wayne does, "I didn't vote for the Guy, but he's my President and I hope he does a good job"

Well thats a moronic way to look at it, as it avoids context. If your presidents intent is to form a benevolent dictatorship and bring prosperity to America, and you wish he does a good job just because hes your President...

Doing a good job is separate from being a decent administrator. It VERY much matters as to what path you set the country down. Thats your legacy.

[2-D Ron]

Well thats a moronic way to look at it, as it avoids context. If your presidents intent is to form a benevolent dictatorship and bring prosperity to America, and you wish he does a good job just because hes your President...

Doing a good job is separate from being a decent administrator. It VERY much matters as to what path you set the country down. Thats your legacy.

Again.. You utterly miss the point and rant on about something completely off topic.

I also feel you're deliberately trying to single me out here, you seem to follow each comment I make and attack me... Maybe a Time out is in order for you?

[Ariovistus Maximus]

(allow me to bud in for a moment)

I fixed my post, Seneca. It really was rather unclear. Sorry about that.

[Ariovistus Maximus]

I ignored the majority of your ramblings, because I want to focus on this one point: Rush wants the president to fail. No. Rush said if Obama's intent is to socialize the economy and grow the size of Government, he wants him to fail in that endeavor, and such policies to be unsuccessful. Thats common sense. Liberals wanted Bush's policies to not be implemented, or for the American people to disagree and boot him out of office. Thats the nature of politics. You represent a particualr ideaology because you think its the best way forward. Only an idiot savant shrugs his shoulders and says its A.O.K if the complete opposite of everything he beleives in is enforced in his society.

And of COURSE Democracy is a joke. Its an extremely flawed system. Its BAD. Unfortunately, its also the best we've got.

I have to confess it was a ramble.

OK, I can definitely see how Rush wants Obamas policies to fail. This seems reasonable, given that Obama seems bent on ruining us.

And yes:

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried."

Did I say democracy sucks? Hardly. I'm saying we need to be very careful and make some adjustments so that we can PRESERVE it. See?

Agreed. Well, actually, pure democracy is a mess. And that seems to be where we are going. Rule of the mob.

Although, something else I find interesting is double standards in free speech etc.

For instance, when the people of a state vote in favor of abortion, that is democracy.

When the people of a state vote against gay marriage, that is "rule of the mob."

EDIT: Sorry! The above (in bold) is NOT my own oppinion. I am describing behavior I see rather often in politics these days.

And to disagree with Bush/Obama's policies is FINE. In fact, it is constructive because it helps keep each side in line.

However, to brand one or the other a criminal for disagreeing with you? That's pathetic.

/rant

/spam

Thanks for that.

However, I admit, I am guilty. I do consider it a legitimate issue though.

The point, though, would be that we are more interested in what Hannah Montanna is wearing to the next galla then who takes office in Iran or whether or not we get nuked by N. Korea. This is bad.

[Francebunkerer]

Could you please try to bring some semblance of structure into it for your own sake? And I mean way more than just formatting.

To pick out one particularly peculiar statement:

I am upset that, while killing babies is fine with us, that we stand aghast when our neigbor throws away his pop cans instead of recycling them. "You're destroying our environment!!!"

I assume that by killing babies you mean abortion, and although this formulation is at the very least questionable let's just go with it. So you are saying that environmentalism is somehow invalidated by abortion?
I don't see any bit of logic here. Not one. Either that or I am completely off track in making sense of the OP.

[S.L.I.G]

I assume that by killing babies you mean abortion, and although this formulation is at the very least questionable let's just go with it. So you are saying that environmentalism is somehow invalidated by abortion?
I don't see any bit of logic here. Not one. Either that or I am completely off track in making sense of the OP.

I think hes saying everyone's sense of priorities are out of whack. More care given to the Trees than our fellow man, let alone babies.

[Ariovistus Maximus]

Could you please try to bring some semblance of structure into it for your own sake? And I mean way more than just formatting.

To pick out one particularly peculiar statement:

I assume that by killing babies you mean abortion, and although this formulation is at the very least questionable let's just go with it. So you are saying that environmentalism is somehow invalidated by abortion?
I don't see any bit of logic here. Not one. Either that or I am completely off track in making sense of the OP.

Pray excuse me.

I'm not making a comparison of the two, exactly.

I'm saying we're worried about nickles and pennies while we waste dimes and quarters.

Sorry; too much of an Americanism.

Making mountains out of molehills, how's that?

Our priorities are severly misplaced, and people seem to simply float to the latest fad, or whatever entertains them the most. That is no way to conduct politics. Sorry, but not all things are amusing.

[Denny Crane!]

I have to confess it was a ramble.

OK, I can definitely see how Rush wants Obamas policies to fail. This seems reasonable, given that Obama seems bent on ruining us.

And yes:

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried."

Did I say democracy sucks? Hardly. I'm saying we need to be very careful and make some adjustments so that we can PRESERVE it. See?

Agreed. Well, actually, pure democracy is a mess. And that seems to be where we are going. Rule of the mob.

Although, something else I find interesting is double standards in free speech etc.

For instance, when the people of a state vote in favor of abortion, that is democracy.

When the people of a state vote against gay marriage, that is "rule of the mob."

And to disagree with Bush/Obama's policies is FINE. In fact, it is constructive because it helps keep each side in line.

However, to brand one or the other a criminal for disagreeing with you? That's pathetic.



/spam

Thanks for that.

However, I admit, I am guilty. I do consider it a legitimate issue though.

Sounds to me like when people do things you like its democracy but when its something you don't like you object. Can't have it both ways, abortion and gay marriage are both matters of liberty, but you claim one to be democracy and the other rule of the mob.

Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, your merely quibbling over the fact that its not your brand of tyranny.