IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> What Isn't A Threat To The Government?
Grimer 54
post May 3 2005, 02:14 PM
Post #31


loveable nemesis
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 3,623
Joined: 17-December 03
From: New York City
Member No.: 1,381



So you don't believe that there could be a youth-conservative movement, picking up steam? Hm.

I don't think liberalism holds the vast majority of young adults anymore, (as it used to seem) is all I'm saying. I'll try to scan the article at work tomorrow, if I get a chance.


--------------------
This is the FiFTY-FOUR effect: (the loveable nemesis)
QUOTE(Grimer 54)
Society begets government. Anarchist theory is actually just a pseudo-intellectual state of denial, an idealistic illusion that can never be more than a wholly unfulfilled dream. Thus, it is a counter-productive measure that actually weakens, rather than improves the progress of society as government is inevitable in the maintenance of civilization. Therefore, it is infinitely more effective to pursue political upheaval through the system, rather then against the system. For despite all of its flaws, both Democracy and Capitalism are still rooted within the people themselves by rational and realistic means. That is not to say I advocate the status quo, but instead, a moral pursuit to right the endless wrongs brought on by the evils of human nature, via an unintimidated, undaunted, unmitigated spirit of liberty and justice for all, rather then the destructive hypocrisy of your so-called "revolution."

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend, to the death, your right to say it".
- attributed to Voltaire

Still a sheltered idealist... but learning:
This is no Oasis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bllrghtz
post May 3 2005, 05:24 PM
Post #32


Corporate media...The more you watch, the less you know
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 582
Joined: 10-March 05
From: Lost Iceni
Member No.: 3,231



I should have been more specific....

To take the closing paragraph of the article.... "Anderson's ultimate objective isn't to achieve some sort of ideological reversal, where conservatives dominate campuses in the same fashion that the left currently does. Instead, he's trying to ensure that academia "isn't a machine for left-wing political advocacy". "

That's what I referring to with my comment about the 'liberal professor' thing. As for the rest of the paragraph

"Anderson says that students "are trending to the right on issues from how to view capitalism to attitudes about abortion and many view campus PC orthodoxy with abhorrence -- which is why so many of them love South Park."

Well, who knows? The way information is molded/shaped/selectively focused on etc by the neocons/modern right/corporate media in general, is so orwellian and gross that it is hard to tell which side is up most of the time [if one only makes a casual effort at staying informed]. Is it that there are 'more' conservative students - or is it that they are being handed a megaphone by people wishing to exploit them in order to 'correct' what they see as a stronghold of the left? I don't think this article even tried to explain that, but was, obviously, just a puff piece written largely to sell a book, and advance the agenda of the book's author specifically and the website/national right generally.

I mean......the whole thing was just ridiculously biased and misleading......One of my favorite 'conclusions' in the article was "saying that Turner demanded that the documentary series deal with the Cold War "unjingoistically," adding that Turner "did not want a triumphalist approach". In other words, Turner didn't want to emphasize why it was a good thing that America had won. "

"In other words...." laughing.gif Oh, is that what it means? Really? Lol......... In the very section that that the article is pushing the idea that the media was once 'left wing and out of touch' [paraphrasing majorly here], it then takes the position that to look at one's national history in any way other than one that isn't rabidly nationalistic and self congratulatory is to essentially be 'anti-America'. Last I checked, real journalists [and their editors....which is the role I'm assuming Turner was playing here] strove to be as unbiased as possible..... apparently, according to this piece anyway, they are not just wrong to do so, but somehow a bit treasonous as well.........


At any rate, with the corporate/conservative monopoly of the national media in the US, it would only be surprising to me to learn that 'young people' weren't falling for it in ever increasing numbers......

edit: "I'll try to scan the article at work tomorrow, if I get a chance." -- that would be cool grimer, thx.... hope work/time allows......


This post has been edited by Bllrghtz: May 3 2005, 05:26 PM


--------------------
Imagine a world....

WATCH THIS: PART 1 , PART 2 , PART 3 [right click - 'save target as' ]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
insurrection
post May 6 2005, 10:02 PM
Post #33


Very busy w. school >_<
****

Group: Activist
Posts: 2,267
Joined: 18-April 04
From: Toronto, ON
Member No.: 2,022



QUOTE(Bllrghtz @ May 3 2005, 09:24 PM)
...
  "In other words...."  laughing.gif  Oh, is that what it means? Really? Lol......... In the very section that that the article is pushing the idea that the media was once 'left wing and out of touch' [paraphrasing majorly here], it then takes the position that to look at one's national history in any way other than one that isn't rabidly nationalistic and self congratulatory is to essentially be 'anti-America'. Last I checked, real journalists [and their editors....which is the role I'm assuming Turner was playing here] strove to be as unbiased as possible..... apparently, according to this piece anyway, they are not just wrong to do so, but somehow a bit treasonous as well.........
...
[right][snapback]171466[/snapback][/right]

Were the media ever liberal?
Chomsky makes some interesting juxtapositions on the topic... Russia in Afghanistan vs. American in S. Vietnam, Khmer Rouge atrocities vs. East Timorese ones are two that come to mind.
It would be logical that the media would serve the interests of power (i.e. it's owners) who are conservative...


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st October 2020 - 01:27 PM