Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy

Propaganda in TV series and movies?

16 replies [Last post]
User offline. Last seen 11 years 9 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-08-23
The "leave / stay and try to

The "leave / stay and try to make things better" is something I've pondered a lot.

Your argument for staying (I'm don't live in the USA, though) is a call on my feelings of responsibility: if I leave, things may get worse for those left behind. Do I feel responsible for the well-being of these people? For the majority, I say no. They're the ones who keep voting for rats no matter how much you argue with them. If they have problems because of the country going down the drain, it's their own fault. I don't have to go down with them, now do I? On the other hand there are indeed many who do deserve my cooperation.

My main argument against leaving is that I'm not so sure that places that seem better actually are better. If you cross a border, you will just find the same kinds of people, both the selfish kind and the kind that tries to build a better future.

So perhaps moving to a different place doesn't really matter. I think especially the USA has many young, intelligent, hard working immigrants. The Netherlands, with its reputation of freedom, same thing. So what does it matter if others are leaving, making some space for the newcomers?

Maybe it's just a change of scene, which could be good for everyone involved. If I move from A to B, and someone else moves from B to A, and we both get more hopeful and motivated because of that, that's great, isn't it?

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 31 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
I suppose the answer is we

I suppose the answer is we still didn't use technology properly. Its abuse for greedy purposes still seem to outway its rational use for the benefit of all of us.

Humanity creates pure magic with technology these days, but even magic wont save us if we don't handle it properly. In fact, this magic can kill us if we misuse (nuclear and biological weapons, uncontrolled reliance on oil even though there are alternatives etc.).

I like the way WorldChanging.com puts it. All the ingredients for a perfect world are already here. They exist. We just have to put the puzzle together.

But this is hard when there are so many too powerful detractors which wont give up their greed. And so the magic that we have, the technology that can be used positively, remains more of a curiosity and a casual life enhancer than a true world changer.

If people were smart, we wouldn't have a Free Software movement on our hands. We wouldn't still be talking about freedom as if it is something we still lack so much in so many places of the world. We wouldn't talk about fears from destroying ourselves in a nuclear war. If we just did everything right from the beginning, so many issues we're blowing our breaths about would simply not exist. What we're dealing with here is a huge amount of ugly stuff that shouldn't have been piled up in the first place, but it did because humans weren't smart enough to use what they've go, because every blessing they get (in form of a discovery, most often) they turn into a mission of greed: more power, more money, more more more..

Anyway, this's turning into a rant.. To get at least marginally back to the topic, on its face I like the idea of people across Europe competing for jobs and resources, if it were only a competition where everyone has equal chances of winning. Competition is great as long as everyone actually has equal footing. You don't run a fair race if one guy is 10 meters in front than the other guy. That's not a fair race.

But that's what happens all the time in this system, and it doesn't seem to be doing much to help out those who are disadvantaged. In fact this *version* of capitalism (not even real capitalism) that even we in Europe are adopting, awards those who are already in advantage and punishes those who are not. And when you try to introduce an idea that sets everyone on the equal footing (like Free Software and Free Culture) you get so much resistance calling it anti-capitalism, anti-commercial and what not.

Do they not realize that Free Software and Free Culture IS capitalism, the ideal free market, the real competition and real diversity.

But media and propaganda manages to convince even the ones who would benefit the most from such ideas, to vehemently oppose them. Incredible.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

User offline. Last seen 7 years 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2007-02-26
The dirty secret of course

The dirty secret of course is that the freedoms trumpeted by libertarians as the ideological foundation for capitalism, are for the few. The last thing those on top want is capitalism for all, instead we have the economic caste system of owner and employee.

Read "The Richest Man in Babylon", "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" and other books and the common theme is clear, put your money to work so you don't have to. Of course money doesn't work, people do, it's double-speak for parasiting off your fellow man.

The most exciting developments in business economic relationships are happening in democratic co-operatives, but how many tv shows are set in that environment? I can think of none. Instead what is pumped out incessantly is a glorification of those barking orders within a central command hierarchy, hire-em fire-em companies run like mini planned economies with a holy duty to enrich the owners. Forgive me for not being inspired.

Maybe I'm overly optimistic but I've faith people will eventually cop on.

dylunio's picture
User offline. Last seen 11 years 8 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2005-05-08
reply
democrates wrote:

The most exciting developments in business economic relationships are happening in democratic co-operatives, but how many tv shows are set in that environment? I can think of none. Instead what is pumped out incessantly is a glorification of those barking orders within a central command hierarchy, hire-em fire-em companies run like mini planned economies with a holy duty to enrich the owners. Forgive me for not being inspired.

Very true and interesting observation. For the past eight or so weeks there has been a series on BBC2 called Party Animals, about researchers, lobbyist and hacks in Westminster. It portrays the Dog-eat-dog world you go on about, it is very hard to decipher here what is the truth and what is the writers spin (I know they had help from the left leaning New Statesman in writing it). We live on secondary and tertiary sources, via the radio, TV and news. I do not have the time to go to Gaza or Washington or Belfast to research the news myself so I place my trust in the news sources on the TV etc. I place quite a lot of trust in the BBC as I believe they are quite unbiased, but how do I know if they are feeding me porkies?

From this I think we are all under the spell of others, and in countries where the government controls the press etc. this can be very harmful. Unless we can do primary research we truly know nothing.

Quote:

Maybe I'm overly optimistic but I've faith people will eventually cop on.

I'll be the cynic - how can people cop on if they do not have the primary evidence for most things - though I do admit by saying this I am saying I can't prove some of my own beliefs such as the existence of the universe.

User offline. Last seen 7 years 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2007-02-26
Agreed, the BBC are above

Agreed, the BBC are above anyone else in terms of credibility for me too, and provide thought provoking documentaries, add to that the absolutely top-drawer website. Excellent.

I guess I'm thinking in terms of two classes of truth, one is the record of events over time, the other is about what we believe represents justice. I think with the internet we have some more confusion on the former, but a revolutionary acceleration in discourse on the latter.

I guess my optimism stems from believing that
a) more fringe reports on events may be picked up and validated by the mainstream
b) transparency eventually arising from the latter discourse will further improve the news
c) most importantly as more people consider what entails justice we can improve our societies

Fingers crossed.

memenode's picture
User offline. Last seen 31 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2004-07-12
Well, although I think it's

Well, although I think it's been said in some way, bloggers are much more easier to trust. They can report news directly from the source, and they could be more easily trusted than big media. Even if someone is dishonest there is a chance that the blogosphere will figure it out.

And this is putting pressure on big media too, which is leading to positive developments.

I would too like to be an optimist about this. There are some positive movements and I guess I don't lose much by being an optimist.

__________________

Daniel Memenode signature

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.