General discussion


Has libertarianism reached its peak?

By jardinier ·
The war in Iraq has caused me to divert much of my attention from local issues to international matters.

As I pondered over social mores in various countries ... especially Western democracies ... I realised that we have become to a great extent a dissolute society. Consider things which are now accepted as "normal" such as a high divorce rate, leading to single-parent families; the universal acceptance of homosexuality as "normal," even to the extent of allowing marriage between partners ofthe same sex; the escalating problems of drug abuse and juvenile crime; the "everything's acceptable" attitude expressed in movies and TV series; and so on.

We are seeing fundamentalist religious views gradually replacing the more liberal views to which we have become accustomed.

Is the pendulam starting to swing back to a more conservative overall approach to life?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

141 total posts (Page 2 of 15)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Oldefar-still at it are you?

by Oz_Media In reply to you read my mind

"Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but don't consider the beam that is in your own eye?". Matthew Chapter 7

Now you're going to bring religion into the discussions to? That's bound to get a rise out of people. As for myself, I will not participate in a religious discussion, as long as people have faith of some kind, even if just in themselves, that is commendable but it doesn't belong here.

As for the rest of your post, perhapse you could just get to the point. ifyou think I'm an a-hole, whatever, just tell everybody so you can get it out of your system and we can move on with a smile.

Collapse -

Oz I am being Civil

by MallardtooXX In reply to you read my mind

"I have bashed my head against the wall many times reading the one sided and biased (shall we say ignorant) opinions shared in this 'global' forum. I see you have had similar experiences with this site's most notorious leader too. Unfortunately, this same person seems to gether all information and knowledge from the internet, which we all know is jaded and simply one person's point of view." -OzMedia

Even in a thread that is totally unrelated to anything discussed in previous threads you try subversive attacks. If you want to post here which you are welcome to do, and you want to garner respect which is what you want (admit it to yourself other wise you would not be here) then you will stop already. Let it go, it has nothingto do with Max, or me or even mrafrohead, not in this thread. No one will attack you for having an opinion, to that you are entitled, they will however take exception to repeated open and not so open quips. Just please bear in mind that there are adults here and even though this is cyberspace, not everyone here is out to get you nor do we want to listen to you attack other members of the forum. Stick to your opinion, that is what you know best.


Collapse -

for the Fowl

by Oz_Media In reply to you read my mind

"When I posted the comment on biased news media, which Colin was agreeing with in his post, I had you in mind. Not from your technical postings, but from your recent discussions on world affairs and your poorly conceived experiment."


Think again where you point your bill, it's rabbit season anyway

Collapse -

OzMedia. Will you please ....

by jardinier In reply to you read my mind

go and empty your bowels in the appropriate facility, after which you will be most welcome to rejoin the discussion.

But we do not appreciate you pooping in our sandpit.

Collapse -

Part 1 of 2

by rickydoo In reply to Media Follows?

I agree that there has been an attempt to swing back to traditional values, but the reaction to this seems to be a concerted effort to shout these "dissenters" down by anyone who has a vested interest in contunued progress of the "new morality". I liken this to a Denial of Service attack. Joe or Josephine Average can attempt to make his/her opinion known, but in the face of an organised attack of hatred and name-calling (bigot, fascist, etc), s/he can only back away in wide-eyed shock. Untilthe silent majority (the soccer mom and the weekend gardener dad) organises as effectively as the special interest groups (I'm not going to name names for fear of reprisal in this thread) and stays strong in the face of reprisal, they don't stand a chance.
The constitutions of Canada and the U.S. protect freedom of expression, but inundating the public with imagery of abberent behaviour was not, in my opinion, the intended purpose. How could the U.S. Founding Fathers have foreseen 500 channels of visual bombardment with seemingly no control over content? I Don't know what is available down south, but in Canada we have a couple of cable channels, Bravo! and Showcase which air standard broadcasts such as Highlander and 3rd Watch, and in the evening show programs such as Kink and Eros, which bypass pornography laws by mixing in commentary, turning S&M and other fetishes, and soft porn in general into "documentaries".

Collapse -

Part 2 of 2

by rickydoo In reply to Media Follows?

As for who follows whom (who/who? whom/whom? I dunno), it has been my observation that although television shows are affected to a point by Nielsen ratings et al, the producers and distributors seem to have lots of control over what lives and what dies. There have been many stories (which I can neither confirm nor refute) that tell of programs being cancelled because a network executive didn't like that director or actor. I take these stories and add them into the recipe that is my outlook onlife, and see how the mix tastes. It is getting bitter.
Commercials are getting outrageous. Axe body spray for instance. The gist of the campaign is: spray it on and women will sleep with you at the drop of a hat. Half-naked beauty rolls over the next morning and says "by the way, my names Mandy". Sultry Godess peeks at you under her eyelashes and asks " do you mind if my best friend joins us?" (Heck no!). Good messages for your kids to grow up with?
I believe "to each his own", but if it's illegal to have sex in the park, why is it okay on basic service television?

Collapse -

What controls what?

by jardinier In reply to Media Follows?

I have used this ploy to evade the enigma of deciding whether to use the grammatically correct "whom" or the more commonly used "who." [Yes, I actually sweated over that for a while].

Thank you "rickydoo" for elaborating on my over-simplistic statement regarding the degree to which the people control the television media.

In the Bible (1 Timothy 6:10) we read: "For the love of money is the root of all evil." Well of course we are well aware that "the love of a root" is the cause of much evil, whilst "the lust for power" is the cause of really serious evil.

Collapse -

Control of media ... 1

by jardinier In reply to Media Follows?

Well of course the Fairfax family and Rupert Murdock are obviously good guys, because they paid my wages when I worked on Sydney dailies.

Now my question is that when these media moguls reach the stage that they already have more money than they could ever spend, what drives them on to control more and more media outlets? Is it actually a lust for power, or do they just enjoy doing the thing that they are best at?

I suspect that Murdoch is actually one of the good guys, in that he startedthe first national newspaper in Oz, "The Australian," which ran at a loss for the first 10 years, and was subsidised by the now defunt "Daily Mirror." However, was Murdoch doing this as a kind of service to the public, or was he looking much furtherinto the future, when owning this now highly regarded newspaper, he could exert more political pressure through his publications?

Collapse -

Control of media ... 2

by jardinier In reply to Media Follows?

Now I know first hand that political allegiances and any constant editorial bias come from the top down.

I also know that money rules the amount of content of a publication. First the advertising space is sold, then spaces are left for news itemsand comment according to a fixed ratio in relation to advertising revenue.

And so, as "sex sells," it seems likely that the final publication which reaches the public probably derives from the three types of "evil" I have mentioned earlier: money, sex, and power.

By the way, that naughty Australian who has been found guilty of insider-trading, was a close friend of Kerry Packer (the richest man in Australia) and said that he (Packer) was a very unhappy man.

When Packer's father, Frank Packer controlled the empire, Sydney's "Daly Telegraph" was so biased in favour of the Liberal Party that it was almost a joke. Also, there is no question that Rupert Murdoch, through his publications, helped to get Gough Whitlam elected as Prime Minister, and helped him get out when he realised that Whitlam was going downhill.

Collapse -

Subgroups and change

by generalist In reply to Media Follows?

I suspect that we're assuming that society is monolithic when it isn't.

With that in mind, consider the possibility that a subgroup associated with the media makes a social change because it appears to be the right thing to do. This subgroup, having a higher than average informal influence on the media, moves the 'acceptable behavior' marker a little past what the silent majority accepts.

Over time, the silent majority accepts this as 'normal' making it possible for the original subgroup, or a different one, to move the 'acceptable behavior' marker again.

It doesn't even have to be an overt process. There are lots of people in various subgroups that believe that their viewpoints reflect that of others, even when they are not.As a 'trivial' example, consider the practice of taking office supplies home from work. Some people consider this to be perfectly acceptable behavior, kind of a business 'perk'. Others consider it to be stealing.

Once upon a time you didn't dare 'borrow' office supplies, except by accident. Nowadays it can be a grey zone, condoned by management because it is too expensive to use draconian measures to prevent it.

Back to Community Forum
141 total posts (Page 2 of 15)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums