Post by Amaranth on Sept 8, 2011 20:51:08 GMT -5
This sort of combines elements of the threads on Fox News and their panning of "environmental" games and the "Liberal agenda" thread, in which it's discussed how to we can unify the left or whatnot.
This is a video from a show on the escapist called Jimquisition. Ignore the persona, it's rather over the top, but he kind of does have a point:
www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/3799-Fight-in-the-Name-of-Childishness
Brief description: Jim asserts that childishness has done more to get results than being adult. He is speaking specifically about gaming (Hence the Fox News connection), but I kind of wonder if this doesn't work on a poliical level, too. And not just because the woman who went after Mass Effect admitted she had been misinformed by Fox before going on once her book was bombed on Amazon.
And the part where the Dems/liberals come in:
Let's ignore the Teabaggers for a moment. They have got their way by screaming like the infants they are, but it's readily becoming apparent that it will not hold for long.
But let's go back a bit. 2000. Gore ran a pretty adult campaign. As he was being ridiculed by a rather juvenile base, he took the high ground. He lost.
2004. Kerry took a lot of the jabs at him in good spirits. He wasn't quite as stoic as Gore, but he also lost. Better, he lost on a referendum on gays, and he wasn't particularly pro-gay, but he people screaming teh gheys voted. Not to mention, we now have the term "swiftboat."
2008. Obama played a fairly mature campaign, and it looked like he might lose. Then everything goes to shit, and I'm still convinced that a good chunk of his win was a "fuck you" to GW. He gets into office, and he tries to play mature in front of a Congress who would rather fling poo. Despite getting a good number of things done, he has the reputation of being ineffectual. I can't see this helping in 2012.
Okay, so maybe y'all disagree. Maybe this string isn't completely accountable. Correlation definitely doesn't prove causation. But it does seem the more childish side tends to get their way. Even when the Democrats won, they lost.
I get the desire to play clean and take the high ground, but I also wonder if this isn't one of the reasons the Dems get their asses whipped in general.
Maybe it's not so much selling out our principles that we need to do as be willing to actually fight for them, even if we're not united.
Again, the games parallel. Games tend to get hammered in popular media. And not just Fox, though they're probably the worst example. What does it take to get attention? Anonymous are twats, but they seem to get recognised. Lulzsec are major fuckwads, but they drew attention to online security and raised points of discussion. Hate bombing Amazon review pages is pretty damn childish, but it's gotten more than one person to back down.
I'm not even sure I think childishness needs to be used, and I think the Tea Party proves that you can certainly go too far. But it seems like a mature or disciplined response leads to an asskicking. No matter how much the GOP fucks up, the libs have the uphill struggle because they're fighting bad PR from people who are willing to sling more than just mud. Yeah, part of it's Fox, but not all of it. Not by a longshot. TV "debates" were shouting matches far before Fox had particular power. It's not even a new thing.
We kind of have to deal with the world we live in, and bullshit seems to be a part of politics. It's long been my opinion that conservatives tend to ignore reality for ideals (kids shouldn't have sex, so if we don't tell them about it, they won't!), but maybe the same's true for the libs. Maybe higher ground has become a political myth.
I don't know how to finish this chain of semi-related thoughts, so I'll just ask: Opinions? Flames? Reality checks?
This is a video from a show on the escapist called Jimquisition. Ignore the persona, it's rather over the top, but he kind of does have a point:
www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/3799-Fight-in-the-Name-of-Childishness
Brief description: Jim asserts that childishness has done more to get results than being adult. He is speaking specifically about gaming (Hence the Fox News connection), but I kind of wonder if this doesn't work on a poliical level, too. And not just because the woman who went after Mass Effect admitted she had been misinformed by Fox before going on once her book was bombed on Amazon.
And the part where the Dems/liberals come in:
Let's ignore the Teabaggers for a moment. They have got their way by screaming like the infants they are, but it's readily becoming apparent that it will not hold for long.
But let's go back a bit. 2000. Gore ran a pretty adult campaign. As he was being ridiculed by a rather juvenile base, he took the high ground. He lost.
2004. Kerry took a lot of the jabs at him in good spirits. He wasn't quite as stoic as Gore, but he also lost. Better, he lost on a referendum on gays, and he wasn't particularly pro-gay, but he people screaming teh gheys voted. Not to mention, we now have the term "swiftboat."
2008. Obama played a fairly mature campaign, and it looked like he might lose. Then everything goes to shit, and I'm still convinced that a good chunk of his win was a "fuck you" to GW. He gets into office, and he tries to play mature in front of a Congress who would rather fling poo. Despite getting a good number of things done, he has the reputation of being ineffectual. I can't see this helping in 2012.
Okay, so maybe y'all disagree. Maybe this string isn't completely accountable. Correlation definitely doesn't prove causation. But it does seem the more childish side tends to get their way. Even when the Democrats won, they lost.
I get the desire to play clean and take the high ground, but I also wonder if this isn't one of the reasons the Dems get their asses whipped in general.
Maybe it's not so much selling out our principles that we need to do as be willing to actually fight for them, even if we're not united.
Again, the games parallel. Games tend to get hammered in popular media. And not just Fox, though they're probably the worst example. What does it take to get attention? Anonymous are twats, but they seem to get recognised. Lulzsec are major fuckwads, but they drew attention to online security and raised points of discussion. Hate bombing Amazon review pages is pretty damn childish, but it's gotten more than one person to back down.
I'm not even sure I think childishness needs to be used, and I think the Tea Party proves that you can certainly go too far. But it seems like a mature or disciplined response leads to an asskicking. No matter how much the GOP fucks up, the libs have the uphill struggle because they're fighting bad PR from people who are willing to sling more than just mud. Yeah, part of it's Fox, but not all of it. Not by a longshot. TV "debates" were shouting matches far before Fox had particular power. It's not even a new thing.
We kind of have to deal with the world we live in, and bullshit seems to be a part of politics. It's long been my opinion that conservatives tend to ignore reality for ideals (kids shouldn't have sex, so if we don't tell them about it, they won't!), but maybe the same's true for the libs. Maybe higher ground has become a political myth.
I don't know how to finish this chain of semi-related thoughts, so I'll just ask: Opinions? Flames? Reality checks?
