Comments on: High School 1957 vs 2009

By: Matthew

Matthew — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:46:11 +0000

I assume people mentioned these, but here we go:

Scenario 9:

Little Ernest attempts to go to a school with white children in it.

1957: Parents complain about having a black child in their local school. The National Guard is called in to block Ernest and 8 classmates from entering the school. The president assigns an armed escort to allow the children to go to school. It remains a tense school year, and one of Ernest’s classmates has acid thrown in her eyes.

2009: Little Ernest is admitted with no problems.

Scenario 10:

Johnny’s parents take him out to buy some comics and watch a movie.

1957: Johnny or his parents don’t see anything objectionable; because the comic and movie industries are concerned about being practically shut down by the federal government, the Comics Code Authority and the MPAA (using the Hays code) prohibit mentions of homosexuality, sexual perversion, or childbirth; methodology of crimes; the sanctity of marriage being broken (divorce, adultery, illicit sex); depiction of illegal drugs; and many, many more. Johnny and his parents grow up with a skewed perception of reality, and a generation of artists, writers and filmmakers suffer through creative filtering that holds back both forms of art for twenty-plus years from maturing as fast as their counterparts in Europe.

2009: Movies, comics, and video games are all very clearly labeled for age appropriateness. Johnny’s parents buy him a Mature game, and let him see a Rated ‘R’ movie. They proceed to hire Jack Thompson to sue the video game company, and protest the movie that their child shouldn’t have watched anyway. Neither work. Films, comics, and video games are all multi-billion dollar industries. Johnny grows up to be well adjusted.

Scenario 11:

Little Johnny’s parents are suspected of being less than vehemently against America’s enemies!

1957: The US government used illegal wiretaps to keep tabs on his parents, kept them on a blacklist for suspected communist activities, and makes their life a living hell. However, McCarthyism is on the decline: 14 formerly convicted communists are released.

2009: The US government uses (now) legal wiretaps to keep tabs on his parents, keeps them on a no-fly list for suspected terrorist activities, and makes their life a living hell. However, fear of terrorism is on the decline: but no suspected terrorists have been released from Guantanamo Bay.

Okay, that last one could go either way.

By: kersplash

kersplash — Thu, 20 May 2010 05:47:12 +0000

Thanks, Larry, and you’re absolutely right that legislation driving culture would be tyranny; I wasn’t really thinking that through enough when I said it. I do believe, regardless, that governmental intervention is often required to protect minority rights from the voting power of the majority.

And, crazysquid, no doubt the media has power on par with the government — that’s why they’re the unofficial ‘fourth estate’. The problem is when that media is bought out by big business (FOX), or when news stations decide they need to present both sides of every single issue, regardless of the validity of one argument over another (CNN). In that respect I can agree that 1957 > 2009.

By: crazysquid

crazysquid — Thu, 20 May 2010 02:39:00 +0000

I can not see that legislation has as much of an influence as you may think. we are not talking about the rights of “Little Johnny” to wear offensive T-Shirts to school that clog up the judicial system. We are talking about the First Amendments as they pertain not only minorities, but each and every Citizen. it is illegal to yell “Fire” in a movie theatre, Why, it induces panic and a danger to the public, But, it is a violation of the first amendment none the less. In this case, I will have to agree that a law passed to try and prevent this had good intentions and shows that the First Amendment is not in keeping with the advance of civilization, But, it also goes to show that the Government thinks that every thing can be solved just by passing a law to make it illegal.What I am trying to convey is, where does it stop. As it is progressing, soon you will become a criminal and possibly go to jail for calling the “Weight Challenged Americans” fat because it hurts their feelings, or calling a minority by a racially offensive slur will get you the death penalty.
As small a thing as making it illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre, or not allowing that kid to wear a T-shirt that read “I Hate fags”, is just the beginning.
The ones that are taking away the liberties and rights are Banking on the fact that it is passed from generation to generation. They are very patient in that they have the ability to pass on to other generations what they want changed by means of what is taught in schools. What is heard and read in the Media etc.
Not a lot of “Big Issues” get the attention of legislators with out them hearing it, or reading about it in every headline and T.V. station.
I am by no means a conspiracy freak or anything to that effect, But it seems, as I observe it’ that the Media, whether it is T.V., Newspapers, Internet, is the ones that dictate policies and the way people change. help me out here, think what shows broke color barriers, religious barriers..you see where I’m going..After they came out in the open on national T.V., things seemed to have started to change.
So I’d like to throw this out for discussion; media has more influence over cultures than any laws passed by congress. No legislative mandate can come close to the power of the pen. the pen being those few that wright the stories, articles shows, movies etc. etc. The media is covered under the First Amendment, and can pretty much say what they want with impunity, suffice that it is perceived to be factual that is.
If it were to be wrong, it is too late. The information has already been planted in the minds of the masses. People will believe Diane Sawyer before they would Believe the President.

By: crazysquid

crazysquid — Thu, 20 May 2010 02:38:22 +0000

I can not see that legislation has as much of an influence as you may think. we are not talking about the rights of “Little Johnny” to wear offensive T-Shirts to school that clog up the judicial system. We are talking about the First Amendments as they pertain not only minorities, but each and every Citizen. it is illegal to yell “Fire” in a movie theatre, Why, it induces panic and a danger to the public, But, it is a violation of the first amendment none the less. In this case, I will have to agree that a law passed to try and prevent this had good intentions and shows that the First Amendment is not in keeping with the advance of civilization, But, it also goes to show that the Government thinks that every thing can be solved just by passing a law to make it illegal.What I am trying to convey is, where does it stop. As it is progressing, soon you will become a criminal and possibly go to jail for calling the “Weight Challenged Americans” fat because it hurts their feelings, or calling a minority by a racially offensive slur will get you the death penalty.
As small a thing as making it illegal to yell fire in a movie theatre, or not allowing that kid to wear a T-shirt that read “I Hate fags”, is just the beginning.
The ones that are taking away the liberties and rights are Banking on the fact that it is passed from generation to generation. They are very patient in that they have the ability to pass on to other generations what they want changed by means of what is taught in schools. What is heard and read in the Media etc.
Not a lot of “Big Issues” get the attention of legislators with out them hearing it, or reading about it in every headline and T.V. station.
I am by no means a conspiracy freak or anything to that effect, But it seems, as I observe it’ that the Media, whether it is T.V., Newspapers, Internet, is the ones that dictate policies and the way people change. help me out here, think what shows broke color barriers, religious barriers..you see where I’m going..After they came out in the open on national T.V., things seemed to have started to change.
So I’d like to throw this out for discussion; media has more influence over cultures than any laws passed by congress. No legislative mandate can come close to the power of the pen. the pen being those few that wright the stories, articles shows, moviesetc. etc. The media is covered under the First Amendment, and can pretty much say what they want with impunity, sufice that it is perseved to be factual that is.
If itwere to be wrong, it is too late. The information has already been planted in the minds of the masses. People will believe Diane Sawyer before they would Believe the President.

By: Larry

Larry — Wed, 19 May 2010 13:34:55 +0000

Whoa. Culture happens by legislation? Think about that for a moment. In the case of meaningful, long lasting, enabling legislation, it is exactly the reverse. Emancipation didn’t drive the culture – culture drove us to emancipation. Similarly with civil rights laws in the 60’s, the culture was demanding the legislation, not the reverse. Likewise with women’s rights, from women’s suffrage to sexual discrimination laws, the cultural change preceded the legislation. Legislation driving culture, by definition, is governing against the will of the people. That’s tyranny.

Now admittedly the culture was not uniformly in favor of the changes embodied in the legislation when these ideas became law. If it were, the laws would have been unnecessary. But the culture was already changing, and not just on the lunatic fringe. The cultural movement toward abolition destroyed the Whig Party and founded the Republican Party. Culture led, politics followed. Similarly civil accomplishment and contribution by blacks had far outpaced the assumptions behind an inconsistent patchwork of unjust, provably needless laws long before our federal civil rights laws. Again cultural change happened first.

There’s a place for legislation in promoting cultural change, to be sure. And ‘kersplash’ is right that the change is not lasting change until it becomes part of the assumed culture of the next generation. But don’t make the mistake of believing a law or two will change the culture. It won’t. Cultural change is a ‘full contact sport,’ played between friends and neighbors, work associates and colleagues, in churches, bars, baseball diamonds and band shells. Once the change reaches the hearts and minds of a significant portion of the population, usually a minority, but a fairly large minority, then legislation can be used to solidify the change and promote it further, but legislation is never the cause of the change.

Change happens in the hearts and minds of you and me. Laws merely reflect that change. Not vice versa.