fansince62 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Is Hollywood morally bankrupt? We’ve witnessed a cranking up of the propaganda machine of late. The coddled , privileged citizens in Hollywood have taken umbrage and hit the streets. Why there’s Sheen and Farrell and the gang of 100 affirming their deep and abiding humanity, their profound communion with the citizens of Iraq. There’s Robbins and Sarandon monkey facing their way through Donahue as they sound the clarion call to protest. And Sean Penn, in Iraq no less, confirming what a great dad he is, noting that Iraqis, like himself, have children and for this reason alone war is unconscionable. Hey, there’s Harry Belafonte bellyaching about how terrible a place America truly is, that the problem is not in the Middle East and its country club of sadistic leaders, but with the American political system and its contradictions. What are we to make of these folks? Some thoughts: - Their hyprocisy/moral equivocation is simply breathtaking. They are strangely quiet when it comes to the moral calculus of the Middle East. One wearies of their one sentence sidebars, “Yes, Saddam is a bad guy, don’t get me wrong.” Oddly, no prescriptions for action follow from this declaration. For Hollywood, it’s acceptable for America to exercise it’s cultural and economic power when it comes to favored “value propositions” such as gender equality, sexual tolerance, environmental conservation or sexual “responsibility” (i.e., condoms); in short, for those value structures and lifestyles that Hollywood views as legitimate or self-reaffirming (one is tempted to think). But, confront these folks with mass murder, terrorism, torture and their muted protests are deafening. It’s a strange pyschological balancing act these heros and heroines must walk themselves through. They seem completely at ease reconsiling their professed abhorence of American sponsored death with silence in the face of the mass murders and suicide bombings that have been political currency in that part of the world, and Iraq in particular, for the latter half of the last century. Their morality, by all appearnces, is situationally dependent. - In whatever measure, it is clear that many of the terrorists are irrevocably committed to the destruction of America not only because of the threat freedom and individualism represent to the societies and power structures they wish to lead, but to the global cultural hegemony created, financed, purveyed and celebrated by Hollywood. These terrorists are clearly angered by the excesses and depravities they see in much of American film, music, radio, television. Hollywood bears some responsibility, meritted or not, for the attacks we have bourne and will bear. The Hollywood paragons of virtue are strangely silent when it comes to these matters because they impact their viscereal interests: the astronomical incomes they earn from the distribution of their products across the globe. Their morality, by all appearances, is financially dependent. - One wearies of the “we worry about the lives of American troops” these folks dog walk when attempting to form a protest strategy different from that pursued during the early stages of the Viet Nam war. In other words, they want to express solidarity with the parents of the children who actually serve and protect their country – a service to collective security one can easily imagine 999 out of 1000 Hollywood plutocrats find dishonorable and do not advise their children to follow. Further, they want to communicate to armed services personnel that it’s not the valorous soldier they detest, but the fell politicians and commanders who direct them – an awkward contempt for democracy if you think about it. Their morality, by all appearances, is duplicitous. - 60 years of state and terrorist sponsored murder against Israeli's and yet there is no organized protest from Hollywood; no full page newspaper ads, no television events, no trips to Palestine for consultation with Arafat. Their morality, by all appearances, is calculated, not principled. Freedom of speech is one matter. Accountability is another. It’s high time these privileged windbags shoulder some of the burden for their actions. They do not know what is going on. They are not trained by education, experience or habit of mind to address foreign policy issues. They were not elected to represent the United States (Penn is meeting with Iraqi officials). They have no alternatives. They have not spoken out when it counted. They are, in a word, morally bankrupt; no matter how good they feel about themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 The worse thing we can do is continue to give them and their views air time and press. Let it go. If Sean Penn wants to be a traitor, let him. I just hope he hangs around long enough to feel the first shrapnel bomb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Good post 62, I agree with you on all you said. Hollywood is always quick to make a criticism, but never quick with a viable solution to any given problem. They are constantly in search of ways to spread their morally bankrupt lifestyles around the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsThug Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 I don't take anything anyone from that industry has to say seriously, whether conservative or liberal. Anyone who works for the sleaze/violence/porn industry that is hollywood is only slightly above a ****roach on the evolutionary scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 They're just private citizens with opinions, just like the rest of us. The difference is that the have the resources and money to make sure their opinions are heard above those of the rest of us. Unless a public figure is willing to put his (or her) money where his mouth is (As Charlton Heston, Sonny Bono and Fred Thompson have) I don't waste a whole lot of time worrying about thier ill-informed opinions. I've got plenty of my own to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Aren't the major players in Hollywood jewish (no not the actors) but the bankrollers of the film industry. At least thats the joke that always goes around. So does it make sense for Hollywood to be anti-semitic? I think you are barking up the wrong tree here - are there neo-liberals and ever lefter in Hollywood? Of course there are. The same can be said about the staunch neo-conservatives and ever farther right in Hollywood (Arnold and MR NRA come to mind) . I am not saying that the proportions are equal - because they aren't. Obviously there are more DEMS the GOPers (at least with actors) in Hollywood.. But one needs to look no further as to which party has traditionally given more money to these arts to see where the core of support began. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Originally posted by Henry They're just private citizens with opinions, just like the rest of us. The difference is that the have the resources and money to make sure their opinions are heard above those of the rest of us. Unless a public figure is willing to put his (or her) money where his mouth is (As Charlton Heston, Sonny Bono and Fred Thompson have) I don't waste a whole lot of time worrying about thier ill-informed opinions. I've got plenty of my own to think about. The problem is Henry - some people (not singleing anyone out - cause hell - I am the same way sometimes) here on this board dont want the other opinions heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2002 Author Share Posted December 17, 2002 EG...if you're referrring to me....I have been very circumspect on defining the concern: that actions have consequences. The Hollywood feel gooders are advocating policies/actions that elevate risk for all of us. They have been given a free pass in the past. I'm asserting that we all abide by the democratic decision process, but if this turns out for ill, that those who moved us in the wrong direction be held accountable. Yomar correctly pointed out that this cuts both ways.......finew by me. no one has answered my challenge as to the moral qualities and actions of these peoples. this is a matter that is separate from free speech rights. as we all know, free speech is not an unbounded right (yelling fire in a theatre, etc.). lots of people have money...not too many fly to Iraq, go on television, etc., etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 it is called Free Speech. Conseratives have there propaganda, Liberals have theirs. Agree or disagree, everyone has the right to express their political views openly and freely. It the basic principle this country was founded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2002 Author Share Posted December 17, 2002 bubba....how many times do I have to repeat thge same simple thought: no one is arguiing against free speech (which is not an unfettered right, see above). the issue at hand is accountability and respsonsibility. questioning the moral status of these great Americans is a simply a freebee..... you'll have to do better than that....there are lives at stake...this is altogether different from wages for mexican immigrants servicing california lettuce groves or massive tax schemes for redistributing income........these folks are essentially saying the government and its intelligence agencies are lieing about the scope and nature of the threat. thewy are not willing to support actions the government deems appropriate. fine, they have the right to voice these opinions. if they influence policy in a manner that adds to the collective risk and results in further death...then they need to be held accountable....the free ride for Hollywood is OVER!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Originally posted by fansince62 EG...if you're referrring to me....I have been very circumspect on defining the concern: that actions have consequences. The Hollywood feel gooders are advocating policies/actions that elevate risk for all of us. They have been given a free pass in the past. I'm asserting that we all abide by the democratic decision process, but if this turns out for ill, that those who moved us in the wrong direction be held accountable. Yomar correctly pointed out that this cuts both ways.......finew by me. no one has answered my challenge as to the moral qualities and actions of these peoples. this is a matter that is separate from free speech rights. as we all know, free speech is not an unbound I guess I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you mean by 'held accountable?' Should celebrities be punished for making @sses of themselves publicly? Of course not. Should the liberals of the world be allowed to hold you and me 'accountable' for voicing hawkish views here? Of course not. This is America, where everyone has the Right to be Wrong. If enough people think Sean Penn or whoever in Hollywood is acting irresponsibly, they'll boycott his movies and write letters and picket the studios or whatever. Then he and his fellow Hollywood types may change their tune. More likely, however, is that most of us will simply ignore their opinions and use our own brains when we head to the voting booth. That's the way it works here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2002 Author Share Posted December 17, 2002 henry...you just answered my question with a possible action. these people are attempting to sway public opinion to influence foreign policy and the proper authorities of the executive branch. this is serious stuff not some hyperventillating by overpaid, undereducated Hollywood do gooders. if they guess wrong and people die....they bear responsibility and should be held accountabile ON MORAL GROUNDS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 fansince, Who defines the moral grounds that you are talking about here? Moreover, these hollywood types that you are listening do enjoy the right to free speech - however abridged that right may be now. Yelling fire in a crowded theatre is entirely different than publicly disagreeing with the governments actions or flying over to a country to see whats going on there. Its still legal to go to the Mid East right? It would be different if the constitution or the courts decided that public disagreement with the President was a punishabe crime. Thankfully, we havent started down that slippery slope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 17, 2002 Author Share Posted December 17, 2002 That is the challenge I laid out for others. how many friggin times do I have to draw the distinction between free speech and accountability for the actions this speech motivates? these people aren't expressing opinions, they are advocating actions that directly impact our national security. they should be held accountable if they are wrong. there is a connection. now, the notion of responsiblity may be foreign to many, but it is one that I believe, even in this day of knee jerk thinking, is viable. this isn't some harmless placard at FEDEX.....this is about life and death issues and tehse people are not voicing opinions - they are attempting to redirect policy and action. they are therefore, in some measure, accountable. my question, in another thread, was to ask what accountability meant. the morality of what they are doing is a separte and interesting question in and of itself. suppose they sway policy and a more benign, gentlemanly policy toward Iraq is pursued. Then a year or two from now, a small nuclear device explodes in DC or NY. Further suppose that it is established, even if circumstantially, that this was an Al Queda effort furtively supported by Iraq. Are those who did not recognize the threat and actively worked to prevent addressing it somehow accountable/morally culpable? Or do they return to their homes in Bel Air and ensure the vacation homes in souther france and the bahamas are well provisioned and good to go? This is all about high stakes risk taking - my life and yours is now being wagered by both sides. you are free to line up with whomever you chose, either way, there must be accountability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APB Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 That's what I was wondering also, Evil Genius. Is the problem people have here with the fact that the "uneducated" and "untrained" of Hollywood dare to voice an opinion or rather with the fact that the opinion voiced is contrary to what they (the people here) believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 They have the right to be morons and say whatever they want. I also have the right to not watch their films, or see their movies. The caveat is when they do it on foreign soil. If Penn's trip to Iraq and his condemnation of US policy while he's there leads to the opposition gaining more support and power, then that might be a different story. There is legal precedent for aiding the enemy. Dont know if it would apply here, but it's not that far fetched. Im curious as to why we dont here more from the conservatives in Hollywood. The only 2 we ever hear about are ahhnold and Heston. Kathy IReland is way prolife, but I dont think anyone takes her seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 The caveat is when they do it on foreign soil. If Penn's trip to Iraq and his condemnation of US policy while he's there leads to the opposition gaining more support and power, then that might be a different story. There is legal precedent for aiding the enemy. Dont know if it would apply here, but it's not that far fetched. If Jane Fonda is still allowed to open her fat yap, I dont think Penn will ever see any legal action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 There is a huge difference from expressing ones believe to sway public opinion , to say taking illegal action such as bombing the white house. You keep claiming they should be held accountable for stating their political view, If you punish someone for expressing doubt in our govermnet, or opposing view points, censor them from questioning the goverment leaders.... that is dening them free speech. Everyone in this country has the right to express their views without fear punishment. The republican buddha, Rushie Boy went on the radio everyday with the sole intent to trash Clinton and undermine his adminastration. Neo Nazi's, the KKK, and many other extreme political group can go out and march hold rallies and no matter how distaseful or stupid their message maybe, they have that right, and not be punished as long as they don't take actions that are illegal. When actors or celebrities go out and express their opinions and beliefs... you can hold them accountable if you feel necessary. You can speak out against them,, you can protest their movies or plays, boycott their work not buy their books or products they endorse. You can write letters to the companies that own the products and express your outrage that company would hire such & such to represent their product. You have that right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted December 17, 2002 Share Posted December 17, 2002 Originally posted by Kilmer17 The worse thing we can do is continue to give them and their views air time and press. Let it go. If Sean Penn wants to be a traitor, let him. I just hope he hangs around long enough to feel the first shrapnel bomb. While this is an important issue and I agree with ol'62, I think you are giving these people a bit too much credit. Yes America loves it's entertainment industry and we enjoy movies and music. These are cultural standards that are lucerative businesses to be in. Naturally, at a time when the economy is swaying, these nuckleheads will resort to anything to boost their sales/profitability. They will do all they can to get their faces out there before their latest release. It is discourageing that people, like us, are paying attention and listening. The encouraging though, is that not many agree. Hopefully, we can finally see the power of their influence wane-especially in the eyes of a younger generations that appear to be becoming more and more agressive and partaking in dangerous activities. Those that do agree are the readers of the pappa-razzi crap that is strewn across grocery stores for unappreciated wives to read and form their beliefs. For the obsessive teen who can't get enough of their favorite actor/musician and for the tv junkie with nothing better to do. These people don't weigh into our democratic process too much. They're either too fat to get off the couch, too worried about their appearance or too young and dumb. If anything, it portray's a bit of a silly \image of our country's people while important foreign policy decisions are being made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 bubba....you're not reading my assertions correctly. My current job requires me "to protect and defend the Constitution." Free speech is not an issue - it is a right. My contention is that speech doesn't occur in a vacuum, that in fact these people are advocating actions. If that is the case, then, the line of reasoning goes, they should be held accountable for the consequences of these actions. Accountability can take many forms - my original intent was to see what the board thought in this regard. If you're going to attack my argument, one starting point is to ask how one establishes a causal chain from consequences (actions) back to advocacy. It can be done, but I'm not sure it can be done in the current information environment vis terrorism. that I consider these folks, people who should be focused on sustaining relationships beyond days/months or keeping their children alive beyond the age of 20 (Hollywood doesn't enjoy a good track record in this regard), not positioned to be advising the rest of us on the morality of International policy is my own "hang-up." That these people are singularly silent when it comes to the ethics of much of the crap they put out in the name "of art" is also a personal matter. That I see their hypocracy and wonder why they are permitted a voice leads me to wonder if there should be controls on money other than just the flow to politicians (just kidding! I realize that only oil corporations and the like are venal, corrupt and satanic!). This time around, it will be important to deprive these people of the mantle of virtue they so cherish. If you don't care for my exercising the right to free speech - you are free not to read the thread!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn X Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 I certainly understand your concerns here, fansince62, but ultimately this is a moot point. Poll after poll has been taken on the Iraq Question, and the American people are overwhelmingly in favor of militarily deposing Saddam Hussein. Penn and Sarandon and Donahue (goodness gracious is this guy's ratings-troubled show funny or what? It's like some sort of televisual timewarp to the 1970s, what with Donahue's laughably anachronistic political views on full display; the only thing he's missing are the sideburns and tan-colored patches on the elbows of his jackets to complete the utterly ahistorical effect) will continue talking sh*t about Bush, the Republicans, the War on Terrorism, and the Iraq Question, however, in the end, what they say will scarcely matter. They are out of touch with America. And they know it. That's why they keeping using their mass media megaphones to harp on this issue as they do, hoping to eventually change minds. But the American public has already figured out their game and doesn't take them the least bit seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 all...note that I believe the decison-makers, conservative talking heads, etc., are equally accountable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 Fansince62, Just curious, where do you stand on the guy who put the owners of abortion clinics names on line then drew lines threw the names as the clinics were firebombed and the doctors killed? You want to talk about advocating illegal actions? I'd say this is a far more blatant case than anything you accuse the mass media of doing. Unfortunately, I believe the maker of that website was found to be within his constitutional free speech rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 I think anyone who does that should be arrested. Just MHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 blatant is in the eyes of the beholder, of course....but if you can establish a material link......yea, i'm open to the idea...afterall...we can't have citizens attacking core industrial processes!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.