Ignorance, American Media and Partisan Polarization

[Death Metal]

Also, an interesting thing I want to bring up, and it's the buzzword of "mainstream media".

First off, let's be realistic here: Every significant news media source in the Western world gets their information from one of two agencies, either the Associated Press or Reuters.

Every news TV personality works for a station affiliated with CBS, ABC/Disney, NewsCorp, Time Warner, NBC, or Viacom. Major, billion-dollar media empires.

Every news radio personality works for a station affiliated with CBS, ABC/Disney, Clear Channel/iHeartRadio. All major media empires worth millions of dollars. This includes Alex Jones, the debatable coiner of the buzzword.

Virtually every book published by a politician or news media personality has been published by one of six publishers: Hachette, Macmillan, Penguin Group. HarperCollins. Random House, Simon & Schuster. All multi-million dollar empires, all with bestselling novels in their ranks.

And finally, every blog sources, or at the very least gets their information from, at least one of the above sources.

In other words ALL news comes from mainstream media. This isn't a good thing nor is it a bad thing. It just... is.

However, demonizing mainstream media, a phenomenon that again, comes from people within the mainstream media, is nothing more than a polarization tool that is only exacerbating the problems with today's media culture. These demogauges are a virus, not a vaccine, and are best left ignored.

I think the fact it all comes from two sources is not good at all. It means a rich man slips AP and Reuters money and the rich man never gets bad press.

Which is why Bernie Madoff still walks the streets today. Oh wait.

[The New Sea Territory]

Stalin was a leftist

Nope. Stalin was a reactionary with a state-capitalist/corportatist economy with lots of meritocracy thrown in.

You're talking to a wall. Please don't entertain the walls.

We need that sign up in this thread somewhere.

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Stalin was a leftist

Nope. Stalin was a reactionary with a state-capitalist/corportatist economy with lots of meritocracy thrown in.

Stalin was not reactionary. He totally supported the Russian Revolution.

[Norius]

Hello. *clears throat*

I just got back from a somewhat heated conversation with an elder relative of mine. In a conversation she was not a part of, but butted into, she claimed that Homosexuality in America became an issue when Birth Control became legal (how the fuck are those related? ), Vladimir Putin is a Communist, and the Hobby Lobby case was about taxpayer funded abortions.....Also, she remarked that everything Bill O'Reilly says is true and everything MSNBC says is false, lies, communist (what?!?!) and atheist.

This phenomenon seems to be observable for both Democrats and Republicans, but it takes a more...socially unacceptable turn within GOP ranks because of shit like this. Demonizing your opposition is very common in politics, but the Religious Right, which the individual I described above is the hardest of hard Catholics, takes it to new heights daily when they say Putin is a fucking communist

The individual I spoke to said she hates communists. I asked her: Have you ever met a Communist? "No." Have you ever read any communist literature? "No." This proves ignorance. The individual I spoke to also claimed that Jesus was not left-wing at all...The face palms of this conversation are unending.

To get to the questions here:

Does mainstream media foster ideological ignorance?
Can the Media be somewhat blamed for increasing partisan polarization?
Why does the Religious Right throw the word "Communist" around like McCarthy is running for president?

My Opinion:

Fuck yeah it does. People who worship (Stupid As) Fux News are so ignorant of what communism, atheism, liberalism and even Christianity is and stands for. Also, they demonize Democrats as "communists".....when Democrats are centrist. How in the name of Buddha do you back up such a claim: "Obama, MSNBC, Vladimir Putin and Homosexuals are Communists!"

Footnotes:

This thread isn't about communists, but I use the word because it's something that Fox viewers throw around lightly...as if anyone who is not far-right wing advocates for a stateless, classless and moneyless society where the means of production are collectively owned and social hierarchy is torn down. I apologize for using it so much in the above paragraphs...but the conversation I describe basically consisted of her denouncing her opposition as communist, even calling me a communist and yelling at me for not supporting social conservatism.

I agree all the way with you man. I think ONE of the main problems is that Americans have become use to living in such a politcally stablized country that they're vunerable to what ever the media tells them. Not saying we are so politcally stable, we're very corrupt and i'm sure these media corporations are funded for the purpose of curving the public's politcal inquiry.

[The New Sea Territory]

Nope. Stalin was a reactionary with a state-capitalist/corportatist economy with lots of meritocracy thrown in.

Stalin was not reactionary. He totally supported the Russian Revolution.

...plenty of reactionaries supported the Russian Revolution. Russian Nationalist groups did, though they were small and usually left out of high school textbooks.

[Andarro]

"Communist", "socialist" and "fascist" have become insults that people throw around without regard for definitions.

Communism, Socialism, and Fascism are variations of collectivism.

Collectivism is a vague term referring to almost any kind of sociopolitical/economic organization that gives precedence to the group over the individual. In other words, the individual is at all times expected to subordinate his or her preferences for the greater good of the larger unit. The trouble with collectivism is that while the justification for decision-making is the greater good, inevitably there is usually one dominant person (perhaps several) who is actually making the decision that is presented to the "community" as the greater good.

Collectivism as a philosophy has been used to support numerous movements, many of which were popular in the 20th century, including socialism, communism and fascism.

Collectivism is in its application a fraud that inevitably allows a few powerful people to loot others while hiding behind the concept. Collectivism at best is a kind of exploitative mercantilism. At its worst it creates the conditions for genocide.

[The New Sea Territory]

Hello. *clears throat*

I just got back from a somewhat heated conversation with an elder relative of mine. In a conversation she was not a part of, but butted into, she claimed that Homosexuality in America became an issue when Birth Control became legal (how the fuck are those related? ), Vladimir Putin is a Communist, and the Hobby Lobby case was about taxpayer funded abortions.....Also, she remarked that everything Bill O'Reilly says is true and everything MSNBC says is false, lies, communist (what?!?!) and atheist.

This phenomenon seems to be observable for both Democrats and Republicans, but it takes a more...socially unacceptable turn within GOP ranks because of shit like this. Demonizing your opposition is very common in politics, but the Religious Right, which the individual I described above is the hardest of hard Catholics, takes it to new heights daily when they say Putin is a fucking communist

The individual I spoke to said she hates communists. I asked her: Have you ever met a Communist? "No." Have you ever read any communist literature? "No." This proves ignorance. The individual I spoke to also claimed that Jesus was not left-wing at all...The face palms of this conversation are unending.

To get to the questions here:

Does mainstream media foster ideological ignorance?
Can the Media be somewhat blamed for increasing partisan polarization?
Why does the Religious Right throw the word "Communist" around like McCarthy is running for president?

My Opinion:

Fuck yeah it does. People who worship (Stupid As) Fux News are so ignorant of what communism, atheism, liberalism and even Christianity is and stands for. Also, they demonize Democrats as "communists".....when Democrats are centrist. How in the name of Buddha do you back up such a claim: "Obama, MSNBC, Vladimir Putin and Homosexuals are Communists!"

Footnotes:

This thread isn't about communists, but I use the word because it's something that Fox viewers throw around lightly...as if anyone who is not far-right wing advocates for a stateless, classless and moneyless society where the means of production are collectively owned and social hierarchy is torn down. I apologize for using it so much in the above paragraphs...but the conversation I describe basically consisted of her denouncing her opposition as communist, even calling me a communist and yelling at me for not supporting social conservatism.

I agree all the way with you man. I think ONE of the main problems is that Americans have become use to living in such a politcally stablized country that they're vunerable to what ever the media tells them. Not saying we are so politcally stable, we're very corrupt and i'm sure these media corporations are funded for the purpose of curving the public's politcal inquiry.

We don't have ideological radicality in this country like others do. The Two-Party system, if it does one good thing, stops violent movements from every becoming mainstream. This is why the last internal conflict in this country was the Civil War. We've become comfortable in political stability, so we think America can't be corrupted.

At least, many apathetic people do unknowingly. They usually don't think that deep. Either way, yes, people believe what the television tells them.

[The New Sea Territory]

"Communist", "socialist" and "fascist" have become insults that people throw around without regard for definitions.

Communism, Socialism, and Fascism are variations of collectivism.

Collectivism is a vague term referring to almost any kind of sociopolitical/economic organization that gives precedence to the group over the individual. In other words, the individual is at all times expected to subordinate his or her preferences for the greater good of the larger unit. The trouble with collectivism is that while the justification for decision-making is the greater good, inevitably there is usually one dominant person (perhaps several) who is actually making the decision that is presented to the "community" as the greater good.

Collectivism as a philosophy has been used to support numerous movements, many of which were popular in the 20th century, including socialism, communism and fascism.

Collectivism is in its application a fraud that inevitably allows a few powerful people to loot others while hiding behind the concept. Collectivism at best is a kind of exploitative mercantilism. At its worst it creates the conditions for genocide.

Ok, Alex Jones. Calm down. I'm a huge individualist, but I don;t blame everything on collectivism.

And all philosophies are inherently collectivist by your definition anyway, because if more than one person follows it, a group follows it.

[The Serbian Empire]

I think the fact it all comes from two sources is not good at all. It means a rich man slips AP and Reuters money and the rich man never gets bad press.

Which is why Bernie Madoff still walks the streets today. Oh wait.

Madoff's in prison, but half of the banking executives at fault for the 2008 crisis are still walking free.

[Othelos]

"Communist", "socialist" and "fascist" have become insults that people throw around without regard for definitions.

Communism, Socialism, and Fascism are variations of collectivism.

Collectivism is a vague term referring to almost any kind of sociopolitical/economic organization that gives precedence to the group over the individual.

Most ideologies include that to some degree. Usually people are aiming for whatever's the best for society as a whole (for all or most people) rather than specific individuals.

[Viritica]

The left demonizes those who disagree with them. But they don't throw around words like "communist" and "socialist". Instead they use terms like "racist", "sexist", and "xenophobic".

[Herskerstad]

So the OP goes, there is a problem of partisan polarization on both sides, but the religious right is horrible while the left is reasonable and centrist, blame faux news, I am so angry I met a person with several unfounded claims and this is going to be the overarching example to the thread.

Painful.

[The New Sea Territory]

So the OP goes, there is a problem of partisan polarization on both sides, but the religious right is horrible while the left is reasonable and centrist, blame faux news, I am so angry I met a person with several unfounded claims and this is going to be the overarching example to the thread.

Painful.

This is focusing on the Religious Right, who do it the worst, hands down.

And don't think I support the Democrats, either. Read the sig.

[The New Sea Territory]

The left demonizes those who disagree with them. But they don't throw around words like "communist" and "socialist". Instead they use terms like "racist", "sexist", and "xenophobic".

Let me remind you there is no "Left". You, I assume to be a conservative in American terms, are far-right. The Democrats are, by and large, Centrist, somewhat leaning right in practice when they try to compromise with you.

America has no real leftist party.

[Genivaria]

How is that related? I'm saying you are quoting someone that you have proven on other threads you are very, very opposed to.

Stalin was a leftist who had control of the media. Orwell had some good points.

Socially speaking no Stalin was far right.

[The New Sea Territory]

Stalin was a leftist who had control of the media. Orwell had some good points.

Socially speaking no Stalin was far right.

In practice, not in rhetoric, to be fair.

[Genivaria]

Socially speaking no Stalin was far right.

In practice, not in rhetoric, to be fair.

Indeed.

[Death Metal]

Socially speaking no Stalin was far right.

In practice, not in rhetoric, to be fair.

Yep. The wizard only appears to be great and powerful, until you look behind the curtain and find him a humbug.

[The New Sea Territory]

In practice, not in rhetoric, to be fair.

Indeed.

This is where the fundamental split between people who claim the Soviet Union was/wasn't communist.

People who say it was go by it's rhetoric, people who say it wasn't go by it's practice.

[Genivaria]

Indeed.

This is where the fundamental split between people who claim the Soviet Union was/wasn't communist.

People who say it was go by it's rhetoric, people who say it wasn't go by it's practice.

It was Stalinist if you use that term.
The word Communist though can mean anything depending on who you're talking to.

[The New Sea Territory]

This is where the fundamental split between people who claim the Soviet Union was/wasn't communist.

People who say it was go by it's rhetoric, people who say it wasn't go by it's practice.

It was Stalinist if you use that term.
The word Communist though can mean anything depending on who you're talking to.

Apparently Putin is a communist. Despite being almost 100% in line with the Religious Right's policies....

[Atlanticatia]

Yes. This is why we need a publicly funded mainstream public broadcaster in the USA, similar to the BBC.

[Herskerstad]

So the OP goes, there is a problem of partisan polarization on both sides, but the religious right is horrible while the left is reasonable and centrist, blame faux news, I am so angry I met a person with several unfounded claims and this is going to be the overarching example to the thread.

Painful.

This is focusing on the Religious Right, who do it the worst, hands down.

And don't think I support the Democrats, either. Read the sig.

I did not claim you supported the Democrats, but your OP gave them far more than a pass than the opposition, which, in turn, gets a lot more flak from you, and the topic includes partisan polarization which there is absolutely no lack from the side of the progressive left either. I see words like Islamophobic, bigoted, racist, homophobia and other words tossed around as it was a free fire zone all the time, which stand as of now far more incriminating words than socialist or communist.

Truth be told most of these words have been devalued by such, but a prime factor of partisan polarization is demonizing the opposition. I know of plenty people who will love you should you vote for the Democratic party, but if you go GOP, you're a Nazi voting for Satan in their eyes. And you will get it the other way around as well, and while some differences will be too far for discourse alone to bridge, topics like abortion for example, there comes a time when fair play in discourse becomes vital and both sides seem to be lacking it, while neither side stands de-facto guilty of it. And if this administration gets a Bush factor near the end with a major economic issue which is entirely possible given the inflation potentials with ISIS in the middle east and the oil links now occupied, and the nation takes a shift for the right in a general sense, and you suddenly get individual judges striking down same sex marriage laws, a republican presidency, congress and house which would not co-operate with the minority and use nuclear options while doing a social u-turn from the last presidency? Well, then you can talk of it inquisitively, right now however that is not going to have much currency in it having the right as the primary culprits.

[Genivaria]

Yes. This is why we need a publicly funded mainstream public broadcaster in the USA, similar to the BBC.

SOCIALISM!!!

[Atlanticatia]

Yes. This is why we need a publicly funded mainstream public broadcaster in the USA, similar to the BBC.

SOCIALISM!!!

It's spelled SOCIALIZM, god.