Does it bother you that certain issues get more attention?

Post Reply New Topic

For example, racism gets more attention than classism, people care more about cancer than mental illness, the Holocaust gets more attention than the Soviet atrocities, bad music gets more attention than good music.

The only reason the Holocaust gets the attention it does is because there are so many people who deny it ever happened or wish to find excuses to justify.

The way I see it, it was business as usual. Genocide is an age old human custom.

ruveyn

Last edited by ruveyn on 04 Jun 2011, 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Occationally it can do so...

bad music versus good music - I would have to know your standards.

For others, the factors that are not accidental or a function of who directs the attention and their interests might make me seem more cynical if expressed.

For me its when people talk about one cancer over all the others. All cancers are horrible and should be cured.

People aren't concerned about issues that are most important. Only toward the issues the spotlight is pointed to.

Sometimes; but the tendency is then to beat those issues into the ground, and/or to start seeing them lurking around every corner, until nobody wants to hear about them any longer.

The fact that the "issue" of whether a candidate wears a flag pin got a lot more attention than the Iraq War or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the 2008 election genuinely pissed me off.

I think people often want to support issues like wars, economic policy, and social issues above the REAL issues like whether a candidate is patriotic enough to wear a flag pin. I mean, doesn't character matter?

It is not the character, it is the animation and the choice of who does the voice.

I don't know what you are getting at.
1) I am guessing you are saying that politics is a marketing game.
2) I am also guessing that you didn't understand that I said this specifically to mess with M_P, as I really don't believe flag pins are a real issue.
3) You could have said what you meant in a much much more direct manner.

3. What I meant was to play on what I took to be a humorous "doesn't character matter" in your post, assumed humorous a. because of who / what you be b. because clearly even if you believe that character matters in elections [which I suspect you do though your standards for character might differ from mine] the wearing or otherwise of a flag pin or an Old Dumbletonian tie does not speak to character. Wherefore I jumped to character as in a cartoon and went with it. I asm not sure how I could have said that more straightforwardly.

2. I did not understand you to be messing with MP, whose views on flag pins and character are unknown to me. I did understand that you did not consider flag pins an issue.

1. I do indeed believe that politics is a marketing game, and I have often said so, but I was not intending to say that here. Else would I have said it. More directly. BUT I would not have said that in response to the flag pin thing.

I guess this means we have to start a draft Maddow petition:

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 05 Jun 2011, 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Umm..... actually manners of dress do speak to character. The link I drew wasn't absurd to put forward, even though the context made it such.

Secondly, character is just narrative, not cartoon.

Thirdly.... I actually wasn't trying to promote character at all. You misread me. I am not even sure character matters in elections as the real issue may just be the median voter theorem. I actually do believe in putting policy before side-issues.


He was literally the person ABOVE my post. LITERALLY. The only thing more I could have done was to quote him.


Err....... you are just a confused interpreter, aren't you? My interpretation of you was probably the only sensible one out there. Yours actually makes no sense and is grossly wrong, oddly enough. I mean, it's correct to your intent, but.... your intentions made no sense in the context. I don't understand this.

Finally, seriously, why don't you post in a normal order? You can. It would aid comprehension. Your willful actions make no sense, and contextually suggest that you are an a**hole, as implicit formatting agreements, while they can be tastefully violated, openly flouting them on a continual basis suggests a lack of concern, a willingness to waste time, and a certain level of rudeness. Not trying to be too testy here, but seriously, it's clear that you could actually post in a more comprehensible manner just with a few minor alterations. You've received complaints on multiple occasions, but nothing has been done.

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 05 Jun 2011, 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

I generally think the median voter theorem is of secondary applicability to the Investment Theory of Politics.

Then why do you bother to care about politics? Under that theory, you're screwed if you want to change the system ever.

In any case, I don't think the investment theory gives us much reason to be concerned about political character either. It still reduces the actions of the office-holder down to incentives and meeting requests.