Viewing WALL-E as Class Struggle, (Marxism)

[amicus]

I used to watch children’s films as a father, to guide what my children watched. I watch them now, somewhat helplessly, as a grandfather and wonder just how much the movies influence children.

I was amused at EVA, who was quick on the trigger and lethal and poor old Wally, portrayed as the loyal and courageous, romantic but doofus foil; typical modern day feminist gender portrayals.

Then, of course, as so many scenario’s are, the terrible Corporation, B&L, Big and Large; kind of the Wal-Mart that ate the world, polluted and despoiled all of creation.

I did find it curious that the inhabitants of space ship Axiom, after 700 years of inactivity were subjected to the ‘bone loss of low gravity’, although gravity was portrayed as earth normal in the film; hey, I understand…(Any, ahm, 'overweight' peeps on the forum?)

But still, how man despoiled the earth, made it toxic and uninhabitable and how the collective, ‘we’ were supposed to return and, ‘help’ the planet to return to viability. Sighs…

I challenge you, each and every one, in every film, cartoon or children’s film you watch, to do so with a critical eye as to the messages being delivered. Hey, we’re author’s, we always have a message!

How long before this left leaning liberal arts propaganda is viewed in parody as the 50’s, ‘Leave it to Beaver’, sarcasm is rife?

But the love affair between Wall-E & Eva, was just darling…



Amicus

 

[TE999]

That whole 'Man despoiled the Earth in the name of Capitalisim and Consumption' message came in loud and clear to me. I still enjoyed the heck out of that movie.

I figure a lot of that rather heavy handed moralizing went right over kids heads...they were watching the robots. The space ship reminded me of a cruise liner writ large...in fact one with 16 (!) decks, 2,700 cabins and a crew of 2,100 made it's debut today in Florida. It can carry 6,100 passengers.

Ted Turner had his 'Captain Planet' cartoon series back in the 80's that made big business and nuclear power the villians the Captain and his team fought...subtlety wasn't it's strong point either. The kids liked the action and never really absorbed the message...most of 'em anyway.

 

[Stella_Omega]

There was a "Tiny Toons" episode in the nineties, in which the Evil Villain was turniong whales into lipstick. The Tiny Toon contingent had to save a Mommy Whale from the big Corporate factory ship, before the Baby Whale was orphaned.
And when the head of the corporation... was lost overboard and never came back up... nobody cared. They were reuniting the Mother with her baby, and that was more important than some heartless money-grubber's life.

That was pretty shocking to me-- Warner Brothers, after all!

 

[TE999]

There was a "Tiny Toons" episode in the nineties, in which the Evil Villain was turniong whales into lipstick. The Tiny Toon contingent had to save a Mommy Whale from the big Corporate factory ship, before the Baby Whale was orphaned.
And when the head of the corporation... was lost overboard and never came back up... nobody cared. They were reuniting the Mother with her baby, and that was more important than some heartless money-grubber's life.

That was pretty shocking to me-- Warner Brothers, after all!

I can get behind that plot line...I think whales are cool...and several species are still critically endangered. Why countries like Japan and Canada continue to hunt whales for things like food and lipstick is beyond me.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Again we run up against that debate: does art reflect our attitudes or create them?

Obviously Amicus thinks art creates attitudes, that is, the purpose of art is propaganda, and so one message is as valid as another.

The people who make these movies, though, are tapping into attitudes that already exist. Kids today are very much concerned about urban sprawl, the disappearance of wild lands, and the despoiling of the earth. They don't have to look far to see plenty of examples of this.

And the dehumanizing nature of Corporatism and the drive for profits has a long and distinguished career as a source of fear and antipathy among people who value their freedom and individuality, whether represented by modern Big Business today or by Ebeneezer Scrooge in Dickens' day.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Again we run up against that debate: does art reflect our attitudes or create them?

Obviously Amicus thinks art creates attitudes, that is, the purpose of art is propaganda, and so one message is as valid as another.

The people who make these movies, though, are tapping into attitudes that already exist. Kids today are very much concerned about urban sprawl, the disappearance of wild lands, and the despoiling of the earth. They don't have to look far to see plenty of examples of this.

And the dehumanizing nature of Corporatism and the drive for profits has a long and distinguished career as a source of fear and antipathy among people who value their freedom and individuality, whether represented by modern Big Business today or by Ebeneezer Scrooge in Dickens' day.

It does both, of course. The films and cartoons referenced on this thread reflect the attitudes of the producers, and they are subtlely trying to instill the same attitudes and opinions in others, especially children.

 

[amicus]

Again we run up against that debate: does art reflect our attitudes or create them?

Obviously Amicus thinks art creates attitudes, that is, the purpose of art is propaganda, and so one message is as valid as another.

The people who make these movies, though, are tapping into attitudes that already exist. Kids today are very much concerned about urban sprawl, the disappearance of wild lands, and the despoiling of the earth. They don't have to look far to see plenty of examples of this.

And the dehumanizing nature of Corporatism and the drive for profits has a long and distinguished career as a source of fear and antipathy among people who value their freedom and individuality, whether represented by modern Big Business today or by Ebeneezer Scrooge in Dickens' day.[/QUOTE]

~~~

As a moderate attempt to remain sociable and, 'civil', in Roxanne's terms, I present opinions that differ from others, but I do so in a rather gentle way. That is largely ineffective as it is defined as weakness.

Mabeuse's post is an example of a 'civil' refutation, by name, of the presentation of a conclusion I drew and expressed.

Obviously Amicus thinks art creates attitudes, that is, the purpose of art is propaganda, and so one message is as valid as another.

I didn't express what I thought art might be, as Mab deduces; rather, he attributes his definition to mine and I reject that, totally.

Art projects a sense of life, how the artist views reality and history and beauty, which is why I admire the Impressionists above all, in terms of beauty and why I find modern architecture, straight line efficiency, glass and steel and concrete that expresses the mind of man in conquering nature.

The people who make these movies, though, are tapping into attitudes that already exist. Kids today are very much concerned about urban sprawl, the disappearance of wild lands, and the despoiling of the earth. They don't have to look far to see plenty of examples of this.

The above paragraph is pure fiction, unbridled nonsense, blatant propaganda and totally false. There are no existing 'attitudes' about urban sprawl, wild lands, despoilation, those attitudes are inculcated in the art of the pastoral seeking left wing liberals who are so far above the common man that they will not lower themselves to engage in the 'business' of life, the actual building, making, creating, fixing, manufacturing of the goods we use to live.

Mabeuse is a defining example of the worst in the liberal left, one who survives as a parasite on the accomplishments of others but looks down upon them as if they are beneath him.

And the dehumanizing nature of Corporatism and the drive for profits has a long and distinguished career as a source of fear and antipathy among people who value their freedom and individuality, whether represented by modern Big Business today or by Ebeneezer Scrooge in Dickens' day.

Mabeuse has no idea, really does not even fathom just how many people love the sprawling Malls that provide a Cornucopia of goods and services close at hand in a comfortable and entertaining evironment. Mab really has never seen a Super Wal-Mart or realized the millions daily that visit that huge 'dehumanizing Corporation', or that of McDonald's or Pizza Hut or any of dozens of other heartless, cruel corporations that are loved, depended on and INVESTED in by millions of people around the world day after day.

Blue Collar and White Collar workers, those who visualize, create and design the world we live in, seldom have excess time to dabble in the arts. It is instead, the pointy headed intellectual elite, divorced from reality, that write and create the entertainment that so many sit back to enjoy. A captive audience for the continuation of the feotid Class Struggle manufactured by Marx & Lenin and a host of socialist wannabe's.

I pointed out just one, WALL-E, and you immediately saw and knew the embedded propaganda and realized just how pervasive that attitude is throughout the entertainment industry, overwhelmingly populated by the Hollywood Liberal Left that pandered to the Clinton's during the 90's.

I have been writing for nearly half a century now and I know what is contained in the written word and I know when it is intended to inform, entertain, persuade or indoctrinate.

I respect Mabeuse's writing enough to attribute purpose to his words and mark my word, he does have a purpose with each and every word chosen.

I, too, choose carefully my words; the meanings I intend to convey are clear and consistent and they always express my love of humanity and the works of man and the values by which man lives his life.

Take the time to read closely the character of Elsworth Toohey in Ayn Rand's Fountainhead and you will better understand Mabeuse and his ilk when you read them.

Amicus

 

[Epmd607]

Animal Farm is still a beloved story. Kids watch the cartoon enthusiastically. Every cartoon I've ever seen shows big business as bad, pollution as bad, and mafia as bad. Just watch Bugs Bunny and all the first cartoons.

Big Business is what makes the pollution that destroys the land. I don't know how you can argue against that. Why can't art reveal how cultural achievement also despoils what we love? Your view is too skewed to appreciate the complexity that art reveals of life. Go read The Republic, you share a view with Plato. Ban all art that doesn't enhance the spirit of the great civilization we're a part of!

 

[Epmd607]

Marxism in a nutshell means describing society in terms of class struggle. I think you understand that. The odd thing is, almost every post you make, whether it's on health care, taxes, immigration, terrorism, death penalty(I can't recall you making a post on it, but I'm sure you have an opinion) is framed in terms of class struggle. Amicus, you're basically a Marxist.


"Humankind's history is fundamentally that of the struggle between social classes. The productive capacity of society is the foundation of society, and as this capacity increases over time the social relations of production, class relations, evolve through this struggle of the classes and pass through definite stages (primitive communism, slavery, feudalism, capitalism). The legal, political, ideological and other aspects (ex. art) of society are derived from these production relations as is the consciousness of the individuals of which the society is composed."

 

[amicus]

Animal Farm is still a beloved story. Kids watch the cartoon enthusiastically. Every cartoon I've ever seen shows big business as bad, pollution as bad, and mafia as bad. Just watch Bugs Bunny and all the first cartoons.

Big Business is what makes the pollution that destroys the land. I don't know how you can argue against that. Why can't art reveal how cultural achievement also despoils what we love? Your view is too skewed to appreciate the complexity that art reveals of life. Go read The Republic, you share a view with Plato. Ban all art that doesn't enhance the spirit of the great civilization we're a part of!

~~~

The bolded portion in your first paragraph rather underlines my point, does it not? Early cartoons, as I remember them, were morality plays of good versus evil, the big bad wolf, or criminals; there was a distinct line between good and evil, right and wrong, good and bad. Hans Christian Anderson comes to mind, but I cautiously venture that as I am not a student of comedic art.

Locusts leave a footprint as they strip all vegetation and leave a devastated land. Early man, as hunter/gatherer, followed the game, taking what he needed and moving on.

The instant man became settled and agriculture and animal husbandry came into play, man left a 'footprint' also, changing the natural environment to suit his needs.

The Industrial Age took the burden off the backs of horses and men and reshaped the natural world into one envisioned by men who foresaw a clean environment, fresh, running water and conveniences that only the aristocracy knew before became available to the common man.

Big Business is what makes the pollution that destroys the land. I don't know how you can argue against that.

There is no argument to make. Walk down any pleasant street in any small town in America where private owners maintain their property. Amble through the business district and look upon the well tended shop windows and swept sidewalks. Take a gander at Microsoft Headquarters in Washington State; you may even appreciate the architecture, along with the beauty of the landscaping.

Property ownership and enforced property rights, all a matter of property law, protect the rights of all property owners from encroachment by other property owners, adjacent and up and down stream.

The only time a property owner can pollute land, water or air, is under the guise of Government permission and license. That pollution did and does exist is a failure of government to protect the property rights of all and enforce those laws on those who pollute.

As I have carefully pointed out to you or xssve before, man is not all knowing, we did not spring into the Industrial age fully knowing the consequences of all our actions. Growing industries, like growing lives, follow a learning curve of what one can do and what one can not do with respect and regard to the rights of others.

No area of science moves, for example, from early vacuum tube electronics to modern silicon chip technology by God given insight; it happens little by little as free menexercise free will and create innovations that improve the process and the qualities of human life.

Go find a paper mill that turns would chips into two ply toilet paper and give that smokestack a hug; it deserves it.

Amicus

 

[Epmd607]

~~~

The bolded portion in your first paragraph rather underlines my point, does it not? Early cartoons, as I remember them, were morality plays of good versus evil, the big bad wolf, or criminals; there was a distinct line between good and evil, right and wrong, good and bad. Hans Christian Anderson comes to mind, but I cautiously venture that as I am not a student of comedic art.

Locusts leave a footprint as they strip all vegetation and leave a devastated land. Early man, as hunter/gatherer, followed the game, taking what he needed and moving on.

The instant man became settled and agriculture and animal husbandry came into play, man left a 'footprint' also, changing the natural environment to suit his needs.

The Industrial Age took the burden off the backs of horses and men and reshaped the natural world into one envisioned by men who foresaw a clean environment, fresh, running water and conveniences that only the aristocracy knew before became available to the common man.



There is no argument to make. Walk down any pleasant street in any small town in America where private owners maintain their property. Amble through the business district and look upon the well tended shop windows and swept sidewalks. Take a gander at Microsoft Headquarters in Washington State; you may even appreciate the architecture, along with the beauty of the landscaping.

Property ownership and enforced property rights, all a matter of property law, protect the rights of all property owners from encroachment by other property owners, adjacent and up and down stream.

The only time a property owner can pollute land, water or air, is under the guise of Government permission and license. That pollution did and does exist is a failure of government to protect the property rights of all and enforce those laws on those who pollute.

As I have carefully pointed out to you or xssve before, man is not all knowing, we did not spring into the Industrial age fully knowing the consequences of all our actions. Growing industries, like growing lives, follow a learning curve of what one can do and what one can not do with respect and regard to the rights of others.

No area of science moves, for example, from early vacuum tube electronics to modern silicon chip technology by God given insight; it happens little by little as free menexercise free will and create innovations that improve the process and the qualities of human life.

Go find a paper mill that turns would chips into two ply toilet paper and give that smokestack a hug; it deserves it.

Amicus

It's also important to point out that cartoons, such as looney tunes, played before and during the intermissions of major motions pictures in the 40's and 50's. Children were never the target audience of those short cartoons. Bugs Bunny portrays class warfare because the adults understand it and can laugh at some underling being mistreated by their boss, or the faceless factory and machinery pushing out pointless goods. Hanna-Barbara focuses on children in the early 70s, those cartoons are harmless, have next to no social commentary. Additionally, a movie like Wall-E isn't focused solely on children, someone has to sit there with the child and watch the movie. You could say that about a lot of cartoons, even in casper there'll be some joke meant for adults, because adults have to sit through cartoons too.

 

[TxRad]

Ami, one of these days, you're going to actually hear what people say and not what you want to hear them say. I wonder at your reading skills all the time. Not to mention your knowledge of the real world as opposed to the dream world of the fifties that you seem to live in.

 

[amicus]

It's also important to point out that cartoons, such as looney tunes, played before and during the intermissions of major motions pictures in the 40's and 50's. Children were never the target audience of those short cartoons. Bugs Bunny portrays class warfare because the adults understand it and can laugh at some underling being mistreated by their boss, or the faceless factory and machinery pushing out pointless goods. Hanna-Barbara focuses on children in the early 70s, those cartoons are harmless, have next to no social commentary. Additionally, a movie like Wall-E isn't focused solely on children, someone has to sit there with the child and watch the movie. You could say that about a lot of cartoons, even in casper there'll be some joke meant for adults, because adults have to sit through cartoons too.[/QUOTE]

~~~

Empd...I note your exceptions but acknowledge them as that, 'exceptions', with the general rule of 'content' written into literature and films, as being mainly anti business, anti industrialist, and with the last generation, 30 years or so, a 'civil rights' equality driven agenda with always a Black, an Asian and a female always included to balance the cartoon or film. One should also note the extant 'gender bias', poor old Wally, smitten by Eva, but with Eva being the motive force in the scenario.

Writers that came of age in the 60's also and always it seems, include poignant pricks of 'environmentalism' into every scene, both the obvious and the subtle.

Perhaps by pointing out these glaring inclusions, one can bring about awareness of their existence and perchance persuade those who write to become aware that their fiction also includes a political statement that borders on indoctrination.

For what it is worth...

Oh, and Txrad, I think you know full well that I do read and understand fully and it frightens you because my critical observation hits a little too close to home and in makes you most uncomfortable and reduces your response to one of whining.


Amicus

 

[Boxlicker101]

It's also important to point out that cartoons, such as looney tunes, played before and during the intermissions of major motions pictures in the 40's and 50's. Children were never the target audience of those short cartoons. Bugs Bunny portrays class warfare because the adults understand it and can laugh at some underling being mistreated by their boss, or the faceless factory and machinery pushing out pointless goods. Hanna-Barbara focuses on children in the early 70s, those cartoons are harmless, have next to no social commentary. Additionally, a movie like Wall-E isn't focused solely on children, someone has to sit there with the child and watch the movie. You could say that about a lot of cartoons, even in casper there'll be some joke meant for adults, because adults have to sit through cartoons too.

I have seen many cartoons from the Thirties, Forties and Fifties and later. The earlier ones were frequently about celebrities, such as Eddie Cantor or Bing Crosby and were aimed at adults. Some of the others were quite racist. There were inane shorts such as "Steamboat willie" and others of that type, which had no propaganda that I could see. In the early Forties, there were many strictly anti-Axis shorts, but I think we can disregard them because they were so obvious.

In the latter part of the Forties and the early Fifties, cartoons were still intended for movie theaters and were strictly entertainment, especially for kids. Bugs Bunny would steal carrots from Elmer Fudd or Jerry and Tuffy would frustrate the efforts of Tom to catch and eat them or Mighty Mouse would defend other mice against evil cats. I didn't see much of a message there, except for Good triumphing over Bad, although Jerry and Tuffy would often get away with raiding the refrigerator and Bugs would succeed in stealing carrots.

There was also an anti-hunter or predator message, such as in "Bambi" or the Road Runner cartoons. (They ignored the fact that road runners are also predators.)

In the latter Fifties, we started getting made for TV cartoons, such as The Flintstones, Yogi Bear, Huckleberry Hound and some others. I didn't see much of a political message in any of them, except "Tsk tsk. Aren't men dumb!" which was a common theme during TV of the Fifties and Sixties.

I haven't seen many cartoons since then, at least not current ones. Those I have seen are so inferior to the earlier ones, that I wouldn't have many memories of them.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Kids movies are often used to promote burgeoning ideas. Bambi was an avid anti hunting movie. It was made at a time when being vegan and "animal rights" was in it's infancy. Man as a hunter was made to be a complete villain in the eyes of any child that watched that movie.

 

[Epmd607]

"Writers that came of age in the 60's also and always it seems, include poignant pricks of 'environmentalism' into every scene, both the obvious and the subtle."

Environmentalism is the new romanticism. Women can't be saved by men on horseback, but women can be wooed by the man who protects a habitat. It used to be the bohemian poet was the hero against the aristocratic man of means. Sorrows of Young W. by Goethe isn't the best example, but he represents the romantic ideal in fiction for Europeans for decades. Now instead of the tender, bohemian poet, you have the tender, schlumpy environmentalist crusader against the sterile businessman. I don't really think that the presentation of our culture in art is that indoctrinating. I'm sick of environmentalist crusaders as the heart of many movies, shows, fiction. But it's not because I don't see the value of environmentalism, it's because the new romanticism is already stale.

 

[TxRad]

Oh, and Txrad, I think you know full well that I do read and understand fully and it frightens you because my critical observation hits a little too close to home and in makes you most uncomfortable and reduces your response to one of whining.

Amicus

If you even knew what a critical observation was would surprise me. Make me uncomfortable, only in the fact that you're opinionated bullshit makes me feel sorry for someone so far out of touch with reality. You hide at home and get your "Information" from sources that are far from trustworthy much less news worthy.

This whole thread right here is a good example. To kids Wally_E is a cartoon. Most of the romance goes over their heads much less the propaganda you speak of. Like someone said, It's moire for the adults in the audience.

Your paranoia is shining through. Everything is a plot against you and what you think society should be. Well, to be blunt with you, society isn't even close to what you think it is.

Get out of your cave and turn the internet and Fox off. Go look around. It'll shock the shit out of you, I guarantee.

I don't know why I even take the time, I should put you on ignore like most everyone else but then again, why should I pass up such a good laugh.

 

[Epmd607]

The Jim Henson show Fraggle Rock is by far the best evidence of children's programming purposely presenting class warfare. It was a muppet show from the late 80's or early 90's that everyone my age adored, very musical show. The Fraggles were like the middle class, and there were working class race of characters, various owners and threats. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AF96fnozXw and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=262kfAoZmog

Still, when reading serious papers on Fraggle Rock you just end up laughing, because there's no indoctrination going on, even if Henson was trying to represent our society in a kids' puppet show. Someone mentioned Captain Planet before, I'd advise Amicus to watch an episode of that on Youtube or Hulu, you'll shit your pants. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w_TE3yuGqw

 

[amicus]

The Jim Henson show Fraggle Rock is by far the best evidence of children's programming purposely presenting class warfare. It was a muppet show from the late 80's or early 90's that everyone my age adored, very musical show. The Fraggles were like the middle class, and there were working class race of characters, various owners and threats. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AF96fnozXw and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=262kfAoZmog

Still, when reading serious papers on Fraggle Rock you just end up laughing, because there's no indoctrination going on, even if Henson was trying to represent our society in a kids' puppet show. Someone mentioned Captain Planet before, I'd advise Amicus to watch an episode of that on Youtube or Hulu, you'll shit your pants. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w_TE3yuGqw

~~~

Thank you, Empd607(?) and others, there is surprisingly more agreement on my thesis than I expected.

Also thanks for the link to the Captain Planet episode, I watched enough to get the point.

I don't really think that the presentation of our culture in art is that indoctrinating.

I harken back to the recent flap over the open admission of the National Association for the Arts for using 'art' to influence cultural trends and in this case, support plans and programs of the current administration.

Then I remind you of the Art of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany and the United States, especially the USA in 'patriotic' anti Japanese/German, pro God and Country films and cartoons of the war years of the 40's. One also cannot leave out the 'Red Scare', the McCarthy era, and how much that influenced the film industry with the 'black lists' of actors and directors having ties to Communists.

Over the internet, I talk with many young people who are infuriated that one such as I would contradict everything they learned in school, confirmed by everything they watched on television concerning environmental indoctrination and the anti industrial mentality of all their role models.

My own kids look askance at me when I state that global warming is a hoax and bad science to boot. How could everything they learned possibly be wrong?

But...as the years have tumbled on by, they begin to gain a perspective that maybe the old man wasn't all wrong, just so damned certain as to infuriate them and most here.

I have no doubt that the anti industrial propaganda is and always has been influential on a cultural level.

On a musing, philosophical note, Art is very precious to me; I smile at references in film and literature to the 'beauty of a line' that curves like a woman's thigh. I have emotional reactions to music that teases and intertwines the melody and the harmonies and the counterpoint; that contrasts the male and the female in competition as notes and chords swoop and rise and fall.

I am saddened when art is used to vilify and demean the struggle of man to overcome adversity, when a vulgar sense of life is thematic in the work.

There exists a complex interconnection between all the arts and all of reality as viewed and recreated by the artistic mind and brought forth again to uplift we lesser mortals who stare in startled amazement at the harmony and beauty of life.

One can still pursue an enjoyment of beauty and disregard the chaff that one must discard as the artist presents his wares, corrupted by the political message, it still remains art but sometimes only glimpses, dimly through the muck of indoctrination.

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

Ami, do you know of these people; http://www.artrenewal.org/ ?
They, too, fight for Light, Beauty, naked young girls and The American Way.

 

[Dragonlipz]

I used to watch children’s films as a father, to guide what my children watched. I watch them now, somewhat helplessly, as a grandfather and wonder just how much the movies influence children.

I was amused at EVA, who was quick on the trigger and lethal and poor old Wally, portrayed as the loyal and courageous, romantic but doofus foil; typical modern day feminist gender portrayals.

Then, of course, as so many scenario’s are, the terrible Corporation, B&L, Big and Large; kind of the Wal-Mart that ate the world, polluted and despoiled all of creation.

I did find it curious that the inhabitants of space ship Axiom, after 700 years of inactivity were subjected to the ‘bone loss of low gravity’, although gravity was portrayed as earth normal in the film; hey, I understand…(Any, ahm, 'overweight' peeps on the forum?)

But still, how man despoiled the earth, made it toxic and uninhabitable and how the collective, ‘we’ were supposed to return and, ‘help’ the planet to return to viability. Sighs…

I challenge you, each and every one, in every film, cartoon or children’s film you watch, to do so with a critical eye as to the messages being delivered. Hey, we’re author’s, we always have a message!

How long before this left leaning liberal arts propaganda is viewed in parody as the 50’s, ‘Leave it to Beaver’, sarcasm is rife?

But the love affair between Wall-E & Eva, was just darling…



Amicus

You are too dumb to be believed: You are too dumb to be believed; You are too dumb to be believed:
By the way, Mon Ami (Ami Bitch)]

I'm very glad that you have me on 'ignore' - it's a badge of honor for me, yes.....and a signal of your impotence........you never were that potent anyway - according to certain sources......

 

[Dragonlipz]

~~~

Thank you, Empd607(?) and others, there is surprisingly more agreement on my thesis than I expected.

Also thanks for the link to the Captain Planet episode, I watched enough to get the point.



I harken back to the recent flap over the open admission of the National Association for the Arts for using 'art' to influence cultural trends and in this case, support plans and programs of the current administration.

Then I remind you of the Art of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany and the United States, especially the USA in 'patriotic' anti Japanese/German, pro God and Country films and cartoons of the war years of the 40's. One also cannot leave out the 'Red Scare', the McCarthy era, and how much that influenced the film industry with the 'black lists' of actors and directors having ties to Communists.

Over the internet, I talk with many young people who are infuriated that one such as I would contradict everything they learned in school, confirmed by everything they watched on television concerning environmental indoctrination and the anti industrial mentality of all their role models.

My own kids look askance at me when I state that global warming is a hoax and bad science to boot. How could everything they learned possibly be wrong?

But...as the years have tumbled on by, they begin to gain a perspective that maybe the old man wasn't all wrong, just so damned certain as to infuriate them and most here.

I have no doubt that the anti industrial propaganda is and always has been influential on a cultural level.

On a musing, philosophical note, Art is very precious to me; I smile at references in film and literature to the 'beauty of a line' that curves like a woman's thigh. I have emotional reactions to music that teases and intertwines the melody and the harmonies and the counterpoint; that contrasts the male and the female in competition as notes and chords swoop and rise and fall.

I am saddened when art is used to vilify and demean the struggle of man to overcome adversity, when a vulgar sense of life is thematic in the work.

There exists a complex interconnection between all the arts and all of reality as viewed and recreated by the artistic mind and brought forth again to uplift we lesser mortals who stare in startled amazement at the harmony and beauty of life.

One can still pursue an enjoyment of beauty and disregard the chaff that one must discard as the artist presents his wares, corrupted by the political message, it still remains art but sometimes only glimpses, dimly through the muck of indoctrination.

Amicus

Blah, blah, blah.....rave on, but it's still unsubstantiated BullShit....You couldn't appreciate the 'curve of a woman's thigh if it hit ya in the chops.....'
Come clean and tell us how much ya wanna get in my time machine and go back to the mythical 50's: where all the fathers had great jobs and the mothers wore pearls to vacuum the house while the kids learned life lessons while forgetting to do their homework....
My machine can take you to that place you so often dream of.....where your desires and fantasies merge.....In Supem Glorium........

 

[Epmd607]

If your thesis was something like, "Many cartoons have anti-industry/pollution messages and pro-worker/pro-environment messages" then I think most people would agree, it's just something you can observe from watching enough cartoons since the inception of cartoons. However, the second part about nefarious indoctrination of children via cartoons isn't something I can agree with.

There is a type of cartoon that's straight up propaganda; Soviets, Chinese, and Americans have used cartoons to send messages to kids. However, those are special circumstances like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jivU-4xv7aw

Cartoon All-Stars was a cartoon that was opened by George and Barbara Bush in the early 90s, and it uses everyone's favorite Saturday morning cartoon characters for the most Soviet style propaganda you'll ever see. It's pretty disgusting and most kids hated it.

Cultural values are in cartoons, messages and themes, just like with Sesame Street or Mr. Rogers. But environmental messages are more indoctrinating coming from parents and schools. Cartoons, like most media, have a message but it's underwhelming when compared to the messages kids get from parents, teachers, peers. The message is usually: Love instead of Hate, Cooperation instead of individual effort, and somewhere down the line is protecting nature from pollution, the number one polluter being big business.

Anyone who lives in any size town or city in the Rust Belt can tell you about pollution. 20, 30, 40 years after the factories have gone dormant we're still dealing with polluted soil, water, the crumbling factory itself. The thing about factories is that the owners often went bankrupt and the structures are left to rot on the land because it's too expensive for a small town to pay for the demolition and cleanup. You ever hear of SuperFund Sites? New York has them in some pretty strange places, places you wouldn't expect to be polluted. IBM of 20 and 30 years ago is responsible for a ton of pollution in whole neighborhoods miles from the industrial center in a town near where I live. Some of these chemicals didn't even exist in the 50s, they were knowingly dumping this stuff into the mid 80s. Hudson Valley folks know what ConEd and GE have been doing up into the 90s, stuff that they thought they could get away with.

Unregulated business will pollute as much as it can instead of properly dealing and disposing of chemicals. This isn't just 1950s business and not knowing the effects of pollution, this is in the last 20 years. It's really simple, if you can squeeze out more profit you do it. Businesses don't have values, the only value is in profit and growth of profit. Some businesses don't even make that their first priority, for some it's about management making as much money as possible and the only reason to make the business profitable is so executives can continue to profit. I can name off a list of companies and executives that I think operate that way, I'm not gonna just go with the WorldComs or Jeff Skillings either. I'm talking about publicly traded companies that are widely owned by people as part of mutual funds today.

 

[xssve]

So what role does the primitive accumulation of capital play in your little universe ami - or is there such a thing there?

 

[amicus]

"...Unregulated business will pollute as much as it can instead of properly dealing and disposing of chemicals..."

~~~

That is about as relevant as saying, 'unregulated murderers and thieves will kill and steal as much as they can...'

People remain people whether they are Preachers, Businessmen, Corporate CEO's or elected officials.

That is why we have individual human rights and the delegation of those authorized to use force to protect lives and property; notice the 'property'.

Just how people/humans, began trading or bartering among each other we will never know, but we can speculate, based on human nature.

The 'free market' that most seem to hate so much, is merely an outgrowth of the exchange of goods and services between mutually consenting individuals; nothing more...

Surplus capital has been around forever, well, with some reservations concerning when Kings and Popes stole so much from the people to build their Castles and Cathedrals that the people starved.

It takes perhaps ten years from the time one plants an orchard of fruit bearing trees before they begin to produce a 'surplus' of goods in excess of the basic needs of the individual or family that tended the orchard.

I do not begrudge the owner of that productive orchard should he decide to trade his surplus for a valuable metal, such as gold or silver, and thus become, 'wealthy', in the eyes of his neighbors.

There remains the 'hijacked' religious concept of 'Usury', which involves exorbitant fees for the borrowing of wealth/funds/money, that Utopian believers still think an evil practice.

Without the ability to loan money for interest, for long or short periods of time, there would be no major construction of any sort that requires a large amount of capital to build and maintain.

It is true that government shied away from prosecuting large polluters both at the local and Federal level for economic reasons. It is a continuing philosophy of sacrificing the rights of some property owners for the benefit of the whole of society for such things as coal mining and coal and oil fired electric generating plants.

There are many the the story of a violated individual property owner seeking redress throught the courts only to be bought out by the corporate interests or the political and judicial bodies that were put in place to protect the 'individuals' property rights.

There is no perfect solution to the exchange of goods and services, just as there is no 'perfect' way to live one's life. In those aspects and all aspects, the basic fundamental value to be protected is the individual, not the collective.

Every 'Keynesian' like attempt to regulate the economy has created unforeseen consequences that have proven to be much worse than the cyclical 'boom and bust', of the natural market place, and, even worse, have limited and stifled the freedom of individual and corporate interests to seek new innovative ways to dampen the height and depth of the cycles.

It is fitting, in a way, that this post, #9,999, should be addressed to two worthy opponents.

Amicus