I got into a tremendous argument with a raving liberal friend of mine.
I was arguing that society as a whole has been collapsing into vulgarity and rediculousness which is the result of too much indulgence in freedom (or too much indulgence period) and that as a whole we have cheapened ourselves.
He was arguing that vulgarity was simply the detritus of time, and that overall we are doing better morally since there is less racism - no more institutionalized racism, etc.
We really didn't come to a conclusion.
Where do yall stand on this one. Is vulgarity and constant indulgence in the rediculous the a sign of moral decay, or is it simply a natural biproduct of progress?
If you don't follow what I mean by vulgarity and rediculousness recall the popularity of the gay sponge that lives in a pineapple "Spongebobsquarepants" and if you don't know what I mean by vulgarity, spend more time amongst people.
i still dont know what ur talking about
and I dont watch that lame cartoon
speaking of cartoons tho-I watched simpsons last night and it made me think of u
the family were kicked out of springfield for being too "unpatriotic" and springfield had to prove they loved America
Regarding cartoons: they are preaching to kids.
However the morals they preach, I do not accept.
Regarding vulgarity, if you keep on changing the base on which morals are judged, you will never know wether you are better off or not.
After all there are some things we should never accept. Explain that to a liberal loon.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Precisely,
I think the problem with liberals is that in their quest for "global unity" (in other words global unity under liberalism) they start to reject religion as a unifying force. How many times have you heard some arrogant lefty saying "I am spiritualistic, not religious, religions divide people." Consequently when you rely on ''autoerotic" spiritualism, and it's liberal buddy "feel good morality" both driven entirely by you and demands from you only as much as you wish to be demanded - you can change your moral base on a whim.
That show is pretty vulgar too.
And why did the Simpsons make you think of me?!- I'm not the INS
its not ALWAYS rude
sumtimes its funny
we dont watch the rude episodes-dont want baby sis to pick up bad stuff
that episode reminded me of u cos u seem very patriotic to me
lol ohh I see - so i'm gonna deport everybody.
Thanks - no really thanks.
I appreciate that.
Actually I am pretty Nationalistic.
Probably blinds me a lot of the time.
I'll add that to my list of things to improve upon.
AND YOU need to watch less vulgar television!
UK is the only country that aint that patriotic
even citizenship lessons aint been fully implemented yet
patriotic people like u make me laugh
and I DONT watch vulgar TV
simpsons aint ALWAYS vulgar
MTV is-which I need to give up-I'm always getting into trouble for watching that :oops:
I think to blame "liberals" for all of societies short comings is a bit simplistic.
There have been many "conservative" figures who've been revealed to be morally decadent like Rush Limbaugh, Christopher Hitchens and that evangelist guy who was caught with a prostitute.
Also, belief in "global unity" today is pretty much universal except among people generally labeled as extremist (David Duke) or conspiracy theorist (Lydon LaRouche). Its hardly a liberal cause.
The evangelist, you mean [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/21/newsid_2565... guy[/url]?
And there was the anti-gay mayor of Spkane who tyrned out to be gay himself. :roll:
Well I am not blaming liberals for all of societies shortcomings, certainly one can squarely blame the conservatives for the jim crowe culture of the South.
but
I think it is certainly fair to blame them for this rising self-gratification culture which stresses Individualism above community ties and leads to vulgarity and less emphasis on "old time" values.
As for Global Unity, certainly every group I can think of is all for it - however I singled out the liberals because their particular flavor undervalues the strict religious morals that break with their individualist vision.
In short, they don't feel that issues like vulgarity, sexual purity etc are important in the long run.
Yea I remember that guy... I think they did something on the Daily Show about him.
What's wrong with being patriotic?! I think it's good to feel a strong bond of loyalty with your people and culture, I just flat out like Americans.
Not all the time of course.
Don't confuse Patriotism for Nationalism - the latter is exclusive and imperialistic (I think anyway).
MTV is a waste of time.
Except for the show "Punk'd" which might be the greatest television show in the history of television.
do u sing ur national anthem every morning?
Yes, then I recite the pledge three times and declare my undying loyalty to the Bush administration.
If I have time I brush my teeth.
What you're describing as liberalism I'd describe as freemasonry and I'd say its the ideology espoused by most politicians today including George Bush and Tony Blair. They both talk in ambigious terms of freedom with reference to futurology.
I don't know enough about freemasonry to really answer to what they believe but I do know what George Bush is talking about and there is a slight difference.
The individualism George Bush is talking about is influenced by a Southern ideology that people should be allowed to live their lives individually - although not free from responsibility - and should be allowed to find a place and build ties to it as their home. It's a result of the Southern farmer-style democracy that Jefferson wanted to see.
In Texas it is further influenced as a result of Manifest Destiny - a kind of belief that America was meant to rule the continent, and when that looked like it was being achieved (manifest) in Texas - usually by Southern colonists, the ideologies were mixed into this idea that there are always new horizons waiting to be conquered and that an individual - when left completely free - will find their maximum potential. Furthermore - and this is very important - there is still an emphasis on social ties. Whereas the original ideology was live your own life - but we agree to all come together to work on this... that farmer communal mentality - the new ideology stressed that there are still ties but they are more ethereal - ties to "the culture" ties to "the nation." Naturally as a pioneer went further away from society his ties to society became weaker - but as a pioneer on the mission of the people to settle and colonize land and realize an american dream they felt very connected to the people back home.
And THATS what GWB is talking about.
Liberals on the other hand reject those sentaments - especially ones influenced by manifest destiny as imperialistic and a stumbling block on the road to unity.
Leaving them with ungoverned self loyalty in the pursuit of global unity.
Seems like apples and pears to me.
Blair and Bush propagate the same worldview as far as I can tell.
Minor differences in language don't really change this.
If you ask me society is becoming more and more morally degenrate. Instead of evolving to a state where we try and better ourself we're doing the reverse.
Back in BLACK
vulgarity has always been around it exhibits a baseness of human character we can all degenerate to time to time
it can be yucky and make you sick or can be funny at times and outrageous
some of us are more drawn to it then others. IMO vulgarity likes to shock but instead it just sickens
bawdyness and vulgar are seperate things
i would class Simpsons etc as just a bit cheeky. spongebob as naughty and perhaps a little vulgar, south park as vulgar but funny our black adder series for example was bawdy
i'm as left as you can get but my morals are intact and i try to avoid the vulgar. we lefties just want to live and let live and will find reasons for others behaviour before we would dream of condemning
erm.....wats wrong with spongebob square pants???
The Lover is ever drunk with love;
He is free, he is mad,
He dances with ecstasy and delight.
Caught by our own thoughts,
We worry about every little thing,
But once we get drunk on that love,
Whatever will be, will be.
ɐɥɐɥ
Apart from the fact he is gay?
comeone they are preaching to three years olds that its an acceptable way of life!
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
hes gay? :shock:
i never noticed it!!! and ive watched a few :oops:
The Lover is ever drunk with love;
He is free, he is mad,
He dances with ecstasy and delight.
Caught by our own thoughts,
We worry about every little thing,
But once we get drunk on that love,
Whatever will be, will be.
ɐɥɐɥ
According to American conser-wackos he is gay.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4190699.stm
It's like saying that Tinky-Winky is gay.
hehe spongebob square pants is probs the most pathetic cartoon on this earth, just the name is enough to put you off, no offense...my fav. is tom and jerry
I've never picked that up either.
I dont watch that programme cos its stupid.
Two years ago I remember doing a presentation in Uni, in some popular culture module arguing that Teletebubbies was gay....it was based on someones report in some journal.
Some people read too much into stuff.
deleted
lol it's not hard to read into Spongebob - he's pretty overt.
My biggest complaint about him, believe it or not, isn't that he has a questionable sexual orientation, but rather that as the admin pointed out children are impressionable and they DO learn morals from TV - a sad but I think realistic situation. Given that shows like Spongebobsquarepants, Ren and Stimpy etc are moral vacuums that teach kids it's okay to be hyperactive undisciplined lunatics.
And it's not just kids.
Young adult's are also regressively embracing the nonsense http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3906687.stm either for attention or a lack of interest in responsibility.
The only morals people seem to be deriving from Spongebob are:
"simple things like having fun and using your imagination"
Now I am all for having fun and using my imagination, but there is a point that even I don't cross. We cannot live in the vacuous trippy undersea pineapple playground Nickelodeon execs have constructed for us.
It's just too much.
Dude... seriously... it's the running joke on college campi - it's so obvious.
Just watch him sometime
Not too mention all the american sexual slang that they cleverly work into the show.
In all fairness the absurdity of television has not yet reach japanese purportions:
http://media4.big-boys.com/content/japtvhead.wmv
I cannot speak for Blair but the worldview of Bush is very much different than the unfettered individualism of American Liberals.
I guess the better way to describe it is that the close people lived together in this country the more emphasis was placed on community. Thus Northerners especially in NE during the early years of the republic had a greater concentration on Community over Individual, due to their large cities where they all lived close to each other - than Southerners who lived further apart on farms. Community ties became even less important to the Pioneers of the American West because they lived even further apart. - But it was still there, it simply morphed into a cultural unity, where one could be an individual but still had to accept social and cultural norms tied to the identity of the people.
US social liberals reject all such community bonds as nationalist and backwards - or at least believe they are inferior to individualism.
Bush is speaking a totally different language derived from a totally different experience than radical social leftists like Sen. Hilary Clinton.
I actually doubt that Bush has any kind of "worldview" considering he'd never left the country before his presidency.
I was talking in very general terms.
What I meant was that most world leaders today promote global governance, democracy, feminism and secularism.
Bush may not be explicitly supporting all of the above but he doesn't really challenge them in any significant way. Like I've said before I don't believe he really has any influence over American policy to start with. So what he personally believes is pretty irrelevant.
Pages