RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UT"The only difference between
Socialism and Fascism is that under socialism the government both owns and
controls the means of production. Under Fascism ownership is still retained in
private hand, while control is maintained by the government."========= Then Germany, France, England, Canada, Spain, Italy,
Japan, South Korea et. al are not Socialist but Fascist?!Then, I expect you to stop using them as examples of Socialism and kindly refer to
them from now on as being Fascist States from now on...Good Luck
with that Red...
I know? Social Engineering?
There has never been a libertarian dictatorship. Just sayin'.
Clearly, reddy has no idea what fascism is.Look at Panem. Is there any attempt to have a classless society? Absolutely not. Some
districts are the one percenters. They control everything. While the rest of the
99 percent live in poverty.Is universal health care present? Nope.
It's the right wing version of health care (pre Obamacare) If you can pay
for it... Or have a mother who knows some basic first aid, then you'll
live. If not, you're dead.President Snow's entire regime
is homogenous. That's just like today's GOP. The left embraces
diversity the right rejects it.The EPA and unions are non-existent.
Resources are being exploited and workers aren't protected. It's a tea
party paradise.The police are brutal. They have restricted freedom,
just like Bush and Cheney did with the patriot act.The districts are
fed propaganda by Ceasar. He's the Rush/Ann Coulter of Panem. Propaganda is
a common trait of right wing regimes.The games themselves are
designed to show strength in the tradition of the state. It reminds citizens of
the past. The left works for progress while the right hinders it.
...because that's what you want to see in it.
"Please name the right wing totalitarian government." I
did, I gave you Pinochet, head of a rightwing military junta that overthrew a
democratically elected leftist president, murdered thousands of dissidents,
locked up thousands more, and ruled with an iron fist. Oh, and he directly
implemented Milton Friedman's Chicago School of neoliberal, freemarket
economic theory. "Under Pinochet, capitalism didn't really
do that well."No, they call only it the 'Miracle of
Chile' because of its economic growth, which was fantastic. Other than the
massive inequality it generated. And the whole totalitarian dictator thing.
Try calling economic neo-liberalism 'socialism'!"[T]he
Tea Party is opposed to fascism since fascism is SOCIALISM."We've had this conversation about fascism versus socialism before, and
it's not worth my time convincing you otherwise. But I want to point out
to any readers of this that you're completely wrong to conflate the two,
and the notion that you understand what you're talking about as you wildly
fling these words around loses you massive credibility in the process.
@RedShirt"Under Fascism ownership is still retained in private hand,
while control is maintained by the government."Exactly,
there's another term for that particular brand, corporatism. Opposition to
anything that trends that way is why liberals have all those freakouts over
things like Citizens United, the Koch brothers, and big money being too
influential in politics.
Sorry, but the Hunger Games Universe doesn't look anything like a liberal
democracy, where the market is free but not exploitative. To me, it looks like a
colonialist empire with a few exploiters at the top and an exploited majority...
a picture that is very far from liberal democracy.
- - - LiberalThen all I can say is that you miss out on a lot. Even
though I am conservative, I'm frequently disappointed at DNs news coverage
on a range of issues. I struggle to find stories that should be front and
center, only to discover them way down the list, or not mentioned at all. And
PBS is well known for liberal leanings. As for Al Jazeer being unbiased? That
once again says a lot about you. Your the one in a bubble of limited
information, and thanks for admitting so, even if you didn't realize it.
To "Wonder" I didn't say it was a textbook definition of socialism,
but it is a form of socialism. The only difference between Socialism and
Fascism is that under socialism the government both owns and controls the means
of production. Under Fascism ownership is still retained in private hand, while
control is maintained by the government.I hate to tell you, but drug
abuse rate is about the same between rural and urban kids, but the urban kids
start at a younger age.As for unemployment data from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, except for 6 months in 2013, rural areas have lower
unemployment rates.Please try again after you find some data.To "LDS Liberal" yes, LDS members do live outside of Utah, and a
majority of them do vote conservative, and even more identify with Republicans.
See "Mormons in America: Certain in Their Beliefs, Uncertain of Their Place
in Society" at Pew where they found 66% of LDS members (throughout the US)
consider themselves conservative and 74%. That isn't just for Utah, that
is for the US.You will not like that fact, but the fact is that most
LDS are conservative and support Republicans.
@RedShirt -- Name one "collectivist" policy that has been stopped (or
started for that matter) under Obama. Also, by textbook definition, fascism is
not socialism, but if that's what you want to think, go right ahead.
Finally, you bemoan the liberal cities, but you could, if you were honest, also
bemoan the conservative rural areas with their high unemployment and shocking
rates of meth use. Why do so many rural young people flounder with poverty and
drug use? Must be the conservative ideology at work causing these social
@SCfan@clearfield, UT- - - liberalJust who do you listen
to for info? Name names. 7:36 a.m. Aug. 20, 2014[Honestly?! Read the DN comments. It should be obvious that my news source is
99% the Deseret News, with an occasional KSL-TV. But, IMHO - I think PBS and Al
Jazeer America are the best International and least biased news sources.]========= RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UTTo
"LDS Liberal" lets look at it this way, so few LDS identify as liberal
--- IN Utah?8:57 a.m. Aug. 20, 2014[To
"RedShirt" let me put it to you this way, why do so few LDS identify as
liberal? Most LDS do not live in Utah, Most LDS are not
American, therfore -- Most LDS are not Utah Republicans.Your bubble, Your world.]
To "KJB1" did you also notice that the DOW has been doing better since
Obama's collectivist policies have been slowed down or stopped?
Interesting isn't it.To "Unreconstructed Reb" unless
your idea of left wing and right wing is communist to fascist, you are wrong.
Please name the right wing totalitarian government. I would bet that if you
could name one, the government is at best fascist, which is still socialist and
collectivist in nature. Under Pinochet, capitalism didn't really do that
well. However, since they got rid of their dictatorship and embraced freedom
their economy has boomed.To "The Real Maverick" you do
realize that the Tea Party is opposed to fascism since fascism is SOCIALISM.To "LDS Liberal" lets look at it this way, why do so few LDS
identify as liberal? Could it be that the LDS emphasis on individualism
counteracts the public school indoctrination into collectivism? If liberalism
is so great, why is it that where liberalism has dominated for decades the
cities are crime ridden and falling apart, at the same time conservative
dominated areas have less reported crime?
Well how much of this is actually the fiction being popular and how much of it
is just some people seeing politics in everything? - agree with that
- - - liberalAnd IF that is true about gen Y, just how long do you
think that will last when they grow up and see the real world? Everyone starts
out a little liberal. Most become more conservative as real world
responsibility hits home. Plus, you always seem to want to criticize Limbaugh
or others. Just who do you listen to for info? Name names. And I will laugh
if you say someone like Ed Shultz, or Chris Matthews. They are pathetic with
about 10% of the audience of people like Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Prager,
Hannity, Beck, Medved, Hewitt, and of course Limbaugh.
young adult books are political because young adults are impressionable, and
Funny thing is about these so called political message movies. One can take
away whatever ones wants. I mean, if your a liberal, you can look at big
corporations as the dystopian threat. Conservatives can look at the big
government as such. And in context of who has been President for the last 6
years, one could draw conclusions that the film makers don't want. I doubt
many young people draw any life changing conclusions, they just want to be
entertained. By the way. Things like Brave New World, 1984, Farenheit 451, all
warn me of the dangers of big government. And even when big government and big
business get closely aligned, it is easy to asign blame on both right and left
principles as the cause.
@RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UTTo "LDS Liberal" actually,
the Generation Y crowd has watched as liberal politics destroys city after city,
and does not raise the poor but only makes the middleclass poor, and the
politically connected get more wealth and power. In other words, Generation Y
sees the failure of liberalism, 1:23 p.m. Aug. 19, 2014======= Ah, now I get it, That must explains why generation
"Y" rejects Republicans and votes Liberal by a factor of 4 to 1...I see
Red, right...whatever Limbaugh and Beck tell you....
No readers in the bunch? In the book, both sides are guilty. The book indicts
both the left and the right. The movie continues on the same theme, so that
each side can view the movie from their own point of view. Sadly, most of these
movies propose only violence as a solution. So, Hunger games blames both sides
and revels in the violence that they say will follow. History while full of bad
examples also has some great examples of people choosing peace through self
sacrifice, just consider George Washington not seeking a third term as
Hogwash.Hunger Games isn't a communist regime. It's what
the fascist tea party desires. Panem is a fascist state. There's absolutely
no attempt to equalize the classless into a classless society. Quite the
opposite. If you wanted to use tea party rhetoric, districts 1-3 are job
creators. They're the educated ones. Meanwhile, the other districts are
welfare queens. They rely on the guidance of the tea party. The
bottom line is, political books and movies have been popular since forever.Even the Book of Mormon becomes quite political with kings being
replaced by judges and judges being dethroned by king men (tea party 1
percenters).If it sells well they'll continue to make political
books. What the right appears to desire is for government to deny the free
market trading of books. Yet another sign of fascism.
Redshirt, the considerable number of transnational corporations which have
thrived operating under right-wing totalitarian regimes (many of them putative
allies of the US in during the Cold War and beyond) belie your argument.
Capitalism can do just fine under a dictatorship - see Chile under Pinochet,
Taiwan under the KMT, South Korea from 1961-1987, and the latter half of
Francoist Spain for examples.Government control of
production/distribution of goods is not the very definition socialism except in
the minds of those whose reductionist understanding of political and economic
theory is based on the John Birch Society. The author of Hunger Games has
explicitly denied linking Panem to a specific economic philosophy. You, of
course, are free to read into it what you will, but you're overlooking the
central theme of the trilogy, which has nothing to do with leftwing/rightwing
RedShirt:Have you seen where the Dow closed at today? If those durn
liberals are trying to undermine "freedom and capitalism", they're
doing a horrible job at it.
To "Unreconstructed Reb" if you look at the role the government in the
Hunger Games books, it is communist at worst and socialist at best. The
government controls the means of production and distribution of goods. It
represents the very definition of Socialist.The interesting thing is
that you cannot have a totalitarian government if you have the free market and
capitalism operating. Just something to think about.
"The Hunger Games to me represents a Communist society at its worst and
politically aligns itself with the current far left ideology of today."Hogwash. The books are intentionally ambiguous about the exact social
and economic structures of their world, and a case can just as easily be made
that Panem represents a rightwing imperialist regime where the raw goods and
materials of the enslaved outer colonies are extracted for the benefit of the
wealthy minority. Hunger Games is about the struggle against
totalitarianism. Totalitarianism is politically neutral on its face. History
is replete with examples of totalitarianism from both the far right or far left.
The view that totalitarian rule is inherently a feature of one or the other,
but not both, evinces a fundamental lack of political understanding or
perspective. Accusing those who disagree with your politics of desiring
totalitarianism demonstrates the same.
"This generation - Generation Y - has watched the rich get insanely
richer, and poor getting poorer their entire lives."Look
up a graph in the average income of the lowest quintile (the "poor")
from 1980 to the present -- roughly the lifespan of Generation Y -- and then see
if you want to reword that statement.Short version: The poor
aren't getting poorer. They're not getting much richer, but
they're not getting poorer.
"People carp about the high corporate tax rate in the US compared to other
countries. What they dont do is look at the effective tax rate for
comparison."Even the *effective* tax rate is unusually high.
"When you have a society [in which] General Electric gets away without
paying any taxes on their profits...."I would change to
"When you have a society in which public discourse is dominated by
celebrities who have no clue about the policies they wade into debate
about..."GE pays taxes on their profits. Profits, however, are
not a one-year-only thing. A company that is profitable one year, then loses
the same amount of money the next, has a net profit of zero. Obviously, if you
taxed that company on its profits (but did not refund negative taxes on the
loss), the company would quickly disappear. Since everybody but communists
understands that companies are, on balance, useful things to have around (since
we like (a) jobs and (b) things to buy with the earnings from them), there is a
provision in virtually every country's tax laws that allow a company to
"carry forward" its losses for a few years, offsetting them against its
subsequent profits, so that only when a company actually realizes income does it
pay income tax.
"then you have a society [in which] General Electric gets away without
paying any taxes on their profits"Funny to me that the only big
corporation that those on the right finds fault with is GE. I also
think it is sad that a corporation like GE can skirt taxes. But, they are not
the only one. People carp about the high corporate tax rate in the
US compared to other countries. What they dont do is look at the effective tax
rate for comparison.(except under Reagan, then they bleat about how
no one was paying those high rates)
Patriot, it's virtually impossible to "miss" the ostensible message
of The Hunger Games. Subtle it ain't. I hate to burst your bubble, but you
aren't operating on a higher plane of comprehension. Our difference is how
seriously we take said message.You know what "reaction"
Lionsgate (not "Hollywood") wanted, and got? $1.5 billion in box-office
and counting. Too-strident-by-half pronouncements about our "Orweillian"
society today become impossible to take seriously when you point to a couple of
popcorn movies as evidence.The world where The Hunger Games is an
effective tool for political indoctrination is as fictional as the world its
characters inhabit. This is professional populist entertainment; nothing less,
nothing more. But, by all means continue, as one of the most entertaining side
effects of any movie with a supposed political message is watching the far right
twist themselves into knots in protest. Queue the hysterical shrieks of
"Liberal, Godless Hollywood!" I never can get enough of that.
"Well how much of this is actually the fiction being popular "I meant to say political, not popular. Whoops.
@patriot"Somehow you missed that? "Probably because as
a lefty-liberal almost-socialist I support things like universal healthcare and
consider wealth inequality to be a major problem. There's very little
that's similar between the Capital in the Hunger Games and my political
ideology. Which is not to suggest that the Capital is like your ideology either.
There's perhaps a piece or two from both sides but otherwise it's just
an extreme fascist state.
But this isn't anything new. We have seen this throughout cinema.Who has seen Logan's Run, The Last Run, Star Wars, and Planet of the Apes
(Heston version)? Those are some of the dystopian movies that I could think of
off hand that are quite old yet contain the same message. An all controlling
government is bad and ends up enslaving and destroying its people.This is not something new, the youth have always been fearful of the all
powerful government. The ironic thing is that often they are the pawns of
collectivists that will implement the all powerful government.To
"LDS Liberal" actually, the Generation Y crowd has watched as liberal
politics destroys city after city, and does not raise the poor but only makes
the middleclass poor, and the politically connected get more wealth and power.
In other words, Generation Y sees the failure of liberalism, but doesn't
know what to do because they have been taught that freedom and capitalism are
re: WabbitSeasonLike talk radio stations or cable news analysis
Because it's easy to have polarizing characters that people can easily
re:SchneeSorry guy but I only watch maybe one movie a year so I
certainly don't "see" politics in everything HOWEVER when a movie
like the Hunger Games comes out even the casual observer can't help see the
parallels to the "Orwellian" society we live in today. Somehow you
missed that? Perhaps a reading of the book "1984" would help ...at least
open your eyes a bit to the message of the Hunger Games.
The reason?Quite simply -- This generation - Generation Y -
has watched the rich get insanely richer, and poor getting poorer
their entire lives.These movies are a grim self-fullfilling prophesy
of the direction our world is going.FYI -- It's no
different than what happened to the Jaredites, Nephites, Egytians, Greeks,Romans, snd Nazis.It had
nothing to do with SameSex marriage, or alcohol -- and EVERYTHING to do
with the un-fair distribution of the wealth, and how they treated the
poor, sick, the young and the elderly...i.e., "the least of
A lot of children's literature has been political in nature. Ayn Rand, for
Well how much of this is actually the fiction being popular and how much of it
is just some people seeing politics in everything? It expands to everything else
as well. People say the Lego Movie is anti-capitalist, or that Frozen is
pro-gay, others..."The Hunger Games to me represents a Communist
society at its worst and politically aligns itself with the current far left
ideology of today."say things like that.
Hollywood is far left politically so naturally they color their movie scripts
with all sorts of leftist propaganda from global warming to a socialist godless
society. The last movie I watched - and really liked - was Lone Survivor.
Probably the only movie I will watch for the entire year. The rest are just too
predictable and too political and raunchy morally. *I will say I
think they blew it with the Hunger Games. The Hunger Games sort of back fires on
the leftist agenda showing what a far left society could look like. I doubt
Hollywood wanted that reaction.
The Hunger Games. Both times my wife and I have watched these movies we come
away saying the same things - there is a stark parallel to the direction the
United States is headed today and the Big Brother government that president Snow
has established in the Hunger Games. Of course this is Hollywood and not to be
taken too serious but it does strike a nerve or two. Consider the following in
the Hunger games...*the complete politically correct society they
live in. No one dare state the obvious ...at least not in public. *the
giant all-powerful federal government with zero rights give to the people*the rich fat cats who live at the top compared to the poverty amoung everyone
else*the constant spying by the federal government and the parinoia by the
peopleYou can't watch these movies without feeling queezy about
the state of the union today. I almost feel like I am watching the future of
America in about 75 years. The Hunger Games to me represents a
Communist society at its worst and politically aligns itself with the current
far left ideology of today.
Re: ""When you have a society [in which] General Electric gets away
without paying any taxes on their profits, and where [the government] has the
gall to take $15 billion of food stamps away . . . ."You mean
Hollywood believes Hunger Games is about a corporatist dystopia?Hmmmmmm.Sure smells like a much more common, much more likely
Orwellian leftist dystopia, to me.
The more our government (with either political party in power) meddles and
micromanages every part of our lives, the more we will see books and movies
dealing with governments that micromanage people's lives.