8 ms·

What Happens When a State Is Run by Movie Stars?

57 points by fractalb 11y ago

kenjackson 11y ago
I 100% thought this was going to be a conservative hit piece about Hollywood/California. tl;dr: it's not.
- protomyth 11y ago
  In the New York Times?
  - jerf 11y ago
    Well, there's a much quieter but also storied history of West Coast vs. East Coast rivalries. Even computer science had its own rivalries, before the Internet effectively erased the geographical distinction for most such purposes.
    - mindslight 11y ago
      The Internet has not erased the distinction that one region gets snow and therefore tends to plan ahead.
- patzerhacker 11y ago
  That's unlikely given that Saint Reagan was a movie star.
  - slayed0 11y ago
    As was Schwarzenegger
    - gyc 11y ago
      Once again. It's the New York Times.
    - mindslight 11y ago
      As is every political candidate. Tailored personas meant to attract our hopes and dreams for sanity. When they lose, it's as a hero and we tell ourselves that we supported the good fight. When they win and inevitably disappoint (being just public relations for the status quo), they're demonized as the villain to contain and channel outrage into support for the next round of a manufactured rivalry.
- briandear 11y ago
  What do you mean "conservative hit piece?" Would you have used the term "liberal hit piece"!if the publication were Motherjones or MSNBC? Your comment reveals a lack of objectivity.
  - devindotcom 11y ago
    Given that California is generally considered one of the most liberal in the nation, and that the headline (or how he imagined it) is critical of the state in question, it's actually a very reasonable suspicion. Your assumption that he would not use a comparable term for the opposite situation, say "a liberal hit piece about Texas" in fact reveals a much more obvious lack of objectivity.
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    The publication doesn't even have to be taken into account. The movie stars bit of the title makes one think California, and the 'what happens' gives a slight negative implication when combined with movie stars (at least that was my initial perception). Thus the title appeared to be casting California in a negative light. Being California leans liberal, a negative article reviewing the state would likely have a conservative lean to it. Thus the description can lead to the assumption without even needing to see the source of the article.
    - mc32 11y ago
      There are at least two California's, the liberal one we all see and live in on the coast and the more agricultural and conservative interior which we don't hear about so much.
      - thrownaway2424 11y ago
        ... because nobody lives there.
        mc32 11y ago
        Nah... I think it's more because they don't have much access to media. They are a sizable portion of the pop. But like most minorities, they are underrepresented in popular culture and zeitgeist. For most intents and purposes they are a "forgotten backwater".
rebootthesystem 11y ago
> Karunanidhi promised free televisions for all. He won, and a freebie arms race commenced. Since Jayalalithaa resumed office in 2011, she has given away or heavily subsidized laptops, saris, fans, rice, cows, goats, food processors and bicycles, and branded all of it with her face and the name Amma I know this is going to be downvoted to hell and back, but that's OK, somebody has to say these things so you kids learn to think for yourselves rather than be captive to the indoctrination you were subjected to in school. That, the quote above, is the left wing's preferred approach to amassing votes everywhere in the world. From Argentina through the US and on to India. Give shit away to buy votes. In places like Argentina and India it migt have taken the form of blenders and bikes. In places like the US it feels a bit more sophisticated but it is the same thing: pander to unions and minorities. And, just like in India and Argentina, the masses respond with votes. Once in office the politicians drop their "little people" supporters on their heads and proceed to enrich themselves. The right wing has it's own set of issues, including seeing everything through the eyes of religious fanaticism of varying degrees. Which easily buys the votes of the religious masses. Politics is such a mess. It is probably one of the lowest forms of the human condition. It causes those in the game to have to devolve into despicable beings for the all-mighty vote. Sick. Think Libertarian. Wake Up!
- CoffeeDregs 11y ago
  Nancy Kress wrote Beggars in Spain to explore nearly this exact topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggars_in_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggars_in_Spain In the book, the upperclass controls all capital and productivity and, literally and directly, buys the votes necessary to stay in office. That, the quote above, is the left wing's preferred approach to amassing votes everywhere in the world. I happen to agree with much of what you say, but it's not just the left wing. See Medicare Part D (http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/01/medicare-part-b-tea-party-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/01/medicare-part-b-tea-party-o...)...
  - rebootthesystem 11y ago
    Well, buying votes is the nature of politics. I happen to think that the left is far more despicable than the right because they claim to be for the little guys and the poor, use and abuse them for votes and then toss them aside until the next election. What's incomprehensible is that the masses keep getting duped and and the come back with more votes. And, BTW, I am not only pointing the finger at the US political system. This is true almost everywhere. The particularly nasty examples are in most of Latin America, where the ruling parties (all leftists, socialists) play the masses like finely tuned violins, keep getting voted into office and all the get in return is more misery. Every single politician walks away rich, entitled, protected from legal repercussions. Talk about the 1 percent. Despicable.
spiritplumber 11y ago
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3703 http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3703 Possibly related.
sremani 11y ago
The movie-star to politics transition pretty much is run from late 60s and mid 80s. The two storied legends are MGR in Tamil Nadu and NTR in Andhra Pradesh. J. Jayalalitha was protege of MGR and she took over after a internal struggle after MGR's death. The present day India does have its movie-star to Politican transition most of them are topped off at the most as MPs or MLAs, many tried but nobody ever reached the zenith like MGR, Jayalalitha and NTR. Movie stars in India esp. South tend to be super duper populists and when Movies were the only medium of entertainment (they still are primary) they wear their movie character out into the real world when they transform into Politicians. The results are mediocre, but this transition brought a Personality Cult or should I say exaggerated that mentality, pretty much each politician in India who is running for Chief Minster or Prime Minister runs as if they are the "Savior" who will turn the 70 years mis-rule on the head.

57 points by fractalb 11y ago

kenjackson 11y ago

I 100% thought this was going to be a conservative hit piece about Hollywood/California. tl;dr: it's not.

protomyth 11y ago
In the New York Times?
- jerf 11y ago
  Well, there's a much quieter but also storied history of West Coast vs. East Coast rivalries. Even computer science had its own rivalries, before the Internet effectively erased the geographical distinction for most such purposes.
  - mindslight 11y ago
    The Internet has not erased the distinction that one region gets snow and therefore tends to plan ahead.
patzerhacker 11y ago
That's unlikely given that Saint Reagan was a movie star.
- slayed0 11y ago
  As was Schwarzenegger
  - gyc 11y ago
    Once again. It's the New York Times.
  - mindslight 11y ago
    As is every political candidate. Tailored personas meant to attract our hopes and dreams for sanity. When they lose, it's as a hero and we tell ourselves that we supported the good fight. When they win and inevitably disappoint (being just public relations for the status quo), they're demonized as the villain to contain and channel outrage into support for the next round of a manufactured rivalry.
briandear 11y ago
What do you mean "conservative hit piece?" Would you have used the term "liberal hit piece"!if the publication were Motherjones or MSNBC? Your comment reveals a lack of objectivity.
- devindotcom 11y ago
  Given that California is generally considered one of the most liberal in the nation, and that the headline (or how he imagined it) is critical of the state in question, it's actually a very reasonable suspicion. Your assumption that he would not use a comparable term for the opposite situation, say "a liberal hit piece about Texas" in fact reveals a much more obvious lack of objectivity.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  The publication doesn't even have to be taken into account. The movie stars bit of the title makes one think California, and the 'what happens' gives a slight negative implication when combined with movie stars (at least that was my initial perception). Thus the title appeared to be casting California in a negative light. Being California leans liberal, a negative article reviewing the state would likely have a conservative lean to it. Thus the description can lead to the assumption without even needing to see the source of the article.
  - mc32 11y ago
    There are at least two California's, the liberal one we all see and live in on the coast and the more agricultural and conservative interior which we don't hear about so much.
    - thrownaway2424 11y ago
      ... because nobody lives there.
      - mc32 11y ago
        Nah... I think it's more because they don't have much access to media. They are a sizable portion of the pop. But like most minorities, they are underrepresented in popular culture and zeitgeist. For most intents and purposes they are a "forgotten backwater".

rebootthesystem 11y ago

> Karunanidhi promised free televisions for all. He won, and a freebie arms race commenced. Since Jayalalithaa resumed office in 2011, she has given away or heavily subsidized laptops, saris, fans, rice, cows, goats, food processors and bicycles, and branded all of it with her face and the name Amma I know this is going to be downvoted to hell and back, but that's OK, somebody has to say these things so you kids learn to think for yourselves rather than be captive to the indoctrination you were subjected to in school. That, the quote above, is the left wing's preferred approach to amassing votes everywhere in the world. From Argentina through the US and on to India. Give shit away to buy votes. In places like Argentina and India it migt have taken the form of blenders and bikes. In places like the US it feels a bit more sophisticated but it is the same thing: pander to unions and minorities. And, just like in India and Argentina, the masses respond with votes. Once in office the politicians drop their "little people" supporters on their heads and proceed to enrich themselves. The right wing has it's own set of issues, including seeing everything through the eyes of religious fanaticism of varying degrees. Which easily buys the votes of the religious masses. Politics is such a mess. It is probably one of the lowest forms of the human condition. It causes those in the game to have to devolve into despicable beings for the all-mighty vote. Sick. Think Libertarian. Wake Up!

CoffeeDregs 11y ago
Nancy Kress wrote Beggars in Spain to explore nearly this exact topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggars_in_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beggars_in_Spain In the book, the upperclass controls all capital and productivity and, literally and directly, buys the votes necessary to stay in office. That, the quote above, is the left wing's preferred approach to amassing votes everywhere in the world. I happen to agree with much of what you say, but it's not just the left wing. See Medicare Part D (http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/01/medicare-part-b-tea-party-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/01/medicare-part-b-tea-party-o...)...
- rebootthesystem 11y ago
  Well, buying votes is the nature of politics. I happen to think that the left is far more despicable than the right because they claim to be for the little guys and the poor, use and abuse them for votes and then toss them aside until the next election. What's incomprehensible is that the masses keep getting duped and and the come back with more votes. And, BTW, I am not only pointing the finger at the US political system. This is true almost everywhere. The particularly nasty examples are in most of Latin America, where the ruling parties (all leftists, socialists) play the masses like finely tuned violins, keep getting voted into office and all the get in return is more misery. Every single politician walks away rich, entitled, protected from legal repercussions. Talk about the 1 percent. Despicable.

spiritplumber 11y ago

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3703 http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3703 Possibly related.

sremani 11y ago

The movie-star to politics transition pretty much is run from late 60s and mid 80s. The two storied legends are MGR in Tamil Nadu and NTR in Andhra Pradesh. J. Jayalalitha was protege of MGR and she took over after a internal struggle after MGR's death. The present day India does have its movie-star to Politican transition most of them are topped off at the most as MPs or MLAs, many tried but nobody ever reached the zenith like MGR, Jayalalitha and NTR. Movie stars in India esp. South tend to be super duper populists and when Movies were the only medium of entertainment (they still are primary) they wear their movie character out into the real world when they transform into Politicians. The results are mediocre, but this transition brought a Personality Cult or should I say exaggerated that mentality, pretty much each politician in India who is running for Chief Minster or Prime Minister runs as if they are the "Savior" who will turn the 70 years mis-rule on the head.