Wednesday, June 15, 2005

I'm not a fascist.

Boycotts are apparently OK for liberal causes, but if Christians engage in one, it's a new Blacklist. Pardon me?

I thought that Hollywood was engaged in business, which means that you're supposed to pay attention to what your customers want. Unfortunately, a lot of the current crop of Hollywood types see themselves much like journalists--somehow appointed to decide what kind of entertainment the rest of us should have. Of course, that means sex, profanity, violence, liberal politics and more sex. When a significant group of the audience tells the sponsors of television shows they don't like the shows they're underwriting, and the sponsors withdraw support--Yikes! It's McCarthy all over again! The Constitution is threatened! Christians, or, in the newest dismissive name, "Christers" are the new Fascists! (Or is that Fascisters?)

Of course, since broadcast television depends upon people inviting you into their homes, maybe you don't want to behave in such a way that they show you the door. The response of the networks has been the old tried and true formula: more sex and sleaze.

A lot of people I know are either eliminating TV from their homes or severely limiting it. With kids at home, I think they may be right. I like television. I watch the History Channel and the Science Channel with Brit Hume every day. I also like sports. But I notice that there's a kind of inertia involved once you turn the set on. As a friend of mine used to say, "I like sports programming and crime shows . . . but when I'm tired, I'll watch anything." Boredom and tiredness leads us to "see what's on" rather than doing something that requires thought. Hey, it made Johnny Carson a showbiz legend!

But people are starting to catch on. They like TV but not this trend. They see it as a form of indoctrination of their children contrary to what they're trying to teach them. If they choose to take it out on sponsors, it's their right to do so, just as it was the right of Hollywood types in the 70s to boycott table grapes to show solidarity with Cesar Chavez' union. Calling them Fascists will not bring them back.

James Lileks also notes the use of the F word:
“Religious fascism.”

One of the mantras you hear invoked from time to time is “words mean something.” But they obviously don’t. When intelligent men can make such a specious observation you realize that “fascism” has ceased to mean anything at all, and exists now as an all-purpose slur, a tar-soaked brush to slap on anything you don’t like. Whether the Soup Nazi actually believes in exterminating the Jews and bending the nation towards race-based collectivism and militarism is irrelevant; what matters is that he doesn’t want to give you some of that yummy chowder.
Read the whole thing. As James says, words should mean something. In the case of Kaplan and "Fascist," it means the speaker is dishonest.


Post a Comment

<< Home