> From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, the people who are trained to investigate and > > understand things, > > by the best universities in the country, given lots > > of time and money to do > > so, and undiluted access to real information, and > > the people actually making > > the decisions, end up having a left-wing bias (in > > your eyes at least) > > > > Couldn't be that they are actually onto something > > could it? > > > > Andrew > > You know, that sort of left-wing self-congratulation > is the single best weapon conservatives have. Also > the most irritating trait of the left. >
Umm, I did not mean to be irritating, It was the start of a larger thought about how the right really doesn't like the media cos they don't see the need for it. You mentioned the lack of evangelical Christians in the media. They would report the Truth, not the truth. The right doesn't need the media cos its either all written in a book some bloke wrote 2000 years ago, or look, don't worry your pretty head about that stuff, just leave it to old Papa Bear to look after you, trust me, I will... The media is perhaps inherently unconservative (I hate using these stereotypes, but its all we have) because it wants information, and open criticism of the government cos that's their job. When the Lord sends his second Son down to run America, then perhaps the government wont need criticism, until the more the better. So if you want a media that spouts the Truth According to Bush then sure, perhaps this lot is a little lefty. For mine I see more of a right wing bias in the media personally, but perhaps that just me. And it depends where you look, you can find whatever you like, and take it however you feel like taking it. > One could easily reverse the question. So, those > people who have proven their abilities in the real > world by managing organizations, employing people, > creating wealth, or protecting their countries (i.e. > people in business and the military) who have to face > real responsibilities and make real decisions, not > just ace standardized tests, get put through private > schools by accomplished parents, and comment from the > sidelines on things done by others, end up having a > right-wing bias. > > Couldn't be that they are actually onto something > could it? > I never suggested that all business leaders and the military were right wing. I would not be so simplistic. > You could also ask it differently...people from those > best universities in the country are, > disproportionately, the children of the wealthy and > privileged. You liberals always talk about how people > back their class interests. So those people with > inherited (not earned) wealth and privilege tend to > support the left...maybe that should tell us > something. One person who works with me (an > immigrant) says that his objection to the left is that > it's made up of a bunch of people whose parents > succeeded in American society, then want to pull the > ladder up underneath them - through things like high taxes, >government regulation, and, in fact, the >expanded power of the government in general (which is > far more likely to be a tool of the rich against the > poor than the other way around). > Yea, I can see some truth in that angle on things. It easier to be sympathetic to others when you are comfortable. I am quite happy to pay more tax if it means better schools, hospitals, welfare etc, cos I think that makes a better society. But than I can afford to pay more tax. For some that may not be such an easy decision. But that's perhaps cos the tax system is basically stuffed, but that's another argument. However, I am not sure I am a leftist if that means being for high taxes, government regulation, and, in fact, the expanded power of the government in general. I am for appropriate taxes, necessary government regulation, and the government protecting the people against the excess of the system, be that capitalist exploitation or environmental lunacy. And for that, as it happens, one needs a free and unfettered media. And BTW, by 'best' schools, I didn't mean most expensive. I meant the places that educate people the best. I couldn't care less if you went to Yale or Hicksville High. I don't judge the quality of education by how much it costs. > You could look at specific policies, too. Wal Mart is > the best thing to happen to the American poor in my > lifetime, period. Which company is most hated by the > American left, with the possible exception of > Halliburton? Hmmm. I wonder why? Could it be > because Wal Mart, with its $39 DVD players, is just so > declasse? Just a thought. > WalMart, great saviour of the American Poor ! Halleluiah ! Praise the Checkout ! Lucky they are saving them, cos some of the monopolistic practices that these huge purchasing conglomerates wield is making plenty more of them too. Farmers get 20c in the $ on retail prices. And its getting worse. But then you need a lot of markup to pay for all that advertising, to sponsor the news shows I guess. Ahh it's a lovely vicious circle. I don't object to Capitalism. In a balanced world it's a great idea. When this world is balanced, and competition actually works as a tool that really, in a holistic sense, benefits the consumer, rather then keeping them brainwashed on cheap DVD's, I will fully support it. For now I treat it with the cautious respect it deserves. Andrew _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
