Right wing commentary on world politics from a man on a mission to prove that Conservatism transcends national boundaries. Thoughtful comments from people of all political persuasions are welcome and encouraged. Contact the blogger at elephantman.conservaglobe@gmail.com.

Friday, August 25, 2006

"Survivor" Plays the Race Card

I am addicted to "Survivor". I really couldn't care less about the girls in bathing suits and I think that it is tacky that there are always one or two professional models on the show (if they want eye candy, fine, but there are plenty of attractive people in other professions), I watch because I think it is a great sociological experiment. It puts contestants under an amazing amount of mental and physical stress, which means that their true colors always show. At its core, "Survivor" is a show about the true nature of what it means to be human. Of course, there is a new plot twist every season to help ratings, create more stress on players, and explore a new portion of the human psyche. This next season (the 13th) is going to be about ethno-cultural relations (I hate the word "race", we're all human), and the tribes are divided by ethnic group.

Now, I think this is a wonderful social experiment and will create some of the most interesting inter-personal dynamics in Survivor history, but there are those who think that this is an exercise in racism/segregation. Because of such people, Survivor 13 has become the subject of a massive political debate (which is why I'm covering it).

Of course, I think that these accusations are a load of hooey, so I feel like deconstructing them.

Accusation #1: "This is just a ploy to get ratings!"
Of course it's about ratings, television is a capitalist enterprise! Every show on television has one purpose, to draw viewers to its network, and is therefore is a ploy to generate ratings. In order to get viewers, networks have to produce edgy content that people will watch, so the motivation of ratings is actually what cases networks to produce good television! The motivation for producing a program has nothing to do with the program's quality or acceptability.

Accusation #2: "'Survivor' is being racist!"
No, it's not. In an interview with "The Early Show", host Jeff Probst hit the nail on the head when he said that the show is about integration, not segregation. Trust me, the four tribes will have to be scrambled and/or merged very early on (I've watched all 12 seasons, I know how the game works), and the point of the game will be to see which players can successfully overcome cultural differences and form alliances that will help them get farther in the game. Any players who exhibit racist tendencies will be voted off in short order, humiliating them in front millions of viewers. In short, the point of this show is to ridicule racism, not promote it.

Accusation #3: "This twist encourages viewers to divide along racial lines!"
Not really. The people who latch on to their own ethnic tribe are probably going to be the ones who had issues with other cultures long before anyone ever heard of Survivor. I am personally a Caucasian, but I have no intention of rooting for the white tribe. Actually, after combing through contestant biographies on the Survivor website, my early favorite is nail salon manager Anh-Tuan "Cao Boi" Bui, a Vietnamese-American. Furthermore, I will probably root for the Asian tribe in general because an Asian has never won Survivor. People will generally root for a contestant whose personality they find appealing, and I don't think that ethnicity will be that big of a factor.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I plan on spending Thursday evenings parked in front of my TV - because Survivor is going to be great this year.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

PERSON OF THE WEEK - Aug. 13-19, 2006

Sorry for being late agian this week, but events in the real world have limited my time in cyberspace.

I don't have time to write a big column right now, and I don' t want to write about this guy anyway because he makes me sick. However, he did make the most news this week.

Som, whether he is really a murderer or just perpetrating the biggest hoax of the 21st century, ConservaGlobe's Person of the week is...


Tuesday, August 15, 2006

PERSON OF THE WEEK - Aug. 6-12, 2006

Joe Lieberman has served the Democratic Party in the U.S. Senate for years. He has been one of their most influential Senators, and he was almost universally respected by both political parties. He was the party's nominee for Vice-President in 2000, and has drawn words of praise from everyone from Al Gore to Sean Hannity. He has fallen out of favor with his own party in recent years, but why? Joe certainly hasn't changed. He's still socially liberal, he's still strong on defense, and he still thinks that removing Saddam Hussein from power was a good idea - just like he had for over a decade before the current war in Iraq began. Joe didn't change, but the party did.

It used to be okay for Democrats to support forcibly removing genocidal maniacs like Saddam Hussien (even John Kerry liked the idea), but then George Bush decided to actually do it. Since then, anti-war radicals (led by far left millionaires and extremist bloggers) have hijacked the Democratic Party. Somehow, these groups managed to replace blue-collar Americans as the Democrats' base, and they decided that there is no room in their new anti-war party for good old Joe.

Enter Ned Lamont: anti-war millionaire. He agreed with Joe on a lot of things, but not on the war - and the war was all that mattered to him. He decided that Joe had to go and ran against him for the Democratic nomination to the U.S. Senate from Connecticut. Many elected officials stood by their old friend Joe, at least in the primaries, but the bloggers vilified him and threw their support behind Lamont. In addition, Lamont plowed several of his own millions into his campaign. In the end, he managed to squeak by Lieberman in last Tuesday's primary election. Joe decided to run in the general election, but all of his old friends (being good Democrats) abandoned him.

The moral of this story is that the Democratic party doesn't care about the vast majority of issues at the moment. Sure, they have positions on education and health care and such, but at their core they are totally fixated on Iraq. In fact, they are so obsessed with it that they were even willing to tar and feather their old friend Joe.

So, for making it crystal clear that there is no room in the Democratic Party for Joe Lieberman or anyone else who supports the war, Ned Lamont is ConservaGlobe's Person of the Week.

Tags: Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

I Love Ned Lamont!

No, you don't have to worry about this rock-solid conservative Republican jumping ship - I have no desire to see Mr. Lamont enter the United States Senate. However, I am very pleased with the results of last night's Democratic primary in Connecticut. Thanks to Lamont's victory over Joe Lieberman (my favorite Democrat), it is now crystal clear that the Democratic Party has been taken over by the radical left and that there is no room for those who do not toe the increasingly extremist party line. Joe Lieberman is a class act and a tremendous asset to the Democratic Party, yet he was tarred and feathered because he had the chutzpah to vote against the party line on one issue (Iraq). I disagree with Joe Lieberman on a vast number of issues, but I admire the fact that he is willing to stand up for everything he believes in, even if it's unpopular.

Hopefully, the Democrats continue to ostracize Joe Lieberman, because it will show just how far their obsessive hatred of Bush and his Iraq policy has caused them to fall.
I wish Joe Lieberman the very best in his quest for re-election and look forward to having him around for another four years. Whether I agree with him or not, it's nice to know that there are still a few independent thinkers in Washington who do what they think is right, even if it costs them personally.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, August 06, 2006

PERSON OF THE WEEK - July 30-Aug 5, 2006

Fidel Castro's recent suregery sent shockwaves through the world political scene. Is it possible that the world's longest reigning dictator may be on death's doorstep?
Whether or not Fidel Castro is near death, his illness has made Cubans (and the rest of the world) ponder what life will be like without him. Will his brother be as effective, or will Castro's death be the beginning of the end for Cuban Communism?
So, regardless of how sick he really is, Cuban Dictator Fidel Castro is ConservaGlobes's Person of the Week.
Photo Credit: Fotografía tomada por Ricardo Stuckert/ABr. el 26/09/2003 para la Agência Brasil (The Agência Brasil makes images and photos available free of charge. To comply with existing law, we kindly request our users to list the credits as in the example: photographer's name/ABr.): http://img.radiobras.gov.br/