National Review Defends Gaming 67
The National Review has a piece up entitled National Born Regulators, in which they lay out the problems with legislator decision-making processes when discussing videogames, and lay to rest some of the most common misconceptions around gaming. From the article: "Those games are the exception to the rule. The vast majority of video games sold each year do not contain intense violence or sexual themes. The Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB), the video-game industry's self-regulatory labeling body, places ratings and numerous content descriptors on almost every game sold in America today. These ratings and descriptors are remarkably detailed and displayed prominently on all game cartons, making them easy for parents to evaluate."
But...that means it's our job? (Score:2)
Ok, ok...couldn't resist. But is is refeshing to see a little common sense and objectivity for a change. Politicians are just far to eager to legislate and jump on the latest turbo-charged bandwagon these days. On both sides of the Atlantic...
Re:But...that means it's our job? (Score:1)
Re:But...that means it's our job? (Score:3)
Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:4, Insightful)
It gets harder and harder to defend these people every year as they shift away from free market economics and individual self-determination and towards more big-government nanny-state big brotherism. If only the Democrats had the guts to step in and fill the void instead of likewise pandering to its base...
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1)
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:2)
I don't know about good politics, but I do know about common decency. On the one hand you've got a "husband" who's already living with another woman and stands to get a 6-figure sum if they pull the plug. On the other hand you've got mom, dad, brothers and sisters willing to accept the financial burden of caring for their loved one.
Instead of just divorcing the comatose woman (if she's brain dead - then killin
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1)
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:5, Informative)
Assuming we accept that the publication's role is, effectively, a Republican think-tank (which is disputable, but perhaps not worth disputing here), you have to bear in mind what a think tank does. The most successful think tanks aren't the ones that try to shape policy in the present, on a scale of weeks and months, but rather the ones that try shape political movements over a matter of years. If you want an example from the other end of the political spectrum, look at the UK's Labour Party in the late 80s and early 90s, where a few think tanks, with Tony Blair as their figurehead (although decidedly not the leading intellectual light), formulated what was to become New Labour. This took place at time when most of the party was still wedded to programmes of nationalisation, punitive taxes for high earners and a ban on private schools. Although much of what the think tanks were saying was heresy to much of the party at the time, it formed the basis for a successful political movement that has already dominated the UK for over a decade.
If you look at the history of National Review, a similar pattern can be seen. It played a central role in the formation of the modern conservative movement back in the 50s and 60s, when the conventional wisdom was that conservatism was dead. It identified Reagan as somebody to watch and support in the days when the idea of him as President would still have provoked gales of laughter from across the political spectrum. More recently, it predicted much of the present brand of conservatism, with a strong emphasis on moral values, that we see under Bush, back in the days when Clinton was in office. Rather than criticising the divide between what the think tanks are saying and the party is doing, it's more useful to look to the think tanks to discern the possible future directions the Republican party can take. It's interesting to note that there's a near-uniform consensus in such think-tanks now that while they are glad Bush won the last 2 elections, US conservatives would not tolerate another big-spender of the same ilk.
The exercise is made a bit more difficult by the very nature of a think tank. There is no one consistent strand to its thinking. Indeed, if you read the articles and the associated blogs regularly, you can see some persistent and often heated areas of dispute. "Intelligent" Design is one area that keeps coming back up, although fortunately the editorial view seems to have shifted largely against it. However, you'll also find disputes on social and education policy, immigration and relations with the Islamic world. We've seen both sides of the videogame debate put forward on NR, although I think the more libertarian line seems to be winning out. Does this indicate the future direction the Republicans will take post Bush? Not necessarily, but don't rule it out.
As a closing note, don't underestimate the power of these publications, which is growing all the time. A decade ago, they were read only by the more academic of the party-faithful. Today, they've got a much wider reach. National Review in particular has been extremely successful in establishing a widely-read online presence and its blogs in particular have become extremely well known. As these publications gain a wider base, their power to influence the base as well as the elites starts to grow.
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:2)
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1)
While we're trying to reshape reality with our thoughts, do you think maybe I can make my coffee cup turn into a bar of solid gold if I pretend it already is one hard enough?
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean like Cynthia McKinney, who punched a security officer (who politely tried to stop her from walking through a security checkpoint without identification) because he was a white male? She's pretty racist, mysoginistic, violent, and a crazy-go-nuts. Oh wait, she's a liberal democrat. Nevermind.
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:2)
Well, I'm winning this argument about 300,000 to 1. Would you like to continue? Or would you like me to go highlight some examples of where, for example, Freepers had wet dreams over the idea of a journalist doing his job being murdered in Iraq by American soldiers (note that, apparently, the soldiers are much smarter than freepers, which doesn't take much, since they didn't actually kill him for exercising his first amendment r
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:2)
Yes, I am making fun of you. Although, to be fair, I'm probably making fun of your teachers and parents really...
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1, Offtopic)
And yet, who tries to regulate gaming ??
Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman, notorious conservative Republicans [gamespot.com]
And where did they try to limit games ? Michigan. As I recall, a Democrat signed that into law.
Heck, let's fire up the Wayback Machine. Remember the Communications Decency Act ??? [wikipedia.org] ???. Sponsored by Senator James Exon, D-Nebraska. . .
Yep, look to the GOP to censor games and the Net. . . You keep forgetting the real rule of polit
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1, Offtopic)
In all fairness, while it was signed by Granholm, it was passed by a Republican House & Republican Senate. Let's face it, Democrats & Republicans are co-conspirators in this matter. Keep voting for control-freaks, and you'll keep getting control-freak legislation. Maybe it's time gamers think about voting for Libertarians [lp.org].
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:2)
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1)
"WON'T ANYBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!!"
And btw, Tipper Gore vs. Body Count. I think I just dated myself.
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:2, Insightful)
Never happen.
At least the Republican party has Giuliani, Bloomberg, McCain, Schwarzenegger, Specter, Colin Powell.. Folks who are just as happy as Democrats (and me, frankly) to see DeLay get DeFrocked.. Who do the Democrats have that isn't a complete tool of the left, besides possibly Ron Wyden? Where are the principled, moderate Democrats? (answer: retired or Republicans, or dead like the late g
Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice (Score:1)
omg!!! republicans!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:omg!!! republicans!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
The "social conservative" and "religious conservative" groups that have co-opted the term are practically anathema to the real meaning
Re:omg!!! republicans!!! (Score:2)
Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:2, Interesting)
Very true. However, there are plenty of cases where the child buys the game outside of the parent's presence. What do you suggest then? Following your kid 24/7, never letting them out of your sight? Weekly room sear
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:2)
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, because enforcing age restrictions with legal penalties on retailers have made alcohol and tobacco so insanely expensive. Oh...wait. It's mostly taxes doing that, not age restrictions. Never mind.
And the only ad
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:2)
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:2)
This is not a small thing:
1. By giving them personal identification, like a licence, they now can send me all kinds of marketing crap, track my purchases to create a marketing profile on me, etc.
2. There is an increased chance of identity theft, because now I got minimum wage clerks looking over my ID.
3. Now there is a way to link my purchases to my
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:1)
Tinfoil_hat++
also, Slippery_slope++
Your other two points had some merit, however...though again, you don't see anybody complaining that ID checks for alcohol or tobacco are leading to identity theft, and calling for an e
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:1)
Damn, I might go to church if there was...
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:2)
Are you kidding? The Bible, had it been published today (in game form), would have been rated AO, never mind M. We could play Gut the Canaanite and then pin the phallus on King Solomon's concubines.... I think that the proper way to consider the analogy is not "OMG teh Bible might convert my heathen childs!!!11!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:1)
More to the point, if a parent decides to consciously purchase such a game for his 12-year old, it isn't anyone's "fault", because by making the purchase, the parent has at least implicity decided that the game content is not inappropriate for his child; there is no problem.
One would think that someone truly devoted to "family values" would not gi
Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake (Score:1)
I have no problem if you want to have children, and I am delight to act as part of a village to help you raise them, but that is my choice not my responsib
Passing the buck... (Score:2, Interesting)
Just because someone has responsibilities, does not make them responsible in any fashion.
Sad but true
Shock! (Score:1, Flamebait)
OMG I'm actually being held responsible... (Score:2, Insightful)
Safety Nets (Score:3, Interesting)
Some days you just wish for a party that would be the proponents of a moderate and fiscally responsible social safety net and completely disregard this moral safety net idiocy. A long shot, I know. But since when did the government have the right or even the ability to make subjective judgements about morality? Religious people should be up in arms that the government is interfering with their baliwack (instead of just muddying up religion with politics). Church groups should be pounding the street protesting the latest GTA, not trying to get politicians to deal with it. I can ignore street protests...laws are a little harder.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Thierier is not a real NRO type (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Thierier is not a real NRO type (Score:2)
And let's not forget William F. Buckley [amazon.com].
Re:Thierier is not a real NRO type (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Republicans (Score:1)
Do you need a bigger brush or flame thrower? (Score:2)
Traditionally, Republicans (in the modern sense) who have nothing to worry about with respect to being elected (aka. the general populous) generally believe in less government and more personal responsibility. That's why anti-gaming laws are generally considered to be an afront to what the standard, non-politician Republican believes. Such laws are nothing more than bigger government usurping parental responsibility.
I really wish that people like you
Re:Do you need a bigger brush or flame thrower? (Score:2)
Re:Do you need a bigger brush or flame thrower? (Score:2)
Re:Do you need a bigger brush or flame thrower? (Score:2)
And while you pretend it's just politicans who have become completely twisted and lost sight of their values, look around. I live in a "red" county. I know a lot of Republicans. They support the current administrati
From the article... (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, the parents of the 37-year-old want to make sure nothing untoward happens in their basement.
101st Fighting Keyboardists (Score:1, Troll)
Of course National Review writers support gaming. Especially those war games. Playing War games allows the National Review writers to feel like real warriors and patriots. Then they write their articles about supporting a war that they would never think of serving in themselves. That's why they're called the 101st Fighting Keyboardists by some and chickenhawks by others. War: its on the computer or in the imaginary land of neo-con theory. No blood, no fear, no death. Just democracy in the Middle East
Well said (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Well said (Score:1)
Raise your standards. Grandparent is completely off-topic.