Diversity of viewpoints among firefly fans
POSTED BY: Diego
UPDATED: Thursday, June 7, 2018 10:35
VIEWED: 13821
PAGE 2 of 4
Quote:
How about I neatly sidestep your logic trap by hypothesizing on why people of such diverse beliefs/ backgrounds/ etc. would all be drawn to Firefly, and why they would also be inclined to carry on intelligent conversations about their differences?
My theory is that because FF is, at its center, about widely diverse people who come together and form a family, the audience base is widely diverse because we can all find someone to identify with, or we identify with multiple characters for different reasons.
Excellent!!!!!!
I'll be in my bunk........
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Greetings Fellow Browncoats:
The thing that most resonates for me about Firefly is the theme of doing what it takes to "keep on keepin' on". For many Americans (and Brits, too, from first-hand knowledge), finding work and keeping it, and then putting food on the table and a roof over the heads of a family is a Sisyphean task. I have a saying, "Forget about making ends meet, I'm happy if I can get 'em close enough to wave hi at each other." (Steal it, if you fancy it).
Beneath every episode is that palpable but rarely expressed fear of destitution. That's why Simon is an outsider: He can't relate to the constant threat of imminent poverty the way Mal, Zoe, Jayne and Kaylee can. We see the crew socializing and bonding while feasting on gruel that almost certainly contains recycled human waste matter.
Yet, they are a family, wouldn't you agree? "Just keep flying" is an apt mission statement for a vast number of American families; a number that's growing every year as the gap between the richest and poorest segments of our society widens and the 'middle class' is only the wistful nomenclature of a rosier past. It's strictly the 'Haves' and the 'Have Nots' these days, and neither political party in this country has any right to claim moral superiority on that issue.
Which is why FFFn has a separate "Real World Events" (read: political) discussion board. I truly dislike regurgitated political dogma mixed into my entertainments like 'protein paste' made into a birthday cake. Political debates invariably turn nasty, and the reason is obvious: The adherents of both parties seem to have a dearth of original thoughts. Stop numbly believing everything you hear. Assume that the goal is to grease the rail for the common man, to the greater profit of the 'Haves', regardless which party of Eloi wins. The choice is strictly cosmetic, and facile in any case...
Regretfully,
zoid
_________________________________________________
"Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." The Ballad of Serenity
Only 251 days, 20 hours, 41 minutes, and 2 seconds left until The BDM!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
'Tash, are you sure you're talking to the right Board? 
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Good point. I know I see something like the alliance coming about or the resulting end state of the opposition's political views. And I am sure the oppositions will say exactly the same about my side of the debate.
Originally posted by kukoo:
"This may be slightly off-topic, but I have always thought it was interesting how Firefly Fans seem to be at such opposite ends of the political spectrum. I believe the reason why is in the way Fans view the Alliance.
Liberals tend to view the Alliance as the end result of the path the Bush Administration has set us on. Declaring that the Geneva Convention isn't applicable to the war, creating a new name for prisoners and criminals so they can throw the Bill of Rights out the window and hold them indefinetly, being able to shroud key policy meetings in a viel of secrecy so that the public cannot determine how decisions were made and the build-up and reckless use of the Armed Forces. Under this theory, River and Simon were probably listed as "enemy combatants" by the Alliance.
Conservatives tend to view the Alliance as the end result of too big a government with too much control over our daily lives. i.e. too many social programs and laws regulating behavior and business. Mals quote about governments being there to get in a mans way would support this theory.
I think the Alliance is a mixture of both. It is the worst aspects of the two current parties rolled into one. It is as if the special interests (maybe the forerunners to the Blue Sun Group) took over both parties and pushed them into one. The point of a 2 party system is to balance each other out, and the absence of a second party is what makes the Alliance so scary and powerful. "
So what is fundamental? What is the goal? OR better yet where in the "field of grey" is the balance point between anarchy (which precludes civilization or even benefitical co-existence) and a totalitarian state that has absolute control over every aspect of human endevour? How do you get there, to that "tween" state?
I think that question can be answered by going a bit deeper philosophically. Recognizing certain key features of human (indeed biological) existence. Which has primacy? The mind and our ideas, or the physical aspects of reality? Which is the real thing, the individual or the group, and which is mental construct that we utilize in order to survive, thrive and allow us to grow and be happy?
Due to work, I have not, and cannot be on nearly as much as I was in the past. Sadly that is how life is.
"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ok, So I am an odd duck...
Me.. I see the Alliance as the end result of business running things. More and more we find special interest groups dumping money and pull to what they want. We see news media owned by a few, and often saying only the part of a story they want us to see, and they tell us how we should feel about it. Plase no bashing, but as an example, not long ago, in the news was a statement about Gays being allowed to wed. The comment was " it will destroy the the sanctity marrage is based on " ok now exactly HOW that is to effect my marrage?
The other comment was.. " if we allow gays to marry, next they will want us to allow marrage to children by pediphiles".. Huh? the link in logic to that is where?
The news media wants to control us, the business wants to control us .. ( yes, sure , uh huh , I believe the major oil companies are working HARD to find alternate energy source ). Oh sorry, the oil tanker sank yesterday so he have to raise prices 10 cents for a few months due to the shortage. So lets build bigger trucks and cars to suck up more gas.. Lets even give tax breaks on HumVees ( yes there is,, it is about using it for business ).
soooo yep, I see it as business taking over, doing the research they want, using any force to keep it and exploit it. Who is making the major race for space... Private business.. Plans of " Joy rides, low orbit habitats, Japan even has full plans for moon bases including getting water from rocks ( no joke ).. Where we all sleeping when all the satellites went up in space? Who put them there? Us? Nope. Russians? Nope.. how bout a space port closer to the equator that has several launces a week putting up packages. ( started in 1968 and has over 460 succesful launches ) Every see anything of it in the news?
Up the news media shows us only what it wants us to see.. and business is a driving force. The poiitics are a joke. " Sure he is a liar, he is a politician" They can promise anything they want, they are NOT accountable when they do something different in office. They are there for the bucks and ego.
If the senators and congressmen where only paid IF they attended 95 % of the votes on issues AND voted for what they were elected for.. NONE would be paid.. watch CNN and note how many empty seats there are all the time.. ( ooooooo I called my vote in ) hard work if you can get it.
Alliance? Ledt? Right? nope.. business greed.
The Journey is the worthier part.
www.southdownabby.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:As I have attempted to point out before and elsewhere, the only way you can make a viable third party is to get enough popular support. I don't think money has that much effect, but then it appears I have a higher opinion of the American voters than many folks I have talked to.
Originally posted by MacBaker:
I agree with you, but I also feel the current two party system is deadlocked and stagnant. We need a viable moderate third party to shake things up and swing votes between the partisan "liberal" and "conservative" parties that have the country's voters so divided.
You need to appeal to voters, you cannot force them to vote your way. That means listening to them and tailoring your message to address their concerns in a way that they understand. It also means meaning what you are telling them. Americans know BS when they hear it.
Quote:You can demand till you are blue in the face, but if the voters don't vote for you, for whatever reason, you ain't gonna get it. You have to remember that all you got is persuasion. You cannot, in a democracy resort to any kind of coercion, and even attempting to will simply turn the voters off, give them an excuse to write you off and ignore you.
The real winner here, isn't the voters, it's "The Blue Sun" (the corps and special interest groups) that both parties cater to like the whores they really are! We are heading towards that "Alliance", and the only way to really avoid it, is to demand a third party that makes sense, and one that represents the voter, not big money contributors and special interest groups!
I see a lot of talk about corporations and special interest groups, but I think this is done mostly by ignoring what those groups are. They are essentially nothing but people exercising their right to free association, banding together in order to acheive their goals. Their goals and policies may not be yours, but they do feel strongly about them and are willing to work together to achieve them.
These groups see a problem and are exercizing their First Amendment rights and working to be heard. Whether you agree or disagree with their policies or proposals, if you want to stop them, you have to act within your rights, without denying theirs.
In short, the only way to get rid of such groups is to outlaw a freedom. The freedom to assemble, the freedom to speak out. You disagree, but the solution is to form your own "special interest", attract funding and support and lobby. Do the same thing they are doing. If you want to limit their rights, you have to be extremely careful that does not come back and bite you.
Quote:True enough. The difference is not in the goals but how we achieve them. Which methods work, and which cures are in fact worse than the disease? Are some goals mutually exclusive, or are some more important than others? Its one thing to bemoan the fact that one's positions are not more popular, but its another thing to try and fix that. Or ask the potentially more important question, is it possible that the reason the public has rejected it, is that one's own policies are simply wrong, unworkable, or in some other way, contrary to thier best interests?
I think we all want pretty much the same thing, but we don't really know if our government is capable of meeting those needs. Some believe the Democrats, while others put their hopes with the Republicians, and some (like me) don't think either party is capable of the leadership we need, or really cares what the average American thinks. We get divided over issues, but we all want a world that is safe! Where jobs are secure, and inflation and taxes don't bury us! Where our children get good educations and have the opportunity to live peaceful happy productive lives. We aren't really that different. We all want what Mal wants! Freedom and "Serenity"!
A lot of folks are very sure they are right, and everyone else is wrong. That can become an article of faith, instead as impetus to recheck one's reasoning, or re-think one's positions. They see the opposition as the enem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I couldn't agree with you more. The fans of this show are a very diverse group of people who like it for very different reasons.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I feel the need to point out... especially now, that there is an army of avatars out there posing as Sci-Fi fans... but they are not.
They are part of a sort of "whisper campaign" to spread their "message" out onto the Net. This includes Right Wing operations out of Republican think tanks to FOX marketing weasels trying to create anti-Joss sentimate online.
Don't think for a second this BBS isn't a hotbed of paid opinions. It is.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ghoulman wrote:
Quote:
I feel the need to point out... especially now, that there is an army of avatars out there posing as Sci-Fi fans... but they are not.
They are part of a sort of "whisper campaign" to spread their "message" out onto the Net. This includes Right Wing operations out of Republican think tanks to FOX marketing weasels trying to create anti-Joss sentimate online.
Don't think for a second this BBS isn't a hotbed of paid opinions. It is.
And to think, people have accused me of being a conspiracy theorist. I humbly bow to my obvious master...
v/r,
zed
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
I feel the need to point out... especially now, that there is an army of avatars out there posing as Sci-Fi fans... but they are not.
They are part of a sort of "whisper campaign" to spread their "message" out onto the Net. This includes Right Wing operations out of Republican think tanks to FOX marketing weasels trying to create anti-Joss sentimate online.
Thats not fair. Yes I'm part of the "whisper campaign" and get regular talking points faxed to me daily on FOX letterhead from the Oval Office. But I'm as big a fan of Firefly as they come.
Just because there is a conspiracy to spread the "message" does not mean the message is incorrect. You're just mad because we wont let you join.
So call me a conservative, call me a member of the "vast right wing" conspiracy. But don't you ever question my love for this series.
Besides, since we conservatives are all powerful and rule the entire world with the exception of the Lifetime Movie Network and France, do you really think this little fan club caused the movies to get greenlighted? Believe me, this movie was going nowhere till "we" decided it was going to happen. FOX owned the rights to Firefly, remember...
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME