<p>What social/political growth in Europe are you referring to?</p>
<p>^^This is a country where the SUPREME COURT decided that Bush would be president in 2000.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>This is a country where people were forbidden from openly protesting during bush's inauguration (they were asked to stand 300 feet away from the proceedings, conveniently out of the site of the cameras</p></li>
<li><p>This is a country where people openly stated that Bush's succession into the white house was a coup d'</p></li>
</ul>
<p>woops my response was directed to hotelmoscow</p>
<p>I don't know where to begin. You can trace this political growth far back. In a more recent sense, look at the growth of communism, the fall of communism and the formation of the European Union. People, in Europe, appear to actually care about politics.</p>
<p>Ask any American how many places our military is in. The most they could probably imagine is Iraq and, possibly, Afghanistan. Most Europeans are profusely aware of our hegemonic ventures. We have over 700 bases in over a 130 different countries. Talk about a empire! Americans don't know this.</p>
<p>I've been stationed at 7 of those 700 bases. ^ ;)</p>
<p>I think you just inadvertently proved mine and poppin's point.</p>
<p>Edward04,</p>
<p>Oh, no no. I completely agree with you in that many Americans are not politically aware. However, I do believe there is a growing census of those who are becoming aware at an un-normal growth rate. I don't think it is fair to judge everyone based on the idiocracies of a majority of people. I think the number of people, like us, are growing but are being overshadowed by the growing stupidity as well.</p>
<p>I like to think of it this way - We aren't easy please while they are. Who are the media going to target? Those who are easy to please. I don't believe they represent us as a whole.</p>
<p>Well... I'm off to bed. I'll go crazy if I stay up any longer worrying about admissions. Goodnight.</p>
<p>What would you describe the cultural backlash and quasipolitical awareness of the 1960s; as I previously stated, Americans will become irregularly active for a short period of time, but then slump back into their self-interested inclinations.</p>
<p>first of all i dont think funding was cut because white students became a minority. that seems like a bit of a stretch in my opinion.</p>
<p>and we aren't intellectually oppressed. the media only gives the public what the public wants. and what the public wants is lurid scandals and celebrity nonsense. </p>
<p>and for all the uproar about bush in 2000 what did the electorate do? they elected him a second time. kerry certainly didn't run a good campaign but that doesnt change the fact that the vast majority of americans are like sheep.</p>
<p>i also get the feeling this threat is certainly not going in the way that it was intended haha</p>
<p>Wow, this thread is nothing like the title. Hell, this whole transfer section of CC is all scattered.</p>
<p>The 1960's was more than just a short period of irregular activity. It was a mass awakening of millions of people not only in America but throughout the world. It is the closest we have come to a revolution in the United States since the founding of this country.</p>
<p>Uh, what about the civil war?</p>
<p>Wanted to point something out w/regards to the OP. Your GPA does not reset. You get a UC GPA that does not include non-UC coursework. You still have a post-secondary GPA, and that includes all college level work.</p>
<p>uh, I was thinking more along the lines of a political and cultural revolution. But yea, if the confederates would have succeeded it would have been a revolution. I guess that 40 hours a week studying really paid off for you.</p>
<p>I like this fun thread; it distracts our minds from admissions: :)<br>
I just read through this debate.. and I have to say that I side with Ektaylor and Hotelmoscow. TheCaliforniaLife's arguments make no sense to me... but kudos to him for sparking the discussion. As much as I'd love to interject my ignorant opinions into the wrong thread, I'll refrain.</p>
<p>"What are your prospects after transferring?"</p>
<p>Hopefully I'll finish a double major in poli sci and stats... Join AFROTC and go into active duty for 4 years. I'll be 27/28 years old after I come out which is probably a good time to get married and become a mother... however, I've considered rejecting the domestic life to get a Phd and be a professor. Even so, plans might change.
But one things for sure - I'm leaving Orange County. Living in the suburbs is slowly killing me.</p>
<p>I guess what I am trying to say is that you are right. However, I think the tides are eventually going to change. Let's look at it this way... what do you think makes the differentiation between the Europeans and the Americans on politics? Do you think we are going to forever be in this stagnation about politics? I'm beginning to think that we are hitting a positive growth point. It may not be a huge political revolution. I, however, do believe it is happening. Like I stated earlier, what type of shows have been flourishing? - Colbert Report, Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the Real Time with Bill Maher. In the Pew Research Center study, it ascertained the political knowledge of people. It confirmed that people who watch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report are some of the most politically knowledgeable people. The people who watch regular news are some of the most uninformed. What has been happening is the viewership of network news has been dropping at a rate of at least 3% each 6 months. If more knowledgeable people are watching the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, that are having strong growths in viewers, and the less knowledgeable people are watching network news, that are having strong declines in viewers, what can we say about the populous in general?</p>
<p>What does it say about the state of our media when informed people need to turn to comedy programming to find out what is going on in the world? It's really sad. The Daily Show is commentary, not reporting. I'm not against it, but you should still have a good primary news source besides a show that is essentially analysis. </p>
<p>I'm for PBS by the way, the state of the news media in this country is appalling. Fox News, CNN, Good Morning America: These are NOT "news," they are entertainment. We shouldn't confuse that with news!!</p>
<p>What does watching The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report have anything to do with being accurately aware of what goes on in the world? These shows are comedy shows. They are different from other comedy shows in that their materials come from the news. Just because the hosts take on satiric viewpoints of the news does not mean that the shows offer accurate news reports. Furthermore, good news reports should be impartial, in both the presentation and the material. These two aforementioned shows achieve neither of those. They are opinionated and funny. The latter is what you watch these shows for.</p>
<p>The contention that the increase in viewers of those two shows indicates higher public awareness is horribly based. Just read what Jon Stewart had to say about his own show.</p>
<p>CNN transcript of Jon Stewart on Crossfire:
CNN.com</a> - Transcripts
"STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls."
This is Stewart responding to claims that he was sucking up to Kerry. The point is, even Stewart realizes his show is a comedy show. The purpose it serves is to entertain the viewers with jokes about news stories. He is not there to inform the general public.</p>
<p>I LOVE Jon Stewart, but comedy central isn't exactly a credible source of news. BBC or NPR are better. </p>
<p>Your argument:
More people watching TDS/TCR + Less people watching network news = A more politically informed mass populace</p>
<p>We can say that those who are politically uninformed stopped watching boring network news in favor of the entertainment that TDS provides... but that doesn't necessarily mean the switch will make the mass populace more informed. The masses will never take the painstaking time to thorougly research what's really going on in politics. You and me included. True wisdom is realizing how little you really know.</p>
<p>PLEASE. Let's drop this matter. </p>
<p>CaliforniaLife: I don't want to be mean... but you need to brush up on your logical thinking if you want make it in law school.</p>
<p>look..</p>
<p>you will NEVER be able to consistently get the "truth" from any one news source--think about it; all news sources are controlled by human beings. Humans inevitably have certain private interests and motives, that, despite their commitments to their job, WILL permeate into their work. </p>
<p>It's not like people consciously insert their motives--have you ever been in a situation where you talk yourself into believing you're doing the right thing? Self-delusion is something that most, if not all people, go through...so imagine I'm a war correspondent, and military moral is extremely low at the station I'm reporting. Then one day, the base is attacked by a tuck with two grizzly looking men in the cockpit. The base responds by blowing up the truck, but upon further inspection, they find the bodies women and children in the back of the truck.</p>
<p>I'm willing to bet that 85% of reporters, if they even chose to report on that event, would report that a "threat" was eliminated. I'm a 100% sure that no reporter would put a picture of the women and children in the article. It's so easy for people to convince themselves that the partial truth is acceptable.</p>
<p>My point is that, if you want to know what is REALLY going on, read varying perspectives. Read Fox News, then Read "The Nation. Listen to NPR, and then listen to CBS radio. Go to BBC, and then read Al Jazzera news. </p>
<p>And most importantly, read what the common man has to say. Seriously.
We are SO lucky to have blogs--I read up on ethanol / alternative energy oriented blogs once in a while, but there are ABSOLUTELY news / politics blogs.</p>
<p>I also recommend IIDB</a> - Powered by vBulletin if you're hardcore.</p>