In Beyond the Bounds Baltar took us to the world where visiting travelers were accompanied - even to the bathroom - by minders. No, it wasn't the Soviet Union or Cuba, it was the inauguration of George W. Bush. In my comment, I compared the minders to action of the good old USSR or Fidel Castro. I have to admit, however, that I was wrong to make that comparison. I picked the wrong socialist!
It must have been the use of the word "minder" that got me off on the wrong socialist track. Instead of thinking about Soviet tourism and the inability of the (supposedly) party faithful to speak freely to reporters, I should have been thinking of nipples. That's right! Janet Jackson's nipple, to be exact. And how could I have forgotten on superbowl eve, especially since the spambots have been loading us up with superbowl comment spam in the dark of night?!
Guessed the correct socialist yet? If you were thinking Hugo Chavez...ding ding ding...you win the prize. From the BBC:
Venezuela has passed a controversial media law condemned by the opposition and a human rights group for threatening freedom of expression. Discussion of the law has dominated political debate in recent months.
The government of President Hugo Chavez says the law will improve the quality of Venezuelan television and open up access to the media.
Media outlets will face heavy fines or even closure if they do not follow the rules.
After six weeks of debate and a marathon final two day session, the government majority in Venezuela's parliament finally got what it wanted: a new law that it says will encourage higher standards in broadcasting, protect children from inappropriate sex and violence and democratise access to the airways.
The opposition, which controls most of Venezuela's private media, insists the new law on "Social Responsibility in TV and Radio" is aimed at silencing them.
They point to the possible suspension of licences for those who broadcast messages that promote the disruption of public order.
Their concerns were echoed on Wednesday by Human Rights Watch, which repeated earlier warnings that the legislation could seriously threaten freedom of expression.
Government supporters, however, have argued that the owners of Venezuela's private media are more worried by the law's provision that a portion of all programming must be made in Venezuela, and that some of this must be produced independently.
No word yet on whether the new law in Venezuela will require the pixelation of cartoon characters' butts. Guess it's a good thing the US has new enemies, otherwise it would be bad news for the administration to be cribbing so many moves from the commie playbook.
Posted by binky at February 2, 2005 11:19 PM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsThis reminds me of a distinction between the parties that a few writers noted back in the 1990's but which never caught on (I think there was a National Journal cover story on the idea). Democrats want a big-government "mommy" state, providing lots of services and with mantras and beliefs that are worried about people's feelings and self-esteem and trying to improve the lot of those with special needs and disabilities. Republicans though want a big-government "daddy" state. They want institutions that uphold their control (and that benefit the current powers), where they set the rules and will whack you upside the head if you dare to disagree. Of course given the last few years it's no huge shock that a "daddy" state's authoritarian tendencies would appeal to both Chavez and Bush.
Posted by: Armand at February 3, 2005 09:49 AM | PERMALINKInteresting. And of course, I do believe in the whole "bend the political continuum at the middle" idea, because it illustrates that often wings have more in common (at least in behavior) than moderates and radicals on the same wing. Nut that's another discussion for another day.
Posted by: binky at February 3, 2005 09:57 AM | PERMALINKand in mild and anecdotal support of your comment, binky, the wing phenomenon you note points back to the discussion a few days ago regarding the odd and not insignificant similarities between bush and carter.
Posted by: joshua at February 3, 2005 11:33 AM | PERMALINK