The way I see things is that video games are the current political boogieman. The problems in society are not easily solved, and solving a lot of big problems like the level of crime and the like involve questioning a lot of the central morality on which our system is based. Those kinds of issues are things that a politician can't address without turning a lot of hands against them by their very nature. On the other hand acting like comic books, video games, or Rock N' Roll are a substantial contributing factor it gives them something to attack that doesn't involve having to address the big issues.
Obama and Clinton both used the video game industry as big ways of generating hype without having to go after anything anything paticularly touchy. Hillary was a major force in the whole "Hot Coffee" thing, and Obama uses video games as a whipping boy for things like the obseity epidemic. With the democratic party forced to close ranks around these ideas, combined with the conservatives who ALSO support this kind of thing, we're seeing an unprecedented amount of pressure being directed at what has always been a faux threat.
The Supreme Court is a political entity like any other, despite how things might seem on paper. This is not the kind of thing they are going to ignore. What's more I have no doubts that a lot of the Justices see a lot of political power/favor or just plain out money to be gained through this confict as we're dealing with politicians and PACs on one side and multi-billion dollar industries on the other. I for one do not have complete faith in the fact that something that SHOULD be an open and shut case actually turning out that way.
-
I've said all that before, but for those who are actually reading this here is something that I haven't said before:
This entire conflict gets to the root of one of the problems with our entire system. The fact that an issue cannot be put to bed permanantly after a desician. Even when something goes to The Supreme Court, nothing prevents people from keeping the same issue alive, working around the edges, and trying to garner the support to bring the case above the Supreme Court AGAIN, perhaps with differant justices.
You see this mostly with civil liberties issues, like gay rights, minority rights, and other things. Just because something is short down (and these things have been) doesn't prevent the people from immediatly getting up and trying again until they succeed. Our system basically rewards persistance.
A lot of people will point to that as a good thing, which I suppose it is when you agree with the issues at stake. However with this type of case... video games and goverment censorship, the same exact thing can happen where the issue is kept alive, for decades if need be until whatever is being campaigned for succeeds. What is considered unthinkable now might not be in a matter of years. There are a number of social movements, including things like NAMBLA that seem to be based around this basic idea.
It's an issue that goes both ways, and one of the reasons why we really don't have a mechanism that will genuinely put an issue down for good, however it is something to consider. Just as people crusading for civil liberties of whatever sort can be persistant,
so can those who are looking to take them away.
