The Big Picture: In Defense of Nostalgia

[Mid-Boss]

ah yes, the idealised 1950, when sexism and backlash from the war was in full force, that's the good old days

If you are a rich, old, white, christian, male then yes those WERE the good old days where you had absolute power over anyone even slightly different from yourself. THAT'S the good old days they miss. It's not the old cars, the home baked cakes, or the zombie-like smiling families. It's complete power in the hands of people exactly like themselves that they are nostalgic over.

I can never understand why minorities, or even women, can claim to be conservatives. They, some how, don't seem to grasp that the party wants their votes, but at the same time HATES that they have any rights.

 

[ecoho]

In Defense of Nostalgia

Are the rose tinted glasses always so bad?

Watch Video

im sorry bob but unless you can be objective you should never talk about politics otherwise you are no better then the right wing people you bash. i mean lets look at the other side for a second. Obama ram rods a healthcare system WE CANNOT SUPPORT!!!! into being against the majority of people's wishes, then we have Biden saying that the one birth law in china is a good idea........ personally i think both parties should be dissolved so people will actually have to vote for the man/woman instead of what party they are.

Not a fan of party politics myself, but I ask you this question: without the parties, how would you suggest a political hierarchy is formed in the United States? Their structure is largely based on the bi-partisan system.

who say we need a political hierarchy? we just need to have good men and women run for office and do the job they were elected to do no more of this party bullshit.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Well, that topic made a complete 180 turn at the end there.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

So your argument for nostalgia in popular medium is that it isn't as bad as nostalgia in politics.... could you have picked two things that relate to each other less?

So, by your logic. I argue that companies churning out the same basic game every 2 years (ala CoD) isn't as bad as someone churning out the same bad rhetoric about immigrants and the youth of today.

I like this logical fallacy thing, I might just use it to win my arguments.

/sarcasm

No Bob. When we talk about nostalgia and your insufferable radiating of it on this website, we're talking about games and maybe films. We're not talking about politics, so drawing a parallel to it and linking it by a theme to shift the focus off what we're talking about isn't going to cut it.

Did you honestly think anyone here was actually going to let you shimmy off topic so much? I'm actually pretty shocked Bob.

The entire time he went off his political tangent I was wondering what this had to do with nostalgia in regards to geekdom, and to my surprise it didn't. <== last bit sarcasm. Honestly, I just rolled my eyes at his little political tangent, even though it had some points -like two- and I don't see how politics even relates to our nostalgia in movies and games. I must be an idiot, but I don't.

I think the last half should've been a part two of nostalgia, one part being movies and games, and the second part being politics and culture, not both of them together. Yes, one isn't as world shattering as the other, but really, we know that, we're not idiots, and I think it's a bit ridiculous to compare the two like that.

Yea, this was a really stupid episode.

'Nostalgia in gaming isn't that bad.... at-least it's not like I'm, trying to make us all live in some crazy idealised 50's fauxtopia.'

How the fuck did he jump from one to the other? It's quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever seen Bob do.

Yes Bob, we're not morons. We understand that in the grand scheme of things gaming isn't really as important as who we elect to run things. No one ever insinuated that it was, so I don't quite see why it was worth bringing it up.

His entire show is built on the premise of frivolity. All he talks about is comics, films and games. That's what we're here for, we want to talk about comics, films and games. (not necessarily in that order.)

It's nice when he grounds some of that information in real world history or the political attitudes towards [insert frivolity here]. But making the argument that we really shouldn't complain about X because Y, which has nothing to do with X mind you, is much worse.

It's just a stupid logical fallacy he threw in because he really doesn't have anything else to say on the subject.

I'm sorry for the rant, but this episode actually felt insulting. To think he actually expected us to swallow that at face value. Like he was telling anybody anything they didn't already know.

No no, the rant was totally necessary, and that's how I kinda felt afterwards. I don't need to be talked down to and I certainly don't need to have some half-baked argument for anti-nostalgia.

I agree that this wasn't one of Moviebob's best episodes and I don't really need to hear some guy's political opinion when it wasn't needed.

He should've either just made this a short video, expanded on some of the arguments against the changes happening in comics, movies, games etc. that are affected by this, or just kept it for his junk drawer episodes if he felt like it wasn't long enough for a full episode.

Yes, he had a disclaimer at the beginning and I was expecting it, but not to the degree that it was and how insulting it was. I'm beginning to wonder if he's doing that just to bait us for that kind of discussion (political I mean) since it was that blatant, but if that's the case, then fission mucking accomplished.

 

[faspxina]

So basically, the reason we shouldn't worry about nostalgia affecting movies and games is because there are worse things in the world?

I think Bob's point was just that, so far, nostalgia hadn't done that much bad to the industry as some people might say.

The way he drew comparisons with unrelated topics, however, was a bit confusing and didn't really had much to his argument. Actually the political part showed how nostalgia might not be so good.

 

[JMeganSnow]

I think it's a mistake to think *any* political movement is based on *nostalgia*. Nostalgia (aka Tradition) is one of the many things people use to justify their irrational positions, is all. You can replace it with just about anything sufficiently big-sounding: God, Manifest Destiny, Will to Power, the People's Good, the People's Vote, you name it, and it works pretty much the same.

 

[Wuggy]

I usually find you quite insightful, Bob, but this I didn't really agree with. See, you can put in the "perspective" argument in use in any given situation.

"I think X movie is one of the worst things I've seen!"
"Oh yeah! Well I guess you haven't seen WORLD HUNGER!"

"I don't like this game."
"Well, you should be glad that you can even play games, because a lot of people don't! So stop complaining!"

Yeah, this is why we limit dialogue under an umbrella of a certain topic(s).

Also, I don't think that nostalgia (in terms of movies, games, TV shows) is the most harmful thing in the world (because that'd be global warming or something! Perspective!). I don't like it because people who are (highly) nostalgic can get really obnoxious about it. Claiming that Super Mario Brothers is the greatest game of all time just goes to show how little rationale you put behind that thought. No, games have developed greatly beyond that. You had fun playing it as a kid, so you let your fond memories dictate your opinions.

 

[freaper]

...If you want to hear people complain about COD being the same thing over and over then go to /v/ and start a COD thread


see how that ends

"Some guy thinks the Thundercats redesign is the worst thing that has ever happen"

and then they saw the new Cheetara

then it was never heard of again

Didn't you know? They distribute free poles at /v/ to stick up their arses.

Bob's undercover political shorts are very interesting most of the time, I agree with the public.

 

[ShadowKatt]

(funny that only really US people call themselves "Americans" since there's a small piece of land called "South America" where they are not "Americans"... Never really thought of why but if you have an answer please tell me)

It's also funny that there's another small peice of land called "North America" conveniently located "North" of "South America" and that the United States of "America" is located in the "North" part. It's the "United States of America", therefore we are Americans. America is part of the country's name. Canada has Canadians, Mexico has Mexicans, and down south Brazil has Brazillians, Columbia has Columbians, Argentina has Argentinians, etc etc. It's not the continent you call yourself after, it's the country, and in our case, it's the USA, not just the US.

 

[Blind Sight]

In Defense of Nostalgia

Are the rose tinted glasses always so bad?

Watch Video

im sorry bob but unless you can be objective you should never talk about politics otherwise you are no better then the right wing people you bash. i mean lets look at the other side for a second. Obama ram rods a healthcare system WE CANNOT SUPPORT!!!! into being against the majority of people's wishes, then we have Biden saying that the one birth law in china is a good idea........ personally i think both parties should be dissolved so people will actually have to vote for the man/woman instead of what party they are.

Not a fan of party politics myself, but I ask you this question: without the parties, how would you suggest a political hierarchy is formed in the United States? Their structure is largely based on the bi-partisan system.

who say we need a political hierarchy? we just need to have good men and women run for office and do the job they were elected to do no more of this party bullshit.

See, I don't disagree with you, but you're talking in feel-good soundbites. How would you approve Presidential nominees? How would you elect a President? How would the Senate and Congressional votes work? These are parts of the American political system that are partisan in their nature simply due to the two-party system being in place for so long. Basically, you couldn't run everyone as an independent in a system crafted for parties. What reforms do you believe would help create a system to benefit non-party politics?

 

[Smber2c]

I'm a bit disappointed in this. Sure Glen Beck is a total joke, but he's also a complete scarecrow when it come to dealing with actual political topics. You want bash on the constitution or gov't role on marriage don't look to clowns like Beck, man up and try to counter the much more reasonable arguments of Ron Paul. There are literally hundreds of millions of people (billions globally) who don't approve of homosexual marriage...so their belief just doesn't matter because another group millions strong say it doesn't?

Why not just shrink gov't a bit and get them our of determining marriage at all? Let churches or other groups marry whoever they feel like, and let the gov't simple enforce contracts and stop mandating that one group must accept a seperate groups moral views.

Gov't used to dictate which sexual acts were legal, did we counter that by having the gov't come in and say from now on positions X, Y, and Z are legal? No we got the goverment to shut up and get out of our sex lives. Sadly we didn't get them out of determining what a marriage was at the same time.

Personally I don't support gay marriage, but it's not an issue for me anyway because my church will never allow it anyway. I'm fine with the gov't allowing 2 men or 2 women to contractually become the power of attorney, granting medical privileges, being the benificiary of insurance policies, etc...

 

[TwikTwok]

Geeze. Wouldn't be a political discussion on The Escapist without some callous alienation of homosexuals. Way to make an entire segment of the community who is marginalized elsewhere feel unwelcome here as well. You're all just lovely, lovely human beings.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

I usually find you quite insightful, Bob, but this I didn't really agree with. See, you can put in the "perspective" argument in use in any given situation.

"I think X movie is one of the worst things I've seen!"
"Oh yeah! Well I guess you haven't seen WORLD HUNGER!"

"I don't like this game."
"Well, you should be glad that you can even play games, because a lot of people don't! So stop complaining!"

Yeah, this is why we limit dialogue under an umbrella of a certain topic(s).

Also, I don't think that nostalgia (in terms of movies, games, TV shows) is the most harmful thing in the world (because that'd be global warming or something! Perspective!). I don't like it because people who are (highly) nostalgic can get really obnoxious about it. Claiming that Super Mario Brothers is the greatest game of all time just goes to show how little rationale you put behind that thought. No, games have developed greatly beyond that. You had fun playing it as a kid, so you let your fond memories dictate your opinions.

Yeah, and considering that games, comics, and movies are made for escaping the real world and not having to worry about larger problems for a while seems a bit ridiculous when he did that. Using fiction nostalgia as base to make claims about real-life nostalgia was something I felt wasn't needed.

This one wasn't his best, nor did I find it insightful.

 

[Crimson_Dragoon]

Great episode. That opening joke - brilliant! And I always appreciate some Republican bashing.

 

[SensibleCrout]

Dear Bob. What you are talking about in politics isn't nostalgia, it's conservativism. Nostalgia is to have fond memories of something in the past. Conservativism on the other hand is the belief that some/most things should actually stay as they used to be. Warm, fuzzy feeling here, inhibition of social change there, see?

 

[VGC USpartan VS]

I wonder how many people don't know he's talking about the Republicans.

 

[Imperator-Zor]

I must agree with Bob, awesome video.

The devil was the first whig, and he's been winning for 500 years

Yes, free us from "Serfdom" by bringing back actual Serfdom, nobility, rigidly defined class structres, church and state linked together, supression of any idea that might come up to challenge the status quo regardless of its legitimacy and all that. Oh the Irony.

Besides, your ideology came about in the early 1800s cenutry and had its massive failures. Mass famines in India, widespread poverty and horrible instability. The US had numerous finacial crashes due to lack of regulation over the course of the 19th century. The Great Depression was just the worst because of the rise of the cash economy (A larger precentage of people were using money more frequently, farmers before the Industrial Revolution usually had little money but could generally feed themselves and often could barter for things they could not make at home, once cities emerge people need to buy food and once industrial manufacturing begins stores no longer accept jars of jam as payment). Now, Banks and Finance have been deregulatd and the result, recession. Canada and the rest of the world's banks did not try to pull such scams because they were better monitored and kept on a shorter leash.

Thats the thing about Romantics, they have no understanding about what the past was really like. They are all about Knights in Shining Armor and Princesses on white steeds but forget the countless Peasants bound to the land living out of waddle and daub shacks that are forced to cultivate the land to make those things possible.

Zor

 

[orangeapples]

I wonder how many people don't know he's talking about the Republicans.

political ideologies of a party change.

Republicans today are the conservative party and Democrats are the liberal party. However at one point the Republicans were the liberals and the democrats were the conservatives.

I personally don't tie myself to any particular party because of that. I look at the points each candidate makes, vote for the one that I like the best and watch as they disappoint me for the next few years. I personally think that's how politics should work. Some people see politics as "their person vs our person" I always look at it like, "one of those people is going to be the one that will disappoint me for the next few years"

Unfortunately since the people who do get nominated by the parties tend to be nowhere near the fence the best I can do is agree with someone about 70% of their ideals.

conservatism and liberalism both have their party in everything. Somethings don't need to change while others do.