Neil's Blog

It's ridiculous and it's only gonna get worse now industry has built up around it - papers drop real stories for celeb stuff, whole magazines are created around it, people have emotional responses to people who are directed and scripted - i think i'll start a cult of hand puppetry it's pretty much the same thing.

Actually i do rather like the fact the TV show 'Extras' is satirising it. The more people who do that the more it might stop, but i balme people like Paris Hilton who have n reason for me to even know who they are - although it was this very website which brought her to my attention.

Absolutely agreed.

However, and it is a big however, due to your use of 'society' I must say this...

Socialism would have this 'celebrity worship' (borne out of freedom of choice) replaced with a more wholesome, honest and true model of what we should aspire to. This seems like a good thing in principle. However, would this not be an end to freedom of choice as we are forced into what we should aspire to rather than choose? Would this not be an end to humanity in it's freely chosen environment as we are told that our choices may be bad and against the betterment of society? Would this not bring about an end to the freedom to express what we feel rather than express what is idealistic and principled?

At least in a liberal environment you are free to turn your back on this 'society' (celebrity worship) if you wish and find an alternative - for in our culture of diversity there are many alternatives. Similarly, if you wish to, you can speak out against this 'society' without fear of reprisal. Would the socialist ideology of 'for the greater good' bring about an end to the beautiful dichotomies of liberal culture? Would replacing mainstream and counter culture, that have so freely expressed and existed together in harmony for so many years now, with simply what is right and what is wrong not distort and supress us as human beings?

I don't like mainstream culture, but I sure as hell would not like to see it taken away and replaced by a police state that bases itself upon the misguided rules and principles of the 'greater good of society'. No way. Especially when you consider that there is no one grand society or ideal in existence, only millions of fractured ones that start and end with an individual. Only an economist and a politician in their persuit of gain can look at a society as one whole thing and as we all know, they suck satans c*ck.

Bit long in the tooth, but you know me and society don't get on.

Absolutely agreed.

However, and it is a big however, due to your use of 'society' I must say this...

Socialism would have this 'celebrity worship' (borne out of freedom of choice) replaced with a more wholesome, honest and true model of what we should aspire to. This seems like a good thing in principle. However, would this not be an end to freedom of choice as we are forced into what we should aspire to rather than choose? Would this not be an end to humanity in it's freely chosen environment as we are told that our choices may be bad and against the betterment of society? Would this not bring about an end to the freedom to express what we feel rather than express what is idealistic and principled?

At least in a liberal environment you are free to turn your back on this 'society' (celebrity worship) if you wish and find an alternative - for in our culture of diversity there are many alternatives. Similarly, if you wish to, you can speak out against this 'society' without fear of reprisal. Would the socialist ideology of 'for the greater good' bring about an end to the beautiful dichotomies of liberal culture? Would replacing mainstream and counter culture, that have so freely expressed and existed together in harmony for so many years now, with simply what is right and what is wrong not distort and supress us as human beings?

I don't like mainstream culture, but I sure as hell would not like to see it taken away and replaced by a police state that bases itself upon the misguided rules and principles of the 'greater good of society'. No way. Especially when you consider that there is no one grand society or ideal in existence, only millions of fractured ones that start and end with an individual. Only an economist and a politician in their persuit of gain can look at a society as one whole thing and as we all know, they suck satans c*ck.

Bit long in the tooth, but you know me and society don't get on.

Socialism doesn't have to be achieved by force ... why do you think it has to be? People can - and do - choose to make their actions for the common good and not for themselves.

And where did I mention socialism anyway? The cult of celebrtity might have been (it has!) been created thru a capitalist force, but a capitalist force - such as realising that our money is wasted drooling at nice smiles on TV - can end it too.

Replacing the cult of celebrity can't be achieved by force, it would have to be something people choose for themselves. The cult of celebrity didn't exist in the past in the way it does now, it's something that society has been led into and chosen to go along with. In just the same way, society can be led from it, having seen that other ways are better.

Once we all wise up to the fact they are all useless and can't do anything then the cult of celebrity will move on - especially with olympics coming, it'll be the cult of sporting heroes next - just hope it's not too sullied by drug taking steroid addicts.

Socialism must impose itself as it dictates that money, power and the individual are all socially responsible for their actions in the world. Economically I agree, but not individually.

I'm sure that this 'fad of the undue celebrity' will be replaced in time. Just part of the post-modern condition we find ourselves in I reckon. Hopefully, the Global condition of the future will see to it's end.

Oh, and you said society, which implied my invovement - I hate that.

Richard Hammond is like a brother to me.

Socialism must impose itself as it dictates that money, power and the individual are all socially responsible for their actions in the world. Economically I agree, but not individually.

I've no idea at all why you think socialism is relevant in this thread.

However, socialism doesn't have to impose itself with force - or does the free will to support a social society not exist?