It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: US Out In The Cold Over Hollywood Globalization

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   
The United Nation's culture arm UNESCO approved a "Diversity" convention which left the US "out in the cold" and is likely further proof of growing anti-american sentiment and bias within the U.N. The US and Israel were the only opposition to the vote with Australia being one of four countries that abstained from voting. Britain who is usually the US administrations staunch ally voted for the convention to be passed. The diversity convention is seen by supporters as vital in the effort to combat English speaking cultural standardization.
 



www.news.com.au
Under Article 6 nations are authorised to take "regulatory measures" aimed at promoting cultural diversity, while under Article 8 they may identify "situations where cultural expressions ... are at risk of extinction" and take "all appropriate measures" to preserve them.

For the French government - which has successfuly fought to keep cultural items such as films, music and publishing exempt from the general drift towards freer trade - the text is an important international marker ahead of a new round of talks at the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Article 20 states that the convention is not "subordinate" to any other treaty, which Paris says will give juridical force to countries which refuse to open up their cinema industries for example to outside competition.

But defying a near total international consensus, the United States refuses to see the convention as a force for cultural variety - but instead as a charter for governments to put up new trade barriers and suppress the free flow of information.

Noting the increasing tendency of countries to classify material goods as "cultural" - France did it only this week with foie gras - Washington fears the text could be wilfully misinterpreted "as a basis for impermissible new barriers to trade", according to a state department statement.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I am one for cultural diversity. I find all to often in the world that due to war, exploration, take overs and global populization, individual cultures are being buried and lost to the people.

One small battle won in the effort against the New World Order. I find it amazing that a country like Australia with such a large multi cultural base, abstained from voting. Its a disgusting move to crawl higher up the Bush administrations backside.



[edit on 20-10-2005 by Mayet]




posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   
against? puzzling, forcing nations to diversify their culture and giving the UN permission to inflict trade penalties on countries who try to keep their culture....how is that in any way against any supposed NWO?



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I'm very much for this. What the Conventions says is that cultural contents - movies, books, etc. - are much more than merchandise to be sold in a competitive market. Culture is part of the identity and heritage of a nation, and should not be a question of competition and financial darwinism - for example, the vitality of Canadian culture should not be judged by whether Celine Dion dominates Las Vegas or not.

Right now a lot of countries are worried that their cultural identity is being submerged under a tidal wave of American content. The biggest threat to cultural diversity is that for the U.S., cultural exports are big business - hundreds of billions per year. The U.S. being the richest country in the world, there is no way that any other country can compete in the marketing of its cultural products.

So this isn't "revenge" against the U.S. for Iraq or something like that. It's just acknowledgment that culture is a lot more than a question of commercial value, and that a lot of people out there don't want the fact that the U.S. has more marketing power to cause their kids to become little Americans.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Good point namehere, cause if the NWO comes into actual existence, it will be by way of the UN or through the UN.





seekerof



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Good point namehere, cause if the NWO comes into actual existence, it will be by way of the UN or through the UN.




IMO - the NWO already is in existence - by way of corporate law, and establishing corporations as equivalent to nations under international law in free trade agreements.

Yea UN! This tiny little convention might help protect the few freedoms we have left.


.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
I'm so glad that you support the NWO=UN, soficrow.
I always knew that you had it in ya.






seekerof



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by OttsSo this isn't "revenge" against the U.S. for Iraq or something like that. It's just acknowledgment that culture is a lot more than a question of commercial value, and that a lot of people out there don't want the fact that the U.S. has more marketing power to cause their kids to become little Americans.


yes it is, whos economy do you think it will hurt? its an easy way to force our businesses out and shut our media up, they can now arbitrarily deem anything they dont like as cultural intrusion, our fast food resturants or any other business ventures are not culture or objects americans hold any signifigance to yet many like you wish to deem it as such and i bet the first victim of this will be the US economy.

their just doing this because they cant handle competition, they deem our businesses as culture so they can punish them and force them out to prop up their own business with no challengers, also to censor our media and movies if it questions anything they do, many ways to single out individual nations here if they happen to anger europe or russia or china or all 3, if theres any nwo, it will be socialist and this is an example of a disguised control measure playing off popular opinion to sneak past.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Hmmmm, If a culture can't hold its own against a more dynamic culture, maybe its not supposed to.

Otts mentioned financial darwinism. How about cultural darwinism? If your culture is backward, repressive, and anti-productive, maybe it should vanish. If your culture only holds you back and puts you at a disadvantage when interacting with other cultures, maybe it is natural for it to become extinct, like a failed species.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
IMO - the NWO already is in existence - by way of corporate law, and establishing corporations as equivalent to nations under international law in free trade agreements.

Yea UN! This tiny little convention might help protect the few freedoms we have left.


.


when the darkness passes your eyes you'll regret missing the one manipulation that snuck up on you.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 02:17 AM
link   
I honestly dont get this. The UN meddling. How is this anti NWO? last I checked, the UN WAS NWO.

I could really care less if American culture does not get exported. Its our culture. This also means we can block other cultural imports as well. So I dont see what the problem is on either end. Besides, having American culture in other countries makes it less unique. It is something to be enjoyed by us.

I dont see anythoing wrong here, other than UN meddling where it doesntg belong.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   
well its the principal of freedom and open information being subverted that bugs me and the obvious targetting of our country, its undemocratic and hostile towards us but hey like you said skadi, goes both ways and we can screw with them in return if they try to use it as economic war tool, i mean considering the wording it could be used to legally subvert the wto rules....



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 02:36 AM
link   
why should there be a law to prop up cultural expressions? thats what commercial musuems are for. if the culture itself is strong enough to sustain itself then it will be.

if you want to stop globalization homogenization so badly stop integrating economies.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
This seems like a heck of a silly thing for an international body to be meeting on. If the French don't want American films, music, etc. in their country, then let them ban them outright, then the world can see what is really going on here. This is simply an idiotic attempt to make trade repression seem logical and legal. What happened to the concept of free and open worldwide trade? If some countries can't take the heat then stay out of the kitchen because this kind of thing is just plain wrong.

I wonder how much the U.N. will pay to hold this convention and how many employees are tied up in it? I'm beginning to agree more & more with the critics who argue the U.N. is badly in need of reform. The only thing this will accomplish is to drive some things underground and hurt the businesses involved that have "cultural" products that must be repressed.

[edit on 21-10-2005 by Astronomer68]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Tell that to the American steel and lamb industries. They are protected by American tarrifs and protectionist policies. The Americans only extoll the virtues of free trade when it comes to their own exports.

Some here seem to equate cultural longevity with commerical viability. Shows how much you know about culture...



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by namehere: yes it is, whos economy do you think it will hurt? its an easy way to force our businesses out and shut our media up, they can now arbitrarily deem anything they dont like as cultural intrusion, our fast food resturants or any other business ventures are not culture or objects americans hold any signifigance to yet many like you wish to deem it as such and i bet the first victim of this will be the US economy.


Maybe it will hurt the US economy, but right now, the view that cultural products like movies, books or music are solely marketable goods is hurting cultural diversity worldwide. The ability the U.S. marketing powerhouse has to just swamp a country with American cultural products is causing other cultural expression in various countries to wither in the face, not of healthy competition, but downright invasion and conquest. The goal is not to shut out American culture, but to re-establish a balance and enhance cultural diversity by saying that not everything in this world needs to be submitted to the law of the jungle.


Originally posted by AmbientSoundHow about cultural darwinism? If your culture is backward, repressive, and anti-productive, maybe it should vanish. If your culture only holds you back and puts you at a disadvantage when interacting with other cultures, maybe it is natural for it to become extinct, like a failed species.


Yes, but if over 190 countries voted for this, it means that a good large number of them feel their culture is threatened - and not all these cultures are repressive of backwards. Furthermore, the U.S. has the ability to gain cultural dominance pretty much anywhere not because other cultures are weak, but because it has the financial and marketing means to introduce a movie or a record in a given country so overwhelmingly - just look at the whole Star Wars phenomenon of movies, props, toys, Halloween costumes, ads, etc. - that other movies in that country don't stand a chance. It's a matter of peer pressure and advertising pressure so overwhelming that nothing can stand in its way. Not a matter of the other culture being obsolete.


Originally posted by Astronomer68This seems like a heck of a silly thing for an international body to be meeting on. If the French don't want American films, music, etc. in their country, then let them ban them outright, then the world can see what is really going on here.


I know some Americans like to think everything is France's fault, but in this case, it's not about the French not liking American movies. They wouldn't have them at the Cannes festival if they did. It's about putting culture in another arena than the commerce and trade arena, and making sure globalization means the cohabitation of all cultures, not the domination of the one which has the best ability to impose itself and wipe out all the others.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   
How does America repress cultures in other countrys? The last movie I saw was "Kung fu Hustle".....a chinese movie, that BTW was very popular and real funny.Also, why does almost very american kid watch cartoons made in japan every saturday morning? Last time I checked, my local video store had spanish films as well(alot of them).....again what part of America is repressing culture.If something is good, or liked...people buy it or want it.WE can't stop that.Do french films suck so bad, that they can't release a film if we have a new release...c'mon.Sounds like a hidden trade barrier to me.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Its an OVERT trade barrier! That's the point, all these countries don't want their cultural identity to be subjected to free trade agreements. How is this so hard to understand? Lets say (and this is a hypothetical), how would America feel if a cultural icon such as baseball was suddenly being swamped by soccer? Say an advertising blitz flooded American TV's and schools with "Soccer this" and "Soccer that", then in the next 5 years no ones playing baseball any more. No one is sponsoring baseball teams any more, the stations take baseball games off their programming schedules because no advertisers want to buy advertising slots for it. Americas favourite game is now soccer, hoorah for free trade!

Is that a good thing? Do you really want to jeapordize American cultural and historic icons to free trade? You might not mind it now, now that America has the upper hand with everything they do. But would you like it if say a consortium of soccer playing nations (like about 3/4 of the World) got together and decided to carry out the hypothetical I mentioned above? Not that it matters anyway, the World has spoken with uncommon clarity, you have to respect that now.

[edit on 21/10/05 by subz]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Subz, concerning your baseball -vs- soccer analogy, I would love it, I think baseball sucks and soccer is great--I do understand your point though. I wonder if China has any idea what they are in for as they continue to expand commercially--Chinese culture will be embedded in many of their indigenous commercial products. Right now they are producing products for other countries that were mostly thought up in other countries, but that will not always be the case.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join