How did the world get so stupid?

The BBQ Pit
1

Not sure whether this has been discussed here previously ('cause of the limitations of the vbulletin search engine and my knowledge of how to use it), but here we go.

Case in point - Time Magazine, a respectable publication, award an… award… for Man of the Year. This award is given to people who have changed the world the most in the past year. That’s basically the criteria - person who has most changed the world. Now, it’s not limited to men (I believe the Queen once won one), nor does it have to be given to a recipient who has changed the world for the better - Hitler was famously awarded “Man of the Year” in 1938. Actually, I’ve just learned they now call it “Person of the Year”, as if people didn’t know Man relates to Mankind and isn’t gender specific. An excellent factoid that relates to my goddamn point.

In 2001, the year of September 11, some trumped up public official wins this “Man of the Year” award. Mayor of some pissy ass town. Not the orchestrator of the terrorist attacks, but the figurehead who became associated with “cleaning up” afterward. Fantastic. Makes sense. Rudy more influential in the past year than Osama? I don’t fucking think so.

Of course, I’m not denying that the man showed courage in the face of disaster and brought strength to his city and the nation, but to suggest he actually “changed the world” (remember that criterion) more than bin Laden is fantastically ridiculous. Surely anyone with the barest sense of logic could see that Rudy’s courage and strength would have been for fuck-all if bin Laden hadn’t decided to get a bunch of crazy misfits to blow the fuck out of a civilian work area. bin Laden basically * made * Guilani. No disaster, no heroic endeavour, ya see? So, why did Captain Guilani* recieve this Man of the Year award instead of the more obviously influential Colonel bin Laden*? Gee whillikers, I’m supposing public outrage. Outrage because people are too stupid to realize themselves, to realize that “Man of the Year”, while it sounds prestigious and delicious, like Man of the Hour, does not mean “God to worship”. Let me cover it again - it means “person who has most changed the world in the past year”.

Now, remember how Hitler won in the late 30s? Why was that? Why didn’t Winston Churchill or Roosevelt or Jesus win? They were the good guys. They saved us from destruction. But they wouldn’t have had to without their antithesis. Therefore, the anti-hero is more influential than the hero, in this instance too. In the 40s, people recognized that “MotY” wasn’t about greatness in the moral sense, just in the realm of change. So, 60 years on, the public, who clearly act on hair-trigger whims (“What? bin Laden Man of Year? NOOOOO… He’s EVIL - NEVER FORGET NEVER FORGET, USA IS NUMBER ONE”) are far more reactionary and, well, fucking dumb, than they were 60 years ago. Why is this? What exactly has caused the amount of total fuckwits ( http://www.snopes.com/rumors/manyear.htm) to multiply so greatly? Why are people dumber now than they were then? Valid question, but some pretty heavy invective, so here’s the forum for it.

2

Another instance of stupidity is where people forget to annotate. I meant to point out that putting in clearly false military titles is just an idiosyncrasy of mine. Actually, some people do use Captain a fair bit (Captain Angry, Captain Obvious, Captain Fuckwit) but whatever.

3

So you’ve been seething about this for over a year and no more obvious examples of gross public stupidity have come to your attention since then? Sheesh. Not only a lame rant, but remarkably delayed.

4

I thought it was a decent example of public opinion. If you have a better way to gauge how the mass market has deteriorated over time, I’d like to see it, ya fuckwit. Perhaps one example could be the trite Hollywood claptrap they have the nerve to call art. However, I’m no expert on anything, much less the pre-80s zeitgeist, so I can’t really compare how classy and intelligent movies were way back when compared to now. The Time award, having been a long-running event, was simply the easiest to use to compare things occurring in different eras. I suppose I could go to the Oscar website and say “YES, SCORE, when Citizen Kane won a lot of stuff, that was totally appropriate, whereas when Titanic swept the Academy, I cried in shock and misery”.

5

I’ll bite, only because I’m on an anti-StupidAmerican kick today.

Suicide attacks are not new. Airline hijackings are not new. Cave-dwelling mullahs are to most people, just plain silly. This was his second attempt at destroying the WTC, so that’s not even new. I fail to see the big ‘change’ that he’s enacted, except for pointing out a rather obvious weakness for us within our society. He’s little more than a self-important perennial pest that pulled off a major success that day, and he’s barely coherent besides. Why would he be considered the better choice?

6

Uh, gee. I don’t know. I guess you Americans never really made a big deal out of that whole September 11 thing. There was no mass panic or a nation in shock and you pretty much forgot about it within a few days. Nobody suddenly became fervent with patriotism, nobody decided to firebomb mosques, nobody really supported the clean up or blood donations. Nobody really gave a shit at all. It didn’t change the viewpoint of a nation, it didn’t make people think - “is it possible we were wrong?”. It was a real non-event, come to think of it.

7

j_kat_251… Americans were shocked after the first attack on the WTC. Just not as badly because it didn’t affect as many people. Nor was it as successful. The reason Bin Laden’s attacks worked so well this time, was a bit of luck, and knowing that we were very happy to forget about the dangers in the world. He shattered a false sense of security, that’s why it made such a big deal, even though it really wasn’t. I mean, more people die from other things, and noone’s crying over it the way they did after Sept. 11th. It wasn’t a non-event, it was just not as unique as some have made it out to be. After all, thousands have died in terrorists attacks, probably millions really. The difference was that it was completely unsuspected here, and we Americans tend to be naive about such things unless they’re on our doorstep. Breaking a happy ideal, really, of us being special. Now… back on topic, I never pay any attention to Time magazine. The Person of the Year award seems slightly silly, really, to choose one person out of the billions on the planet as being the most influential. however, one could say the most influential person was Bin Laden… but perhaps it should be Lady Luck, I think that’s a bit more appropriate.

8

This looks like a troll…I’ll bite in an effort to fight ignorance.

In 1938, Adolph Hitler was regarded worldwide as a hero for helping to bring Europe out of a great depression. Of course, the rest of the world didn’t really realize his plans for world domination at the time.

Since that the only city you have for your argument, it’s pretty much blown out of the water, huh?

9

Survival of the Thickest.

I am not joking. Intelligent people do not shag like rabbits. Thick people do.

Also, intelligence does not breed success. Ruthlessness (commonly in stupid people) does.

My boss is, without doubt, the stupidest person I have ever met in my life.

10

Yeah, I guess it is. No, wait, not really. You’re quite clever, why don’t you tell me exactly why Rudy Guilani would be recognized as more influential than bin Laden. What actions did Guilani take that so changed the world? Like ** i won’t tell ** said, even though people die all over the world in greater numbers in other catastrophic things, it was Sep. 11 that so changed the viewpoint of a nation and the world. Lockerbie was nothing compared to the aftermath that S11 invoked. Whether bin Laden was lucky or a genius is irrelevant, the point is he orchestrated an event that caused a nation, and the rest of the world, to stop in its tracks and shit itself. Guilani just stood fast. Why is he recognised as greater?

Oh, by the way, Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini won a PotY as well. Doesn’t that blow *your *argument out of the water?

11

how did the world get so stupid is often said as code for a pat on the back and a “gosh! how did I get so smart!?”

12

I fail to see how whom a magazine (published by the uber-stupid AOL Time-Warner) picked as their Hand-Job of the Year makes the “world” stupid. I thought it maybe had something to do with their plumetting stock price.

Guess I’m just part of the problem.:dubious:

13

While I didn’t care for Time’s selection of Guiliani either, in their defense, I should point out that the award/title goes to the person who has the most influence for the past year – and Osama bin Laden, quite frankly, was off most folks’ radar screens from January 2001 through August 2001.

Not that I think Rudy deserved the win, but IMO neither did Osama.

14

I suspect that the reason Giuliani won the Person of the Year award was because in the midst of 9-11 he was symbolic of what Americans were striving to be: courageous and defiant. Even if you disagree with the man’s politics I suspect that few can criticize his actions on the day of 9-11. In effect he was symbolic of the shift in American mentality, from “we’re safe” to “we’re defiant”.

It’s also possible that Time just chucked the idea of picking a person or group who has represented change in the past year and was going for a healing choice for Person of the Year, and Giuliani was praised as a hero immediately after 9-11. Overall I think that a better choice could have been made that would have fit the possible criteria I’ve listed (firefighters) but I don’t think that Giuliani was a poor choice overall.

Ultimately I just think that you’re being cynical. You cite a single act from one magazine as proof of how people have become less intelligent, and it’s not a good proof at that.

Think of it like this: A hundred and fifty years ago blacks were slaves in my country; we’ve wised up since then. A hundred years ago women couldn’t vote in my country; we’ve wised up since then. Fifty years ago we had forced segregation in my country; we’ve wised up since then. Two years ago we thought we were safe; we’ve wised up since then.

One more thing…

Don’t get out much, or are you a sufferer of your own rant?

15

Clearly, TIME magazine picking Adolf Hitler as Man of the Year in 1938 demonstrated the immense intelligence and foresight possessed by the entire world at that time. Ergo, this one magazine failing to crown Bin Laden in 2001 displays our collective ignorance in these dark days of mass stupidity. Oh, the shame of it all.

16

Well, yeah I guess calling New York a pissy ass town was kind of stupid. Heh. Caught in the moment I guess.

Excellent point, although his one event, as I said, was quite remarkable. Remarkable enough, IMO, to have deserved the PotY.

What I was somewhat obliquely driving at was that Time (probably) would have picked Osama had it not been for the foreseeable outrage and backlash this would have caused. People up in arms, calling the Time Un-American and the like. However, I don’t really know this for certain, so I guess my argument is rather thin. Still, I like to think I have a point in the fact that bin Laden was more influential than Guilani and therefore should have received the award (preferably post-humously). I don’t know 100% if I have a point in that Time surely would have given it to him if not for the crybaby attitude of people who couldn’t comprehend the phrase “Man of the Year”.

17

Reading back, I can’t even parse this myself. Sorry, fellas.

It’s my opinion that bin Laden was more influential than Guilani, not a fact. It’s also my opinion that Time would have probably awarded bin Laden PotY over Guilani had it not been for the public outrage evidenced in the link.

18

What utter bullshit

-Bubba.

19

Of course, it would blow your theory all to hell to discover that Citizen Kane was pushed out of the Oscars by the maudlin How Green Was My Valley that took five awards including Best Picture (over Kane and Maltese Falcon among others) and Best Director (Ford over Welles), and that Gary Cooper (as Sergeant York) beat out Welles for Best Actor. In fact, I believe that Kane’s only Oscar was for Best Original Screenplay.

Using the Kane standard, the world has been quite stupid for a long time.

20

Well, like I said, you fuckwit, I’m not a goddamn expert on movies made 50 years ago. I didn’t say I WENT to the fucking Oscar page, I said I COULD have. Had I, I would have seen that Kane didn’t clean up at the Oscars. But I didn’t. Speaking of stupid for a long time, how’s that reading and comprehending thing working out for you? No improvement? Poor bastard.