The Big Picture: In Defense of Nostalgia

[karamazovnew]

This episode sure hit the spot. I'm in the middle of a nostalgia crisis myself. I'm European, and a big fan of the concept behind the EU. Seeing how America invades country after country has made me think of old Europe as a bastion of peace, forgetting that we Europeans used to have war for breakfast and slaughter for lunch. Why the OLD one? Well, because the present one seems a bit weird. First of all, because we got ourselves involved in Libya. Not Syria, no oil there. There was a time when you could buy a house in Italy and not trip over trash left out to rot. There was a time when Spain had jobs, when the French national football team had a white guy called Pierre or Francois. And there was a time when our image of England was tea for breakfast, rather than Falafel with Ayran. Even I am guilty of regarding the 50's America as the best place and time to live (IF you were white and had a tad of money). Heck, I even regret the good old 60's USSR and our own (Romania's) 70's communism. And I was born in the 80's! I've noticed that I've gone so back in time with my recent passions that I've become technophobic, mistrusting things like IPads and even GPS How far back in time? Well, judge for yourself: I'm currently playing Bach, gathering money to buy a digital church organ, studying medieval cathedrals and Roman history. That's how far back. Oh, how I miss those plagues and taking dumps in the middle of the street Not really, but the cathedrals were nice, weren't they? And I still call myself an atheist... shame.

 

[Sylveria]

I am getting tired of the gay marriage thing being dredged up over and over again whenever someone wants to show how liberal they are. I agree that the majority of people who oppose gay marriage generally do so for the wrong reasons, but that doesn't make it right. If you're right for the wrong reasons, you're still right.

But I'm not willing to even discuss why they might be right with people who are so bent on being "forward thinking" that they can't consider that maybe, just maybe, the ignorant, scared, slavering masses might be right about this one.

That's some good, old fashion, American hate and fear mongering right there. Listen, I get that a lot of people have repressed homosexual urges and that they deal with those feelings by being gay-bashing homophobes while crying "marriage is sacred" even though 51% of marriages end in divorce and a concerning number end in murder.

But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, please explain to me why it is wrong? Also do not quote or incite the will of the Bible or Church in this argument. Doing so simply proves that the people taking this position have no thoughts or values of your own, just one the priest beat into them during the "special" prayer sessions in his back room.

Also, were you one of the people that were against blacks and women being allowed to vote? Because your stance is the same that those people had "It will destroy America because." Because why? Well that was never answered, it was just a way to keep certain groups oppressed. It's about equality and equal rights. If you act against equality and equal rights, you hate the values that America holds dearest, thus you hate America, thus you are a traitor to America, thus you are a terrorist. See what happens when you say someone can be right for the wrong reasons and still be right.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

200 years is nothing for most nations. For the record.

Hey heres a fun game, after the fall of the soviet union guess who most of these suddenly new nations decided to base their constitution on? Take a wild guess on who they decided might be a good idea.

The US Constitution is one of the most remarkable pieces of paper ever written based on even more remarkable pieces of paper. Funnily enough it's that paper which by the way can be changed as has been fairly often considering it's fairly young age allowing quite a few changes.

So please don't take pot shots at the founding fathers and the constitution. It's got enough people who spend all day, every day doing such.

Wha ... whaa.. what?
I don't mean to spoil your fun, but thats almost not true. The US Constitution is indeed a remarkable piece of paper, but it only influenced the constitution of others in a, well, theoretical way, as they were based on common western values. Practically alot of constitutions as also the law of most former states of the soviet union are based on the german constitution and the german law (there is no right to have guns anywhere). Also the American constitution can't be considered "fairly young" as it's older then most constitutions of all western states.

Let's not forget that our so-called founding fathers also heavily plagiarized from political theorists and philosophers whose ideas they felt were conducive to their argument of why they were seceding from Britain

 

[DTWolfwood]

Just like to add that i am a fan of the New Thundercats! They have the "Thunder Thunder Thundercats HOOOO" montage and that is all that matters. Also Mummrah still looks the same

also a plus Snarf doesn't talk anymore \o/

 

[MeTheMe]

You make a point I'd not thought of before. I had, before, simply considered those too afraid of progress and change to be shallow minded, but the idea that they are, instead, trapped in their own little world of self destructive nostalgia is an interesting new one to me. I'll have tot hink about that, good episode.

 

[Something Amyss]

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

That's the kicker, isn't it? A lot of these guys are really pining for days when women were property and black people were non-entities. Where you could blacklist someone by suggesting they were a communist. Which has sorta come back in and of itself in the socialism debate.

To be honest, I don't think it's an illusory ideal. I think it's what a lot of them really want. The days when the upper and middle class white male ruled the roost and everyone else was not worth mentioning. I don't think they're nostalgic for a false vision of the past, but rather selling a false vision of the past because they're nostalgic for the real version. When you could hit your wife or deny a negro a job and nobody cared.

In essence, I agree with Moviebob ob the fundamentals, but not the specifics.

Also, as this is a game website, I am a gamer, and this did talk about games, I'm going to go into that.

I don't mind nostalgia. I don't care about the dozen remakes that will happen this year in Hollywood over a three month period. I might even watch a couple, though probably not til I can netflix them. I like the warm feeling of nostalgia in small doses. Same with games. I have a couple of remakes/upgrades to games from my past. I'd be lying if I said otherwise. And when I see nostalgic titles I don't like, I generally ignore them. It's really none of my business what makes you squee from your past.

What bugs me is that we now have entire platforms built on nostalgia, and that's pretty bad. We also have entire companies built on nostalgia, and that's not as bad, but it's still pretty annoying. Nostalgia's fun in small doses. Otherwise, it's pretty bad.

Admittedly, this isn't as bad as people trying to incite panic in the name of a movement whose history and nature they didn't understand, or people trying to take us further back into the past because change is scary. But we do have to keep in mind that just because something is not as important does not make it meaningless.

Granted, I'm never going to sign a petition to change Superman's underwear, but some things do concern me about the future of games.

 

[cymonsgames]

That's some good, old fashion, American hate and fear mongering right there. Listen, I get that a lot of people have repressed homosexual urges and that they deal with those feelings by being gay-bashing homophobes while crying "marriage is sacred" even though 51% of marriages end in divorce and a concerning number end in murder.

But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, please explain to me why it is wrong? Also do not quote or incite the will of the Bible or Church in this argument. Doing so simply proves that the people taking this position have no thoughts or values of your own, just one the priest beat into them during the "special" prayer sessions in his back room.

In otherwords "You're a white supremacist evil Hitler loving secret homo religious fanatic idiot fool jerk. Alright, I'll listen to your ignorant backwards argument."

Not really encouraging the response, are you?

I'll tell you what, I've already said what I was going to say. You may have to dig through a couple of pages, just search for my name and you'll find it. If you can get off your high horse and consider for a second that you might be wrong you may get the point. But I doubt it.

Also, were you one of the people that were against blacks and women being allowed to vote?

Oh, no. MOvements for racial and gender equality I feel happened way later than they should have, tho looking at history they happened just as soon as they were able. There is no physiological, chemical, psychological, cultural.. uh.. melanomial.. uh.. mamiraial.. (had to make those last two up) anyways, no reason why those groups should have been denied the rights they were.

Confused? Well maybe you shouldn't go making ignorant assumptions before responding.

 

[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.

Well your right (of course =D) it's USA, but I hear every now and then references to "European" people/culture is (or was) a certain way but it really can not get more wrong since so many very different countries with extremely different ways. The interesting in this is that a "State" could be a sovereign country and then be refereed after that states name. But really interesting is when people refer to America (not the people) they mean USA not the continent(s) I guess a lot of "names" is due to how a country was founded and language has evolved from that point. And to continue on this rather boring point, many people refer British people as English and same goes for the country, even though England is just a part of Great Britain (also funny a country uses "great" in their name ;-)

Ok should (probably) not write this late I go way to off topic...

Took me a while to respond to this, but I've been busy x.x

I think when it comes to the isles a lot of people including myself aren't really able to discern where England stops and Great Britain begins so it's difficult to determine whether someone is "English" or "British". From what I understand, for the most part it's a non-issue. Most of the English/British people I know simply handwave it because I think it's more or less interchangable, but I have heard of people that have gotten very uptight over being called one when they are the other.

 

[goliath6711]

As far as this nostalgia issue is concerned, I think I can sum it up in one phrase:

"Learn from the past, don't live in it."

 

[ForensicYOYO]

Do you ever get tired of being told you're right? =) Im really starting to dig The Big Picture videos you do. Keep it up Bob.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Rose coloured glasses often hide jaundiced eyes.

 

[Warforger]

Yah that always bothered me. Do people not realize that the society of the past had just as many if not MORE problems than we have?

I miss the 1840's. That's the ideal that should be restored.

Bring back the Whig party!!!!

They're the modern Republicans. With the John Q.Adams/Jackson split it went "Democrats" with Andrew Jackson and "national Republicans" with Adams. The National Republicans renamed themselves the whigs, eventually when the issue of Slavery became too much to bear they split up and joined other parties, but some formed the Republican party like Abraham Lincoln.

 

[Dendred]

Oh, how I despise this man.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

I am getting tired of the gay marriage thing being dredged up over and over again whenever someone wants to show how liberal they are. I agree that the majority of people who oppose gay marriage generally do so for the wrong reasons, but that doesn't make it right. If you're right for the wrong reasons, you're still right.

But I'm not willing to even discuss why they might be right with people who are so bent on being "forward thinking" that they can't consider that maybe, just maybe, the ignorant, scared, slavering masses might be right about this one.

If, however, the right reason simply does not exist, then you are just wrong, flat out. This is the case with opposition to gay marriage. The only even remotely valid reason is a religious reason, but marriage is not owned by or solely contained within religion (and in fact marriage predates most modern religions, it's certainly existed much longer than Christianity has), and thus a religious reason for opposing gay marriage does not hold water. You could argue that a church should not be obligated to perform gay marriages if they feel it goes against their religious beliefs, but then they shouldn't be denied it either if those running the church choose to do so (and there are many many churches who have no opposition to gay marriage), nor should gay couples be denied the opportunity to hold a non-religious wedding, as it is possible to be legally married without any religious involvement at all. And since there is no reason outside of religion to oppose homosexuality, this means that if you are against gay marriage, you are just wrong. No discussion, no debate, no ifs, ands, or buts, you're just wrong.

EDIT: Also, Glenn Beck is insane and everyone who follows him mindlessly is, well, mindless.

No... you're both wrong. The marriage institution in America is a product of Christianity, plain and simple. We don't have arranged marriages like in current India and most of the world for most of history. Nor do we recognize polygamous marriage. "Marriage" is not a secular institution, in virtually ever circumstance it is accompanied by religion. It doesn't matter if it spans multiple religions, that doesn't make it secular.

This would all go away if they stopped giving out "marriage licenses" and just had "civil union forms" instead. It's not the benefits that people care about, it's the word. The entire debate is basically just meaningless semantics.

The liberals are just as much to blame because they ultimately want to force values down people's throats. Sorry, but if you're a gay Catholic, you aren't entitled to get married in a Catholic Church. The religion considers you a sinner. Tough. The government cannot and should not try to change the doctrines of the Church. Maybe you should pick one or the other, because the two are mutually exclusive. Or you can make up another form of Catholicism where homosexuality is fine and elect your own Pope. I somehow doubt God is going to come down and stop you. Sure most liberals would say they aren't for forcibly changing church doctrine, but really it's the next logical step, they'll just try to do it with social pressure.

What ever happened to people minding their own f-ing business? That goes for both sides.

 

[Bigred42]

Don't get nostalgia confused with integrity. they are two separate and important part of our society. gay rights is not a legal issue so much as a religious issue. I can't stop two guys from acting wrongly but I can keep it out of my church. besides I don't tell you how to live you life everyone else dose.

 

[Bigred42]

Don't get nostalgia confused with integrity. they are two separate and important part of our society. gay rights is not a legal issue so much as a religious issue. I can't stop two guys from acting wrongly but I can keep it out of my church. besides I don't tell you how to live you life everyone else dose.

 

[Bigred42]

,

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Oh boy...Why am I biting this lure... >_<

Just a few comments on where the left has got us:

The Welfare State has destroyed the black underclass, by offering welfare benefits to single moms, driving men out of the households. The result is a criminal underclass, where young boys are without father figures, and grow up to engage in violence like women, but with men's strength (rap and ghetto culture).

Ummm...welfare benefits to single moms doesn't kick the men out of the house, you know...most of the time, the men either leave the house, or don't want to get in the relationship, or there's a separation. So it's not kicking men out.

Also, that's not what's causing a criminal underclass. There's a LOT of factors causing that (like ingrained crime culture in some neighborhoods, not much hope for advancement in those areas, etc). ...And..."and grow up to engage in violence like women, but with men's strength (rap and ghetto culture)"? Eh? ...that...just doesn't compute for me, I'm sorry. Mind telling me what the heck that means?

Social progressivism has led to ever-increasing budgets for entitlements, leading the government to bankruptcy and insolvency.

There's also the fact that one side of the political spectrum cries bloody murder whenever taxes go up. If more money came IN, then these kinds of things could be afforded. And if you want to get rid of the US debt, TAKE IN more money and GIVE OUT less! That's how you save money! >_>

Nanny-state laws over-regulate small businesses, so that only the huge corporate concerns can afford the lawyers needed to navigate the labyrinthine regulations.

I know nothing about this, so I won't comment.

The producers and makers (typically 'evil' white males) are demonized, while the unproductive moochers are pedastalized.

Hmm...True. But many of these "producers" also export their jobs to china and hoard millions on millions of dollars and only look after their profits. Which is why they are demonized (MANY of them unfairly). It's another case of a few assholes ruining it for everyone else.

But yeah, I agree that the deliberately unproductive DO get put up on pedestals a bit too often.

No Fault Divorce destroyed marriage, leading to greater unhappiness, even amongst those who stay married, than 'oppressed' women from the 1950s.

Destroyed marriage? Umm...Look, what destroyed marriage is a culture based almost exclusively around instant gratification and not giving a shit about anyone else but yourself. People are used to enjoying something NOW, and then throwing it away as soon as it ceases to fit their needs. This has carried over into relationships.

Also, better divorce than being stuck in an abusive or oppressive or otherwise broken marriage. That just leads to hatred, cheating, and more problems. YES, people are gonna abuse no-fault divorce, I'm aware. But people abuse EVERYTHING, so that's nothing new.

That said, none of this is going to stop any time soon - the US is like a car racing down a mountain, the Dems are pushing on the gas pedal, while the Reps are pushing on the breaks - but nobody's putting things in reverse. Year by year, the big government machine gets bigger, more unwieldly, under the control of Civil Service who are unelected, and unnaccountable (the President has, basically, no real power).

I'd say it's more your republicans hitting the gas pedal and the dems not having the guts to hit the brakes. If reports all over these forums are to be believed, the repubs basically played chicken with the US economy during the debt-ceiling crisis. That's not a good thing.

And I would rather trust the government (who at least has to pretend he cares about you), over large companies who only care about their profits, and CLEARLY don't care about you.

Things are going to crash, sooner or later, and voting isn't going to change that; I just find it amusing that people who support leftism are advocating for their own hell on earth. Not that they're making a difference, mind you - like I said, the machine has a mind of its own - but it's ironic, nonetheless, and provides good opportunities for schadenfreude.

I don't see how a careful and balanced application of "leftist" values will hurt people. Canada is doing pretty well and we're more on the left. And switzerland, norway and seden are all pretty left-happy, and they're doing pretty damn good for themselves.

--
Then again, I'm a Canadian who voted NDP. You've probably written me off as stupid socialist scum already.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I think PROGRESS is the most important thing EVER.

Isn't it, though?

If you don't make progress, you're not advancing. You're just gonna stagnate on outdated tech and social norms! Progress is GOOD! It means more efficiency and equality.

Without progress, we'd all be squatting on holes to poop instead of having plumbing, and fighting war with phalanxes while hoping not to get sick from infections we don't know how to cure!

At least, this is the general idea being the civilization games, so it should be at least partially accurate.

 

[TokenRupee]

Well, I was enjoying your point of view. At least until that awkward segue. Keep the politics out of the video. Especially in this one, even the reasoning for bringing politics into the discussion was as flimsy as, well, people's reasoning for buying Call of Duty every 2 years and complaining about Mario. Just keep the discussion to the actual nostalgia you were talking about and not political ideas. I don't watch this for "American Bob" to insert itself in it, especially since I don't watch "American Bob" to begin with.