I tend to think that the "censorship" of limiting movies availability by ratings is akin to the "censorship" of limiting political agendas through election. In either case, the mechanism we have to exert control on the shape of our society is at some remove from us individually, so our control is tenuous at best, and hampered by established ideologies (one of which, for both the movie industry and the political industry, is that their "product" is a response to the demand of their consumers, the majority of the public).
MHO, telling someone I think they're doing wrong by me and by society (directly in words and actions or indirectly through the operation of established mechanisms I support or don't oppose) is the only way I have to work towards shaping society. I don't say I have a right to do this (the idea of rights is getting vastly overused, IMO), but I do say that many other people are shaping society without a thought for me--so if I want some representation, I'd better do it myself. It doesn't matter whether any particular action (a film, a law, a statement of opinion) is a cause or a symptom, an initiation or a responsive action--even, to a certain extent, it doesn't mattter whether it seems to be a "big issue" or an insignifacant one: all contribute to the overall experience, the assemblage of interactions that is our culture, and interactions affect one another in ways too complex to understand.
Maybe the question is not how to balance individual-freedom against social-responsibility, "what I want" versus "what is allowed/required/expected". The later is based on the former.
In summary, I might be using a lot of words to agree with your basic ideas.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-03-29 02:16 pm (UTC)From:In either case, the mechanism we have to exert control on the shape of our society is at some remove from us individually, so our control is tenuous at best, and hampered by established ideologies (one of which, for both the movie industry and the political industry, is that their "product" is a response to the demand of their consumers, the majority of the public).
MHO, telling someone I think they're doing wrong by me and by society (directly in words and actions or indirectly through the operation of established mechanisms I support or don't oppose) is the only way I have to work towards shaping society. I don't say I have a right to do this (the idea of rights is getting vastly overused, IMO), but I do say that many other people are shaping society without a thought for me--so if I want some representation, I'd better do it myself. It doesn't matter whether any particular action (a film, a law, a statement of opinion) is a cause or a symptom, an initiation or a responsive action--even, to a certain extent, it doesn't mattter whether it seems to be a "big issue" or an insignifacant one: all contribute to the overall experience, the assemblage of interactions that is our culture, and interactions affect one another in ways too complex to understand.
Maybe the question is not how to balance individual-freedom against social-responsibility, "what I want" versus "what is allowed/required/expected". The later is based on the former.
In summary, I might be using a lot of words to agree with your basic ideas.