Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Is the media the modern day equivalent of the state run church?

In the days of Feudalism the king would appoint dukes who were often times close friends or family and grant them control over a large piece of land with a nice castle to live in. The duke would have complete control over the people who were little more than slaves to him. It ensured the king would have greater control over the people. Since he alone could not subject his iron fist rule over the entire country, especially the peasants who lived far away, he depended on his most loyal subjects to keep the order.

The state run church acted as the propaganda arm. Controlling the religious information by outlawing ownership of Bibles and reinforcing the idea that the king, queen, and other royalty held their positions because it was God's will was force fed to the peasants. To reject the king was to reject God.

Answer Question

Asked by Anonymous at 11:46 AM on Jul. 28, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Answers (8)
  • Today we are currently making a leap towards modern day Feudalism. The office of the president has held powers outside of the constitutional limits for far too long, but Obama has taken it to a whole new level. Car Czars, Pay Czars, Health Czars, Climate Czars, and tens of other newly created czars take more power away from the people and free markets and grant it to him and only him leaving his agenda immune from the Congress where the people are represented. He is fast making himself king and his czars are nothing more than modern day dukes to rule over us.

    The compliant media that is in the tank for him and his agenda is nothing more than the modern day state church. Following his every move, even to the point that killing a fly is headline news. The media simply acts as repeaters flooding the airwaves with his agenda until people buy into it. Hitler once said, "The more you repeat a lie, the more it becomes the truth."

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:46 AM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • If the media is the modern day equivalent of the state run church then what is the modern day religion that is preached by the church? Well, liberalism of course, but liberalism when played out in the open is recognized for being anything but liberating. So the liberals had to find a new disguise for their agenda. Well, there are many, but the one that seems to have suckered even many ignorant conservatives is the environmental movement. The environmental extremist lie is your new bible. So Make sure you tune into MSNBC, ABC, NBC, or CNN for todays message from the state run church...err....I mean media.

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:47 AM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • I think this is a very astute observation.

    I also think the MSM is losing its credibility. At least ratings give an indication of this.

    The problem is that peasants tend to be uneducated and in this case "nannied by the state" into a sense of entitlement. It is very hard for the reality of issues at hand to penetrate that.

    I am sure I will probably get bashed for that statement. But, the bashers will most likely be those with little education and dependent upon the state. People, that doesn't have to be you. Rise from it, be better than that. You CAN do it.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 12:00 PM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • When people realize how wrong the media was on Obama I wonder what it may hold in store for Palin.

    Answer by Carpy at 12:20 PM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • The Main Stream media is a useless tool that any sane person would not believe a word of what they say. They are swiftly losing whatever support they had since Obama got in office.

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 12:32 PM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • "The compliant media that is in the tank for him and his agenda is nothing more than the modern day state church. "

    If that was the case, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity would be in the modern-day equivalent of the Tower of London, awaiting their execution. Or perhaps their heads would already be on the spikes. The Wall Street Journal would have been burned to the ground, and the FOX News studios razed.

    The fact that all of these branches are still in operations belies the thesis above. What you are seeing is that people make their choices in what they want to watch, read and listen to. What you are also seeing is that many people DO NOT take the time to really learn about the issues.

    Answer by gdiamante at 1:19 PM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • I appreciate the train of thought in this post.

    And, gdiamante, I fervently hope that you are correct, and that we do NOT see a campaign to shut up dissenting celebrities or shut down dissenting publications.

    Watch the new "diversity commissions" in local broadcasting regulations. Make sure they do not use their breath-taking power to censor dissent.

    Answer by waldorfmom at 8:09 PM on Jul. 28, 2009

  • I aagree with gdiamante. There is much about the media , especially TV, that I do not like, but I am free to ignore it. There is a diversity of opinion, a wide choice and often exhaustive analyses of issues, especilly in print media which , if anyone bothers to read nowadays, is qualatively vastly better than TV and radio talk shows.

    Going back to the original question , in the days of feudalism right up to the protestant reformation, it was not so much a ' State run Church ' but an alliance between Church and State, in which each implicitly supported and guarded each others' interests. By our standards today of course, it was hopelessly corrupt . Of course, groupslike the Christian Coalition would like to see something similar today, a 'theocracy'. You only have to look at theocracies and movements for them in some muslim countries to see how nasty they can be.

    Answer by janet116 at 11:45 PM on Jul. 28, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.