Boeingnut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1634 times:
Continuation and branch off from the Sean Penn thread:
Okey, Mr. Penn went to Iraq to speak out against the potential war. Now, I am all for free speech, and a person's right to express themselves. But I think that a person should stick to topics which they are either heavily involved in, or have done extensive research into.
Why do all these movie stars, who are little more than pretty faces, think that their opinion should matter in the international arena? How much in depth investigation has Mr. Penn done into this? How much trust should we place in him, and all other movie star activists, over well versed individuals who have spent years studying international relations and geopolitics?
I just think that they should stick with what they are good at, and stop campaigning for the cause of the moment
KROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1627 times:
Stars get/have credibility, because of the inability of people as a whole to decipher the fact that becomes one makes movies, and is in the so called spotlight, does not make them any smarter or more in the know on world issues that a homeless person on the street. Not everyone is like this, like myself, but the majority of people are "starstruck", and because they see these people on T.V., in the movies, on Entertainment Tonight going into Rehab for the 42nd time, they think the must be all knowledgable. There are reasons why these people are "actors", and not making world decisions that actually mean something.
Boeingnut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1609 times:
Not to defend Reagan (he had his ups and downs, but that is another thread), he started off by becoming very involved in the actors' union, and that inevitably led to local politics, and he worked his way up the ladder from there. At least he made a semilegitimate progression
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4748 posts, RR: 32
Reply 5, posted (12 years 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1606 times:
I think what happens for stars is that they use their own influence to attract attention to the things that they believe. I remember Sting talking about it, and that it is a big responsibility. He has millions of fans all over the world, and if he says the rainforest is a problem, then millions of his fans believe him. I suppose it is no different to us debating politics on here, we try to convince others to see our way, and we use our influence with each other to try and manipulate the opinion.
Like any story, there are clearly many sides, Sean Penn is right in that why should he reply soly on the US media for his opinions, and he couldnt silence his moral responsibility to look further, but do you think that the IRAQIS are going to say to Sean Penn, "Well the reason that the whole country is starving isnt so much to do with the fact that their are sanctions, it is a lot to do with the fact that we are a military dictatorship, and we don't spend the money on our people, we spend it 4.5 billion at a time on getting 12 cabinet member safe passage into Libya"
They also don't say that "the sanctions could end right away if we did what we agreed to do at the end of the gulf war"