View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
|
megumi's guy
Joined: 28 Jul 2003
Posts: 67
Location: Murfreesboro, Tennessee
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:02 pm
|
|
|
Sounds like Library War. Maybe if they pass both, then they can have the manga fans defend the comic shops. :>)
|
Back to top |
|
|
dangerwhat
Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Posts: 187
Location: Central Florida
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:53 pm
|
|
|
Its interesting that such a movement is going on in the Japanese government, given that prior it didn't seem like Japan even CARED about the depiction of underage girls in Manga and the like.
It seems reasonable to me to protect illustrations, say Manga or even Doujinshi, from a child porn ban because such things are artistic creations and not actual depictions of child porn. That is, if someone is "into" child porn, they can safely indulge in what whould otherwise be a dangerous (both to the person and society) habit via the medium of illustration. Further, ban or not, illustration whould be a bit hard to police, especially given the volume of work that is put out. Granted, many authors and publishers whould probably abide by the rules as they are laid down, but those that whould not whould then have to answer to the government - and I'm sure the Japanese government has better things to do than to expend money policing such a thing. There is also the freedom of art to consider, but thats pretty well covered by now.
|
Back to top |
|
|
yblees
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 165
Location: New Zealand
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:15 pm
|
|
|
daxomni wrote: |
BellosTheMighty wrote: | The Liberal Democratic Party (which is, in reality, highly conservative) runs the country and has for decades |
Any country that can't break out of monopoly or duopoly rule over the course of a generation has some serious problems. Which, naturally, includes more than just Japan.
|
Whoa! Don't go there buddy.
If you take a look around, the Vast Majority of countries in the world with stable governments have at most two major political parties. That includes the UK, Australia, New Zealand, all of South East Asia, etc...... and the USA of course.
One could even make a case that having more than 2 major political parties is destabilising.
|
Back to top |
|
|
angel_lover
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 645
Location: UK
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:37 pm
|
|
|
yblees wrote: | One could even make a case that having more than 2 major political parties is destabilising. |
Don't go there either. In a lot of cases (UK, USA, etc.) there's so little to choose between the parties these days that effectively you have a one party state. At least in NZ, there really are two significantly different main parties (albeit for all the wrong reasons).
|
Back to top |
|
|
yblees
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 165
Location: New Zealand
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 12:42 am
|
|
|
angel_lover wrote: |
yblees wrote: | One could even make a case that having more than 2 major political parties is destabilising. |
Don't go there either. In a lot of cases (UK, USA, etc.) there's so little to choose between the parties these days that effectively you have a one party state. At least in NZ, there really are two significantly different main parties (albeit for all the wrong reasons). |
LOL. Point!
I read somewhere that when the British Empire pulled out of its "colonies", the ones that ended up with the most stable governments in the long run were ones where the Brits had left behind strong "internal security" institutions under the control of the dominant political party at the time. In other words - having a strong dominant (read single) political party was actually best for the stability of the country.
Do people disagree with this theory these days?
|
Back to top |
|
|
ikillchicken
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 7272
Location: Vancouver
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:19 am
|
|
|
Yeah, it's a tricky question. In theory, it would be ideal to have more political parties. (I personally am in favor of small government but do not support right wing values.) It would be preferable if people were able to pick the party they agreed with on all issues, rather that just who they agree with most frequently. The problem however is that it's a lot easier said than done. The more variety there is the tougher it is to implement. There is also advantages to having fewer parties or even one consistent party. In some ways, one single party will make a country more stable in that the government will constantly be working in a similar direction. Of course that only works if that direction remains correct and appropriate to what people want.
|
Back to top |
|
|
fuuma_monou
Joined: 26 Dec 2005
Posts: 1840
Location: Quezon City, Philippines
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:36 am
|
|
|
yblees wrote: | I read somewhere that when the British Empire pulled out of its "colonies", the ones that ended up with the most stable governments in the long run were ones where the Brits had left behind strong "internal security" institutions under the control of the dominant political party at the time. In other words - having a strong dominant (read single) political party was actually best for the stability of the country.
Do people disagree with this theory these days? |
Malaysia and Singapore are definitely stable (and prosperous). Just not much room for dissent. Hong Kong is the odd man out, but then it's not an independent country.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Zin5ki
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 6680
Location: London, UK
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 7:36 am
|
|
|
dangerwhat wrote: | Further, ban or not, illustration whould be a bit hard to police, especially given the volume of work that is put out. Granted, many authors and publishers whould probably abide by the rules as they are laid down, but those that whould not whould then have to answer to the government - and I'm sure the Japanese government has better things to do than to expend money policing such a thing. |
If needs be, artists would probably just lurk on imageboards and other such places. I fathom their will to draw what they want would remain, even if the ability to profit from it does not.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dardre
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 166
|
Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 1:25 pm
|
|
|
VORTIA wrote: |
I doubt it. They have whole festivals dedicated to Doujin, and most of the people in the manga industry started there. Japan has extremely liberal parody laws, intepretable as anything which is a take off of othe original, and it is under Japanese parody law that doujin propogates. |
Industry reps also attend these things too, so I doubt they're all that upset about doujin.
VORTIA wrote: | As for this law, I find it a terrifying attempt to limit freedom of expression. It's quite understandable in a situation where their is an actual victim, but if we go around outlawing the simple expression of ideals we find distasteful, we're well on our way to an Orwellian control state. Outlaw loli doujin, hell outlaw all violent sex fantasies in the media! And how about murder! Let's not allow murder to be depicted, it incites violence! And what about drinking on television, the little children will want to emulate it, and then people will start criticizing the government, and we can't have that either, so we can't allow that! etc, etc. |
Of course those that support this will claim that they have no intention of going beyond this yadda, yadda. Completely ignoring the fact that they are elected and thus would have no official say in any new laws proposed, or passed, once they are no longer in office. In other words, just because the current law-makers have no intention of going further, doesn't mean that their successors would agree with them.
This sounds like UNICEF trying to do an end-run. Japan's government has already stated that they would do a three year study on UNICEF's proposed ban on virtual child-porn. I find it rather suspicious that this comes up after Japan tabled UNICEF's proposal (where said proposal will probably die).
If a definitive, conclusive study ever comes out that viewing/possessing drawn images of fictional children in sexual situations leads to actual sexual predations of real children, I'd be inclined to support such a law. However, no such study exists, and I seriously doubt there will ever be such a study in my life-time. After all, it's been said that GTA games lead to higher crime rates, and yet there is no reliable study that supports this (and considering the sells numbers of those games, most cities should be drowning in blood and violence as millions of people go on rampages; since that hasn't happened, I seriously doubt there is any real link).
Looks to me like another attempt to police thought.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|