Paul Rubin has written an article in WSJ regarding Environmentalism as a type of religion which I find quite interesting. The factors he lists as similarities are pretty dead on:
• There is a holy day—Earth Day.
• There are food taboos.
• There is no prayer, but there are self-sacrificing rituals that are not particularly useful.
• Belief systems are embraced with no logical basis.
• There are sacred structures.
• Skeptics are not merely people unconvinced by the evidence: They are treated as evil sinners.
One could also add:
• Prophet - Al Gore.
• Scripture - The IPCC reports.
However, environmentalism is far from being alone in the specter of issues and causes that people become fundamental about, and many political opinions tend to get stuck because people refuse to change their them - even when faced with overwhelming contradictory evidence. This is not confined to the "right", and possibly afflicts more people on the "left". Scientists routinely refutes diverging opinions with ad hominem argumentation, freezing out those who disagree, withholding resources etc. Economists (sorta one myself) believe their social science is a hard science with evidence based facts proved by complex mathematics. Attempting to critcize a parenting is something I can absolutely forget about since I don't have children myself. Even our hero Einstein refused to accept quantum theory.
What are your opinions on this subject? Can these opinions-turned-fundamentalism be compared to religion?
Of course corporate marketing influences the decisions and is often worth the money, but people must be held accountable for their decisions. Marketing typically don't lie (it's illegal), though construes facts to promote whatever they are selling, and this is widely known (suddenly sounds the same as politics). However, if some are unable to form an independent opinion, it is not marketing which is to blame. The education system plays a factor, but some people are just ignorant, and I'd rather not structure society around the consept of protecting the ignorant from themselves.
Dangling question: If some are unfit to make decicions for themselves, who decides whom must be shielded against what?
Lying in marketing is illegal. The point of marketing is to sell your product, generally by pointing out all the positive aspects. It is not a secret and everybody knows it, and I disagree with you on people not being accountable for their decisions.
However, I do agree that marketing towards children should be banned.
Wow, you really need to take some courses in Economics. The entire capitalist world works on a Supply side economy. This whole idea of demand driven economy with fiat currency is why the world governments are now bankrupt.
You can go ahead and stop buying oil derived products (I bet you can't). Even if you did, and everyone in the western world did, it would not stop China! The ONLY way to address the problem is to demand the governments and corporations lower consumption. The consumerist economy will not save the US, UK or Europe from the current economic depression. So put an end to it, and invest in what is viable for the environment instead.
In North America (Arcus you being from Czech Republic I don't know law there)
Marketing Strategies In Sales: Lying is not illegal, at best, false advertising is considered ever so slightly sinful, and the burden of proof is on the citizen, and those who have fought liars have usually lost: McDonalds, cigarettes, Monsanto, etc How can a citizen on a citizen budget fight multinationals with the budget of entire countries? In our legal system, he with most money wins.
Marketing Strategies In Politics: Lying is not illegal, in politics anything goes, FOX News is marketing for GOP, there is no law in USA that says TV people must not lie. Plus, remember the first Gulf War Invasion, when they showed babies in Kuwaiti hospital and the nurse trying to save them? That got USA citizens to want to go to war with Iraq, before they did not. It was a complete fabrication, a short artistic fictitious film, made by the same marketing company that Clinton had previously used for his own electoral campaign.
Not from CZ, just living here :)
Usually countries have direct laws against untrue marketing, otherwise there are defamation laws with the same effect.
Much the same goes for politics. Not holding promises should be punished by being denied reelection. If you slander the opposition you are leaving yourself open for lawsuits (and public discontent).
If the legal system is unable to deal with it, it is again not marketing's fault, but the government.