From: smith@hall.harvard.edu (Steven Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Comic Strips -- American Cultural Imperialism over Canada
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:31:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: hall.SMITH.92Apr13093152
	<SMITH.92Apr8092049@gramian.harvard.edu>
	<WARKENT.92Apr8182137@ltisun11.epfl.ch>
	<SMITH.92Apr9132033@gramian.harvard.edu>
	<WARKENT.92Apr10161547@ltisun11.epfl.ch>
Organization: Harvard Robotics Lab, Harvard University

In article <WARKENT.92Apr10161547@ltisun11.epfl.ch> warkent@ltisun11.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne) writes:

> In article <SMITH.92Apr9132033@gramian.harvard.edu> smith@gramian.harvard.edu (Steven Smith) wrote:
> > If you read The Economist you would know that the Swedes threw out the
> > socialists in the last election about a year ago, and are now
> > dismantling their welfare state faster than you can say ``Husqvarna.''
> 
> "Thrown out" is a bit harsh since the opposition coalition just scraped in.
> Although they are indeed reducing the role of the government, they are still
> a long way from moving to a libertarian's paradise.  Again, while it is
> clear that too much state intervention is a bad thing, it is definitely
> not clear that no state intervention is always a good thing.

The old Swedish government proclaimed for sixty years that they were
the ``third way'' between capitalist and socialist economies.  That
they were defeated after controlling the country for so long, and in
an election that was fought not simply for the mantle of power but for
the soul of Sweden's future, is significant.


> > Why do feel that the Arts in Canada are improved by forcing them to
> > conform to some bureaucrat's idea of suitable Canadian content?  Do
> > you think that the purpose of art is to provide insight into
> > spirituality, humanity, truth, or beauty?  Or should it simply serve
> > as sanctioned symbolism for nations?
> 
> Let's assume that there is such a thing as Canadian culture.  I am not
> for controlling the content of that, just improving access to it --
> which I believe can be accomplished by quota regulations such as CanCon.
> CanCon requires that radio stations play a certain percentage of music
> produced in Canada by Canadian artists, and not that Bryan Adams has
> to sing "Quebec, Quebec", or "I Left My Heart in British Columbia".
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> The thriving local music scenes that exist in all major Canadian cities.
> The increased awareness of Canada thanks to the internationally known
> musicians that have sprung from these scenes.

Opposition to content regulations does not a social (or cultural)
Darwinist make.  In a previous article you stated

	Although I am generally an opponent of government intervention in
	the economy, I do support CanCon regulations.

But unless the Canadian government has magically struck upon the
Canadian public's demand for music, content regulations are simply
government regulation of the economy, as any Canadian radio station
owner can tell you.  Regulation may or may not be bad, but I can think
of several more constructive methods to foster and encourage Canadian
participation in the Arts other than regulating play-time based upon
putative origin.  Why must papa Ottawa dictate the chiaroscuro of
Canadian Arts?

Steven Smith
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada