Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Che II

A couple housekeeping items first.  

1) DH you are repeatedly butchering the nom de plume, Patricius.  You keep dropping the second "i."
2) Stop calling me Patricius and just use Triple "P".  It's not that I favor Triple "P" but that's the name on my other blog and it's all the same to blogger.  When I post it says posted by Triple P.  

Moving on.  I haven't seen Che yet.  But I might go see it this week.  

But in regard to your more important question about Hollywood....I don't know.  I'm skeptical of your assertion.  Not because I think you're wrong, but whenever anyone asserts "group A always does this ____" my instinct is to ask for the numbers.  In this case the assertion is, Hollywood always makes movies about Nazi Germany, but we never see any about Commie Russia.  to be honest, I can't think of any big budget Hollywood films portraying the evil of the Russians (although there were plenty of propaganda movies back in the 50s and 60s).  

But let's assume your right (as I've thought about it for a day I can't think of anything to refute the assumption).  There may be a less pro-left ideological bias than appears.  

1) There are a lot of Jews in Hollywood and so tales about fascism (Hitler's Germany specifically) have more resonance, which would lead to more greenlighting of films about Nazi germany and the evils of fascism.  If you think about how many Jews there are worldwide and compare that to the number of blacks, chinese, russians, native americans, africans, indians, we might find that the tales that are most resonant to these people slavery, Japan, Stalin, colonization, colonization and slavery, Britian's India are underrepresented based on worldwide populations.  Keeping in mind the makeup of audiences (especially in America) some of those above subjects are made into movies from time to time.  Remember the Titans, Mississippi Burning, Ghandi, etc.  But we'd have to actually tally and compare the makeup of the world, and the country and compare the number of moveis Hollywood puts out to find the discrepancies in representation.  That's way too much work.

2) We also might consider the chicken and the egg.  Did Hollywood create the "fascism worse than communism" thing, or is Hollywood a reflection of the country?  And is it really fascism per se or is it Hitler/Nazis?  I think it's Hitler/Nazis.  This country never had a crusade against fascism but we were worried about reds living next door.  Most Americasn probably can't tell you what fascism is.  But they have an idea of what communism is.  But, for all tht drama, Hitler occupies a special place in the American psyche that Stalin does not.  In America, Hitler is the ultimate evil.  Why?  Stalin was bad too (he murdered more people) but people don't say, "he's a soup-commie" they say, "he's a soup-Nazi."  Nazi has become synonymous with fanatical.   

Is it why they murdered that we view them differently?  Hitler was actually crazy whereas Stalin was crazy-like-a-fox.  Hitler murdered Jews because of his twisted world view.  Stalin was just a power mad macchiavellian out of control.  

Is it because we allied with Stalin? What I mean by that is, in the story of WWII, Hitler was the antagonist.  Stalin was a victim of that, despite being a pretty horrendous dude himself.  The narrative of WWII was, Hitler was evil, and everyone had to gang up on him.  Hitler v. the world.  And while Stalin took his place after WWII, we only got a Cold War.  

Or is it because the western world just excludes Russia from a lot of stuff?  You NEVER hear about how they destroyed the eastern force of Germany's army.  Maybe you do, but only as 5% of the other stuff that's taught.  Africa, Patton, D-Day.  They lost 20MM men!  They did most of the fighting.  The eastern German force was bigger and badder than the western force.  Sometimes you hear about it but in the way that you may look through your elementary school textbook and see that Paul revere only rode a short distance but William Dawes and Israel Bissell completed much more impressive rides.  But you're talking about Paul Rever so it must be that he's more important.  

If that seems right, is Hollywood just giving us what we want?

Whatever the reason, I think there are a several reasonable explanations other than Hollywood is pro-left to explain the predominance of "fascist" films over "communist" ones.  Although Hollywood is pro-left.