|
The Great is also, very explicitly, not set in real history.
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 13:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Open Source Idiom posted:The Great is also, very explicitly, not set in real history. Very few historical movies are. Pretty much every historical movie has a lot of historical inaccuracies (the fact that everyone is talking modern english for example) but the only anachronism that people seem to care about is skin color.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:26
|
|
|
People got very upset when they played "We will rock you" at a joust. But that was a movie for girls and therefore ripe for criticism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 16:02
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Isn't the movie set in like the whitest part of the world? The vikings interacted with the broader world, but basically no one from the broader world would want to go there because it was like the periphery of the periphery. Not being diverse is kind of part of the setting, indicating a society somewhat divorced from the developments of the wider world. 1. Vikings had a lot of genetic diversity in their coastal cities, of which that movie is about. Viking was a job, not an ethnic group. 2. The movie is not historically accurate. It has giant mummy fights and acid trips and Bjork. 3. The choice to do a specifically white monoculture is a choice made in the context of existing white supremacy. They could have done a movie about the Sámi people, who are from the same region, not white, and who were also Vikings. But that would never have gotten funding let alone a fervent racist following.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 17:44
|
|
|
The Sami aren't white?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
Das Boo posted:The Sami aren't white? White isn't really an ethnic group per se, but historically they're closer to east asians/siberians than europeans, which is what most people mean when they say "white". Modernly, they're very white passing sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:16
|
|
|
ITT we are so woke we uncritically accept 19th century race science.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:18
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Modernly, they're very white passing sure. That really is big  There really is still a lot of racism against sami people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:38
|
|
|
2nd Amendment posted:ITT we are so woke we uncritically accept 19th century race science. With that said, criticism doesn’t have to be targeted on a singular film and often period pieces will give a false premise that multi-cultural places are a modern invention. It’s the same way that the Bechdel Test doesn’t mean that there aren’t good stories not about women, but is a larger critique of the stories we tell. And also getting back to the OP, there is nothing wrong with someone choosing to not invest themselves in art that only shows the dominant racial culture. It’s a valid choice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:46
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:That really is big I agree, but I'm guessing that folks not familiar are going google them and see some folks that are fairly white looking. But again, we didn't get a movie about the Sámi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:
Case in point: Hollywood took a movie that actually about the sami and made it into a movie about vikings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathfinder_(2007_film)
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:52
|
|
|
I'm reading the Sami being more Asian than European is a myth (15% genetic markers to 85%, respectively), but concede I have no loving idea what "white" is supposed to mean outside of forensic osteologic markers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:54
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Case in point: Hollywood took a movie that actually about the sami and made it into a movie about vikings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathfinder_(2007_film) Some Sámi were vikings(it's a job not an ethnic group), but your point stands. The Hollywood take on Vikings is a very white euro ethnic group who are specifically not Sámi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:3. The choice to do a specifically white monoculture is a choice made in the context of existing white supremacy. They could have done a movie about the Sámi people, who are from the same region, not white, and who were also Vikings. But that would never have gotten funding let alone a fervent racist following.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:But black (or any other non-white) people essentially playing white people is still reinforcing a white monoculture. Telling stories about a people as deeply appropriated by white supremacists as vikings, even if some of the cast is not white, is a weak substitute for increasing diversity in roles by telling stories about non-white people(s). Merely adding black people to what are clearly "white stories" is basically just another way of saying that the stories of black people aren't worth poo poo. Hell, it might even serve to provide cover for some real historical shitheads, by portraying them as a diverse cast of people - with all the assumptions that follow from that given people's experiences in the real world - rather than correctly casting them as a bunch of racist white men who'd happily wax lyrical about the purity of the white race and the need to preserve it in the face of swarthy Swedes and Germans. You can do both. You can add PoC to viking stories because it's both historically accurate and a good thing to do. You can also tell stories that aren't quintessentially white and euro. And you could stop making movies like viking stories to make space for that. But Hollywood isn't doing any of those things. It's telling white supremacist stories, not telling black stories, and only putting white people in the white supremacist stories.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
How is The Northman a white supremacist story?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 23:04
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:How is The Northman a white supremacist story? Well you see white supremacist like movies like regular people like movies and if a white supremacist likes a movie that movie becomes a white supremacist movie, even if that movie has nothing to do with white supremacy. It's called guilt by association and it's totally cool to view the world through this lens.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 23:07
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:How is The Northman a white supremacist story? Do you think we have 57 movies about Vikings for every 1 movie about, say, the Mali empire for reasons that are completely independent from racism? Madkal posted:Well you see white supremacist like movies like regular people like movies and if a white supremacist likes a movie that movie becomes a white supremacist movie, even if that movie has nothing to do with white supremacy. It's called guilt by association and it's totally cool to view the world through this lens. This is some solid fragility.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Do you think we have 57 movies about Vikings for every 1 movie about, say, the Mali empire for reasons that are completely independent from racism? There is the descriptor of U.S. film production being structured by racism and then there is the assertion that a film is a white supremacist story. Racism is an ideology — so how does The Northman reassert that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 00:10
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:There is the descriptor of U.S. film production being structured by racism and then there is the assertion that a film is a white supremacist story. Racism is an ideology — so how does The Northman reassert that? Racism is both an ideology and a societal structure. You're saying "how does this movie explicitly say white people are better than all other people" and it does not, because that would be explicitly white supremacist and would likely not get made by a major studio due to optics these days. You're hewing to the strictest interpretation of what white supremacism is, similar to folks deciding that the only real racism is the blatant and obvious kind. The US film production system being structure by racism is white supremacy, because it's a system that disproportionately pushes white stories, white actors, and white production staff. When it produces another retread of a white story produced by white white people containing zero non-white actors, that's also white supremacy. Is it a Klansman standing around at a lynching chanting white power? No. But that doesn't make it not a white supremacist story.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 00:28
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Is it a Klansman standing around at a lynching chanting white power? No. But that doesn't make it not a white supremacist story. This renders the critique pretty toothless, though. Like, yes: all movies made in a Western cultural context are shaped by power structures benefitting from racist and colonial histories. But that's not a useful critique of any specific movie; this applies equally to The Northman and also Hot Tub Time Machine and also American Pie Presents: Girl's Rules. Identifying white supremacy, or capitalism, or patriarchy as dominant frameworks that impact art and narrative is correct. I agree. But what does this have to do with The Northman in particular? It's not a rhetorical question, there's a ton of weird, racist baggage weighing down "historical" narratives about Vikings. It'd be easy to make a movie that falls face-first into racist idealization of Vikings as hyper-virile Aryan perfection, or as some early-medieval example of Europe's rightful destiny to conquer the world or whatever. White nationalists love Norse poo poo for a reason. But I'd argue that The Northman is doing the exact opposite, deconstructing these themes rather than upholding them. Granted, it has more to say about patriarchy and masculinity than racism or colonialism, but the entire point of the movie is that Amleth's "heroic" arc to get revenge for his father and earn a place in Valhalla or whatever is fundamentally myopic and childish. The grand kingdom of his youth is actually a complete backwater, he's just a thug and a slaver, and the father he wants to avenge was a lout and rapist. The cultural values he's obsessed with defending are misguided and silly, he rejects the possibility of a better life without those things, and instead throws his life away over something totally pointless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
Xealot posted:This renders the critique pretty toothless, though. Like, yes: all movies made in a Western cultural context are shaped by power structures benefitting from racist and colonial histories. But that's not a useful critique of any specific movie; this applies equally to The Northman and also Hot Tub Time Machine and also American Pie Presents: Girl's Rules. It only renders the critique toothless if you're only interesting in discussing the easiest and most blatant examples of racism, which further entrenches white supremacy. Though, a super viking movie with an 100% white cast in TYOOL 2022 isn't exactly a subtle example of white supremacy in western film-making. We're already at the point where viking groups on social media have to lead with "we're not nazis" to avoid instantly attracting the wrong crowd. quote:Identifying white supremacy, or capitalism, or patriarchy as dominant frameworks that impact art and narrative is correct. I agree. But what does this have to do with The Northman in particular? It's not a rhetorical question, there's a ton of weird, racist baggage weighing down "historical" narratives about Vikings. It'd be easy to make a movie that falls face-first into racist idealization of Vikings as hyper-virile Aryan perfection, or as some early-medieval example of Europe's rightful destiny to conquer the world or whatever. White nationalists love Norse poo poo for a reason. In the same way the fasicsts love Starship Troopers, it's hard to make a cool movie about a thing without sending the wrong message to the wrong people, no matter how obvious you make it. I agree that the character was no hero but he still is the protagonist, still gets cool magic swords and still completes his misguided revenge mission while abandoning a completely fine and viable out where he could have helped raise a child and righted some of the wrongs in his life. The Northman isn't the worst example of white supremacy in the film industry and the characterization is a more realistic take in a fantastical setting, sure. But it's still the 560th movie about vikings and the fascists won't get any of character criticisms. It could have been improved by adding people of color, or far better, never making it and instead making a bunch of movies about African or American(pre-columbian) history. Or basically any culture but blond vikings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 01:47
|
|
|
There’s a difference between analyzing a film as a text and analyzing it as a cultural production. Two contrary readings are possible under those two rubrics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 03:15
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:How is The Northman a white supremacist story? its not by any stretch really, thats just bad posting
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 04:01
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:There’s a difference between analyzing a film as a text and analyzing it as a cultural production. Two contrary readings are possible under those two rubrics. It's a problem in both ways. Where I started was that it's a valid criticism to complain there was no white people in the movie. Gresh posted:its not by any stretch really, thats just bad posting A movie about powerful viking warriors with literally zero non-white cast members in the year 2022? heavens no We're gonnna do that thing that if Eric Northman didn't utter the 14 words I can't say the scary "white supremacy" phrase huh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 08:18
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:But it's still the 560th movie about vikings and the fascists won't get any of character criticisms. It could have been improved by adding people of color, or far better, never making it and instead making a bunch of movies about African or American(pre-columbian) history. See on a fundamental level I just don't think it's ever really a good criticism of a film to say "they should have instead made a completely different film with completely different subject matter."
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 08:55
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:It only renders the critique toothless if you're only interesting in discussing the easiest and most blatant examples of racism, which further entrenches white supremacy. Should we try to make movies much dumber in general so racists don't accidentally like them? I feel like this is coming back full-circle to those 'woke movies' that need to hammer you over the head with the moral lessons. Those movies successfully keep racists from liking them at the expense of treating their general audience as idiots, thus making plenty of non-racists despise the movies too. Like, sure, moronic mouth-breathers can watch The Northman and imagine themselves as big tough Viking dudes, but anyone with half a brain watching it can see that it is clearly taking the piss out of the Vikings' beliefs, in that just about every character is a reprehensible shithead making terrible decisions so they can fulfill self-destructive oaths to gods that don't care. Should movies be dumber, to help the thickheaded parse their message? I think Starship Troopers is fun, and I'm also not a Nazi. I think the fact that it trolled millions of people into taking its message straight is a point in its favor. Is a movie automatically white supremacist unless it features X number of non-white characters? Should movies go out of their way to include them, no matter what? I'm not trying to take the piss - I'm asking a real question. WW2 movies, for example: The US Army was segregated - it had soldiers of all sorts of races, but black guys had their own units and white guys had their own units and they wouldn't be mixed in outside of extraordinary circumstances. Should future WW2 movies have diverse squads that match the racial makeup of America, which would essentially whitewash (hurr hurr) the racist military that existed at the time? I would be thrilled if we got a cool movie about the Nisei Regiment that was the US's fightin'est unit, but I don't think the fact that we don't have a movie about them means every WW2 movie about a generic squad of white guys needs to never be made again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 09:27
|
|
|
Mr. Grapes! posted:Should we try to make movies much dumber in general so racists don't accidentally like them? I feel like this is coming back full-circle to those 'woke movies' that need to hammer you over the head with the moral lessons. Those movies successfully keep racists from liking them at the expense of treating their general audience as idiots, thus making plenty of non-racists despise the movies too. No the point is you need to be cognizant of the context of what you create. Every war movie, to some extent, glorifies war, no matter how anti-war it tries to be. quote:Like, sure, moronic mouth-breathers can watch The Northman and imagine themselves as big tough Viking dudes, but anyone with half a brain watching it can see that it is clearly taking the piss out of the Vikings' beliefs, in that just about every character is a reprehensible shithead making terrible decisions so they can fulfill self-destructive oaths to gods that don't care. Should movies be dumber, to help the thickheaded parse their message? I think Starship Troopers is fun, and I'm also not a Nazi. I think the fact that it trolled millions of people into taking its message straight is a point in its favor. Again, it doesn't matter how smart or dumb it is. If you make a movie about a 6'5" aryan warrior badass and cast exactly zero nonwhite people, the white supremacists are going to enjoy your movie, even if you explicitly don't want them to. That's how it plays into white supremacist culture. You don't get to opt-out, because you don't get to opt-out of western society and it's inherent white supremacy. quote:Is a movie automatically white supremacist unless it features X number of non-white characters? Should movies go out of their way to include them, no matter what? I'm not trying to take the piss - I'm asking a real question. WW2 movies, for example: The US Army was segregated - it had soldiers of all sorts of races, but black guys had their own units and white guys had their own units and they wouldn't be mixed in outside of extraordinary circumstances. Should future WW2 movies have diverse squads that match the racial makeup of America, which would essentially whitewash (hurr hurr) the racist military that existed at the time? I would be thrilled if we got a cool movie about the Nisei Regiment that was the US's fightin'est unit, but I don't think the fact that we don't have a movie about them means every WW2 movie about a generic squad of white guys needs to never be made again. In the broadest sense, every movie produced in western cinema is white supremacist because it's going to disproportionately tell the stories of white people, cast white people. and have white people working it's production and financing. However, if you're making a movie with all white cast and not addressing any sort of diversity, you're going above and beyond to really build a white supremacist movie. To answer your specific examples, if you do a WW2 army, you have some options. You can show both white and black units to show the segregation. You can cast race-blind and just have imagined a better reality than that which existed. You can do a movie about JUST the black units. There's probably some other options I am not listing here. Do we need another movie about WW2 that is almost or literally all white white dudes to show yet another slightly different story about white dudes in WW2? Probably not. But that's probably what we get out of the next dozen or so WW2 movies instead of any of the other options.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 11:17
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:You can cast race-blind and just have imagined a better reality than that which existed. Admittedly the above touches on a more general critique of American war movies, but I do think it's worth keeping in mind that a "progressive" message/presentation in a movie can just be a way to trick people into unknowingly absorbing a much bigger regressive message.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 13:33
|
|
|
If you watch Come and See and come away with the idea that war is cool, you didn't watch Come and See.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 13:45
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I'm not sure how this is not just supporting white supremacy in a different way, given that - as Mr. Grapes! says - that white-washes the history of the US military. You simply can't divorce white supremacy from US imperialism, and the latter supports itself among large parts of the American people through the idea that the US is just inherently morally superior. A belief that is obviously much easier to sell if you show the military not being super racist and sexist during the like one war where it was unambiguously on the right side. And of course applying modern social attitudes to the WW2 military also makes it easier to create a connection the opposite direction, where modern enemies become associated with the enemies of the US during WW2. Yeah, erasing the historical reality of racism is a huge goal of conservatives, because it makes it easier for them to claim and believe that racism isn’t real and never was, and the liberal capitalists who run the culture industry, because an attractive past is more easily consumed by a wider audience.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 13:57
|
|
|
Desperately trying to make movies not appeal to fascists is a ludicrous losing game, because fascists are A: constantly acting in bad faith, and 2: dumb as gently caress, they WILL like whatever they want to like and invent excuses for it, to the frustration of those of you who believe in words and literalism. Even fascists outwardly accept token minorities as useful quislings who can and will be disposed of the moment it's convenient. They don't follow the rules that are convenient to liberals who want them to be quietly discredited and stamp on their hats in frustration. Like, if you want to make a truly antifascist movie, just make Inglorious Basterds levels of literal Nazis being brutally graphically murdered and humiliated, shown as worthless cowards against whom any level of violence is morally righteous, because that's the only thing that works. Ghost Leviathan fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Oct 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 14:10
|
|
|
I knew a white supremacist whose favourite film was Air Bud. Do we censure Air Bud in response to this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 14:21
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:In the broadest sense, every movie produced in western cinema is white supremacist because it's going to disproportionately tell the stories of white people, cast white people. and have white people working it's production and financing. What you’re taking as axiomatic is that diversity is inherently a powerful cudgel against white supremacy, when that can just as easily be a means to reinforce it. In turn, you’re sidestepping the interpretation process in order to totally disqualify films based on whether they meet the dictates of liberal multiculturalism. Like, I think the MCU film Black Panther is far more white supremacist than The Northman, but ideological criticism of this vein would be impossible under your rubric.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 14:22
|
|
|
One subject tangentially related to this topic is that of authenticity. People take for granted the level of subjectivity in what they consider "authentic". Authentic is whatever the person perceives to be authentic; after all you could have a depiction of some tiny tribe of people in some film and two people from that tribe in RL could have wildly different opinions about the authenticity of it, due to their own experiences and precepton. Who gets to be the ultimate authority on this? We could argue "well, the individuals who lived and understand it the most" but even that is going to be subjective. I see authenticity used by many sides in these discussions. As a more mundane example, chuds are mad there are black elves in the LOTR series. They claim their criticism comes from feeling it is inauthentic to what Tolkien had written. But that's so subjective it might as well be meaningless. And since the author is dead it gets left up to interpretation by everyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 14:52
|
|
|
One alternate way of answering the OP is that absolutely nothing makes a film awake, in the sense that there's some objective, measurable property of the text. Misinterpretation (or malinterpretation) is always possible with even the most well-scripted texts. It's consequently pretty much entirely on the viewer to be awake - i.e. to be literate. That's a harsh responsibility, and it's sidestepped when we rest easy in the assumption that such-and-film is 'safe' because of its content. Like, doing a find/replace so that your 'viking movie' uses Mayans & white supremacists might be sad. That's precisely the sleep-state that people are talking about. (Apocalypto was directed by notorious antisemite Mel Gibson, dontcha know.) For one basic example, The Matrix is a libertarian film. Although there's diverse casting and LGBT subtext and whatever, the film presents the unregulated free market as the antidote to their struggles. The Matrix was consequently, effortlessly, appropriated by white supremacists who stand to benefit far more from that libertarian brand of freedom. So, when white libertarians talk about the 'taking red pill', they're not even really misinterpreting the film's message. Finding the truth of The Matrix means reading against it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Again, it doesn't matter how smart or dumb it is. If you make a movie about a 6'5" aryan warrior badass and cast exactly zero nonwhite people, the white supremacists are going to enjoy your movie, even if you explicitly don't want them to. That's how it plays into white supremacist culture. You don't get to opt-out, because you don't get to opt-out of western society and it's inherent white supremacy. I agree with this, in a sense, but you're not taking this far enough: any story produced by anyone starring any people is a product of white supremacy society, because society is white supremacist and these stories are products of that. Positing "white" stories as being uniquely culpable is failing to engage with this. You don't get to opt-out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 16:01
|
|
|
By that metric Blank Panther is a white supremacist movie because there is a white CIA agent who is shown in a friendly light. When you start running purity tests on popular culture you will come up with a lot of reasons why everything is bad and does not come up to lofty impossible standards.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 17:23
|
|
|
Madkal posted:By that metric Blank Panther is a white supremacist movie because there is a white CIA agent who is shown in a friendly light. When you start running purity tests on popular culture you will come up with a lot of reasons why everything is bad and does not come up to lofty impossible standards.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I'm not sure how this is not just supporting white supremacy in a different way, given that - as Mr. Grapes! says - that white-washes the history of the US military. You simply can't divorce white supremacy from US imperialism, and the latter supports itself among large parts of the American people through the idea that the US is just inherently morally superior. A belief that is obviously much easier to sell if you show the military not being super racist and sexist during the like one war where it was unambiguously on the right side. And of course applying modern social attitudes to the WW2 military also makes it easier to create a connection the opposite direction, where modern enemies become associated with the enemies of the US during WW2. While I agree that simply race-blind casting a la Bridgerton(which also has issues) is the least progressive way to deal with the problem, it's slightly better than the status quo. Which is to not only not address the racial inequities present during ww2, but also to pretend black people straight up didn't exist by not putting any in the movie. Most existing WW2 movies just pretend black people weren't even there, while also not addressing any of their stories. I'd much rather that we told black stories, or at least addressed that there was inequity. Ghost Leviathan posted:Desperately trying to make movies not appeal to fascists is a ludicrous losing game, because fascists are A: constantly acting in bad faith, and 2: dumb as gently caress, they WILL like whatever they want to like and invent excuses for it, to the frustration of those of you who believe in words and literalism. Even fascists outwardly accept token minorities as useful quislings who can and will be disposed of the moment it's convenient. They don't follow the rules that are convenient to liberals who want them to be quietly discredited and stamp on their hats in frustration. Was somebody in this thread advocating that it was possible to make movies that didn't appeal to fascists? Because I sure didn't. I made the point you did, which it doesn't matter how much you don't want them to, they will. My issue is not bothering to address white supremacy and/or actively helping it, by telling aryan wet dreams where we pretend PoC don't exist. KVeezy3 posted:What you’re taking as axiomatic is that diversity is inherently a powerful cudgel against white supremacy, when that can just as easily be a means to reinforce it. Where did I do that? quote:In turn, you’re sidestepping the interpretation process in order to totally disqualify films based on whether they meet the dictates of liberal multiculturalism. Like, I think the MCU film Black Panther is far more white supremacist than The Northman, but ideological criticism of this vein would be impossible under your rubric. Where am I doing that? What is my rubric and why can't you criticize Black Panther? By all means, criticize Black Panther, it certainly has problems. Schwarzwald posted:I agree with this, in a sense, but you're not taking this far enough: any story produced by anyone starring any people is a product of white supremacy society, because society is white supremacist and these stories are products of that. Not going far enough? I literally already made this point. quote:Positing "white" stories as being uniquely culpable is failing to engage with this. You don't get to opt-out. Centering white stories is specifically problematic under white supremacy, because it's a specific driving force of white supremacy. However, yes, all media and art produced under a white supremacist culture is indeed influence by white supremacy, to varying extents. That's why it needs to be actively fought against. Madkal posted:By that metric Blank Panther is a white supremacist movie because there is a white CIA agent who is shown in a friendly light. When you start running purity tests on popular culture you will come up with a lot of reasons why everything is bad and does not come up to lofty impossible standards. Black Panther absolutely does have a white CIA agent as a major character to make white people more comfortable, and that's absolutely a concession to white supremacy. quote:When you start running purity tests on popular culture you will come up with a lot of reasons why everything is bad and does not come up to lofty impossible standards. Talking about societal issues isn't purity tests. Something having problems doesn't necessarily make something "bad" and criticism doesn't apply impossible lofty standards. It's about talking about the problems that exist, rather than saying something is "good" or "bad". This is, again, just fragility. If we talk of the problems with something, that doesn't mean we hate it, or that it's bad, or that you're a bad person for liking it and not catching some of the problems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 17:47
|
|