Guilty By Suspicion VHS
cr
even in its fictional parts, and even if the scenes and characters that appear
to be exaggerated for the sake of drama are entirely true; and even if all of
the suffering of those whose lives were ended or ruined or altered is all true,
this movie is still propaganda.
That is because the McCarthy era is presented in this movie out of context.
At the same time that the abominable McCarthy era was happening in the U.S.,
the Soviet Union was having a much worse era, that lasted much longer. China
was having a much worse era, that lasted much longer. And North Korea, and
other countries.
The extremes of the left and the extremes of the right are equally murderous.
When a work of art presents the extremes of the right, without admitting
the extremes of the left, even when they were the same in kind, and even worse
in degree, and happening during the same era of world history, then that work
of art, no matter how well done, needlessly proves itself to be propaganda.
Lefties can discredit and demonize me for pointing this out, and they can
discredit and demonize a million people better than me who know that I speak
the truth about this, but this movie is still propaganda.
-cr
Bob
cr wrote:
If it is true in every detail ( quoting you) , then it is history, and not
propaganda. cr, there are as many evil conservatives as there are evil liberals.
When you realize this fact, you will begin to understand why I deeply suspect
divisive politicians, of either the right or the left.
Bob
cr
> If it is true in every detail ( quoting you) , then it is history, and not
> propaganda. cr, there are as many evil conservatives as there are evil liberals.
> When you realize this fact, you will begin to understand why I deeply suspect
> divisive politicians, of either the right or the left.
The movie was not a documentary. Why do you ignore my point that the same kind
of thing, but worse, was happening in Communist countries AT THE SAME TIME as the
McCarthy era in the U.S.? A fair work of art would not ignore that irony.
I fully sympathize with all of the Americans who innocently flirted with the
Communist Party during bad times in the U.S. I hold them totally blameless,
and condemn McCarthyism as much as anyone. But it's still a fact that the same,
only worse, practices of oppression and intimidation were happening in
Communist countries at the same time that McCarthy was doing his thing in the
U.S. I refuse to let the left get away with pretending that McCarthyism was
something that comes only from the right.
-cr
Bob
cr wrote:
> Bob <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<3DD1F511...@ix.netcom.com>...
> > If it is true in every detail ( quoting you) , then it is history, and not
> > propaganda. cr, there are as many evil conservatives as there are evil liberals.
> > When you realize this fact, you will begin to understand why I deeply suspect
> > divisive politicians, of either the right or the left.
>
> The movie was not a documentary. Why do you ignore my point that the same kind
> of thing, but worse, was happening in Communist countries AT THE SAME TIME as the
> McCarthy era in the U.S.? A fair work of art would not ignore that irony.
First, what was the film about? Was it a depiction of accurate history or a fictionalized
account? Was the intent of the film to show what evil happened under McCarthyism, or to
make a statement that it was "less evil" than what was happening under Stalin?
McCarthy, by the way, should not be painted as right or left, but entirely as the self
serving power hungry drunk he was.
>
>
> I fully sympathize with all of the Americans who innocently flirted with the
> Communist Party during bad times in the U.S.
Oh yes, many of them did. Many people thought the world wide depression was proof that
capitalism did not work, and they were looking for something better.
> I hold them totally blameless,
> and condemn McCarthyism as much as anyone. But it's still a fact that the same,
> only worse, practices of oppression and intimidation were happening in
> Communist countries at the same time that McCarthy was doing his thing in the
> U.S.
But that is not the point. You are looking for different film than the one you saw. Hell,
now, everybody knows that Stalin was a criminally insane dictator, even the Russians,
indeed, the Communist USSR even, admit that. Communism is, in many ways, a dead. Very
few people ( in relation to the population of the world ) think it to be a viable system.
To me, it's like beating a dead horse ( as Limbaugh does). It may satisfy a hate within
yourself, but it does nothing to the horse.
> I refuse to let the left get away with pretending that McCarthyism was
> something that comes only from the right.
> Of course it did not, nor does not. McCarthy was nominally a Democrat, IIRC.
> -cr
Kevin FilmNutBoy
>If it is true in every detail ( quoting you) , then it is history, and not
>propaganda.
Not really -- something can be true in every detail and still be propaganda.
Propaganda is simply the promotion of one side of an issue, perhaps at the
expense of another. Propaganda is not necessarily false -- it's just not
even-handed.
--Kevin
Bob
Kevin FilmNutBoy wrote:
And if true, usually not the complete truth.
Bob
Heynony
filmn...@aol.commode (Kevin FilmNutBoy) wrote:
> something can be true in every detail and still be propaganda.
> Propaganda is simply the promotion of one side of an issue, perhaps at the
> expense of another. Propaganda is not necessarily false -- it's just not
> even-handed.
So if I want to make a wildlife documentary about anteaters I need to
give equal time to zebras?
Trouble with the line of thinking being developed in this thread is that
it leads to bizzarre outcomes when you think it out. All historians, for
example, present one side of an issue: their particular view of it. Even
a historian who breaks his neck portraying different points of view and
different perspectives is still selecting, and furthermore that very
attempt at _objectivity_ is a biased view in itself! Treating the
Holocaust even-handedly, giving equal weight to the view that it never
happened or has been grossly exaggerated, would be a distortion. There
are issues that don't have two sides. Most issues have dozens of "sides"
and there isn't time enough or audience interest enough to present them
all.
The major mistake being made here is to view the trivial left-right wing
political spectrum as if it were some overwhelming, all-encompassing
view of life, as if all events and all life occurs at points along that
single line. While the fact is that left and right are significant
pretty much only to the people fixated at one end or the other of this
rather silly scale.
Talking to political extremists is like talking to a person who believes
the _temperature_ scale is the dominant template on which human
existence is to be measured and examined. I had a teacher once who
actually believed this: that differences in cultures, the causes of war,
disease and just about everything could be described in terms of climate
(mostly temperature). She saw the whole world and the whole of history
as driven by that particular scale. She had some truth of course, the
temperature scale exists and does have _some_ impact just as the
(current version of) the left-right political scale exists and has
_some_ importance. But both are pretty much overwhelmed by the true
complexity of human existence.
John Reilly
Even as a self-confessed lefty I'm of the opinion that the McCarthy episode
should be viewed as a warning to the depths to which a western democracy can
stoop, rather than "look at the type of things the right do when they have
power".
Anyway, if anyone watching that film needed to be reminded of Stalin's
Gulag camps then god help us.
--
John
(Remove NOSPAM) to Reply
------------------------------------------------
"Hey, don't worry, don't be afraid, ever, because... this is just a ride."
- Bill Hicks
cr
> So if I want to make a wildlife documentary about anteaters I need to
> give equal time to zebras?
The movie wasn't a documentary. The fact remains after all of your skirting of
the issue that there was great irony in McCarthyism persecuting people who once
innocently flirted with Communism, at the same time that Communist countries were
practicing even worse political persecution. This movie would have been better,
and not propaganda, if it had faced that irony.
-cr
cr
> Even as a self-confessed lefty I'm of the opinion that the McCarthy episode
> should be viewed as a warning to the depths to which a western democracy can
> stoop, rather than "look at the type of things the right do when they have
> power".
> Anyway, if anyone watching that film needed to be reminded of Stalin's
> Gulag camps then god help us.
God help us, indeed, because our universities are making sure that graduates
today know all about McCarthyism and Nazism, but next to nothing about Stalin,
Mao, and next door neighbor Castro.
-cr
Heynony
> McCarthyism persecuting people who once
> innocently flirted with Communism
Are you saying THAT'S what McCarthyism was? People were persecuted for
things like having the same last name and a similar address to somebody
who once knew a left-wing Democrat (only a very slight exaggeration).
People who had favored a second front in WWII, or contributed to
charities for Russian victims of the Nazis. Mainstream Republicans were
attacked as pinkos and fellow travellers. Geeze, man, read.
You're also hopelessly muddling the Hollywood blacklist and associated
evils with McCarthyism, a later and very seperate disease.
cr
> os...@netscape.net (cr) wrote:
>
> > McCarthyism persecuting people who once
> > innocently flirted with Communism
>
> Are you saying THAT'S what McCarthyism was?
You quoted me out of context. I didn't say that was all that McCarthyism
did, only that it did do that (in the general sense, mentioned below).
> ...
> You're also hopelessly muddling the Hollywood blacklist and associated
> evils with McCarthyism, a later and very seperate disease.
Ok, you're right about that, but it wasn't much later that TRUE McCarthyism
came along, and the disease certainly was not 'very separate'. The whole
era, encompassing all of it, is often thought of as McCarthyism, but I don't
mind being admonished to be more precise in the future.
You're still evading my point, because whatever you want to call it, the
people in the movie were being persecuted for having innocently flirting
with Communism. And at the same time that this persecution was happening
in the U.S., there was even worse political persecution being carried out
in Communist countries. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this point, which
is the basis of the charge that the movie is propaganda?
I'm not asking you to agree with the charge, only to indicate that you
understand it. All you are doing so far is trying to discredit me, which I
predicted in the first post in this thread.
-cr
Stan Jones
>You're still evading my point, because whatever you want to call it, the
>people in the movie were being persecuted for having innocently flirting
>with Communism. And at the same time that this persecution was happening
>in the U.S., there was even worse political persecution being carried out
>in Communist countries. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this point, which
>is the basis of the charge that the movie is propaganda?
>
But Americans are only responsible for what Americans do to other
Americans, not for what Russians do to other Russians. If a film maker
is trying to make a point about American society and what happens when
thought is made a crime, what's it matter what was going on at the
same time in Russia?
Stan
Heynony
> If a film maker
> is trying to make a point about American society and what happens when
> thought is made a crime, what's it matter what was going on at the
> same time in Russia?
You make an excellent point, and I agree. You win. I'll give you Russia.
However, the film's failure to deal with the problems of the chocolate
industry in Sweden, which was going on AT THE VERY SAME TIME, is totally
inexcusable. The film loses all claim to any merit by that excusion.
John Reilly
news:22680de.02111...@posting.google.com...
Well there is such a thing as independent learning: I studied physics at
university and Stalin wasn't very prominent in the syllabus.
cr
> But Americans are only responsible for what Americans do to other
> Americans, not for what Russians do to other Russians. If a film maker
> is trying to make a point about American society and what happens when
> thought is made a crime, what's it matter what was going on at the
> same time in Russia?
I'm talking about balance and fairness. When there is an agenda behind a
portrayal of what Americans are doing to other Americans, an agenda which
aims to expose the evils of the extreme right, and cover up the evils of
the extreme left, then that portrayal becomes propaganda, even when every
detail of the portrayal is true.
-cr
P.S. Speaking of thought being made a crime, check out what's happening
in the universities of the U.S. these days.