Wednesday, June 30, 2004

I don’t think I really need to say anything about Fahranheit 9/11 that hasn’t already been said and said better. That’s what comes of seeing the film after everyone while on vacation from blogger duties.

It was fun to read Hitchens’ piece after seeing the movie. Clearly he didn’t enjoy it mostly because images of dying children contrast badly with the tune of “The 1812 Overture” playing in his head. I won’t go through the whole thing. Rereading it will send me into a fugue state. But Chris should keep is gin-soaked paws off of Black History.
From Fahrenheit 9/11 you can glean even more astounding and hidden disclosures, such as the capitalist nature of American society, the existence of Eisenhower's "military-industrial complex," and the use of "spin" in the presentation of our politicians. It's high time someone had the nerve to point this out. There's more. Poor people often volunteer to join the army, and some of them are duskier than others. Betcha didn't know that. Back in Flint, Mich., Moore feels on safe ground. There are no martyred rabbits this time. Instead, it's the poor and black who shoulder the packs and rifles and march away. I won't dwell on the fact that black Americans have fought for almost a century and a half, from insisting on their right to join the U.S. Army and fight in the Civil War to the right to have a desegregated Army that set the pace for post-1945 civil rights. I'll merely ask this: In the film, Moore says loudly and repeatedly that not enough troops were sent to garrison Afghanistan and Iraq. (This is now a favorite cleverness of those who were, in the first place, against sending any soldiers at all.) Well, where does he think those needful heroes and heroines would have come from? Does he favor a draft—the most statist and oppressive solution? Does he think that only hapless and gullible proles sign up for the Marines? Does he think—as he seems to suggest—that parents can "send" their children, as he stupidly asks elected members of Congress to do? Would he have abandoned Gettysburg because the Union allowed civilians to pay proxies to serve in their place? Would he have supported the antidraft (and very antiblack) riots against Lincoln in New York? After a point, one realizes that it's a waste of time asking him questions of this sort. It would be too much like taking him seriously. He'll just try anything once and see if it floats or flies or gets a cheer.

Shorter Hitchens: Well somebody has to fight these wars and the blacks have always been so good at it. Moore is a racist because he doesn’t want them to succeed at their God-given talent.

No comments: