American History Xi is a lousy propaganda piece in the exact style of Soviet agitprop productions a few decades priorii. Much like the Soviet counterparts, it is extremely entertaining, quite iconic, and definitely worth watching.
That apparent contradiction is only skin deep. It so happens that as part of their normal lifecycleiii, socialist regimes suffer of momentaryiv delusions of omnipotence. During that time, and on that basis, they momentarily allow frank depictions of "evil" as they understand it in the mass media they control. Because "evil" as socialists understand it is almost entirely identical to Good as far as Humanity is concerned, the net result of this arrangement is that the good of the "evil" characters shines through, and turns the whole would-be aesop into what art always is, for it's all it can ever be : an argument against socialism and the evils it brings. Soon enough the socialists catch up to this, and spend the remainder of their days trying to close, bolt down and weld shut that faucetv - which is why a film like American History X could never be made today, nor will it be made tomorrow. Not in that language, at any rate.
The very transparent ploy is for Edward Norton, a dedicated socialist propaganda tool, to somehow show the futility of Humanity through the application of an enchanted amulet. Let's try it ourselves!
as the dedicated socialist propaganda tool he is
made his life better ? ~
As a young man he was a very talented actor. Has he made any good films, outside of this particular one ? What has he done, with all that talent, with all that time ? Take Angelina Jolie, an exact equivalent period prop. So she's taken out her tits, to be replaced with plastic balloons and so protect her from the perils of the flesh. She supported all sorts of causes, ran a private orphanage for indistinct litter and ? Made any good films ? Did anything whatsoever ? Has anything these people have done made their lives better ?
Yes, yes, I know how it's doublespoken - socialism is not about them making their own lives better. It's all about making "other people's lives" better. Because it's so selfless and "good" and - most importantly! - because it can't be measured. If they dedicated themselves to making their own lives better, there'd be a definitive authority to say when they failed. But if they instead pretend to be all about making "other people's" lives better - well! Should anyone claim they failed they can just change the "other people", can't they! The socialist electorate, always and everywhere ein anderes. That enchanted, imaginary public which supports you (from a safe distance) in your quest as you destroy the little you actually have. For asscience!
But let's leave aside how easy it is to break the zombie's arm off and beat it into a pulp with it. Instead, let us point out that the question is fucking stupid, as it directly reduces to consumerism. I am sure there's a bunch of derps running around throughout Central Asia as we speak asking various tribal chieftains whether "anything they did made their lives better", and offering iPads or whatever the fuck. Nevertheless, life doesn't reduce to this. There's a Maslow Pyramid, yo!
I'm sure this isn't going to be the last piece about how trading your ancestral land for 40 dollars worth of shiny beads is the best possible thing "for all those involved", produced by the people trying to hawk shiny beads. Not that there's anything wrong with that : unintentional self-crits with a sharp blade of irony are pretty much the only export product of the socialist state. Besides, Fairuza Balk is pretty hot in this one.———
- 1998, by Tony Kaye, with Edward Norton, Fairuza Balk. [↩]
- You know, guy has a sister, to obviously represent "the woman" aka ALL SOCIETY. Which sister-woman-aka-all-society likes the socialist v2.0 much better than the prior, natural man the hero used to be. So then it must be right, right ? Progress and revolution! Bla bla herp derp of that sort, guy's brother worships him, ends up killed by some other guy's kid brother, so you see kids how bad it is to be a man rather than the sort of metrosexual that'd paint his toenails with Davina etc etc qs. [↩]
- No, it never ends well. [↩]
- Such as for instance in the 1950s in the SU, or in the 1990s in the US. Amusingly enough, the Russians got overconfident on the basis of winning the space race ; while the Norteamericanos got overconfident on the basis of the Russians rearranging Europe. Talk about a second hand culture in our distant, irrelevant colonies.
And speaking of second hand culture in our irrelevant colonies : what do you figure the odds of the same people who went around for decades explaining how the Soviet Union collapsed because "we" drew it into a military expense game it couldn't support propose that the mechanics of the United States collapsing being... the azns drawing it into a military expense game it can't support. This is the wonder of projected agency. This is also why projected agency is the certain halmark of second hand cultures lost in the irrelevant margin, those people nobody cares about swimming in those places nobody cares about. [↩]
- Often a source of high comedy, like the poet memorializes :
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Juni Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe Und es nur durch verdoppelte Arbeit zurückerobern könne. Wäre es da Nicht doch einfacher, die Regierung Löste das Volk auf und Wählte ein anderes?