Posted 7:40 PM by Angie Schultz

Hurry (and Wake) Up Hari

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this Johann Hari post. Hari (blogger and Real Lefty Journalist) wrote a previous post about the politically-engineered famine in North Korea, placing the blame squarely on Kim Jong-Il. He also wrote approvingly of a man who's helping North Korean refugees, and sending radios into North Korea on balloons, so people there can learn what's really going on in the outside world.

Hari was then "astonished" to find that many self-professed leftists (on the Medialens website, some Chomskyite thing---go to Hari's for the link) not only disagreed with him in the details, but about the major points too. In essence, the state of North Korea is all America's fault. Simultaneously, if the US was against the North Korean regime, the Medialens crowd was for it, even if it meant the starvation of millions. The doctor Hari wrote about, the balloon-radio fellow, is an "international criminal", and Hari ought to be arrested for supporting him. (Admittedly, that's the opinion of one guy, way over the top and down the other side. That shocked even me.)

Poor Hari explains, in rather bewildered detail, just how the US has opposed North Korea at every turn, and has tried to mitigate tensions between North and South Korea. He is at a loss to understand how the US is, in the opinion of one commentator, responsible for Kim's "harshness" simply by virtue of having fought the Korean War. (Hint: If the big bad US had never opposed those innocent Commies in the first place, the Kims wouldn't have had to take such drastic measures to keep their country free and pure of the Yankee taint. Surely this must be obvious.)

On the one hand, Hari's dismay is rather comic; on the other, his consternation is pitiable. Those of us who've been paying attention to the loopier side of the Left are unsurprised at this. I've been reading stuff like this for the past two years. The problem is in deciding how much of the Left this represents. I never took these kinds of opinions seriously before September 11, because I didn't know any leftwing crackpots personally (rightwing crackpots, on the other hand...).

But now I'm reading this sort of thing everywhere, and I don't know if it's because the websites I read love to stew over it, or whether it actually is everywhere. Hari cautions that Medialens is not really representative of the Left, but I would disagree. While their comments are more rabid than you usually find, their ideas are not. I've heard, from actual live people, attitudes that are not much different than this. It's a common theme that the US is responsible for all the trouble in the world. If there's a coup, the CIA is in back of it. If there's a famine, it's because the US is witholding food. And if there's good news---as in the recent case of Khaddafi deciding to behave---it's because the Great Satan was looking elsewhere for a moment, allowing the Good People to perform their gentle magic.

(Hey, remember when the Soviet Union was the font of all evil, when no suspicious event, down to fluoridation of the water supply, took place unless the Reds were behind it? Remember how silly those rubes looked? Remember how the Left laughed at those bumpkins?)

And here's where my laughter becomes the cold, mirthless laugh of schadenfreude. Here, Hari, writing about North Korea in a previous post, says:

No, this isn't about saying that America is terrific and the last great hope of man on earth. Its foreign policy has done more harm than good in the last fifty years.

Damian Penny thinks this is just the Lefty secret handshake, something Hari has to say to maintain his leftist bona fides. I say it's spinach, and I say, to hell with it.

I think Hari is one of those people who've been denouncing US policy all these years, and one day is surprised to find that this has led to a hatred (there's no other word) for the US and all its works, even when (as in this case, as Hari correctly insists) the good, caring people of the Left ought to be working for the same goal. See also Julie Burchill.

Hari is like a man who's been in a decades-long party, cheerfully defending the right of the revellers to be drunk and disorderly and loud, claiming that it will epater le bourgeoisie, which will do 'em good. And now he's sobered up to find that his drunken mates have gone on a rampage he never intended, that there are crops burned, stores looted, people stampeded, and cattle raped. And he wants to know how that happened.

Think he'll figure it out?

P.S. In expressing his confusion as to why his fellow leftists would object to nonviolent attempts to undermine Kim's reign and support North Korean refugees, Hari says:

I can understand why conservatives would oppose this. Why should we give a toss about a bunch of yellow people, they ask, when we have so many problems of our own? But it didn't even occur to me that anybody on the left - which by definition is universalist and concerned with human equality - would disagree.

Smooooooooth, Hari, smoooth. See, folks? That's the kind of sound thinking which gets you a gig at the Independent.

Posted 3:36 PM by Angie Schultz

Et Tu, Klaatu?

I find myself writing an unscheduled, unMSTied, movie review.

I hate it when beloved childhood memories crumble to dust in the harsh light of reality. Last night, while fixing dinner, I caught part of The Day the Earth Stood Still, a classic science fiction film from 1951. I have always enjoyed this film, less for its message (which, despite its reputation, has been rather trite for about forty years) than for its sleek fifties aesthetics. But while watching it yesterday I noticed a strange echo of the present.

In this film, a human-like alien (named Klaatu) lands on Earth, to immediate suspicion and distrust. He escapes his military pursuers, and takes a room at a boarding house. There, he lives among humans, especially latching on to the widowed Mrs. Benson and her young son, Billy. You can check the IMDB entry for details, but the gist of the movie is that Klaatu has come to tell Earth to clean up its act and stop being so warlike. It doesn't matter if Earthlings kill each other, he explains, but now one (unnamed) nation is beginning to place nuclear weapons on spaceships, which threatens other planets. So Klaatu has an ultimatum: get peaceful or Earth will be destroyed.

In order to give his ultimatum a little weight, he arranges a demonstration: a world-wide power failure lasting 30 minutes. Electricity, phones, telegraph, automobiles do not function, but hospitals still have power and planes in flight are unaffected. This shows that the aliens' power is irrestible.

There's no real resolution to this. Klaatu delivers his message, is shot and dies and (temporarily) resurrected, and blasts off, leaving Earth to consider his warning.

If a movie could be canonized, this one would be. It is regarded by all as a splendid example of the Message film, warning against greed and paranoia and war, urging peace and understanding. It was produced during the Cold War, so we all know it's really a damning indictment of America's belligerence and militarism toward those innocent Commies. This is the accepted verdict in science fiction circles, and if you check out the IMDB's comments, you'll see that it's nearly unanimous: "As relevant now as it was then," is a common refrain. This despite the fact that the intellectual level of its message is best expressed by young Billy, who, when told by Klaatu/Carpenter that they do not have wars where he comes from, chirps, "Gee, that's a good idea!"

(Not to mention the obvious religious overtones of the movie---Klaatu is known to humans as "Mr. Carpenter", geddit?, in addition to the whole resurrection thing.)

But look at the reason for Klaatu's visit again: He doesn't care that humans are slaughtering each other right and left, but now that they've begun to develop technology that will threaten the interstellar community, he comes to lay down the law: shape up or you'll be shipped out.

Pardon me, but wasn't that George Bush's line? In fact, wasn't that pretty much the history of Gulf War II? Except that Bush was infinitely more patient and diplomatic than Klaatu. Iraq was defeated in a war and signed a ceasefire agreement which it did not honor, prompting twelve years of futile sanctions. Before going ahead with the war, there were months of wrangling in the UN.

By contrast, Klaatu lands, makes an unwise sudden move and is shot (and given prompt medical attention) then escapes to find his way to the boarding house. He tours Washington for only a day before declaring that his patience with humanity is wearing thin.

Furthermore, it's difficult to believe that Klaatu's powerful civilization is seriously threatened by Earth's pathetic spacecraft and feeble weapons. This would be like the present-day US threatening a civilization that had just discovered steam power.

And yet many commenters think of Klaatu as mankind's "savior" while George Bush is reviled (sometimes simultaneously, as in this unusually perceptive comment). In fact, if you read through the comments, you find many people wishing for just such a savior as Klaatu; I'll bet that many of these people despise Bush for a fundamentalist nutter, although he's not the one sitting around wishing God (or Gort) would save him. Have I mentioned that the aliens don't have wars because they have surrendered their sovereignty to incorruptible, implacable robots who destroy anyone who threatens the peace? Gort is Klaatu's robot overseer.

I find myself agreeing more with this fellow, even if he is writing tongue in cheek.

Another cherished movie memory ruined by re-examination in a critical modern light, much like M*A*S*H.

Posted 1:31 PM by Angie Schultz

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians: A Modern Exegesis

One of the things I always wanted to do, if I ever got my own website, was review some of the movies featured on Mystery Science Theater 3000. This would be totally self-indulgent, since it's like shooting goldfish in a Dixie cup, and redundant, seeing as MST has already shot those piscines dead.

However, some of those movies have unrecognized virtues which I'd like to call attention to, while still sitting on them and giving them noogies. What better place to start, at this special time of year, than with that imperialist classic, Santa Claus Conquers the Martians?

This movie isn't one of those with unrecognized virtues, however. It has unrecognized vices, which I shall describe in soporific detail.

Short Summary: The children of Mars are unhappy, so their parents kidnap Santa Claus (and two Earth children) to spread a little Christmas cheer to Mars. This makes Santa and the Earth children unhappy, along with a few traditionalist Martians. All's well that ends well, however, as a Martian substitute is found and Santa and the Earth kids return home.

Analysis: The very title of the film brazenly makes its viewpoint clear: Santa---by far the most successful of American imperialists---conquers those Martians. He does not encounter or persuade or dialogue with them; his conquest is swift and total.

Martian children---as represented by Bomar and Girmar (the latter played by Pia Zadora)---are unhappy and listless. They spend much of their time watching the TV programs with which Earthlings aggressively bombard the solar system. As the movie opens we see the two Martian youngsters watching a program from KID-TV, in which a newsman gives a tour of Santa Claus's sweatshop at the North Pole and interviews the Nordic strongman himself. We also see glimpses of the race that labors its life away to make toys for spoiled rich children.

From conversation between the two Martian kids, we find that they're depressed and humiliated that they do not have a Santa Claus on Mars. Forget globalism---this is interplanetarianism! At this point their father, Kimar, leader of the Martians, comes home and expresses his displeasure that his children are forsaking their native, intellectual Martian pursuits in order to stay up and watch TV.

The next day, upon finding that the children still seem listless, he and other Martian men seek counsel from Chochem, a mysterious Martian elder, who bears a suspicious resemblance to Santa Claus. He tells them (for what reasons we can only guess, unless I can make something up) that Mars needs a Santa Claus too, and then vanishes in a puff of smoke.

So the Martians get in their Simon game-powered spaceship and head toward Earth. As they approach a large city, they examine it with their powerful telescopes, and are confused by the plethora of Santa Clauses all over town. They land in a wooded area, where they encounter Earth children Billy and Betty Foster. Kimar explains the Santa confusion situation, and Billy immediately spills his guts by telling them the real Santa can be found at the North Pole. The Martians depart for there immediately, but not before crafty Voldar insists on taking the children along, lest they alert the Earth authorities.

After landing at the Pole, the children somehow manage to elude their captors and attempt to warn Santa. But their inauthentic Western existence has rendered them completely inequipped to withstand the brutal polar winter, and they are swiftly recaptured. The children are then sent back to the ship under guard while the Martians seek out Santa in his lair.

They first send in their robot, Torg, to soften up resistance, but Santa proves too much for the mechanical man, and humiliates it into impotence. The aliens then demonstrate their humanity by immobilizing, rather than killing, Santa's slaves, as well as his downtrodden wife. Santa is completely cowed by this overwhelming display of force, and allows himself to be taken without a fight. (Like a certain hero of the anti-imperia---er, wait, forget I said that.)

The United Nations springs into action, ordering the creation of a task force to study the feasibility of convening a panel to look into the possibility of perhaps contacting the Martians about their intentions towards Santa Claus, but the whole crisis is over before the task force can decide on a logo for their letterhead, thereby demonstrating the intrinsic superiority of multilateralism.

However, once aboard the Martian vessel, Santa uses his CIA training to excite the sympathies of his captors, through the use of stories and jokes such as "What's green and soft and is roasted on a stick? A martianmallow." Quick to ally himself with Santa and the children is the childlike, mincing, grimacing, shrieking, stupid Droppo, a low-status Martian who has stowed away aboard Kimar's ship.

Voldar, however, is made of harder stuff, and proves immune to Santa's mind-tricks. Proclaiming a (strategic) truce, he gives Santa and the children a tour of the ship, terminating in the airlock, where he contrives to trap them. Santa, utilizing methods honed during his days as an MI6 agent, effects their escape through an air duct (just as enters chimneys back on Earth to plant listening devices in the homes of dissidents).

Kimar is furious when he discovers Voldar's heroic efforts, and has him thrown into the brig. But on their return to Mars, the wily Voldar escapes when he gets the better of his guard (the aforementioned chunkwit, Droppo), and disappears.

Kimar and his wife, Momar, introduce Santa (and the Earth children, who are still tagging along) to their own children. In one of the most chilling scenes every filmed, Santa uses his Mossad mind control techniques to reduce the dignified, taciturn Martian children to a pair of giggling cretins.

Afterwards, the Martians offer Santa the thing his black heart must desire most---a toy-making machine! If he had that on Earth, he could finally carry out that genocide against those pesky, smelly elves. Always demanding food, and sleep, the ingrates. Naturally, almost the first thing produced by the machine is a "toy" gun, intended to introduce the Martian children to Earth-type violence. No doubt the resultant splintering of Martian society will please Santa's puppet masters back on Earth.

But even the wicked have to rest sometime, and Santa and his underage minions knock off for the day. This disappoints Droppo, who like all traitors is anxious to prove his new loyalties. He desperately wants to be Santa. So he dons Santa's extra costume (and beard, the existence of which is never adequately explained) and returns to the toy machine to churn out more model death weapons and Earth-centric imperialist playthings.

Now we find that Voldar has joined up with the Martian Underground (literally underground) to try to take back their planet from the colonizers and their running dog lackeys. To that end they arrive to sabotage the toy machine when they see Droppo, mincing and prancing alone in his Santa outfit. Mistaking him for the real Santa Claus, they kidnap him and drag him off to their underground hideout.

The next morning Santa and the children find Droppo gone, and the toy machine sabotaged. Kimar comes to investigate, but instead encounters Voldar, who has come to make an arrangement to give up Santa Claus if he will be deported and the toy project abandoned. Kimar, knowing Voldar does not have Santa, holds him at gunpoint while stalling for time until the next plot point. This occurs when young Billy overhears the parlay and reports back to Santa, allowing him to prepare a defense. Voldar then escapes from Kimar and runs to the toy room where Santa and the children await.

Then follows an embarrassingly goofy fight scene, in which Santa and the children use toys to defeat Voldar and his men.

Meanwhile, Droppo has escaped from Voldar's comrades, on account of they're even dumber than Droppo. After Voldar's defeat, Santa declares that there is no longer any need for his direct supervision of the conquest of Mars, since Droppo is sufficiently brainwashed to do the job (of course, he doesn't put it quite like that). So the Martians send Santa and the Earth children back home, with much hallooing and ho-ho-ho-ing.

Now, this may seem like a major victory for the forces of racism, imperialism, and (inter-)globalization, but consider: instead of the competent (if stodgy) Santa Claus, Mars is left in the hands of the dim, flailing Droppo, whom Kimar has called "the laziest man on Mars". No doubt his reign will be short, and his end, ugly.

For more on this movie, see this site. En française. But you were only going to look at the pictures anyway. More pictures here.

Also, this IMDB commenter points out that the characters' names are just shortened versions of their roles: Bomar=Boy Martian, Girmar=Girl Martian, etc. I never thought of this. Wonder what Voldar stands for? Allegedly the movie was remade in was remade in 2002, but the IMDB listing contains no cast, only a plot summary and the writers (Ben Edlund and Randolph Heard, who have solid modern comic credentials---being writers for The Tick and, in Heard's case, Space Ghost Coast to Coast).

Pleasant December Work Stoppage Interval, Comrades!

Posted 9:05 AM by Angie Schultz

Press Coverage of Iraqi March

Many bloggers are complaining (sample here) of the lack of press coverage of the Iraqi anti-terrorism / pro-democracy march. Well, it was prominently sited on the front page of the Houston Chronicle, main photo, above the fold. How 'bout them apples?

Unfortunately, two photos and the accompanying captions were all there were on the subject! There was no story inside, as there usually is with a front page photo.

(I'd link to the Chronicle's web site, but I didn't see the photos or anything about the march on their front page. They typically have very few photos on their web site.)

The main photo is of men on the pillars in Fardus [sp?] Square. They're waving red flags, so presumably they were Zayed's Commies. (Here and here are Zayed's pictures of the Communists standing on the pillars, waving their flags. Your totalitarian philosophies always know how to make a stunning visual impression.)

(UPDATE: The photo accompanies this story by Maureen Fan in the Seattle Times. Click on the picture for a larger image.

The article takes a very ambivalent view of the march, devoting several paragraphs to news of continued attacks, a woman equally angry at Saddam and the US, and men who cite shortages and unemployment as their complaints---though they blame these on the terrorists. No bias in the article, though!)

The caption in the Chronicle reads:

Common Cause:

A heavily policed march in central Baghdad on Wednesday, organized peacefully by dozens of Iraq's major political parties and religious groups, drew thousands into the street to protest the attacks by guerilla fighters that have injured and killed Iraqi civilians as well as U.S. troops and others.

[For the pillar men]: Several Iraqi men stand atop pillars to wave flags and signs.

There was also a picture of two men in white burnooses (they looked like brothers) standing next to a man in a fur cap, who has his back to them but is looking over his shoulder at them. He seems to be holding hands with someone on his left. This picture is captioned:

Illustrating the diversity in the march, Iraqi communists rubbed shoulders with the Shiite Muslim group al Sadr supporters in voicing their support for peace and democracy.

UPDATE II: The photo is here, as part of a slide show. This is the link if you want to see the other pictures. The same Maureen Fan article (linked above) accompanies them.

Hmmm...Zayed says:

What was interesting, a group of Al-Sadr supporters showed up and started shouting "NO NO to occupiers" obviously in an attempt to hijack the demonstration. They drowned in the rest of the crowd.

None of the al-Sadr supporters in his picture is wearing a burnoose. However, several men in his photos of tribal leaders are.

Anyhow, at least this is some scrap of attention from Old Media.