[Peace-discuss] Chalmers Johnson on "Charlie Wilson's War"

Tue Jan 8 21:06:01 CST 2008

Haven't seen the movie but not my impression that CW is portrayed as a hero. Here's what wikipedia sez http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Wilson's_War 
   --Jenifer

"John W." <jbw292002 at gmail.com> wrote:
  At 03:21 PM 1/8/2008, Laurie at advancenet.net wrote:

>I suppose one cold describe it as "Animal House" for the masses; but I
>prefer to think of the film as a comedy that satirizes the characters that
>it portrays showing how hypocritical, unethical, opportunistic, and Ugly
>American Americans can be.
>
>However, one of the people I went to see this movie with drew some of the
>same conclusions as drawn below, got upset, and walked out of the movie.

Or one can simply boycott it in the first place. I read a short snippet 
about the movie in Reader's Digest and immediately thought, "Hmmmm....Isn't 
this essentially the same as Iran-Contra, when Ollie North went on trial, 
and took the fall for the higher-ups, for illegally funding the Contras in 
Nicaragua? Wasn't it a criminal act back then? And now this Charlie 
Wilson is somehow heroic? How far we've come!" I'm frankly embarrassed 
for Tom Hanks.

But then, I'm reading Naomi Klein's book, and realize anew just how 
terribly, profoundly, shockingly, irrevocably far we've disintegrated as a 
nation in the past 30 years.

John Wason

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-
> > bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 2:42 PM
> > To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net
> > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chalmers Johnson on "Charlie Wilson's War"
> >
> > http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/print/174877/Tomgram%253A%2520%2520Chal
> > mers%2520Johnson%252C%2520An%2520Imperialist%2520Comedy
> >
> > [....]
> >
> > One of the severe side effects of imperialism in its advanced stages
> > seems to be that it rots the brains of the imperialists. They start
> > believing that they are the bearers of civilization, the bringers of
> > light to "primitives" and "savages" (largely so identified because of
> > their resistance to being "liberated" by us), the carriers of science
> > and modernity to backward peoples, beacons and guides for citizens of
> > the "underdeveloped world."
> >
> > [....]
> >
> > When imperialist activities produce unmentionable outcomes, such as
> > those well known to anyone paying attention to Afghanistan since
> > about 1990, then ideological thinking kicks in. The horror story is
> > suppressed, or reinterpreted as something benign or ridiculous (a
> > "comedy"), or simply curtailed before the denouement becomes obvious.
> > Thus, for example, Melissa Roddy, a Los Angeles film-maker with
> > inside information from the Charlie Wilson production team,
> > notes that the film's happy
> > ending came about because Tom Hanks, a co-producer as well as the
> > leading actor, "just can't deal with this 9/11 thing."
> >
> > [....]
> >
> > The tendency of imperialism to rot the brains of imperialists is
> > particularly on display in the recent spate of articles and reviews
> > in mainstream American newspapers about the film. For reasons not
> > entirely clear, an overwhelming majority of reviewers concluded that
> > Charlie Wilson's War is a "feel-good comedy" (Lou Lumenick in the New
> > York Post), a "high-living, hard-partying jihad" (A.O. Scott in the
> > New York Times), "a sharp-edged, wickedly funny comedy" (Roger Ebert
> > in the Chicago Sun-Times). Stephen Hunter in the Washington Post
> > wrote of "Mike Nichols's laff-a-minute chronicle of the congressman's
> > crusade to ram funding through the House Appropriations Committee to
> > supply arms to the Afghan mujahideen"; while, in a piece entitled
> > "Sex! Drugs! (and Maybe a Little War)," Richard L. Berke in the New
> > York Times offered this
> > 
> > stamp
> > of approval: "You can make a movie that is relevant and intelligent
> > -- and palatable to a mass audience -- if its political pills are
> > sugar-coated."
> >
> > [....]
> >
> > My own view is that if Charlie Wilson's War is a comedy, it's the
> > kind that goes over well with a roomful of louts in a college
> > fraternity house. Simply put, it is imperialist propaganda and the
> > tragedy is that four-and-a-half years after we invaded Iraq and
> > destroyed it, such dangerously misleading nonsense is still being
> > offered to a gullible public. The most accurate review so far is
> > James Rocchi's summing-up for
> > 
> jamess-take/> Cinematical:
> > "Charlie Wilson's War isn't just bad history; it feels even more
> > malign, like a conscious attempt to induce amnesia."
> >
> > ###

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080108/1f5853a7/attachment-0001.htm