The Power of Nightmares: Part III

Finally, we come to the conclusion of Adam Curtis' documentary "The Power of Nightmares". In this section, we look deeper into the attacks on New York and the Pentagon on 9/11 and our search for Bin Laden and Al Qaeda after that. This part really had me thinking a lot about us as Americans and as citizens in this country. Also, it brought up bad memories of He Who Should Not Be Name (aka George W. Bush).

I always forget how much I hate George W. until I watch him speak. He is just so unintelligent to me that it is ridiculous. Whenever I see him speak, it still baffles me as to how he was elected not once but TWICE as our president (although I still have my concerns over his first "election" in 2000). The parts of this documentary also make it even more glaringly obvious that all of our military involvement in the Middle East is a continuation of him finishing what his father started. Here's a chart that someone put together of how similar the faces George W. makes to a chimpanzee.

What really stands out to me was when a clip from Bush was included with him stating that it is not the job of the United States to go into other countries when we feel it is necessary and implement change. He said that America is not to think that what we do and how we do it is right and therefore, other people must be like us. This clip was from 2000, yet in 2001, after the 9/11 attacks, Bush pulled a complete 180 and that was essentially the cry of the War on Terror: we have democracy, we're bringing it to them. What they're doing is wrong, and it is our job to right them. Although I do not agree with tyranny and the laws of many Middle Eastern countries, I also believe that it is not our place to jump in and kill civilians under the false premise that we're bringing them democracy. We were completely misled from the beginning of this war, and some are still under the false impression that what we're doing over there is actually helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Something else interesting that I noticed in the film is the idea of just aimlessly searching for terrorists in not only Afghanistan, but also the United States. There is a clip of a patrol man saying that we do not know what a terrorist looks like, what a terrorist wears, and what kind of car a terrorist drives. However, we still seemed to have found a way to find and detain terrorists, and they were all interestingly enough Muslim or Middle Eastern. Pretty much, that is what we have to base terrorists off of in the United States. If they are Middle Eastern, wear a turban, practice a foreign religion - they must be a terrorist. It's disgusting to think that we really used such shameful stereotyping as this, but we did and still do in this country.

Another standout moment in the film for me was the idea that we are chasing a phantom enemy, rather than getting down to looking into the real reason behind our fear of terrorism and who we are calling terrorists. The American and British troops were scoping out Afghanistan to look for terrorists associate with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, even though it was discovered that the attacks were planned by a small group of men based around Bin Laden, and the term Al Qaeda wasn't even given to them until we needed a name for our enemy. This stands out to me because it reminds me of what we discuss in class all of the time. Rather than looking for the root causes in society for a problem, we instead look at individual cases and examples and then make up sweeping generalizations about a group of people or an illness. It's really unfortunate and something that our country needs to stop doing. We'd rather just assume that all Arabs are terrorists, rather than think about as a society why we chose them to be our current "Other".

All in all, I really thought this was a smart and thought provoking documentary. Go figure it would need to be done by a British person rather than an American to lay down all of the facts, rather than just glaze over the topics as we have been given them. Also, as I've said before, the parallels between the Neo-Conservative movement and the Radical Islamist movement is really astonishing. I've always personally looked at the Neo-Conservatives as an enemy, specifically as a woman, seeing as how they are looking to essentially strip me of my rights and are attempting to control my body. I think that more Americans could benefit greatly from watching this documentary and learning the actual facts about two movements that are at complete odds, but really have so much in common.

The Power of Nightmares: Part II

The second part of Adam Curtis' documentary "The Power of Nightmares" takes us through the 80's and 90's, as we see the evolution of both the Neo-Conservative and Islamic Radicalist movements. As I pointed it out in my last post, it is really interesting to see the parallels between the two groups. Both had to deal with major backlash and hardships before getting to the levels of power that they are at now, and both had to rely on scare tactics (although in different ways) to get to those levels as well.

What stood out to me the most during this portion of the documentary was the rise of the Neo-Conservative movement. The film discussed how when attempting to gain followers to the movement through the use of morality and religion, people actually turned away from the ideals and were looking for a different candidate other than the conservative George H.W. Bush to vote for. This surprised me because I didn't realize how the strategy used by the Neo-Conservatives backfired on them. I had assumed that he had his followers and those who believed his ideals, and so he won. I was actually really glad to hear this to, because it gives me some hope that people in this country care about personal rights, which Bush's morality campaign unfortunately attempted to strip away from us. I feel though that this is happening again with this current election, as the republican candidates are focusing a lot on morality issues, and I'm hoping that this won't work out as it didn't for Bush when he ran for re-election. It was also interesting to see how conservatives literally "boo-ed" conservative candidates who didn't want to take away human rights. That really shows the power that he Neo-Conservatives had. One of the commentators in the film even said that America was a myth and it was buying into its myth. America created its own past and stories and we were believing them under the Neo-Conservative rule.

I want to point out that I also liked the section about Bill Clinton and how the Neo-Conservatives failed at getting their smear campaign about him going because "polls showed Americans didn't care about moral issues". I liked hearing that because it bothers me when people try to pull the morality card, seeing as how morality is essentially based off of religion and not everyone has the same beliefs, which we tend to forget in our country.

The portions about the growth of the Islamic Radicalist movement also were interesting to me and provided new information that I wasn't aware of. I had not heard of all the other attacks that the Jihad had done in Africa and that they were shunned and turned against by other Muslims. This honestly made me pretty happy because it shows that not all Muslims are terrorists and support the actions of the extremists. I already knew this, but I think it would be important for a lot of other Americans to see this documentary as well to learn that. Our fear of Muslims is not really a fear of Muslims, but just the most extreme example of a group of them that we have seen. Americans need to realize that.

The idea of terrorists and terrorism always scares me, but the ending of this part of the documentary really sent chills down my spine. The fact that the extremists turned their attention specifically to America and bringing down America's excessiveness really disturbs me. Obviously, I have learned that other countries hate America, but it's really unsettling to see the actual footage of people saying they want to bring death to our country. I don't think I'll ever get used to it. The ending of the film left me nervous for the final installment and I know I'm going to have a hard time sitting through that, as it seems our present is scarier than our past.

The Power Of Nightmares: Part I

Now, I know that I'm a bit off here. I sincerely apologize or posting a day (almost two) late for this week's post. To be honest, the long weekend threw me off and I completely forgot that it was Sunday and missed the deadline. So, I'll make up for it now.

The first part of Adam Curtis' "The Power of Nightmares" was a very insightful look into the creations of the Neo-Conservative and Islamic radical movements. What was most interesting was the look at their parallels to one another in the creation of fear and scare tactics that have been bombarding not only our society, but most parts of the world, for the past few decades. It is interesting to look at our society and culture now, how we think and act, and then watch a documentary such as this one and see how our thoughts and ideas have changed over time due to historic events that may have not seemed as significant at the time.

The film begins by discussing Sayed Kotb (also spelled "Sayyid Qutb"), an Egyptian Muslim who traveled to America to study the education system. Once here, he was horrified with how materialistic and individualistic Americans were and decided that he needed to start a movement back in Egypt to make sure that Egyptians did not turn out the same way. The film explains that Kotb was overwhelmed with how much people only talked about celebrities or their automobile expenses. This made me wonder how he would react if he were here now, in present day, when our culture is so much more focused and obsessed with the entertainment industry and our purchases. It kind of does show that his fear of Americans becoming more self-involved was true, but I clearly think he went to extreme lengths and shared extreme ideals when he returned home to make sure the same thing didn't happen over there.

 Kotb

Parallel to this information about Kotb, the documentary provides information on Leo Strauss, the father of the Neo-Conservative movement in the United States. Like Kotb, Strauss was horrified with the materialism of the American culture. He was more concerned with the idea of liberalism spreading and that the growth of materialism and individualism would lead to selfish lifestyles. I think it really is extremely interesting that the foundations of what our country has turned into was happening at about the same time as the foundations of our "completely enemy", and it seems that they both began for the same reasons. It goes to show that these two different groups of people may have more in common than they would think, but in this world we all feel we deserve to have a sense of entitlement, so there could be no way that we could work together. On the other hand, however, I completely disagree with the beliefs of both Neo-Conservatives and Islamic radicals, so I would not want them working together, because I have been led to believe that this will only lead to violence and evil.

 Strauss

Although this was only part one of the documentary and therefore more introductory than the following parts will be, I can definitely see how these two movements completely work to shape our ideas about fear. Both use extreme scare tactics, they are both using religion to push forth their ideals, that ideal being that they are going to rid the world of evil, and they are offering violence as a solution. Although both groups would definitely not want to admit it, they have way more in common than many Americans would think on their own. I am excited to watch the next two parts of the documentary to see how these movements grew and got us to the point we are at today with how we think about each.

Beyond Beats and Rhymes

Like most comm students, I have taken multiple Sut Jhally classes. I think I've taken all of them, actually. So, having taken these courses, I have seen the documentary, or at least different parts of the documentary "Beyond Beats and Rhymes" multiple times. Although I am so familiar with the film and the subject matter, whenever I rewatch it, I still find myself getting shocked and disgusted over the same parts.

I find myself in a similar position to Byron's when I have to think about the idea of rap music. On the one hand, I am a huge fan of rap music; I grew up with cousins who were deeply immersed in the genre and listened to it constantly. I just love the way some songs sound and the way the words flow with the music. However, over time, I have come to see just how misogynistic and homophobic, and just downright hateful in general, most rap music is, and this causes a huge problem for me. Whereas Byron finds himself at odds with rap music because he is black and rap is such a huge part of the black community, I find myself at odds with it because I am a woman and so much of rap is revolved around the idea of demeaning and objectifying women. On top of this, I also have several close friends and family members who are gay, so that just adds onto my problem. Although I hate the message being sent out through the lyrics of rap music, I can't help but find myself rapping along with the artists and nodding my head to the beats.

I think that the documentary itself can be seen as incredibly brave. Byron goes into the black and rap communities to discuss the deeper meanings behind both rap music and the industry. What always astounds me is the reaction from rappers when he asks them questions pertaining to misogyny. If Byron asks a question about the need for masculinity in rap culture, all the rappers agree that it was what we were taught about in our society; men need guns and tattoos to show that they are "tough" and "real men". However, when Byron would mention how women are portrayed in videos and through lyrics, the rappers never seemed to see much of an issue. Russell Simmons, who is supposed to be such an activist, doesn't even really show any real concern about the issue, simply stating that it would be impossible to get involved in every issue. With misogyny being so prominent in rap culture, it's pretty concerning that Simmons could consider it with the issues that he doesn't need to get involved in directly.

What is more concerning, however, is the interviews that Byron did with women down in Daytona for BET spring break who just accepted the objectification and assault that was thrown at them. They just accepted it as a part of what rap is and what society has taught men that they are allowed to do and how to act, so they didn't attempt to talk back to the men who were harassing them. This is really a huge problem. Women are not only allowing themselves to be objectified in this way, but also accepting it. That is just an overriding summary of how most women who listen to rap deal with the subject. The women being interviewed were explaining how although there is sexism in rap, the insults aren't being directed at specific women in particular, so it isn't an issue. It is this kind of thinking that really pushes women's rights back decades and allows men to continue living the way they do.

Every time I watch this documentary, I come to appreciate Chuck D more and more. I have seen other interviews with him and documentaries that he comments on, and he just further proves himself to be one of the only popular rappers who is willing to deal with actual issues and discuss them, rather than shutting them down and ignoring them. It is that kind of bravery that is extremely needed in the rap community. Other rappers need to follow his lead and come to do the same. Here's a picture of him that I like for everyone's enjoyment:

I think something that really stood out to me was when Byron interviewed hopeful rappers, they explained how they very easily could make a real rap that deals with real issues and still sounds good, but no one wants to hear that. We have been taught that being sexist and hateful will sell records and make you famous, so even if you don't agree with what you are saying, you will say it in order to get a foot in the door. It is yet another huge issue within the rap community that needs to be addressed, rather than swept under the rug.

As I've said, I really enjoy this documentary. It always gives me a new insight into the rap community and reminds me that no matter how much time passes, we are still allowing the same music with the same messages to be made, without a hand being raised to object to it. To end my blog, here's a link to David Guetta's and Akon's "Sexy Bitch", because I have nothing but anger toward this song, which was not only ridiculously popular, but also ridiculously stupid and sexist. And, yet again, no one questioned it.

Sexy Bitch

On Orientalism

Edward Said's "On Orientalism" provides an in-depth look into the perceptions of Muslims, the religion of Islam, Middle Easterners, and the Middle East itself that we have come to know and understand as fact in the United States. The news media and entertainment industry have taught us that Middle Easterners are violent, hateful, and extremists. These ideas are continuously upheld by these media and our country has accepted them as true, with almost no exception. Said explains that it is our lack of knowledge about that area of the world itself that is helping with upholding our misconceptions.

The main portrayal we see of Middle Easterners in film and on television is that of the fanatic terrorist. We are taught to believe that essentially all Middle Easterners and Muslims are suicide bombers, waiting to destroy the United States. This idea was already extremely prevalent in the 1980's and 1990's, but became even more enforced after the 9/11 attacks. Because we are only showed such a limited view of who and what Muslims are in the news and on television shows, we are to believe that what we are shown is true and this further stigmatizes Muslims and those from the Middle East. We are also generally shown men being the main perpetrators of these crimes and acts, so that leads us to absolutely believe that Middle Eastern men are extremely violent.

Another portrayal of Middle Easterns that we see is the hyper-sexualized subservient woman. The females we see are scantily clad, usually belly dancing, and generally always serving men. These women are also usually portrayed as deviant and not to be trusted. It is interesting to see how because the United States is upholding these stereotypes, we have familiar themes of sexism and objectification when dealing with the portrayal of women.

Something I found interesting is the idea of the movie "Aladdin". Growing up in the Disney generation of the 90's, I have seen "Aladdin" more times than I can count. I've only started noticing recently after re-watching it at an older age just how racist the portrayal of Middle Easterners are. Physically, they are mostly menacing-looking. Jafar himself is very scary-looking, as are all of the men who work security (I think that's what they're supposed to be doing). The men who work in the marketplace are all complete caricatures. The women in the film are either absolutely beautiful, with unrealistic bodies (a la Jasmine), or overweight and unappealing. There is no middle ground. Personality-wise, most of the characters seem devious and underhanded. It is just amazing to think about how all of the stereotypes we have been taught about Middle Easterners are all present in this one children's film, and we don't even realize it.

These stereotypes are allowed to be upheld, and are even accepted in our society, due to our lack of knowledge about the Middle East. We know nothing of the area itself, other than what we are taught on the news and in movies, and this information is misleading and racist. It is really astounding to see how our idea of the Other that Hall discusses has evolved and changed form over time, to not only include Middle Easterners and Muslims as the Other, but to perhaps now have replaced African Americans as the Other. We are still not attempting to learn about the Middle East or Islam, we are allowing them to stay separate - and as we are taught, below us - from us. As Said explains, we need to contextualize our history and their histories and learn to understand our history in terms of theirs. We need to stop comparing the histories as better or worse than the other, and accept Middle Easterners and Muslims as a part of our culture, rather than as the Other.