But first…Leigh Scott at the Big Hollywood blog wrote a good piece the other day that should be reassuring to people with right-leaning political ideologies (whether they want to call themselves conservative, libertarian, classical liberal, or invent their own new labels.)

He begins by taking a look at the new sci-fi remake V. I only watched the pilot so far and don’t know if I’ll continue, but there’s enough in that first episode alone to make supporters of left-leaning political ideologies uncomfortable (whether they want to call themselves liberals, progressives, socialists, or invent their own new labels.)

The series examines the dangers of blind hero worship, intense adoration, media manipulation, and looking to others to solve the problems of world. Sounds like a cautionary tale against the worst fears people hold of the Obama Administration.

However, according to Big Hollywood, the series was written during the Bush Administration, and the show’s writer, Scott Peters, is an avid Obama supporter.

Read Scott’s whole piece, but the key quote that stuck with me is this:

“When you get right down to it, the reason there are so few ‘conservative’ films out there is because most films are inherently conservative. Any film that champions the rise and strength of the individual is conservative. Any story that tells of the triumphs of good over evil is conservative. The subtext of films that resonate, films that capture our imaginations, are based on the romantic ideals of conservative thought.”

The “good over evil” part might be going too far, but he’s right that the best stories are those about personal achievement or the struggle of the individual against the collective (or a group of individuals willfully banding together against the collective.) On the other hand, as Scott says, tales of the collective triumphing over individuals does not resonate with us quite so much.

Of course, many on the left would certainly claim that they are for individual achievement. Really, no reasonable person is against that. Leftists simply have some rather peculiar, counterintuitive ways of reaching those same goals (such as funding social programs by raising taxes on businesses, without realizing that those higher taxes will result in fewer jobs from those businesses and therefore more people requiring the social programs.)

It’d be more accurate to say that, on the whole, the best stories are those that promote American values while the weaker, less inspiring stories are those that promote anti-American or statist/leftist values. And I am by no means painting all Democrats as anti-American or hardcore leftists, as I suspect there are many JFK-style moderate Democrats out there who don’t like the current state of their party, just as folks like me didn’t care for the state of the Republican Party under George Bush’s presidency. Also, some people may like aspects of some leftist policies without being an all-out leftist.

Nevertheless, American values vs. statist or leftist values (or values that move us away from our founding principles) are two polar opposites that work for the sake of discussion.

Hollywood does like to put out the occasional movie that examines “the dark side of the American dream,” but those films are often balanced with several other, seemingly apolitical films that espouse pro-individual, pro-freedom, and pro-American values–the values that unite us of our rational free will.

Within the super-hero genre, we can easily find an example of both a leftist film and one that can be viewed as a celebration of the hard-working self-made man. The former drains the life right out of you, while the latter leaves you feeling recharged and excited.

I speak of Watchmen and Iron Man, respectively.

I’m going to spoil plot points of these two movies. So if you haven’t seen them and intend to, you’re warned.

Watchmen gives us psychotic and disturbed super-heroes throughout. One is even a rapist. There are no true heroes in this world. People don’t develop into better people or improve their lot in life. It seems they can’t. They simply exist and make do in a rotten world.

The ending (of both the film and the original comic book) presents the leftist dream of peace through fear. A character–Ozymandias, who is considered the world’s smartest man–saves mankind from World War III by creating the perception that an enormous, catastrophic threat is looming. In the comic, it’s an alien invasion, and in the movie, it’s a god-like super-hero gone rogue. In both, the threat is a hoax, but the hoax convinces the whole world to pull together to focus on this larger problem. Ozymandias even blows up half of New York City to accomplish his objective. He feels some guilt, but never doubts he did the right thing for the world. He acted with the best of intentions.

As I said, peace through fear. Replace the alien invasion or god-like super-hero with global warming, the federal stimulus, or last year’s bailouts that both parties were responsible for, and it’s the same principle: If we don’t unite and act now, catastrophe will strike. Even political correctness is a way of manipulating people through fear of offending others.

Iron Man, on the other hand, gives us a straightforward tale of a shallow businessman who literally builds himself into a super-hero and places himself on the path toward redemption. Tony Stark isn’t bitten by a radioactive spider by sheer random chance. He uses his own genius mind–and plenty of trial and error–to make himself a better person, the quintessential American self-made man. Unlike the helpless characters of Watchmen, Stark improves his lot in life.

He doesn’t give his resources to the government to redistribute. He decides how best to make use of his skills, money, and equipment.

The last line is especially wonderful. In a press conference, Stark decides against hiding behind a secret identity and tells the world, “I am Iron Man.” In essence, he asserts his individualism, and it feels great for the audience.

So to compare, we have the world’s smartest man needing to fool us into behaving ourselves vs. a brilliant capitalist who rises above his faults and uses his natural talents to become a hero.

Which one sounds more appealing?

Now let’s move into the real world, and into history.

Look at the Declaration of Independence and see how dramatic it reads. It’s individual people versus a tyrannical oppressor who sees them as a collective mass of subjects. Freedom hangs in the balance. It’s epic, as if it should be included within a larger work of Romantic literature.

Part of the goal of Romantic art is to present idealized versions of the world and people as they should be, and to avoid art that presents the world at its worst, perhaps leaving us with the feeling of “well at least I’m not as bad as those characters.” (For more on Romanticism, I cannot recommend enough Ayn Rand’s The Romantic Manifesto.)

Our early history is a great work of Romantic art. The Founding Fathers may have been imperfect humans, but as they’re working toward their main goal–the founding of this nation–they represent the ideal humanity. While in the pursuit of that goal, they are people as they should be: committed, passionate, persevering, dedicated, strong-willed, and ultimately successful. They rise to greatness despite their flaws, and it’s entirely through their own hard work. No one gives them handouts. Even the assistance they receive from France took work to acquire.

American values make for the most inspiring stories. Statist or leftist values might make for an interesting tale, but seldom an uplifting one. And isn’t it the purpose of stories to provide fuel for our spirits by showing us the potential of the world and people?

The movie industry may have many leftists working in it, but they still produce some distinctly American work that promote core American values. There’s hope for them yet.

3 Responses to “The best stories promote American values”