...When they played the audio tape of Dan White's testimony during his trial.
This film chronicles the saga of a decent man laid low by dirty politics and corruption. How much can one man be expected to take before he decides to fight back? A haunting question that everyone who sees this film should ask themselves.
One thing I know for certain: until the moment he pulled the trigger, Dan White was a far better man than San Francisco deserved.
I cannot believe you would actually try to justify the murders of Milk and Moscone.
How can you call him decent when he shot two men multiple times, point-blank and having them off guard.
Dirty politics and corruption!? White resigned, a foolish decision on his part, and because he resigned, it was perfectly the mayor's choice to fill the seat with a supporter.
How is shooting two men point blank considered "fighting back"? I consider that to be a cowardly act of murder.
I'm glad he's dead, though he should have died in prison.
There is no justification for these cold blooded killings, and the light sentence was a miscarriage of justice. I do think the film could have delved into White's psyche more--what would make a man do this? Ultimately, and I am paraphrasing Randy Shilts here in "And the Band Played On", hate makes a prison for the hater too. I think White did die in prison, one of his own making. This was a very depressed man.
shareAnd what did he "take," exactly? No more than the average unpopular politician.
Basically he made a string of bad decisions, which he blamed the mayor and Harvey for, then after he killed them he blamed "family pressures" and Twinkies, etc.
He wouldn't accept responsibility for any of his own actions. So aside from being sick and homicidal, he had a weak character disguised by an all-American veneer.
It amazes me that people would defend such a man, but you're probably just a troll anyway.
The only thing about this doco that I dont like is the axis of evil approach to Dan White, obviously this was done to give the film more impact, but at least they could have delved more into why White shot Milk.
It wasnt as simple as the film made out. White did not just get a bit mad that he wasnt going back into office and shot some people, it was alot more convuluted then that.
I honestly do feel for White, I am in noway condoning what he did, only that the portrayal of him in this film was not acurate.
If that 'Love God And Are 100% Proud Signature' makes you sick, make THIS your signature!
"White did not just get a bit mad that he wasnt going back into office and shot some people, it was alot more convuluted then that."
Care to elaborate?
"I'm aroused and confused."
Let me say that I have not seen this documentary --- but I am familiar with the story. I am also aware that Gus Van Sant will be directing a new version of this in January starring SEAN PENN as Harvey Milk and MATT DAMON as Dan White (although I am hearing rumors that Damon is dropping out of the project to work on Paul Greengrass' new film).
That being said, I think the character of Dan White is not so black and white as being described here. There's more depth to his character that, in my opinion, makes what he did more sinister and pathetic.
What you all have to understand is when Mayor Mascone was elected it sent shockwaves throughout the San Fransisco political establishment, which at the time was pretty conservative. There's a long history of conservative politics in San Fransisco, which may surprise most people who see San Fransisco as this bastion of liberalism. But I assure you it's true.
This conservative tradition came to an abrupt end in 1975 when Mascone and Milk were elected to their respective offices. These two men represented the "new order" in San Fransisco --- tolerant, liberal, open, etc. But a lot of people (especially the old establishment) weren't ready to let go of the "old order."
Enter Dan White.
Dan White was young, handsome, articulate. He had an all-American family. He represented the all-American ideal. He had ambitions for himself and his family. He seemed perfect for the establishment. A telegenic guy, with a strong message to convey...He seemed like the future, and the "old Order" rested all their future hopes on him. He was their best shot to reclaim power. They were tailoring him for just that.
Dan White was also something else --- he was in WAY OVER HIS HEAD! He didn't understand politics very well (he was only thirty-two years old) and was bested at every level by Mascone and Milk. In a fit of pique, White resigned his position. When the establishment found out they were furious at him. They saw him as an "investment" of sorts and now he was abandonning them. They told him in no uncertain terms that he was to go back and recind his resignation.
When he tried to, Mascone had refused. Worse, he informed White that his old position had gone to his biggest political enemy: Harvey Milk.
Imagine how desperate and alone Dan White must have felt. Imagine the pressure that must have been put on this young man. Being caught up between these two powerful forces and his impotence in failing to bring any resolution or at least advance his own position and that of his patrons.
I say that's far more interesting than simply characterizing Dan White as some crazed guy who shot Mascone and Milk for no reason.
Bananas? I ain't got no stinkin' bananas!
I think there are only two things you mentioned that aren't brought up in the film - one being that San Fran had been conservative and the other that the "establishment" told White to rescind his resignation. Personally I don't feel that either of these things makes White's story any more interesting. It only furthers my impression of White as being a supremely pathetic human being. But thanks for the info.
Why can't a heterosexual guy tell a heterosexual guy that he thinks his booty is fly?
White definitely was a pathetic human being. He was pathetic in the truest sense of the word.
The reason why I brought up the part about the "establishment" making him take back his resignation is because, like I wrote, it illustrates how White was in WAY OVER HIS HEAD. He no longer controlled his own decisions. He was just a piece of the larger machine. He was being pressured by one side (the old establishment) and was unable to make progress against the other side (against Milk and Mascone - The New Order).
White was obviously a man with some "mental issues," twinkies or not. The pressure coupled with his impotence made him snap. There is no doubt in my mind that he premeditated the murders. This wasn't just some act of temporary insanity or anything like that (hence the reason the Twinkie Defense was so ridiculous in the first place).
Feeling impotent, and being partly out-of-his-mind, he did the only thing he knew --- he murdered his two political adversaries.
My point to all of this is: what does this say about the old establishment itself?
Although I don't wish to turn this into a discussion about conspiracies and I don't believe that a conspiracy took place here (I think White acted alone), I have to say that I think the old establishment deserves some blame for what happened as well. Think JFK, Martin Luther King Jr., RFK, Malcom X, etc. Whenever someone with new ideas comes in and makes a break with the past and presents those new and different ideas they are either murdered or discredited.
Isn't that part of what this story is about as well?
Also what does it say about the facade of the all-American ideal, which Dan White was supposed to represent? Does such an ideal even exist or is it something that conservatives trumpet up to demonstrate a fictious superiority against THEM, whomever THEY might be at the time (can't the same thing be said about what is happening now regarding illegal immigrants or against gay marriage in 2004) --- in this case it was San Fransisco's gay community and liberal ideas which had broken through politically in 1975.
This story has a lot of depth. That's the ultimate point i'm trying to make. I can't wait until the Gus Van Sant film comes out.
Bananas? I ain't got no stinkin' bananas!
Van Sant has never explored anything quite like this so it will be interesting to see.
Why can't a heterosexual guy tell a heterosexual guy that he thinks his booty is fly?
The reason why I brought up the part about the "establishment" making him take back his resignation is because, like I wrote, it illustrates how White was in WAY OVER HIS HEAD. He no longer controlled his own decisions. He was just a piece of the larger machine. He was being pressured by one side (the old establishment) and was unable to make progress against the other side (against Milk and Mascone - The New Order).
Now that I am old, I find these kinds of statements to be wearying. Yes, White had pressures from people who had supported him with money and time. And yes, they were mad that he had resigned.
You can make this same kind of case about a Little League Baseball Board with only one of the members wanting to put lights on the field and conduct night games. Old establishment versus 'new order'.
Dan White is of interest because he chose to murder the people who had opposed him. Not because he had 'pressures'. We's all got pressures.
Dan White is of interest because he chose to murder the people who had opposed him. Not because he had 'pressures'. We's all got pressures.
Moscone and Milk didn't simply "oppose" Dan White. They marginalized him, manipulated him, taunted him, humiliated him, and lied to him simply because he opposed their radical agenda for his City.
White despised the deceit, bribery, and lack of personal integrity among the political class of San Francisco. Whether you want to call that naïveté or decency depends upon how you view politics: as a bureaucratic necessity for the distribution of confiscated wealth to the favored classes or as a cancerous tumor upon civil society. I take the latter view.
[deleted]
Well said! Certainly an understandable excuse for a premeditated double homicide.
It is entirely speculative that either of two murders were truly "premeditated." The jury certainly didn't see it that way. Are you now claiming omniscience or some sort of secret insight into the mind of Dan White?
Anyone can understand why a decent, upstanding citizen like Dan White would take such drastic action. The system was flawed, what better way to fix the system than to murder two people!
I don't think it's quite as complicated as that. Dan White (correctly) saw a threat to himself, his family, and his City. In a state of despair, he (incorrectly) came to view violence as an acceptable response to that threat.
As Noah Cross (John Huston) said in the great film Chinatown, "Most people never have to face the fact that at the right time, the right place, they're capable of anything." In White's situation, would you or I have acted any differently? I don't know that I would have (or could have), and that's what makes the events of 1978 so fascinating.
It is entirely speculative that either of two murders were truly "premeditated."
Is it? White entered City Hall that day through a basement window so he could avoid the metal detectors. That alone indicates premeditated.
The jury certainly didn't see it that way.
And that's why the jury verdict is considered such a joke.
You must be the change you seek in the world. -- Gandhi
If you watch this documentary you will come to realize that Dan White was NOT an articulate spokesperson for his 'cause'. He comes across as an ernest guy who like you said was naive and in over his head and his resignation reflects this. If he had waited around long enough he could have possibly made alliances with some of the other supervisors, or if not with this group, with ones which would be voted in later on down the line. Thatz politics!
"he informed White that his old position had gone to his biggest political enemy: Harvey Milk."
Milk already had a 'position' on the board of supervisors. Other supervisors wanted to block White and bring on someone who reflected their more liberal viewpoints, but Milk was the one who lobbied the hardest with Moscone to find someone else. Thatz politics as well!
When it gets down to it...many people feel frustrated when they discover that they aren't going to turn the world on fire on their own and that they will have to sleep with strange bed fellows and make alliances with them.
The differance is...Dan White's pathetic ego drove him to kill. PERIOD. We would not be discussing this if he was yet another guy who had discovered that being a supervisor could be a very frustrating 'job'. He shot Moscone and then reloaded his gun and went down the hall to kill Milk.
Dan White may represent the 'ordinary guy' to you and it seems like you are finding an identification with him. He was no 'ordinary' guy. He was a murderer, no matter how you slice it.
Dan White was a homophobe and a murderer. He killed 2 good people because of 'pressure'. We all have pressure on us. But I'm not going to shoot anyone due to it.
[deleted]
Did it also bring you to tears when Dan White admitted to Detective Frank Falzon that he had intended to murder two more people, Carol Ruth Silver and Willie Brown, but couldn't find them? The whole damn thing was premeditated by one sorry excuse for a human being.
share