MovieChat Forums > The Purge: Anarchy (2014) Discussion > Liberal propaganda at it's lowest point

Liberal propaganda at it's lowest point

posted 10 years ago by Mellow-Fellow
16 replies | jump to latest

I consider myself a democrat. I vote left on the majority of issues. I must admit the deep liberal bias to this entire movie.

Just take a look at the bad guys, the real bad guys. "The rich". All older white people, I think I saw one token black woman in the crowd of rich people. Black Jesus storming in to save the say with his gang of black panthers to fight the power, because the best way to fight violence is with more violence! You're only a terrorist in the eyes of your enemies right?

This movie is saturated with class warfare with the rich actually exterminating the poor. "Big Daddy" reeks of old southern appearance and mannerisms, the generic Republican. Knowing about gun specifications automatically makes you a deranged psychopath, as seen in the two older women in the movie, the one on the roof talks about the exact make and model of her weapon of choice, and the crazy rich old white lady near the end talk about a favorite gun of hers. So if this movie tells us anything its that we should ban guns or we will be purging in no time! There was a strong anti-gun-rights undertone in my opinion. Constantly referring to the "new founding fathers" and "god given rights by the new founding fathers" for their "rights". It's as if the director is somehow trying to show how absurd he things the 2nd amendment is by making the movie as absurd as possible. Did anyone else feel this way?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mellow-Fellow 10 years ago

It seems like a nice idea you have there. But if you really think about it, it becomes a terrible "Animal Farm" Orwellian future you would lay out for people with that idea. The fact would remain that the wealth would still exist, so limiting personal net worth would still leave massive amounts of wealth in the hands of somebody, presumably the government, which is composed of individuals.

The government is large enough, and your idea would make it massive, the government would become the world's largest organization and corruption would no doubt follow the power hungry, as it always does, and soon all of the money would be in the hands of big brother. I agree it is absurd to own so much wealth, but the nice thing about it is that most all of these people are philanthropists and give generously to charitable organizations without any scrutiny from the public because it is their money. If the government wanted to do this at least half the people would always be upset and assume some underlying agenda towards the donations.

The real world is nothing like this. Most rich people are actually really good people in my experiences. The jerks are the wannabes or maybe some beneficiary to large estates with no culture or real world experiences to humble them, of course there are exceptions to this and there are a lot of bad apples. I agree the deficit is a big problem and everybody should have the opportunity to live financially free but it just is not feasible. At least there are good opportunities for college and employment to work your way up today.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mellow-Fellow 9 years ago

I agree with most of what you said. But you talk as if the rich conspire against the poor in secretive back-door underground meetings. The Simpsons comes to mind where they have Burns and all the rich grouped together in what appears to be like a devil's basement conspiring their evil deeds. Maybe you are right, and they just act this way naturally and all come to the same conclusions.

How to redistribute the wealth seems like the biggest problem. If we raised the minimum wage to say 45k a year, would not smaller items become much more expensive, and more jobs be pushed to areas / countries with much lower minimum wage rates? I should learn more about the whole idea, but it sounds like what you are proposing is pure socialism?

[–] balthazar_bee 10 years ago

I'm not one to get particularly fired up about so-called "liberal propaganda", which (based on comments on this board and some U.S. news coverage I've seen) seems to be regarded as being practically everywhere -- the myth of a genuinely left-leaning media being the biggest canard -- and is greeted with a lot of message board hysteria.

For that matter, the word "liberal" has never sent me into paroxysms of disgust; there are ideals behind it that I think are worth cherishing, junk like seeing that kids get a decent education regardless of personal wealth, providing universal access to good health care, establishing protection for the most vulnerable elements of the population, etc.

I don't hate the word "conservative" either, but I'm old enough to remember that it didn't always mean "anti-intellectual, ideological kamikaze pseudo-populist barking for red meat." Canada gave a majority to the so-called "Conservative Party" and has learned a valuable lesson -- one that will see the CPC driven from office next year -- but even our conservatives are preferable to the Republicans.

Yes, this film has an ax to grind with certain disquieting developments in contemporary western society. No, it isn't particularly subtle, and it's far from perfect. But my beefs with it have to do with the script and some of the performances; the imagery and premise make it worthwhile.

[–] TreeHuggerKyle 10 years ago

I agree. I'm a liberal, and I agree with the points that the movie was making, but the propaganda was quite heavy-handed.

When they were being hunted, when the cop killed five of the "hunters", the rich people called for help and said "they killed five people, they killed five of US!" I kinda rolled my eyes at that. Although there is some truth to that scene: rich people expect poor people to kill each other, but if a rich person is killed, "they killed one of US!" But those rich people were very over-the-top.

[–] Mellow-Fellow 10 years ago

It's not even segregated like this. Maybe the elite will stick together when it is mutually beneficial but if it came down to it the people would look out for who they care about the most. If this were the case you wouldn't see Bill Gates and other massive money guys giving so generously to help with 3rd world problems like clean water and vaccinations. Even if you have greedy power hungry people the government checks them with sanctions if they do not give or spend a good portion of their money by tax year end. The government makes it convenient to just give to your favorite charity or end up just giving it to the government. Who would you rather give to: the cancer foundation or Uncle Sam?

[–] babuandbabu 9 years ago

Aren't their Swiss banks for that?

Vote for "The Purge"! - http://www.imdb.com/poll/4Bk8teoxE44/

[–] Darkkoo 9 years ago

It's hollywood, runned by you know who. What do you honestly expect? the whitey is the bad guy, black guys are the good ones!
that's why even the FBI statistics show who commit the majority of the crime, and what makes it even worse is that the majority that commits the crimes are a minority in the country

[–] le_papillon 9 years ago

the whitey is the bad guy, black guys are the good ones!

This is pure BS. Hollywood loves nothing better than to have stereotypical representations of black people, a handful of movies having good black characters isn't going to change the bigger picture.. because really, there are no heroic black people out there, am I right?

Also, statistics don't mean anything when petty crimes mean incarceration for black people at higher rates than their white counterparts, or that poverty and crime are intrinsically linked (rather than race & crime, as you are suggesting). Then there's this little thing called the prison industrial complex. Take it back to Stormfront, buddy.



[–] paultait22 9 years ago

Can you name some of those films that give a 'stereotypical representations of black people' or portray them in a negative way or as bad guys. I'd honestly be interested to know as I can't remember one and there seem to be more than a handful the other way.

[–] Katz5 9 years ago

For someone who considers himself to be a "democrat," your original post reeks of talking points straight from the files of Ailes and Limbaugh. "Black Panthers," "class warfare," "anti guns." Why not bring up Benghazi while you're at it?

Although the film itself was scattered, it made some good points. America IS on its way to declaring an annual purge. And the police will be militarized as shown in the movie to target middle and lower class members of society (I guess you missed that two of the characters trying to hide from purgers were middle class whites?) And the rich will pay for the right to butcher a member of the lower class. And eventually pay for hunting down "outcasts" with an audience watching, a'la The Most Dangerous Game.

I have an extended family member in Texas, extremely wealthy courtesy of a stint with the Marines that led to lucrative employment with several defense contractors, including Halliburton. He calls himself a "Christian" and every Thanksgiving he leads our large family in a prayer where he "thanks God for all the wealth bestowed on his family that has made him so humble." Humble my ass. He actually told us last Thanksgiving that "an annual purge is actually not a bad idea." And he was serious.

And look at how the police treated the Occupy Wall Street protesters. But the Tea Party, a group whose mission to defy taxes is in their freaking NAME, whines like babies when they feel the IRS is targeting them more than other Americans. Cry us a river.

And then we have the Cliven Bundy compound. How can a man who broke the law for years receive such "hands off" treatment from federal authorities, attract hundreds of Tea Party whack jobs who actually stop average citizens in the community to conduct illegal searches of their vehicles, get away with such activity for so long? Yeah, better to clamp down on the OWS protesters, who are perceived as the real threat to the top 2%, wealthy and powerful enough to have the police on their side.

Take a look at this story and you tell us how we're not heading to a purge state:

http://www.policestateusa.com/2015/cady-raid/

Got 13 Channels of $hit on the TV to Choose From

[–] Khabibul35-1 9 years ago

People on the left don't use the term "class warfare". You gave yourself away my friend!

[–] PhineasAppleby 9 years ago

Yes they do. Class warfare is part of the Democratic platform.

[–] Mellow-Fellow 9 years ago

I wonder why the admin deleted guys posts above, the first ones to reply to me. Funny.. I don't remember him saying anything to warrant somebody just removing his messages.

Tyranny is alive, and it's in the form YOU, thousands of people online everyday who feel a little better about themselves because they are a "moderator" for their favorite forum, sub-redit, or community, lol! Be sure to wipe the cheeto stains off your shirt before addressing your subjects in your future world, superior ones. You are the guys with nothing better to do, who like to work for free to feel a little more powerful against random people on the internet, wow you can delete my message or ban me, a random person who probably couldn't care less, I tremble at the awesome power you claim.

That being said I've never had a dispute, problem or even post deleted by a mod in any forum that I can remember. Back when I was in elementary school and even more of a jerk, enough to get stuff removed, everybody had "AOL" and used "chat rooms" I kinda miss the random chat rooms now that I think about it. I'm sure they are still out there, nobody uses them anymore. We all used the AOL group meeting chat at night, like 30 friends coming and going to the chat room, was kind of cool.. Does Facebook do that or are kids just so connected these days they don't even care to do that, they can just send a group text or use facebook chat I guess, I bet it does group chat...

[–] Jeorj Euler 8 years ago

I wonder why the admin deleted guys posts above, the first ones to reply to me. Funny.. I don't remember him saying anything to warrant somebody just removing his messages.

It's possible that the user's account was deleted entirely. It's also possible that the staff instated a script that automatically wipes the particular user's posting history every once in a while, merely on account of the user's possible notoriety in violating the rules of the site.