evillawyer
Have No God Before His Orangeness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2010
- Messages
- 33,342
- Likes
- 21,834
Read this after I saw the movie today. I'd agree that the initial Wakandan approach was like Trump's, an isolationist nationalism. Killmonger's approach was imperialism, which doesn't really fit the BLM movement. Even Antifa, while militant, isn't advocating the black takeover of the US. They're anti fascism. They want to keep groups like white nationalists from having a public platform. In the end, though, T'Challa actually settles on a cooperative globalism with Wakanda taking a leadership role. That's definitely not Trump's stance.
I thought the movie was very well done, well acted. Top 5 Marvel movie for me. Makes me excited for Infinity War.
People see what they want to.
Remember when Star Wars Episode 3 came out and people were claiming Lucas was making the Emperor into an analogy of Bush 43? Even Lucas eventually had to go on record and deny it.
Because in the days leading up to the movies release, I saw a lot of negativity toward Black Panther in right-leaning media. Ben Shapiro seemed to dislike that black people were excited about it. Rush Limbaugh questioned the films politics. Breitbart used it as an opportunity to praise Trump and bash Black Lives Matter. National Review dismissed it as pro-Democrat hype. The conservative site Western Journalism said it was racist. So did conspiracy peddlers Infowars. Social media echoed this.
What is so upsetting about a black superhero? What is so surprising or even more bizarre, regrettable about black Americans flocking to see a movie about Marvels first comic book hero of African descent?
Is it because the movie is political? Because the original character introduced by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, two Jewish New Yorkers, was always political. One would also reasonably expect for popular black political issues and perspectives to appear in the movie.
Was the anger because there is a racial component to the film? Because Lee and Kirbys purpose in creating this character in 1966 was specifically to better reach black audiences. They certainly accomplished that over the weekend.
Thats good!
Because black kids should have their own superheroes. Those comic book good guys should also be non-black childrens heroes, too. Little girls should have their own superheroes. Those fictional female characters can also be boys heroes, too. Catholics once got their own president, who also belonged to the country-at-large. Philadelphians recently got their own Super Bowl-winning team, though the Eagles victory was cheered by many nationwide. Excited Slovenians even now have their own American First Lady.
What is controversial about any of this?
There are so many examples of particular categories of people celebrating heroes or victories that might have a uniquely special meaning to that group, but the enjoyment of which is by no means exclusive to that group. In criticizing Black Panther, too many conservatives appeared to say there was somehow something wrong with black Americans celebrating their inclusion in our larger popular culture.
There is often a difference in what people think they are saying and what others actually hear. Conservatives who bash Black Panther might tell themselves theyre battling the left, or identity politics, or Democrats, or however else they try to rationalize it. But outside the rightwing echo chamber, thats not what anyone really hears. Its certainly not what most black Americans are likely to hear.
So many black Americans are enjoying Black Panther right now. There should be nothing controversial about that.
Rare is a conservative publication, and sometimes I swear they read this message board.
Conservatives who bash Black Panther send the wrong message | Rare
Rare is a conservative publication, and sometimes I swear they read this message board.
Conservatives who bash Black Panther send the wrong message | Rare
The article and my snippets cover that...did your brain crap out after reading 3 sentences of something that challenges your ideas?
Was it really worth an entire article to bash the few complaining about it?
The few? The article cited a handful of thought leaders and we have a handful on this board on top of that (have you seen the other thread?). People were voting the movie down before it appeared in theaters (it had 18,000+ votes on IMDb days before release). It was a 7.2 and literally everybody I've talked to liked the movie (now it has 96,000 votes and it's a 7.9).
Youll need to point out the passages in the article referencing how this movie is proof of an advanced civilization in Africa if only those pesky white people werent around and white people needing to spare their attendance so as to not take away from the blackness. It should be easy since you had a poorly thought-out sarcastic response. I said dumbass fanfare.
Thank you.
You conveniently forgot about the up votes before the movie came out. Just saying..
The few? The article cited a handful of thought leaders and we have a handful on this board on top of that (have you seen the other thread? Mods can't keep up with it. Tums literally called black people "pathetic" for being excited about the movie. People were voting the movie down before it appeared in theaters (it had 18,000+ votes on IMDb days before release). It was a 7.2 and literally everybody I've talked to liked the movie (now it has 96,000 votes and it's a 7.9).
Negative. I called the ones thinking this movie is proof that an African country would be very advanced if not for white people pathetic. The ones incredibly inspired by a science fiction superhero movie, that this is somehow validating are pathetic.
You posted something stupid. Again.
You're a liar. Your post would still exist, if that is what you had said. At least you realize it was a terribly stupid thing to say, in hind sight. Thanks for walking it back. :good!:
