So the thing about Eddington is that it depicts the world that the right-wing would need to square their egos/worldview while also recognizing the belief that lies at the heart of conservatism (literally, order at the cost of freedom, and with it the implication that humans are bad and horrible and need to be managed).
Everyone in Eddington is exactly as shitty as Joe Cross needs them to be in order to justify his paranoia and antihumanism. Ted is a neoliberal tech shill, Vernon is going to steal his wife, the BLM protestors are almost entirely performative. Meanwhile, he needs Louise to be a stat. rape victim of Ted, and his breaking point (shooting Lodge, the homeless man) comes immediately after Louise publicly rebukes that narrative, because he needed that to be true to existentially square himself and his view on people.
The great irony is that COVID masking (which started the film's conflict) is, philosophically, a conservative policy on account of its order-at-the-cost-of-freedom nature, while the right to bear arms (guns being central to his crusade in the back half of the film) is a philosophically liberal policy on account of its freedom-at-the-cost-of-order nature. And yet, both policies were adopted by their opposite political camps. Then the film ends with Joe having all but lost his mind and body after he was stabbed in the brain, which, really, is the crown jewel of the conservative fantasy; he has completely lost all of his freedom to express any aspect of his humanity, and his existence becomes defined by subordination. Order has completely wiped out freedom.
So it's less a centrist text than it is a conservative text, with the caveat that it's from a very tongue-in-cheek "careful what you wish for" sort of angle. Though I suppose the question of "What does left-wing and right-wing actually mean right now?" that lies at the heart of the film is centrist in nature, even if it ultimately answers that question semi-definitively. It's much closer to something like Bugonia than OBAA, in any case. Excellent write-up, btw (and excellent Substack you have here, more broadly).
Appreciate the highlighting of how having a hopeful ending (basically anything other than despondent doomerism) has become a rarity, and weirdly moved from cliched to something that seems almost daring.
I’d be curious to read your thoughts on other films like The Third Generation, Born in Flames or even Raspberry Reich.
On the interracial element I agree but am reading Idris’s book in which he mentions the liberals who doxxed Rayshard Brooks girlfriend and jacketed her as a “white outside agitator”. Rabid liberal cops armed with that narrative got her locked up for mad long. That “agitator” narrative may have warranted more critical attention. It’s their go to smear. Somehow in 2020 everyone all over the damn country was some outside agitator that the “peace police” would literally capture and hand over to the pigs.
Any radial cheering about the doxxing and police reports filed against j6’ers who faced charges because of that massive oinst op are fucking fools if they don’t realize they’ll be the next target.
I love Born in Flames. One of my favorite movies. And yeah, the people who doxxed Rayshard Brook’s girlfriend are scumbags. It’s kinda a separate issue, though. Peace police and Black liberals are just enemies to class revolt. I also don’t think a white outside agitator is dependent on a romantic connection. It can be a friendship or comradeship between a Black and a white person that gets the white person labeled as “agitator” or a “ race traitor." I have no issue with the interracial relationships in the film or in real life. I just found the critiques of the movie as like “racist” funny cause I’ve seen plenty of strange relationships animated by racial desire in leftist communities.
I should have clarified that the agitator line and discussion of relationships reminded me of her situation, more so the agitator slander. There’s all kinds of dynamics included in that.
I see more what you’re saying now. Fr there’s some odd fetishistic relationships in the Milieu. The scene has a tendency to push out black men in particular while making apologies for their weird ass white bf.
So the thing about Eddington is that it depicts the world that the right-wing would need to square their egos/worldview while also recognizing the belief that lies at the heart of conservatism (literally, order at the cost of freedom, and with it the implication that humans are bad and horrible and need to be managed).
Everyone in Eddington is exactly as shitty as Joe Cross needs them to be in order to justify his paranoia and antihumanism. Ted is a neoliberal tech shill, Vernon is going to steal his wife, the BLM protestors are almost entirely performative. Meanwhile, he needs Louise to be a stat. rape victim of Ted, and his breaking point (shooting Lodge, the homeless man) comes immediately after Louise publicly rebukes that narrative, because he needed that to be true to existentially square himself and his view on people.
The great irony is that COVID masking (which started the film's conflict) is, philosophically, a conservative policy on account of its order-at-the-cost-of-freedom nature, while the right to bear arms (guns being central to his crusade in the back half of the film) is a philosophically liberal policy on account of its freedom-at-the-cost-of-order nature. And yet, both policies were adopted by their opposite political camps. Then the film ends with Joe having all but lost his mind and body after he was stabbed in the brain, which, really, is the crown jewel of the conservative fantasy; he has completely lost all of his freedom to express any aspect of his humanity, and his existence becomes defined by subordination. Order has completely wiped out freedom.
So it's less a centrist text than it is a conservative text, with the caveat that it's from a very tongue-in-cheek "careful what you wish for" sort of angle. Though I suppose the question of "What does left-wing and right-wing actually mean right now?" that lies at the heart of the film is centrist in nature, even if it ultimately answers that question semi-definitively. It's much closer to something like Bugonia than OBAA, in any case. Excellent write-up, btw (and excellent Substack you have here, more broadly).
Thanks for this! I wrote a bit more about Eddington in an earlier post of mine. I really like what you have to say about it. I need to see Bugonia.
Minor note of interest -- the film has two scenes that I'm almost certain were inspired by Sam Green's 2002 "Weather Underground" documentary.
You get a subscription for making me realize that Dijon was in the movie (also your essays are interesting)
Appreciate the highlighting of how having a hopeful ending (basically anything other than despondent doomerism) has become a rarity, and weirdly moved from cliched to something that seems almost daring.
I’d be curious to read your thoughts on other films like The Third Generation, Born in Flames or even Raspberry Reich.
On the interracial element I agree but am reading Idris’s book in which he mentions the liberals who doxxed Rayshard Brooks girlfriend and jacketed her as a “white outside agitator”. Rabid liberal cops armed with that narrative got her locked up for mad long. That “agitator” narrative may have warranted more critical attention. It’s their go to smear. Somehow in 2020 everyone all over the damn country was some outside agitator that the “peace police” would literally capture and hand over to the pigs.
Any radial cheering about the doxxing and police reports filed against j6’ers who faced charges because of that massive oinst op are fucking fools if they don’t realize they’ll be the next target.
I love Born in Flames. One of my favorite movies. And yeah, the people who doxxed Rayshard Brook’s girlfriend are scumbags. It’s kinda a separate issue, though. Peace police and Black liberals are just enemies to class revolt. I also don’t think a white outside agitator is dependent on a romantic connection. It can be a friendship or comradeship between a Black and a white person that gets the white person labeled as “agitator” or a “ race traitor." I have no issue with the interracial relationships in the film or in real life. I just found the critiques of the movie as like “racist” funny cause I’ve seen plenty of strange relationships animated by racial desire in leftist communities.
I should have clarified that the agitator line and discussion of relationships reminded me of her situation, more so the agitator slander. There’s all kinds of dynamics included in that.
I see more what you’re saying now. Fr there’s some odd fetishistic relationships in the Milieu. The scene has a tendency to push out black men in particular while making apologies for their weird ass white bf.
If we ever meet up in real life, I got some stories for you!