Hunger Games - didn't realize it was a right wing

[Aerows]

fantasy until I watched it.

All the themes are there.

[McCamy Taylor]

1. I saw a prelude to a revolution against colonial dictators.

You know, like the war of 1776. But hey, I guess freedom is in the eye of the beholder.

[Aerows]

2. I'm confused by your comments

Please elaborate.

[mmonk]

3. Or the 1% controlling the 99%.

Keeping them fighting among themselves instead of banning together. The author also said she had environmental themes as well.

[obamanut2012]

22. That IS what it is about

Until an event and a person becomes a symbol of freedom.

And, anything more would be a spoiler.

[GeorgeGist]

4. It's a trilogy

Good conquers Evil. Yada, yada, yada.

[Fumesucker]

5. It's a dystopia..

They're commonly either far right or far left wing..

[Bluenorthwest]

6. It is a tale of the 1% in total control, and the grass roots uprising that causes

the destruction of the oligarchs and the start of a new more equal society.

[rhett o rick]

7. I havent seen it. Can you list some of the themes? nm

[XemaSab]

8. I read the book

The premise is that it's hundreds if not thousands of years in the future. The US is gone, and North America is now the country of Panem. In Panem the national capitol controls everything, and the capitol keeps the 12 districts in dire poverty while the people of the capitol are wealthy and decadent. For example, in the second book they go to a party in the capitol where people eat and then vomit and then eat some more, while the people in the districts are literally starving.

75 years before the start of the book, the districts rose up against the capitol and were crushed. Now, as punishment, every year each district has to send a teenage boy and girl to fight to the death in the Hunger Games. One child is left of the 24 who compete. It's a punishment for the districts, but it's entertainment for the capitol.

I saw it as left wing, but I would be interested in seeing a well-developed counter argument.

[mmonk]

9. Yes accurate.

it's about a dystopia from a left perspective as opposed to The Giver which is about a dystopia from a rightwing perspective.

[XemaSab]

11. Lois Lowry's a rightwinger?

I very strongly doubt that.

[mmonk]

15. It may be a different writer I was thinking about.

I'll check to see what I was comparing it too.

[rhett o rick]

28. Looks to me like we are having trouble with the phrase "right wing fantasy."

IMHO the Right fantasizes about a world like Atlas Shrugged and not Avatar. Sounds like Hunger Games is about a Right Wing controlled world as seen from the Left and not the Right. IMO the Right fears a world like Hunger Games (from what I have heard as I havent seen it) and believes it would happen if the Intellectually Elite took over. They believe that the Financial Elite will give them a world like Atlas Shrugged.

[marlakay]

38. I think what they meant was it was a right wing

fantasy to be like the people in the capital.

[Curmudgeoness]

10. It is a right wing wet dream, but

the story is definitely on the side of the left.

[abelenkpe]

12. Haven't seen the movie

Read the book a couple days ago. Couldn't put it down.

Have some issues with press for the movie basically being dishonest about the cost and effects work.

What about the movie made you feel it is a right wing fantasy? I did read a synopsis long ago that drew parallels with Christianity.

[Leopolds Ghost]

20. There's nothing inherently right-wing about Christianity tho. n/t

[rhett o rick]

26. Not sure I agree. Are you referring to Jesus's teachings

or Christianity? Would you said the Catholic Church leaned right or left?

[YellowRubberDuckie]

36. True Christianity is left wing...

...as are Jesus's teachings.

[rhett o rick]

37. That's how I see it. nm

[Leopolds Ghost]

57. Duckie basically said it

what I was gonna say... although I'd put it in different terms since what is considered left wing is relative.

is doing the right thing inherently left wing? I'd say today's right wing capitalists (and SOME churches -- more prevalent when they were an arm of the state) are opposed to doing the right thing, how's that. I'd also say that every movement (including churches) gets corrupted (by the authorities, or from within) the minute it becomes successful.

[rhett o rick]

60. Yes I agree. Although we struggle with definitions.

What is "the right thing". I am sure the authoritarians think they are doing the right thing like the husband that beats his wife.

My definition of Left includes helping mankind whether poor or rich, helping animals, and helping mother earth.

[Lex]

13. It doesn't glorify the 1% being completely in control of the 99% but

instead it shows how horrific it would be.

[joshcryer]

14. I assume you mean that the bad guys were right wing.

The good guys, or rather, the plebs are definitely oppressed and the point is that they rise up, presumably.

[Bjorn Against]

16. No, the story itself is not right-wing although the villains appear to be

The government portrayed in the book seems to be very right wing, but it most definitely portrays them as the villains. In some ways the story may seem to be a right-wing fantasy world, but it is a dystopian novel that presents that right-wing fantasy world as a horrible place to live.

[Zax2me]

17. I was told the govt in control were the bad 1% but were socialists

Claiming they were doing what they had to do to satisfy the will of the people.
But I haven't seen it - heard this from people who have.
Most likely I won't support it, won't go.

[Bjorn Against]

18. The government in the book was most certainly not socialist

Some people say that the author avoided saying anything about the economic system of the government in the book. While it is true that specifics of the Capitol policies which would clearly and unambiguously state whether the Capitol was right or left-wing are largely avoided, but there are more than enough clues to show that they clearly are not socialist. All the wealth in the society is concentrated at the top in the Capitol where they live lives of luxury while the people in the outlying districts can not even afford a basic meal and live in extreme poverty. The book draws very distinct class lines that make it obvious that they live under an economic system that is about as far from socialism as you can get.

[Leopolds Ghost]

24. So it's basically like the society depicted in MLP

When will the Left stop indoctrinating our children with fantasies about the 1%?

[Bjorn Against]

27. While I can't say I am super familiar with the world My Little Pony takes place in...

I am pretty sure it is a much more friendly place than the world of The Hunger Games. The Hunger Games is very dark, those who call it a kids book have probably not read it. If the movie showed everything that was in the book it would have been rated R, the only reason it got a PG-13 is because the camera cut away from much of the brutality.

[Leopolds Ghost]

48. So why is it considered young-adult? Is it like Logan's Run?

I recall reading a couple post-apocalyptic "sci-fi" books as a kid that were far darker than a simple tale of oppression by the central government... more on the paranoia end of things. Then again, I read 1984 as a kid. American kids are too sheltered to make good citizens. Anything remotely political is censored from popular entertainment for "market driven" reasons.

<< Canon!

[sakabatou]

40. Canterlot and Ponyville are nothing like the world in the Hunger Games

[Leopolds Ghost]

46. Depends on which interpretation you're using.

[sakabatou]

47. So much overanalyzation

O.o

[Leopolds Ghost]

51. Source: OverthinkingIt.com :-) But...

Solidarity Is Illusion: The Political Economy Of My Little Pony

There's much more where that comes from though ^3^



I'd say at least half of them take the critique seriously, though.

After all, what's the point of fiction if it does not reflect reality at some level?

There's an entire wing of NLR bronies devoted to leftist reinterpretations of My Little Pony... (See sig link.)

[sakabatou]

63. Whatever happened to love and tolerate?

[Leopolds Ghost]

64. Us so-called extremists are the MOST loving and tolerant!

Would you rather deal with the Earth Pony Liberation Front? (splitters...) I didn't think so.

[sakabatou]

66. I'm more into pegasus' anyway.

[Leopolds Ghost]

67. The comments section here v

Is especially busy lately.

[font face="Times"]You seem certain of this; there is only one thing that I'm certain of,
and that's "I know nothing". What I believe is that we can reach peace
if we begin to respect one another. It is not easy to respect an alien opinion,
that's why peace seems impossible, but I have faith that humanity has it within
ourselves to over come our own bigotry. But we cannot find something with
in ourselves by looking to Celestia, we must find it on our own. It will be hard,
people will die, but we will find a way.

[font color="blue"]galacticrenegade[/font] 1 week ago

The problem with democracy, especially direct democracy, is that is built upon
the opinion of the majority. While this might seem good on the surface, you must
realize that the majority is easily swayed by the media/propaganda. Therefore,
while democracy preaches freedom, it is more of a hidden tyranny. That's why
our founding fathers did not build America on the foundation of democracy!

[font color="blue"]Mrflutterguy[/font] 4 days ago[/font]



sus'sus'es. ;| /)

[sakabatou]

68. Even for me, I think that taking MLP a bit far

[Leopolds Ghost]

69. I'm sure it's all in good fun.

[lapislzi]

43. Conspicuous consumption is a hallmark of Capitol dwellers

When you get more into the backstory of books 2 and 3, you will learn that it's the function of certain districts to provide luxury goods for the Capitol. Sometimes, the Tribute names reflect this. The districts that supply conspicuous consumables (as opposed to more mundane items like coal and wheat) enjoy a slightly higher standard of living.

It shows just how messed up the values are. The people who provide the necessities of life are treated the worst.

I won't offer up any spoilers, but an astute reader will see where this is headed.

[dems_rightnow]

19. I think you saw what you wanted to see.

The authoritarian government is not even remotely likeable.

[obamanut2012]

21. No it isn't, the author is a progressive

And it shows what a Fascist government can do. She was inspired to right it after watching the manipulating leading to the Invasion of Iraq.

It is the very opposite of a RW fantasy.

[Starry Messenger]

23. Right wing blogs I've read on HG utterly dislike it.

It's a critique of the ownership class.

[etherealtruth]

25. I read the book a few years ago

My perception was that it was very "anti" right wing ...?

[rucky]

29. Right wingers dream of social uprisings among the poor?

Read all three books.

[JHB]

30. Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?

Not following your train of thought.

[Lizzie Poppet]

31. I couldn't disagree more.

Taken as a whole, in particular, the trilogy is a scathing indictment of totalitarianism in general (whether that of the right or the left). The portrayal of The Capitol, superficially shallow but mercilessly tyrannical underneath, is an effective comment on the power of the 1%

[RZM]

32. Both left and right have tried to claim it. Neither has a particularly strong case.

I've seen the movie but haven't read the books. From what I know, the author did not really intend to make any major left/right political statement. IMO, both sides could make arguments, though none completely stick. I think that the left has an economic case here, while the right has a cultural one. Probably the most salient themes transcend the political spectrum.

On the left, you could certainly argue that the themes of economic inequality reflect the 1 percent vs. 99 percent dynamic. The people in the Capitol live it up on the backs of the districts and give them very little in return. Katniss and her people are definitely workers and they rightfully despise the elites that keep them in poverty. The elites hog all of the resources and can only live the way they do because the districts are kept near starvation level.

But the right could also argue that the people of the Capitol represent caricatures of today's 'limousine liberal' progressive elites. They are concerned mostly with appearance and rely on technology. They lead insular, pointless lives with circles composed exclusively of one another, they are concentrated in an urban area, and feel vastly superior to the unwashed masses in the 'red state' districts. They mouth slogans of unity, but really only care about people like them. In this framework, Katniss and co. are poor, white, Appalachians from coal country - the kind of uneducated people that are frequently objects of derision and amusement among some in tonier liberal circles.

But I think the most important theme here is tyranny, oppression, and authortarianism, which isn't really a left/right thing. Authoritarian governance can originate on the right or the left. You could argue that Panem is a fascist RW state, but you could also draw parallels with the USSR, where a small cadre of unelected elites rule in the name of the people but in reality were the only ones with access to anything like the good life. It's never really explained how things got this way. So you could imagine Panem orginating from a RW takeover by militaristic, 1 percent oligarchs. But you could also see it as originating as a left-wing socialist state that gradually transformed into an authoritarian dictatorship (you could use the fact that there is little racial stratification and no religion to make that case).

Like I said, I don't think the author necessarily intended any of this. In fact, the fact that one can plausibly project their own views onto this world is a sign that it's well constructed and probably a reason for the durability and popularity of the story. Anybody can look at Panem and see what they want to see.

[rhett o rick]

33. I dont understand how this can be considered leftist authoritarian.

Maybe I am naive but I view all authoritarian rule (tyranny and oppression) as coming from the Right. Who exactly are these "limousine liberal" that you refer to? What class are they and which politicians do they support? Do they have any books espousing their ideals?

[obamanut2012]

35. +1

[XemaSab]

39. I don't think I agree

Communism is obviously a leftist philosophy, but there's never been a communist government that hasn't been authoritarian.

I think the people who founded the USSR had the best intentions, but it certainly didn't turn out well at all.

(I know that it's a common argument that communism has never been done right, but the fact that it's never been done right even though it's been tried quite a few times tell me that there are inherent problems in the system.)

I'm interested in a right-wing reading of the Hunger Games in part because I could see it argued that Katniss and Gale are capitalists in a totalitarian communist regime with a centrally planned economic system. Part of how the capitol is oppressing the masses is dictating that some areas will produce coal, some areas will produce timber, some areas will be agricultural, and so forth. The protagonist is someone who has gone outside the system and learned a form of resourcefulness that most of the other people in the story don't have.

[RZM]

41. I'm talking about elites

There are progressive, liberal elites. People who have money and believe that they possess cultural and intellectual superiority over the unwashed masses. I'm not necessarily saying that's a lot of people, but the Capitol doesn't seem to contain a lot of people either.

You see this on DU sometimes in threads about the south and other parts of red state America - the idea that these people are stupid and inferior and need to be told what's good for them. You also sometimes see this in discussions of religion as well. Like it or not, liberals are more than capable of condescension. I've written OPs about this before. I believe that one barrier to poor whites voting Democratic is the fact that liberals, even those with the best intentions, can come off as arrogant when talking about these types of people. You don't get that kind of thing nearly as much with conservatives (partly because they know that without these people, they are toast).

I say this as somebody who lived for years in Appalachia. I've seen these attitudes first hand. I can honestly say I've encountered people from the east coast who were surprised that I didn't grow up in a trailer park because I'm from Ohio.

I'm not trying to bash east coasters here, but I don't think it can be denied that there's a liberal elite bubble just as there is a conservative bubble. You could definitely argue that the people in the Capitol manifest some of like the worst stereotypes of rich liberals and urban hipsters who personify the folks lampooned on 'Stuff White People Like.'

Like I said, that's just one interpretation. There are many other ways one can look at the Hunger Games. This is only one of them.

[rhett o rick]

42. You need to differentiate between financial elites and intellectual elites.

Everyone hates the elites. The Left hates financial elites while the Right hates intellectual elites.

Are you saying that intellectual elites are looking down on the poor? If so, what legislation do they favor? Who are their representatives? Liberal authoritarians doesnt compute for me.

[Lex]

44. You are correct.

The Righty "elites" are all about protecting the wealthy, the 1%, at the expense of the rest of us, especially marginalizing the the poor and sick and minorities.

I don't see the Lefty "elites" wanting to push laws that do that, but rather embrace the opposite of that ideology.

[RZM]

45. I think you might have misunderstood what I was saying

I'm talking about a culture here. I think some liberals do look down on the poor in 'flyover country' (that term is itself somewhat derisive). Check out any thread here about the south, Christian faith, NASCAR, country music, or even the late Thomas Kincade to see what I mean. Not everybody does it of course. There are liberals that enjoy all of those things. But in just about every thread here about such topics, you will get posters looking down on those things.

That's what I was talking about.

[Liberal_in_LA]

50. The online rightwingers love it.

[RZM]

52. The back and forth over this

Is pretty strong evidence that the author has successfully connected with a wide audience, which is the not easy to do.

[Leopolds Ghost]

54. So basically... it's anti-authoritarian.

Statism is ultimately statism... corporatocracy depends on legitimization of corporate property rights by the State.

Consider that thanks to the War on Terra, you're not allowed to start a BANK ACCOUNT without a corporation,

And thanks to the US doctrine that democracy is nothing more than liberty of capital, you're not allowed to start a CORPORATION without the assumption that it is for-profit

(You have to prove otherwise, and in the absence of nonprofit status -- which by the way requires no shareholders -- if you have any shareholders you're by definition for-profit. Shareholders are sometimes allowed to sue you for not maximizing profit).

So ultimately both societies are about authoritarian State sanctioned greed: the legitimization of corporate entities that the consumer / citizen has no choice but to do business with.

[Are_grits_groceries]

34. Liberal or Conservative: Both Sides Trying To Claim 'Hunger Games'

The New York Times best-selling series “The Hunger Games” by Suzanne Collins makes it to the big screen this week, meaning the audience made aware of the book’s dystopian sentiments is bound to expand from its already more than 23.5 million copies sold.

The book is popular across age groups — although it is classified as young adult — and even crosses party lines. Depending on who you talk to, liberals or conservatives, both groups seem to see their cause in the book. The Hollywood Reporter even pointed out, according to Amazon’s top-selling cities list, that the book is popular in “West Coast cities with strong technology economies and reputations as liberal hotbeds and sunbelt cities perceived as more conservative.” This begs the question: Why is it resonating with both sides?
<snip>
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/liberals-and-conservatives-both-try-to-claim-hunger-games-as-their-own-why/

This is just one article.
Google 'Hunger Games, liberal, conservative and you will find other articles discussing both sides.
I believe there are arguments both sides can use to claim the movie as part of their philosophy.

[Leopolds Ghost]

53. Provoking political questions are censored from American fiction to avoid alienating half the market

This has the nice side effect of creating a culture of self-censorship, without which we'd probably be experiencing a wave of active censorship like in the 1920s (hell what am I saying, look what they did to Dan Rather and Keith Olbermann.)

[RZM]

55. Neither Olbermann nor Rather were censored for their beliefs

Rather screwed the pooch on the national guard docs. And Olbermann has a long history of antagonism with the brass. Major mistakes and constant conflict with the bosses are the kinds of things than can get anybody fired.

[Leopolds Ghost]

56. The national guard docs were broken by Democratic Underground's Walt Starr.

Rather "screwed the pooch" on nothing. It was an organized takedown led by right wing media critic Howard Kurtz, a member of the permanent Washington ruling elite.

[RZM]

58. LOL

I'm not going to rehash this. He retired because of the documents, plain and simple. Had they not been used, his job wouldn't have been in danger.

[Leopolds Ghost]

61. Wait, you think the documents were forgeries?

Were you disputing their legitimacy when the story first broke here on DU?

Funny how we've never heard anything about Bush's TANG records since then isn't it?

[RZM]

62. It's been a while since I've read about it

But I suspected at the time that they might have been forged. But I don't know that for sure of course.

[Leopolds Ghost]

65. I don't know for sure, but I don't think Dan Rather should have been fired for something that

Wasn't proven. I remember reading the horrible editorials by Howard Kurtz and they amounted to a whitewashing campaign defending Bush in the guise of "media criticism". I also remember learning that Howard Kurtz was married to a prominent conservative...

[TNLib]

49. Not sure what you mean?

The Hunger Games defeneatly depicts a right wing Utopia where the 1% domonate, turture, abuse and enslave the 99%.

I've read all the books and it makes the case pretty clear in the books.

[NYC Liberal]

59. It's the exact opposite of that. I loved the books and enjoyed the first movie.

Can't wait for the others.