Why I like “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”


To show that I’m not just a philosophical and theological stick in the mud, devoid of pop culture savvy, I’m going to do something a little new in this post. With The Avengers: Age of Ultron released Thursday, I thought I would take the time to come out and say that I am thoroughly a fanboy of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Spider-Man has been my favorite superhero since childhood, but Disney/Marvel just got the licensing rights to put the web-head back on the silver screen — and hopefully well compared to the dreadful Amazing Spider-Man 2.

The MCU character I really connect with is the quintessential super-soldier himself, Steve Rogers, a.k.a Captain America (Chris Evans). In a time when the Left controls all the mass disseminators of culture — Hollywood, TV, news media and academia — it’s fantastic that a character that represents old-time American values isn’t just rewritten to accommodate today’s rampant moral relativism and politically correct Orwellian doublespeak. He actually is extolled and portrayed sympathetically as a paragon of moral fiber and virtue. His man-out-of-time schtick has never come off as a goody-too-shoes boy scout to me but rather as someone who has moral convictions, plants his feet and says, “I believe in x” or “y is wrong, and I won’t stand by it.” This is refreshing and appreciated.

For instance, in the original Avengers, somehow this exchange (if you want the actual scene) got into a movie: Not only did director Joss Whedon, a self-avowed atheist, stayed faithful to the character, but he showed he actually understands Christian theism better than many of today’s New Atheists. The sophisticated theist (here, here, here) does not hold God to be anything like Thor, Loki, Zeus, Ra, Ganesha, Quetzalcoatl, etc. Even though philosophically-minded theists disagree among themselves whether God is ipsum esse subsistens — Subsistent Being Itself — or is the necessary, infinite and maximally great being amongst contingent, finite and imperfect ones, comparisons to Odin, Vishnu, Marduk and the like are mere caricatures. As Edward Feser pithily puts it: “When you understand why I dismiss all other gods, you’ll understand why I dismiss your ‘one god further’ objection as puerile.”

Contrasted with the Avengers, Captain America: The Winter Soldier inculcates some good political wisdom instead of theological thought. As a brief synopsis to add context, after the events of the Battle of New York, as depicted in the Avengers, Cap has gone to work for S.H.I.E.L.D, an advanced and clandestine intelligence agency headed by the sometimes shady super-spy Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Cap finds himself clashing with Fury due to his manipulations, lack of honesty and his plans to execute a morally ambiguous answer to a 21st-century problem that should resonate in this post-9/11, Patriot Act, drone-warfare age. Not to give the details away, but Cap calls him out on it, describing Fury’s plans as such: “I thought the punishment came after the crime…By holding the gun to everyone on Earth and calling it protection?…This isn’t freedom. This is fear.” The whole scene needs to be watched to see how Cap responds to Fury’s retorts. Our hero recognizes that big, sweeping governmental solutions, where the ends justify the means, aren’t enlightened nor do they preserve liberty.

Cap’s criticisms are inherently conservative in nature, not progressive. Ahem, cue up Grubergate, “If you like your plan you’ll keep your plan” and Marxist eschatology, where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie by the proletariat to immanetize workers’ paradise, as a few examples that come to mind. See, agents of the Left operate under the delusions that they know best, that their utopias are not only true but achievable and that these axioms absolve the lying, defamation, bloodshed and domination of every facet of human life and will to get there. Don’t believe me? Who wants to tax soda? Who wants to introduce legislation to dictate what is considered officially consensual sex between a man and a woman? Who wants ensure that the appropriate numbers of people of each sex, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation are on TV, hired by employers, distributed correctly among professions or admitted into college? Who wants to implement policy to address the issue of racism despite there being no overt racists, i.e. correct thought-crimes or subconscious crimes? Who wants to re-educate people via “sensitivity training”? Who looks to punish those who refuse to bake a cake for a ceremony because of sincere religious and moral convictions when this spiteful patron could easily go somewhere else? Who demands the state step in to remove religious symbols from public ground lest the non-religious or those from different faiths take offense and feel stigmatized? Find those who call upon governmental force, that by its nature is always backed by a barrel of a gun, or other formally coercive and direct means like boycotts or terminations of employment as a first resort to confront every problem or diverging of opinions under the sun. Good, now those are your totalitarians.

The second gem of conservative virtue, which is very much related to the nefarious nature of the Left as described above, comes in one of those cliche scenes when a villain monologues about his scheme to our plucky protagonists. Within this one, this evildoer waxes:

…humanity could not be trusted with its own freedom. What we did not realize is that if you try to take that freedom, they resist…Humanity needed to surrender its freedom willingly…[We’ve] been secretly feeding crisis, reaping war. And when history did not cooperate, history was changed…[We’ve] created a world so chaotic that humanity is finally ready to sacrifice its freedom to gain its security. Once the purification process is complete, [our] new world order will arise.

I would replace “chaotic” with “unfair” or “unjust” and “security” with “equality” in order to apply it more accurately to designs of the Left. But this is another apt characterization. As I argued earlier, the Left does not believe in the liberty of free-market solutions, permit dissenting ideas to challenge its own in the marketplace of ideas or think the rule of law and its system of checks and balances, constitutional or otherwise, will right itself. It ultimately does not trust us with our own freedom, as evidenced by the perpetual attempts to regulate everything and politicize anything in everyday life as justification for its interference.

I maintain these machinations really picked up steam when Marx’s intellectual successors like Gramsci, Adorno and Horkheimer were puzzled as to why the apocalyptic communist revolutions never occurred like Marx and Engels had predicted. After all, white Russians opposed red Russians; Chiang Kai-shek’s nationalists fought again Mao Zedong’s communists; and the United States and its Western allies challenged the Soviet Union and its satellites. Therefore, these Marxist philosophers set out to determine why the popular uprisings struggled to even spark, let alone why heaven on Earth had not occurred as forecast, i.e. “What we did not realize is that if you try to take that freedom, they resist.” In the 1930s, Gramsci focused on what is known as cultural hegemony, where the ruling class transmits its values and beliefs, via educational institutions and mass media, to the exploited classes for the downtrodden to adopt them against their better interests as a means of control. Adorno, Horkheimer, Mercuse and others submitted a critical theory of Western civilization, which I believe has proven as one of the most influential contributions of philosophy in the last century. Critical theory is not only alive but has thrived on college campuses in its relentless pursuit to chastise the West, breeding and festering in university departments like African-American, gender and queer studies. Though I also submit the conditioning starts in earlier education, however, where do you think the myths of the wage gap and 1 out of 5 college girls are sexually assaulted exactly are born from? Moreover, gen-ed courses feature curriculum that indoctrinates students to believe that America is still fundamentally racist, white Christian males are the great oppressors, capitalism is the great evil and American imperialism is as heinous if not worse than the forcible subjugation of foreign peoples as perpetrated by ancient Rome, the Mongol khanates or Hirohito Japan. Meanwhile, the critique — if you can really call it that — ignores the inconvenient fact pertaining to all the cultural, intellectual, technological innovation, individual wealth and personalized autonomy in a nation that has never been so populous and ethnically and ideologically diverse in history. Reveling in both its shrillness and simplicity, this appraisal of America and the West thoroughly has been reinforced and perpetuated by our popular media and culture, which curiously also was a locus of scrutiny for Gramsci, Adorno and other Marxists from the Frankfurt School.

Isn’t it interesting that what these philosophers identified as weapons against the weak, within a generation of their writings, have become magically the inverse: tools to promote “social justice”? What a convenient and fortuitous reversal, unless its just the Hollywood and other media creme de la creme decidedly projecting their values onto the common person to adopts as his or her own, another manifestation of Gramscian cultural hegemony coming from a direction that heavily veers to the Left. Based on what we see on TV, doesn’t the outside world seem so “chaotic,” “unfair” and “unequal” that many of our “liberal” friends have mistakenly bought into it all and are unwittingly “ready to sacrifice their freedom” to ensure “equality”?

Let’s go through another litany of examples to demonstrate what I mean: Who wants to drastically raise the minimum wage even though it naturally will result in a sharp drop in jobs?; who wants the government to provide for entitlements to education and housing and more benefits to the unemployed despite that such initiatives impoverish cities like Detroit and Baltimore; who wants to redefine marriage, rendering mothers and fathers as optional to their children in the view of the state?; who wants to ban assault rifles and enact other gun control measures that likely will be ineffectual on gun violence, in general, because handguns are overwhelming the deadliest firearms in the country?; who demands that the Washington Redskins change its name because some people in a minority find it racially insensitive, despite such a change would fail to address the real empirical problems within their communities? Doesn’t it seem like an extremely bad, crisis-steeped world that requires decisive, comprehensive action from Big Brother, as everything from video games to “mansplaining” is somehow a form of overbearing oppression and injustice?

Furthermore, for the Left, “when history did not cooperate, history was changed”: Travyon Martin, the teenager who pounded “white hispanic” George Zimmerman’s face before being shot in self-defense, is Emmett Till; Ferguson, when a community abandoned all counsel from Rev. Martin Luther King to flaunt the rule of law and further impoverish itself, is Selma. “Hands up, don’t shoot” was and is a lie, yet demonstrators continue to repeat it to protest racist police brutality even though the evidence shows Michael Brown’s slaying was not an example of racist police brutality. Illegal aliens are now “undocumented workers,” and “global warming” has become “climate change.” A University of Virginia fraternity’s members gang-raped a girl, except that they didn’t. Orwell: War is peace; freedom is slavery; ignorance is strength.

As for the purification process, look no further than Memories Pizza which apparently deserves to be threatened out of business because its owners wouldn’t service a same-sex wedding if they were ever asked. A gay hotelier must pay penance for meeting with “anti-gay” Ted Cruz. Actress Alice Eve is harangued until she recants for stating the irrefutable truth: Bruce Jenner is a man whether or not he feels like he has the soul of a woman. More Orwell: “…we have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.”

Anyway, I could go on ad infinitum chronically how today’s mainstream Left and progressives are the antithesis of what they claim to be. With Marvel in mind though, I summarily find it absolutely great that Cap finds that it his duty to say the Orwellian obvious like “This isn’t freedom. This is fear” to the “enlightened” Fury. I’m ecstatic that Cap fights against those who have lied, slandered and manipulated their way to cajole people into endorsing things that makes government bigger for no real purpose or reason other than some elite agenda. I find it hilariously ironic that all this appears in and can be gleaned from a singular work within one of the propaganda engines that the Left uses to “win young hearts and minds.”

Oh, and if you disagree with me, and or this analysis rubs you the wrong way, you should still give the film a try anyway, as it’s highly entertaining. Like the best superhero movies such as The Dark Knight or The Avengers, it not only stands alone but actually transcends the genre. Captain America: The Winter Soldier has elements from spy thrillers and 80s action fare. The fight sequences are arguably the best Marvel has ever produced, and I propose could be the best in recent memory. For the most part, they’re less CGI, more hand-to-hand combat and practical effects. Plus, this is the best iteration of the Winter Soldier I’ve ever seen. He’s a Terminator, not a whiny brat — at least so far — and actually a physical match for Cap. Overall, strongly recommended.

Enjoy (***Major spoiler after 02:57***),

Modus Pownens

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Why I like “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”

  1. I am amused that we share the same favorite Marvel character, at least as far as the MCU is concerned. Yet, you once again have a way of revealing something I only vaguely knew in a horrifying but accurate light. I was aware that the LGBT agenda has veered into totalitarianism. It didn’t occur to me that a large amount of the Left is already walking on that same road. It is terrifying, and ties in to your defense of Daina over on Askthebigot.

    I have three questions for you: One, what is your favorite moment in his movie? Two, what is your favorite Captain America moment overall?

    Three, recently, I watched the reboot of Robocop. Throughout the movie, there are a series of scenes featuring a political pundit. The actor was Samuel Jackson, which gave me a kick, but by the end of it, I was unsure of which side the pundit operated from (Right or Left). What do you think? If you haven’t seen it, the movie is decent to see at least once, and is on Netflix. So, I’d like for you to watch it and tell me which side you think the pundit is arguing from. (Or, you can look up his scenes on Youtube)

    And now, curse you. I have to go and check out all of those links you put in.

    1. Communism, progressivism, Leftism and the “liberalism” of Democratic Party politics are all totalitarian in nature. It’s the great paradox of all these philosophies, that to level the inequality and to enforce equality, some group has to be empowered over the rest to ensure society keeps its strict egalitarian shape. I mean, I’m no expert on Marx or the Frankfurt School, but I know the basics, and after the material and or cultural bourgeoisie was humbled and brought into rank, some entity must ensure things don’t revert back to a capitalist, white Christian male, heteronormative dominated society. Sure, there are those Marxist idiots who think that this is just a transitional stage, that big-state apparatus will dissipate in time and everything will be kumbayah. But this is assuredly false as a quick survey of the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cuba and the like will confirm that indeed those thinkers are idiots. Those who have power always consolidate it.

      1) Favorite moment is probably the embedded Youtube link down below. The film did a good job teasing and building to this clash of the titans.
      2) I don’t know if I have one. I love the Winter Soldier, if I can call that a moment. It’s the best movie Marvel has done: Favreau is an average director when it comes to action in Iron Man uno and dos. The Avengers is good and flirts with serious character development and the civil and philosophical implications of a world in which super-powered vigilantes like the Avengers and their nemeses fight. Guardians of the Galaxy is good but is overrated. Cap 2 is a pretty decent character study of our spangled hero — everything Cap ends up doing in that movie makes sense and feels natural. It shows instead of tells what is going on this character’s head without being obtusely obvious. Hell, even the fight choreography builds these characters: Cap, leaps and runs gallantly; the Winter Soldier is confident, collected, methodical and relentless. For instance, as he blows up cop cars while civilians scramble around in broad daylight in DC, he is slow in his gait with a slight sway in his shoulders as he hunts Black Widow. The movie also is more intertwined politics and ideology, especially in a modern context than The Avengers.
      3) I’ve watched the scene and I think he’s supposed to represent and characterize the Right. He is a proponent for robocops, cops are agents of the state that are supposed to enforce the state’s rules and as such, conflict with civil liberties. The Right in our country tends to be trusting of the police; especially in recent months, the Left has always distrusted and demonized agents of the state when they are not in power. Eric Holder and his zealous and overbearing inquiries about racial crimes or individual business owners penalized because for refusing to cater to a same-sex wedding, for today’s Leftists, that’s ok because it’s for social justice. Whose social justice? The one that adheres to their Leftist values. A double standard, methinks. To me, this is more just some Hollywood elites broadcasting their values on to the masses, but I have not seen the movie, so this could be out of context.

      I’m sure many Hollywood and TV moguls have not heard of Gramsci or the Frankfurt School, but they do understand the value and influence their industries have on formulating public opinion. Samuel L. Jackson’s diatribe, for example, is not there to invoke food for thought. It’s to invoke change. And this is tacitly admitted whenever they justify pushing for more minority characters in media. They want people to think there are black superheroes (and therefore heroic), women aren’t just damsels in distress or weaker than men in order to not “perpetuate false stereotypes.” They actually aim to perpetuate the right, aka their stereotypes to gain political capital. It’s not about telling a good story; it’s about telling one that best serves to shape the world in their image. That’s why on FOX’s Gotham, Barbara is written as bisexual. Or in comics, X-men’s Iceman is suddenly gay. It’s all just a means to social engineer and change how people think, often devoid of reasoned argument because their falsely assured-righteousness and truth would be subjected to criticisms and perhaps shown to be vacuous, as many of those views are when encountered by slight scrutiny.

  2. You see, Jackson’s character confuses me because I see both Left and Right elements. You’ve mentioned why he might be for the Right (which I’ll add, he’s supporting a major corporation’s project as further evidence).

    But, he’s pushing for something new, uses the term ‘robophobia’ (very Leftist tactic), is trying to replace the ‘corruptible’ police force with an upgrade.

    So, that’s why I’m confused. Granted, he’s more likely to be Right, but it’d be nice if Hollywood admitted some of their own ideological flaws.

    1. Anti-corporationism is I assume a part of Robocop, which is very Leftist. It’s not very hard to find some piece of pop culture or literature decrying corporate greed or making a large company the antagonist. Though I can’t think of an example where the unions or the environmentalists are every portrayed negatively that hinder the opportunity jobs for the common person.

      If I may project as to the motivation and mental states of others — as those on the Left love to do — ascribing phobias to people who disagree with you or who stand in opposition to your agendas is something the Left loves to do. I speculate it’s because they are so convinced of their righteousness this is the only way they can account for this phenomenon of differing opinions or they’re just despicable people. Also, conservatives don’t typically coin phrases and push them as political capital. So, I presume whoever wrote Robocop is a Leftist, and as such, invented “robophobia,” an act natural to Leftist thinking, and applied it to caricature and demonize something strongly associated with the Right. Jackson’s character is written to demonize the Right and I would say the fact “robophobia” is term used by him is because he is a fictional creation of a progressive mind and not an indication of a tactic a conservative typically employs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s