“Civil War” – Journalist Circle Jerk, Useful Red-Pill Tool, or Both?

Last weekend, I saw the film “Civil War”, written and directed by Alex Garland. I had seen multiple articles about the movie, ranging from libtard ball-fanning about how “haunting” it is, to libtard complaining about how it isn’t partisan enough and doesn’t have a political message.

As a notorious libtard myself, I lean towards the second complaint. Civil War, as far as I am concerned, is a narcissistic jerk-off session for journalists – from the main characters driving around in a white SUV with the word “PRESS” spray painted on its side, to random soldiers and partisans from seemingly all sides (except the Trump-stand-in president’s forces) giving them almost free reign in their operations, like they are a holy priesthood and not just vultures picking at a corpse for photo-ops. The only instances where the journalists are treated like the subhuman creatures they are is when a pair of rainbow-haired snipers call them retarded, and when red-sunglasses-guy (“What kind of American are you?”) kills a couple of them after determining they aren’t even from America in the first place.

Given that Alex Garland’s father was a journalist, and Garland has been on record talking about his “respect” for the “old-school” style of journalism, this isn’t hard to understand.

The movie studiously avoids any reference to real-world politics, or even an attempt to explain its own premise – Texas and California have, apparently, set aside their differences to fight the Feds, and have achieved a level of organization able to imitate the US invasion of Iraq but in DC this time – meanwhile, the Federal troops are seemingly gone. The movie is supposed to take place in the final days of the war, and for some reason despite having DC fully fortified, the Secret Service are still running around in suits and ties as if they were defending the President from urban youths and not a well-organized invading army.

The film has no plot, and no real antagonist – Red Sunglasses is close, but only has a few minutes of screen time. The President is one, in theory, but Nick Offerman has almost less screentime than Red Sunglasses, and dies like a dog (killed, of course, by the female black rebel officer from, of course, California). There’s a few redneck-coded Whites who have strung up looters behind their gas station, and I assume the libtard Alex Garland expects us to think this is wrong, though he DID make the looters White, so perhaps it’s meant to be ambiguous.

Hunter Wallace over at Occidental Dissent had similar take in his article, “Alex Garland’s Civil War Underwhelms”. However, after making a post on Twitter about how I felt about the film, as well as on Telegram, I got some pushback on my take, which I will now shamelessly use for content on the website.

Friend of the Podcast Billy Roper, of Ozarkia, had this to say:

“The new Civil War movie is perhaps predictive programming, in which putting an idea into the social consciousness makes it more likely to become reality. From the beginning, the film is full of moments which we have anticipated seeing. Urbanites lined up for water and food rations, which turns into riots when there is not enough. Suicide bombings. Barricaded snipers. Urban and suburban warfare. Ethnic cleansing by nationalist militias. Mass graves. Looters captured and tortured and executed. Prisoners of War shot dead after surrendering. The line between police and military and civilians fading and diminishing. Law and order and relative normalcy being maintained in some areas that are homogeneous and look to their own defense, while other areas devolve into anarchy.”

“Why would the Jews want the balkanization of America and the end of the United States to become a self-fulfilling prophecy? Wouldn’t that seem counterproductive to their interests? After all, they are firmly in control of the United States government, both major political parties, the Federal Reserve banking system, the mainstream media, the entertainment industry, and American foreign policy which exists solely to promote the interests of the Jews at the expense of American blood and treasure. But, all of that is not sustainable. The productivity of the White working class has been bled nearly dry by Jewish fiat currency manipulation, Marxist government entitlement programs and social welfare spending, by a dozen fruitless foreign wars, and by high taxes and higher inflation. Through their group adaptive survival strategy of promoting open borders and undermining traditional cultural values and norms, and promoting minority interests, the United States is now nearly bankrupt, and the debt crisis is beyond repair.”

“Even more destructive is the growing political and cultural division between red and blue, right and left, rural and urban, White and everyone else. The Jews know that the host country they have parasitically infested has almost been drained lifeless. They know that it is time to abandon its corpse. They have gotten everything that they can get out of America. But, they cannot take the chance of leaving it as an intact country which might remain united and, after some internal cleansing, be turned against them. They have to not only steal the silverware on their way out of the house, they have to burn it down as they leave.”

“Before I actually watched the new Civil War movie, I assumed that it was going to be presented as a cautionary tale, as a warning for Americans during this election year to not get too excited, to not become too politically radicalized or partisan. I could only imagine that the moral of the story was going to be that our commonality was stronger than our differences, and we should rely on our better angels to pull the country together and hold hands and sing kumbaya rather than descend into the nightmare of a civil war. I was wrong. There is nothing patriotic about this movie. It is not a unifier.”

“I won’t give away too much and be a spoiler, but I will tell you that the end of the United States of America is an inevitability from the opening credits, and not just in terms of a bad government being replaced with a better government, but through the idea that once the bad government has been destroyed, the three or four factions which worked parallel but not in close cooperation with one another to destroy it will then turn on each other as well. Not a revolution, but balkanization, the breakup of the United States.”

“This film does not present that as a tragedy, but as a foregone conclusion, and I believe that even normies will find themselves, contrary to the emotional perspective promoted by the overwhelming majority of esoterically patriotic movies, rooting for the secessionists.”

He also, as you might imagine, recommends people go see the movie, and bring their friends, to use it as a conversations starter about balkanization. I don’t think he’s wrong. The film is almost devoid of real content – in so doing, it has become, effectively, a Rorschach Test that allows the viewer to project their own views. The limited background given, that the soon-to-be-deposed Preisdent took a third term, disbanded the FBI, and treats Journalists as enemy combatants, probably pushes it more towards a leftist interpretation, but that honestly doesn’t matter. The film itself show that while another civil war would be brutal and bloody, it also shows that, in a continental empire like America, that brutality would oftentimes be localized, and likely to people you don’t particularly like. How accurate its portrayal is doesn’t really matter, the people who see it can get the idea that there is something beyond “These United States”.

And, as Mr. Roper said:

“Once they do, many of them will have to ask themselves what comes after America. They will have to ask themselves exactly what kind of American they are.”