Counter-Currents
You can buy Trevor Lynch’s Classics of Right-Wing Cinema here.
954 words
Do you ever find yourself bored on the couch, surfing nearly-identical streaming services or, if you still have it, cable? Do you succumb to watching something you’ve already seen in lieu of trying something new? In an era of content overload, there’s never been so little to watch or read. The sheer amount of garbage that is pumped onto screen and page alike almost seems by design, and it probably is.
Luckily, we have Counter-Currents’ Trevor Lynch book series, the latest of which is Trevor Lynch’s Classics of Right-Wing Cinema. It is a collection of film reviews published over the past few years on movies, many that we’re already familiar with, which give a specific Right-leaning impression. I know what you’re thinking: There’s a sub-genre of Right-wing filmmakers out there that I’m unaware of? Sadly, no, not really. In the preface, Greg Johnson states, “To be a Classic of Right-Wing Cinema, a movie need not have an explicitly Right-Wing director or message. Indeed, very few movies fit that description. Instead, a movie simply needs to have a message that resonates with the Right.”
Though I don’t want to discuss every movie reviewed, one example (my personal favorite) is the first one in the book, on American History X. The reason I enjoyed this one the most is because it may be the archetypal film that epitomizes Hollywood glorifying something that they were in fact trying to shame. Other examples of this are Fight Club, which tried to satirize masculinity and ended up making it cool; Full Metal Jacket attempting to demonize war but causing a surge in Marine Corps recruitment; and Avatar, which sought to discredit colonialism but everyone rooted for the humans, anyway. American History X does the same thing with the holiest of Hollywood holies: racism. Edward Norton is featured in two of the movies I just named, and I’m honestly shocked that no one at the New York Times has written a piece accusing him of being a crypto-fascist. Unfortunately for the screenwriter and director, the film “actually increases audience sympathies with neo-Nazi skinheads, despite its best efforts to present them as hateful hypocrites and losers,” as Trevor Lynch writes in his review. Some chalk this up to good storytelling, one method of which is to make your viewers actually sympathize with those who you believe to be in the wrong. But even in 1998, when the film was first released, there’s no way Hollywood would have sanctioned anything that even inadvertently sanctioned racism. As Lynch writes:
One does not need to endorse Derek’s Nazi ideology, rhetorical excesses, and physical violence to admire his sincerity and conviction, or to see the merits of his arguments. As for his opponents, they have nothing to offer but hurt looks, breaths sharply drawn in disapproval, and mumbling about racism and social inequalities.
How could such a misstep occur? Mere smugness, according to the review — and this hits the nail on the head.
You can buy Trevor Lynch’s Part Four of the Trilogy here.
The other review that I greatly enjoyed was a clear-cut classic of Right-wing cinema: Taxi Driver. Most have already seen it, and if you haven’t, you probably should. The essay does an excellent job of likening the arc of the protagonist, Travis Bickle, to that of men of present times, comparing him to today’s Rightist “honorable defeatists” or incels. Whereas the system once tolerated the vigilante’s crusade against the world’s degradation, it now shouts it down, because they know what they’re pushing. The bottom line: “Travis is a glutton for punishment.” The incel comparison might be the review’s most interesting observation, and it almost seems as if Taxi Driver was an eerie template for the modern, isolated, cultural dystonia that we live in today. Some of my other favorites were those about Bridge on the River Kwai, A Clockwork Orange, and House of Gucci.
Counter-Currents has always emphasized the importance of culture and entertainment as a part of metapolitics, as is evident from many of the books it has published. Another group that has noticed this are those who are currently in control of the mass media. The 1992 documentary Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, based on a book of the same name and directed by Mark Achbar and Peter Wintonick, is a great primer on Chomsky’s work on the subject of media manipulation. A line from the book is reiterated in the documentary: “It’s the primary function of the mass media in the United states to mobilize public support for the special interests that dominate the government and the private sector.” This indoctrination is fact the “essence” of democracy. In an interview with Chomsky included in the film, he discusses how this is accomplished. There are two main targets for propaganda: The first is the “political class,” which is roughly 20% of the population — those who get an education, are articulate, and who play some sort of role in societal decision-making, as well as the mid- and upper-level managers such as teachers, professors, and writers; essentially, those who partake in politics. “Their consent is crucial and has to be deeply indoctrinated,” says Chomsky. The main function of the remaining 80% “is to follow orders and not to think.” Think sportsball and Marvel movies. Has not one mainstream scholar sought to apply Chomsky’s observations to our current regime’s propaganda and indoctrination?
It goes without saying that this manipulation goes way beyond CNN and FOX News. Entertainment-based media is just as crucial. Though there’s no changing the ways of the world overnight, Trevor Lynch’s Classics of Right-Wing Cinema gives you an opportunity to sit back, relax, reinterpret, and maybe even rewatch some of your favorite films, and perhaps some new ones as well. There’s a long road ahead, and everyone needs to some occasional diversion.
* * *
Like all journals of dissident ideas, Counter-Currents depends on the support of readers like you. Help us compete with the censors of the Left and the violent accelerationists of the Right with a donation today. (The easiest way to help is with an e-check donation. All you need is your checkbook.)
For other ways to donate, click here.
18 comments
Fans of American History X may like the Australian film Romper Stomper. Highly recommended.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kizEd4wD3Rw
Yes, that’s a good one too. Really good soundtrack as well.
There’s also The Believer is pretty good along those lines. Who could that be about? Also Imperium is okay. It predicted Charlottesville
Haven’t watch Romper Stomper in forever, based Russell Crowe role.
I just looked at the list of 34 and I’ve seen 13 of them, including all the Dirt Harry sequels. Not bad.
Also, Milk??? I have to admit I’m a little skeptical of that choice, but I look forward to reading the section on it.
Its a good take on it!
There are two main targets for propaganda: The first is the “political class,” which is roughly 20% of the population — those who get an education, are articulate, and who play some sort of role in societal decision-making…
One frequently sees mainstream conservatives showing some pleasure in announcing the drop in ratings of some liberal news network or cable channel. Once again, the market has triumphed!
They are probably missing the point.
Let’s say the viewership of CNMSNACBS have dropped to 30% of the numbers they were a decade ago. But what if that 30% are tuning in from the Beltway, Wall Street, Silicon Valley and Davos? As long as the elites are watching and taking their marching orders from the media, they bring along their subordinates in the managerial class. And since these are the real movers and shakers, they still run policy.
This may be a major flaw with conservative news media. It does not reach the elites in sufficient numbers to influence the regime policy makers.
The main function of the remaining 80% “is to follow orders and not to think.”
From the 1990s to roughly the late 2000s, Hollywood was producing all sorts of movies and television shows glorifying World War II: Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, etc. At the same time, the party line was that Saddam Hussein (or some equivalent) was the new Hitler. Result: wars all over the Middle East.
Then some time in the early 2010s the script got flipped to the American Civil War: Twelve Years a Slave, Lincoln, Selma, a slew of others. And faster than you can say “Ocean is at war with Eastasia,” the new enemy became White Supremacy ™ while the main front became the streets of America, culminating in the 2020 rioting, iconoclasm and crackdown on the political right.
Now, is this all by accident? The outcome of Hollywood meeting market demands? A centralized plan to mold public opinion (ala Edward Bernays, Walter Lippmann, et alia)? Some combination?
Regardless, the Dissident Right might consider ways in which it can target critical communicators within the establishment, like cable TV news hosts and oligarchs who would open to the message. Then let’s see the public march along with them.
Never had any desire to see American History X. Then it was “assigned” (you could opt out if you “couldn’t handle it” but no one did) in college and we spent at least one class period discussing it.
I expected it to be stupid, and I was still blown away by how stupid it was. Fortunately for me, I suppose, it was so dumb that I was easily able to take the movie apart based solely on its stupidity… but the prof still pegged me as a racist and turned against me (she was a blind squirrel with a nut I suppose).
I’m surprised to see it on this list. The rabid anti-white lemmings I know tend to have a very high opinion of it
The review addresses this, saying that the anti-white leaning was so sure and smug on behalf of the film’s creators, they essentially had the opposite effect. I saw this as a young kid and that’s exactly what I thought, I remember sympathizing with Dereck and his younger brother and the end of the film only crystallized that feeling.
All good points and yes you’re right, as long as there’s a certain lean in the media class, however much there is a “ratings drop” or whatever, society will blindly take its marching orders in that direction.
Then some time in the early 2010s the script got flipped to the American Civil War: Twelve Years a Slave, Lincoln, Selma, a slew of others. And faster than you can say “Ocean is at war with Eastasia,” the new enemy became White Supremacy ™ while the main front became the streets of America, culminating in the 2020 rioting, iconoclasm and crackdown on the political right.
And though this is true, from a government-media axis standpoint, you could make the argument this was the anti-white campaign version 2.0. A lot of people forget about that weird 1990s decade where the US was without an external boogeyman to focus on over the horizon (USSR just collapsed, “terrorism” had yet to crystalize with 9/11), so we turned on ourselves. Domestic “militias” became a major concern which, to borrow a term from our media class, was just a “dog whistle” for anti-white BS. Everyone knows of Ruby Ridge, the Aryan Nation, Waco, Tim McVeigh… all 90s and surround by dubious govt/media meddling. I think there was even a TV movie that came out about Robert Jay Matthews in the same timeframe.
The film about Bob Mathews was called “Brotherhood of Murder” , where he was portrayed by Peter Gallagher . It was actually quite sympathetic towards Bob , which I found a bit surprising . Before that , there was a Hollywood film about Mathews & The Order released in 1988 called “Betrayed” , where Bob was played by Tom Berenger , which as you’d expect from (((Hollywood))) totally inverted his character as to how he was in real life
Sounds about right. There was also recently a Waco miniseries on Netflix which also surprisingly portrayed the weird cult people sympathetically… a total guess but it feels like back-peddling. Regardless, I would have more than likely never joined the Branch Davidians!
“Ocean is at war with Eastasia,”
Should be: “Oceania is at war with Eastasia.”
A glitch with the speakwrite machine!
What about Cabaret? Written by two Jews to “expose” the Nazi emergence as a destroyer of “freedom” – watch the whole thing today and its brilliant exposition of lives destroyed by Weimar “freedom”, just as they are being destroyed today, and it makes you want to head out and join the Party.
Never seen it but those types of portrayals are hysterical to me: “What you don’t love the debauchery?”
(I also posted this comment under Jim Goad’s review of Stagecoach.)
I just read Trevor Lynch’s reviews of The Searchers and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. It is gratifying to read reviews of these well-known films by someone who approaches these stories from a different perspective than the usual boring and dishonest film commentary and critique.
I was particularly struck by these lines from The Searchers review:
“He [Ethan] may have to do things that render him unfit for civil society, so that others can enjoy it in innocence and peace.”
“Ford wants to confront liberals with the fact that their civilization could not have been built without illiberal men and illiberal deeds.”
Both of these statements ring a loud bell of truth for me. They highlight the crux of a very difficult and disturbing film and express a truly sophisticated perspective about the nature of the human condition, and what it takes to survive, let alone evolve. Everything comes with a price and the payment must be made by someone. There is no getting around that and it is immature and dangerous to pretend otherwise.
Although I don’t consider myself a liberal or a conservative, I have always thought that the liberal worldview has a limited—and therefore limiting—understanding of human beings. Conservatives often do too, but it is a given on the left side of the political spectrum. There is an unwillingness to acknowledge reality as well as a lack of gratitude for those who did things just so we may sleep at night.
And, this from the review of Liberty Valance:
“He’s the kind of man who needs killing, so decent people can plant crops, raise children, and sleep at night.”
I know this is a big leap from the landscape of the Wild West, but upon reading that, I immediately thought of the banking cartel and the mess they have made of everything over two centuries, and what may need to happen to correct the trajectory of Western nations (indeed, the whole world). I suspect many (on both sides) are thinking along similar lines, but not too many are willing to admit it and say it out loud. This is a shame because it’s just a fact of life: good people sometimes have to do bad things (or, do things that are perceived as bad from a limited perspective). This shouldn’t be a controversial thing to acknowledge on screen or at the dinner table.
The irony of it all is that artists (including storytellers) are supposed to be the ones providing insight into the human condition, and telling the “truth.” But as far as I can tell, most film writers and most film critics avoid doing just that.
I purchased Trevor Lynch’s book of film reviews and I look forward to reading it.
Lynch’s reviews are far more entertaining than the movies.
Agreed. I tried to watch The Searchers a couple days ago and it found it boring as all hell. I enjoyed the review of it way more.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.