Skip to comments.Andrew Breitbart: 'Something's Desperately Wrong' in Hollywood
Posted on 07/16/2008 10:10:38 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
Andrew Breitbart, CEO of Breitbart.com, had a great op ed in the Washington Times yesterday about how Hollywood oppresses Republicans and conservatives in La La Land. Detailing the travails of Republicans in Hollywood -- including destruction by Hollywood's liberals of personal property owned by identified Republicans -- Breitbart laments the "bullying" the self-proclaimed tolerant lefties mete out to those who walk the Republican side of the street.
Breitbart says of this ideological inbreeding:
But Los Angeles is a one-company town. And because of bullying (or what Democrats would call blacklisting or political discrimination if the shoe were on the other foot), Hollywood has become a one-party town. History will show this dynamic hurt both the creative and the political processes. In the absence of checks and balances we end up with a system that creates a mainstream film about Ronald Reagan -- written, produced and directed by narcissistic and myopic partisans who only viewed the Gipper through the lens of partisan AIDS activism. Like anyone would watch an epic movie about Americas victory in the Cold War.
Hollywood is so left-wing that it hurts its own bottom line by constantly producing films that no one wants to see. Especially their current crop of dreck about the war in Iraq. Breitbart mentions the many failures of these left-wing, anti-Iraq war films.
More than a dozen box office failures vilify the troops without a single counter-perspective seeing the light of day. Yet one impactful and heartfelt pro-war film, Brothers at War, dares to tell the story of a noble and patriotic American family yet cant find a distributor.
But there is another way to see how little America cares for these anti-American bombs. It is instructive to take a quick look at the box office takes for these unmitigated disasters to see how Americans have reacted to these films....
Read the rest of this story at Publius Forum.com
Antonio Gramsci is seen by many as one of the most important Marxist thinkers of the twentieth century, in particular as a key thinker in the development of Western Marxism.
Hegemony was a concept previously used by Marxists such as Lenin to indicate the political leadership of the working-class in a democratic revolution, but developed by Gramsci into an acute analysis to explain why the ‘inevitable’ socialist revolution predicted by orthodox Marxism had not occurred by the early 20th century. Capitalism, it seemed, was even more entrenched than ever. Capitalism, Gramsci suggested, maintained control not just through violence and political and economic coercion, but also ideologically, through a hegemonic culture in which the values of the bourgeoisie became the ‘common sense’ values of all. Thus a consensus culture developed in which people in the working-class identified their own good with the good of the bourgeoisie, and helped to maintain the status quo rather than revolting.
The working class needed to develop a culture of its own, which would overthrow the notion that bourgeois values represented ‘natural’ or ‘normal’ values for society, and would attract the oppressed and intellectual classes to the cause of the proletariat. Lenin held that culture was ‘ancillary’ to political objectives but for Gramsci it was fundamental to the attainment of power that cultural hegemony was first achieved.
In Gramscis view, any class that wishes to dominate in modern conditions has to move beyond its own narrow economic-corporate interests, to exert intellectual and moral leadership, and to make alliances and compromises with a variety of forces.
the bourgeoisie was regarded as hegemonic within capitalist society by Gramsci, who believed their power depended on the permeation by bourgeois values of all organs of society.