The United States is founded on the idea that there is an inherent justice in rebelling against a seemingly unjust system. If Public Education is primarily teaching ideology, the most important initial lesson taught is The Revolutionary War. The rebellious colonies were inherently justified in their rebellion. Their assessment of Great Britain as greatly unjust must always be taken at face-value; the American colonies were victims and victims never lie.
There is a eerily lyrical quality to the two planets destroyed in George Lucas’s “Star Wars” (1977). The first was used as the only piece of evidence to justify the Empire’s malicious reputation; the fact that Alderaan was a peaceful planet mattered not to General Tarkin- the destruction of Alderaan was considered necessary for the greater good, the restoration of order, for the larger galaxy. The only morality, for General Tarkin, was civilization. It should go without saying that the decision to destroy Alderaan must have been a difficult one, but the true essence of leadership lies in the difficult and unpopular decisions the role necessitates. It seems childish to think the Empire enjoyed destruction as an end in itself- they weren’t a maniacal serial killer, they were a fascist dictatorship. There is a chaos to genocide, they desired predictability.
Actions aren’t judged; ideologies are judged. When people meet socially they subconsciously scan one-another for the correct ideology, and while there is wiggle-room for an individual to rebel a bit from the uniformity of the predominant ideology, usually in the form of a complaint regarding people being “too PC,” the window is small. Once someone is conscious of this or switches ideologies entirely, it may come as a shock how quickly they are excommunicated from others despite shared history or otherwise social compatibility.
As an interesting aside, the “white knight as sexual strategy” has a lot to do with the confusion of ideology as a social-prerequisite and ideology as sexually attractive. The White Knight in this regard does not understand the difference between civilizational desires and animistic desires.
If there is an ideological explanation behind even the most heinous action, that action becomes acceptable regardless of the immediate outcome. Ideology separates terrorism from activism; not that the victims of either would understand the difference.
So when Luke Skywalker is plucked from his space-farm as a naive kid by an old, agenda-driven mystic, and fed narcissistic drivel about his massive importance in Galactic affairs, it isn’t such a leap to think he’s being told a bunch of deliberate bullshit to serve as a terrorist in training.
Even if Luke was happy to be trading power-converters and targeting womp-rats in his free time, living comfortably with Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru, Obi Wan quickly makes him ashamed of this humility and a short ninety-minutes later Luke cheers wildly as he commits mass-murder.
In other words, Luke would scoff at Dorothy, stay in Oz, and blow most of it up.
The audience is also meant to cheer Luke without giving thought to those murdered on The Death Star; they were guilty-by ideology. The Rebels were virtuous by ideology– murder was a necessary vehicle to accomplish their ideological end. Important to note that a plan for the replacement of the carefully ordered, and meticulously structured Empire is never hinted at.
A replacement, even headed by “General Leia” (I’m throwing up) would require some kind of order, rule, authority, and law. Certainly a consequence to this would be difficult decision making, and there would need to be winners and losers. The losers would find their treatment unfair and want to rebel… This cycle would have likely made for a far more interesting Episode VII, but hey, WTF do I know, I’m just an asshole with a blog.
The next most important Public School lesson is The American Civil War. Ideology shapes perception here and takes center stage. How does The Civil War differ from The Revolutionary War? If we are to understand rebellion as virtue- the rebellious as victims, and victims as inherently virtuous- The South should have been theoretically cast as sympathetic. Abraham Lincoln here can serve as the fascist Emperor with a tyrannical obsession for order and structure, yet not so because of ideology.
Ideology takes center-stage in Public Education’s discourse on The American Civil War; Rebellion isn’t enough, but rebellion plus ideology is bullet-proof.
If the idea is that The Civil War was the war for Social Justice, that the the North took a stand against the morally-bankrupt, intellectually inferior South, and went to war for ideology, why would Lincoln obsess on keeping the South as part of the Union? If you stand-up to an asshole bully, do you then force the bully to be your best friend? And what does that make you?
Under the Rainbow, rebellion is a method for victims to seize power. Under the Rainbow, victims are inherently virtuous; had the power dynamic been different all-along, had the victim class been the ones in charge of decision making, the world would be one gigantic Kindergarten classroom of snacks, naps, and happiness.
Time stands still Under the Rainbow, and the roles have been cast. The eternal victim rebels against the eternally powerful. It’s too frightening to think of a world where the roles become reversed.
Like my post? I accept Bitcoin tips via ChangeTip @ killtoparty.tip.me/