What's Happening

Troperville

Tools

collapse/expand topics back to Main/CSAConfederateStatesOfAmerica

 

MsShaw
topic
11:35:58 PM Dec 28th 2010
edited by MsShaw
I don't mind people removing bullets, but why was this removed?

* Crowning Moment Of Awesome. Yes, Jefferson Davis is 90% evil in this movie. He still manages to get one of these when someone suggests evicting America's Jewish population.
Talking Head: As Davis lay on his deathbed, he literally pleaded with the congress to revoke the act...When young Faunteroy visited the dying man, made the mistake of asserting to Davis "that the nation would be better off without those bloodsucking Jews" Davis for his part reached out with a frail hand grabbed young Faunteroy by the collar and fraily hissed, "Never forget sir, that it was a blood-sucking Jew who saved this country!"
  • Founteroy's slave Horace totally gets one, for sacrificing his life in order to make sure his owner never gets a chance at the Presidential nomination, preventing a war with Canada.

* Ear Worm: Senator Fauntroy's campaign jingle. Specifically, the longer version that runs over the credits.
  • Then there's the theme to Runaway, a parody of Cops—which, in an even more entertaining/dastardly nod, sounds suspiciously like "Bad Boys" (the Real Song Theme Tune to Cops), but done by a diddle-ee country band.

The Anvilious one I can sort of understand, but I'm putting the other two back until someone can explain otherwise.
128.175.117.142
topic
06:44:40 AM Aug 15th 2010
You Fail Economics Forever I disagree here because I think that was the point of the Mockumentary. "An affluent consumer-driven middle class...where slavery is so common they advertise property insurance for slaves on television" IS patently absurd.
65.71.236.47
07:21:25 PM Aug 18th 2010
I agree with you.

I've gone and deleted that, along with the Your Mileage May Vary part. I don't know why the hell people insist on dumping paragraphs of rants on the main page, despite multiple warnings not to do it, especially with all that said up there in the previous topic.
TrevMUN
topic
02:09:18 PM Apr 11th 2010
Trev-MUN: The Wall Banger example was one disgusting pile of Thread Mode Conversation in the Main Page full of people nattering back and forth about how one party Did Not Do The Research or another. After looking through the example, I decided to just rip the whole thing out—the original troper made it their personal rant about how the mockumentary isn't even worth watching just because it takes a near-impossible outcome of the American Civil War as the basis for Alternate History.

Really, the whole thing is better suited to a Headscratchers page.

Here's the entirety of the example I ripped out:

  • Wallbanger: So, so many things wrong. The South never could have conquered the North, it didn't have the manpower. The South never sought to conquer the North, its war aim was to secure its independence. Reuniting with the North would had the same problems for the South that they seceded to get away from: ie, being outvoted in the Senate, House, and Presidential elections. The battle flag is used as a national flag. Dixie is called the national anthem. Britain and France do nothing while an aggressive expansionist slave power conquers half the world. And "slavery defines us as a people"; while there were some who did go to war solely because of slavery, for the most part it was about Lincoln's Northern industrial backers building their industries with money from the South; before the income tax most federal income came from port tariffs, mainly from the South. Lincoln made the Emancipation Declaration deep into the war, redefining the conflict, while before that he had said that "if I can preserve the Union without freeing a single slave, I will do it." This mockumentary plays into a common misconception about slavery being the point of the war, while documents from the time show that for both sides it was clearly about money and power (Lincoln wanting to keep power over the South and the money from its port tariffs).
    • Also, wouldn't the invention of labor-saving devices obviate the need for slaves at some point? Oh, right, Southerners just like slavery.
      • Ancient Greece and Rome both had rampant slavery and still developed loads of advanced machinery. Then they had slaves operate them.
      • No. Rome and Greece did not develop loads of advanced machinery. They didn't even invent the steam engine. By contrast, America did invent better and better technology, which is why slavery was already on its way to being fazed out in the northern Southern states by the time of the war.
    • Just to list a few reasons why the CSA would have never won the war: Aforementioned lack of population, few factories capable of war production, no direct international supporters after Lincoln proclaimed that the war was about slavery and not taxes, the Northern blockade keeping the South from importing supplies, other than what tiny amount blockade runners could bring in, a lack of necessary war supplies, such as shoes and food, and despite that Lee successfully stopped the Northern invasion in the east, the Confederacy was being defeated in the west.
      • The movie makes it pretty clear they got support from other countries that helped them win the war. That's why it's called Alternate History, things are different than in Real Life.
    • Take Howard Zinn as you will, but he insisted that the Confederates would've eventually freed the slaves had they won. Like all Western Powers did; it was already beginning to disappear in the most industrialized Southern states.
    • And what, other than a racial caste system, would a mostly agricultural, anti-federalist, fundamentalist Christian society like the CSA have in common with a mostly industrial, hyper-statist, neo-pagan society like Nazi Germany?
TrevMUN
01:40:59 AM Apr 30th 2010
edited by TrevMUN
... And not even a week or two later, the Thread Mode crops up again:

** And how. The idea of slavery surviving in a semi-modern nation (And if the CSA is able to put men on the moon and win world wars, it must be pretty modernized) is pretty ridiculous. Slaves were expensive, and the mass production of modern farm equipment would have rendered slavery obsolete (A tractor is not only cheaper, but doesn't try to run away). Also, remember that no society stays static. Great Britain was once one of history's most enthusiastic peddlers of dope and slaves, yet it's unimaginable that today's Brits would approve of such things. Oh, I should post-script this by mentioning that this troper is a full-blooded Yankee.

I'm going to go ahead and compile everything I've ripped out and put it in a Headscratchers page.
204.108.244.100
04:32:18 PM Sep 9th 2010
I just thought of this, but couldn't this all be a very stealth satire of the US's policy? The North torched the South and didn't really work to give African American's equal rights more than "Well, you have them, good luck!". The US then basically ran wild in Central America from 1898 with the Spanish American War to about 1989 with Operation Just Cause. These are just the blatant ones, there's plenty of stealth operations they did, backing puppet dictators. On top of this, before the Civil War the US nearly annexed all of Mexico in 1848, and did take a large chunk of it. The commercial for the sitcom was reminiscent of Amos and Andy, a radio and television show that went to the 50's! The fact that they basically flipped the D's and R's on the Senators for the 50's scenes prove it more. The antagonism with Canada is reminiscent with films based in reality like "The Hurricane" and "Sicko".

Basically, it's a trick movie that teaches you "If the South won, it would just be a different flag".

This is all from someone born and raised in South-Eastern PA, so I'm not really a Southern Pride kinda guy.
70.245.41.92
04:48:02 AM Sep 23rd 2010
edited by 70.245.41.92
"Sicko" being a work of Michael Moore (who is well known for his penchant for making Documentary Of Lies), I would highly doubt that proves anything you're saying.

Also, the historical examples you cite are The Theme Park Version of actual events, and claiming that the real-world United States was just as bad as the fictional Confederate States is really offensive. It's like the people who say Galileo was persecuted by the Catholic Church just for advocating heliocentrism, when that's not what happened at all.

The real point of CSA: Confederate States of America is to examine the issue of racism from a provocative standpoint, not to paint real-world Americans as evil imperialists. Here's the comments from Kevin Willmott, the director, from the official site:

"Often, when I would submit scripts to Hollywood that in some way dealt with slavery or the issue of race in a historical context, they would tell me that slavery is not "commercial" and that no one is interested in this side of American life."

Also:

"I started to think how I could approach the subject in a new way. How could you make slavery and the reality of the Confederacy fresh in the minds of an audience? That is where the idea germinated."

And:

"I hope that audiences find the film a provocative and entertaining look at slavery, race and the American way of life."
Jordan
08:39:58 PM Sep 24th 2010
Troper 204.108.244.100 got the same impression of the film that I got. It's not a screed against White Sourtherners/White Americans- everything the CSA does in the movie is a version of something that the United States actually did.

I'm not sure how so many seem to think it's some kind of terrible attack on white people (since in the movie there's plenty of white people who are enemies of the CSA).
75.23.216.123
09:25:55 AM Oct 19th 2010
"everything the CSA does in the movie is a version of something that the United States actually did."

Jordain, do you really honestly believe that?

Do you really think the United States really rounded up every black citizen of the U.S. after the Civil War and returned them to their slave owners?

Do you really think Jewish people were exiled for the country except for a small "colony" on Long Island?

You must have a rather delusional and dark view of the United States if you honestly think so.

The movie is not a terrible attack on white people, nor is it a terrible attack on the USA (which, apparently, certain people like Jordan and ThatTroper earnestly want it to be). The director's comments were pasted in the previous reply. Did you even read them?
Jordan
09:47:05 AM Oct 19th 2010
edited by Jordan
Just saw this reply. Probably a more accurate way of putting it would be that "everything the CSA does is an exaggerated version of actual U.S. policies". For instance, the treatment of Jews in the movie is clearly supposed to parallel the treatment of Native Americans post-Civil War (the Long Island thing is a parody of the reservation system). There might also be a bit of a parallel to how Grant had that bizarre order in which he wanted to round up Jews and how Judah P. Benjamin received a lot of anti-Semitic criticism from both people on the North and his fellow Confederates. And the returning blacks to slavery thing is presumably a parallel to how Reconstruction ended up being abandoned and segregation was either legal or de facto policy in both the North and South. And what the CSA does in South America is a pretty close reflection of the Spanish American War. Not to mention that many of the advertisements are real ones.

So no, I'm not going "goddamn America". The CSA is pretty much an Up to Eleven version of actual historical misdeeds. I kind of think that the movie only really "works" in this way, since as noted, the actual Confederacy had no interest in taking over the rest of the U.S., so if the film is looked at as a speculation on "what things would be like had the Confederacy won", then it's just stupid.
back to Main/CSAConfederateStatesOfAmerica

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy