Saturday, July 23, 2005

Vilifying Subsidies in Popular Culture

I was happy to see that in the super-funny (I'm not using the word "hilarious" only because it's overused on the internet) movie Wedding Crashers, the movie's primary antagonist is a guy who (to paraphrase) 'got the governor to subsidize a scallop fishery' (or something along those lines). Anyway, what I'm so happy about is that the subsidy-seeking is not crucial to the character's persona. Rather, it's just thrown in there, almost capriciously. Like they producers of the movie are saying to the audience, "Yeah, this guy's already a jerk, but on top of it all, he lobbies for increased subsidies!"

It's subtle, and most viewers probably didn't even notice it, but it was encouraging to see. After all, they could have made the antagonist a guy who works to eliminate trade restrictions (as a stereotypical "evil capitalist"), but they didn't. Those chose to vilify subsidies.


At 7:31 PM, Blogger Nehemiah said...

I noticed it also! Spoken by the "ass" Lodge. Was he supposed to be a descendant of big government, exapansionist Henry Cabot Lodge? Great movie, Vince Vaughn is becoming one of my favorite actors. Have you seen The Incredibles? Lots of good Randian symbolism, best of all the scene of Mr. Incredible (with Atlas like proportions) hefting a large sphere. Maybe not all of hollywood is bad? Or is it that libertarianism is becoming hip?

At 2:20 PM, Blogger Christopher Monnier said...

I think libertarianism is becoming a little hip. Liberal is old, and nobody wants to be a conservative and be associated with neo-conservatives, so I wouldn't be surprised if it became sort of edgy to be a libertarian.

Anyway, good point about the name similarity. Who knows? Maybe there that was a little inside joke.

Yeah, it's pretty easy to see why some people claimed the Incredibles' was libertarian. Big government was clamping down on people just trying to help other people. That's exactly what libertarians are against.


Post a Comment

<< Home