- Also Known As:
- Unknown
- Year:
- 2010
- Country:
- Predominant Genre:
- Non-fiction
- Directors:
- Best Performances:
- None
- Premiss:
- Intimate account of one family’s fight against the injustice and brutality they benefited from.
- Themes:
- Political Correctness | White culture | White guilt | White supremacy
- Similar (in Plot, Theme or Style) to:
- Unknown
- Review Format:
- DVD
WHITE MAN’S BURDEN 2: The Comeuppance
The usual anti-Black, White propaganda that fails to address why Whites are hated by Blacks - even though the reasons for this are obvious if one reads a good history book about the British Empire. But this is a self-serving White look at their own past; ignoring anything that makes Whites look bad - as if history is somehow dead-and-buried, which their own film implicitly shows is not the case. These implications are vigorously evaded in favor of a fantasy of the superiority of White culture.
Only a self-deluded White could ever seriously wonder why Blacks do not share their negative White view of President Mugabe. Here, Whites whine on about human rights (ie, White rights) after they have abused those same rights in others. Whites never make such films about human-rights abuses in their own countries, as if their own homelands were somehow perfect and were somehow the font of humanness and as if non-Whites still have to learn how to be human (ie, White). When Whites were benefiting from the British Empire, they did little against this, and so act as though bad things in Africa are caused solely by Blacks. Whites have the advantage that they have a legal process to appeal to which Blacks were never granted.
Classic projection-and-displacement White supremacist claptrap from arrogant Whites who never tire of saying how dangerous it was for them to film. Clearly, such danger is the real theme in this film and offers Whites a vicarious thrill to experience the world as Blacks experience it when Whites are around. It also offers the paranoid delusion that Blacks are a threat to Whites to justify the unjustified fear Whites still have for Blacks. Such an experience is terrifying, yet Whites never relate that experience to why it happened. Whites simply assume they should not have to experience it; while it does not matter if Blacks ever do.
A pity no Black was involved in the making of this film, since that would, at least, have made it more balanced and the issue of White supremacy better dealt with. The White filmmakers here strenuously avoid this central issue by claiming it is not an issue - but never saying why. Would such a film be made about a Black farmer trying to defend his land? It is hardly likely. Would Whites so vigorously attack America for getting their revenge for 9/11 against innocent Muslims? That would be hard even to imagine.
The usual sneering resentment of Blacks who choose to live independently of Whites is always impossible for Whites to hide - as here. All legal cases are about righting wrongs from the past but, when Whites have committed these wrongs, they try to deny that this is so by claiming that the past is no longer relevant. Even when Whites are vigorously celebrating their past, they deny the value of the past of others.
Despite being White supremacist, this documentary is a fairly interesting look at the Heart of Darkness that is White culture and its concomitant inability to be moral, just and right.
Here, Whites are still trying to tell others how to run their own affairs - through political and economic sanctions - because they are not democratic; ie, these others do not subscribe to the political systems favored by Whites.
Here, Whites are desperate to prove Blacks can be just as racist as Whites with only the single faux-example of Robert Mugabe. As usual, when Whites suffer, they howl with indignation - when Blacks were suffering previously, White howling is curiously silent. Mugabe is blamed for White supremacy, as if there were no historical context that need be addressed.
Here, Whites declare their paternalism for Blacks, claiming there is no-one else for them to work for, but Whites never declare their friendship; explaining why Africa became the White Man’s Graveyard. That Blacks and Whites can never be friends is historically obvious and this documentary undermines its own case by implying this all along; while steadily decrying it. Thus, there never really can be any such thing as a “White African” without quote marks.
No historical context is given here to allow the audience to understand what is going on, precisely to evade the why of what we see happening: The White supremacy the filmmakers’ share, which they subtly express by implying Blacks cannot manage their own affairs. The White farmer here claims he has nowhere else to live despite there being 52 White dominated countries in the world along with 49 other African countries. Clearly, Whites cannot be African because they wish to dominate Blacks via the land of Africa. This fact is evaded here in endless debates about what is a genuine land reform - from White ethnic cleansers accusing Blacks of ethnic cleansing.
Historically, Whites could only become Australian or American, for example, because they militarily-dominated the natives - this was not the case in Africa. Whites have always had to use force in others’ countries to get their way, but resent it when such force is used against them. The standard image produced by Whites of an Australian or an American is of a White person not of a black or a red skinned person. Yet Whites decry Blacks for thinking of Africans as being only Black not White.
Whites never think of Americans or Australians as anything other than White and if African Whites had instituted the same, more effectively-genocidal policies of those two countries, then Blacks would not have been able to retake their own lands. Whites are dishonest enough to never admit that racism can breed racism (except when it benefits them in: The Hate that Hate Produced); explaining the one-sided and propagandist nature of this film. When Whites suffer, it is a case of Lest We Forget; when Blacks suffer: Get Over It!
One is reminded of the heroine of the movie White Material who is only upset that there are no enforceable rules for Whites, but never when there were none for Blacks. Did Whites make such films about Ugandan Asians, for example, when they were expelled from Uganda? No. These films are only made when Whites suffer; making it all too clear the White supremacist motivation behind their making. For Whites, there is no past that makes them look bad, only a present that can be made to make others look so. Blacks stripping assets from Whites is simply the inevitable result of decolonization, yet Whites still whine about the inevitable.
This film even shows a stupid Black Namibian lawyer claiming Robert Mugabe is trying to set a precedent that says he can discriminate against people on the basis of ethnicity. Given the history of Africa since the coming of the Whites, this a statement of such profound ignorance that one wonders how she ever passed the Bar examinations. No-one ever asks the obvious question: Why are Whites so hated? Is it because they are White supremacists and the beneficiaries of White supremacy? Whites will never ask such questions because of the guilt and shame at their own history that they arouse.
As usual with Whites, they wish to absolve themselves for their terrible past by childishly claiming the Frankensteins they have created have nothing to do with them. But, as with Al-Qaeda, the truth is obvious and that a “bigger kid” did not do it.
Will Whites ever get a life of their own and learn to live as fully-fledged human beings? The film never tells us.
No comments:
Post a Comment