Battlestar: Iraq

Obviously, like all decent people I wasn't around the house watching television when the season premiere of Battlestar: Galactica aired Friday not. Less obviously, I forgot to DVR it and I thought all was lost. Fortunately, someone or other decided to mail Spencer screener DVDs of the first two or three episodes, so I was able to watch the premiere yesterday. Rather hilariously, what they sent out didn't have all the special effects completed, so you'd repeatedly see on-screen text like "VFX: Raptor Landing" or "VFX: Explosions." Nevertheless, I think I understood what was going on.

It's pretty bold of them to have gone down the path of offering up such a straightforward Iraq analogy. In particular, they've done what really nobody's been willing to do in American politics which is try to cast a sympathetic eye on the insurgency. Of course, this is easier to do allegorically where you get a chance to paper over the fact that the Iraqi insurgency's substantive ideas about the nature of a just Iraqi state are rather repugnant. Nevertheless, I think it does do a good job of capturing the basic logic of occupation and rebellion. The cylons say they're seizing control of New Caprica for humanity's own good.

But who on the human side is going to believe them, especially given their past history (and note the USA's previous support for Saddam's regime, betrayal of the '91 intifada, decades-long indifference to the question of Arab democracy, view of Israel-Palestine universally regarded as anti-Arab by Arabs)? So people fight back. So the cylons fight back in turn. But cylon efforts to tighten their control merely reenforces their pre-existing bad image. The insurgents have much more leeway in adopting extreme tactics because they're not an alien force. They have a presumption of legitimacy while the occupiers have a presumption of illegitimacy. That Baltar is, in fact, the democratically elected leader of the Colonies is neither here nor there, for the simple fact of collaboration with the occupiers trumps the legitimacy of elections.

Comments

Matt,

Good post. I wrote something on my blog about this... I think they are actually not drawing parallels as directly with the insurgency/Iraq occupation as with the Second Intifadah. Calling New Caprica's Police Force "collaborators", for example, hiding weapons in civilian areas etc.

What this means is that they're doing something even *MORE* unheard of in US Television-- it's one thing to sympathize with the Iraqi insurgency, but quite another, more historical taboo to break to humanize the Palestinians...

Posted by parabasis | October 9, 2006 12:05 PM

it's as much about gaza as it is about iraq.

and what i think's particularly brilliant is that you can't really guess (yet?) whether it's a critique, whether BSG will overtly take sides and present an allegory confirming the righteousness of palesteinian/iraqi insurgents, the moral bankruptcy of israeli/US colonialism. which, ultimately, is why it's likely to be successful -- it's not some simplistic critique preaching to the choir but rather a serious investigation of what motivates people, why both sides may feel they have no choice or are justified, etc. (similarly, BSG's 9/11 allegory was very nuanced, providing no clear sense of whether the show's creators/writers were pro- or anti- security measures like the patriot act/shooting down spaceliners/torturing cylons who were gonna nuke part of the fleet.) the genius of BSG is that, even though it's wacky scifi stuff, it's far more realistic about human motivations, frailties, the complexity of trying to do/determine the right thing in the real world, than the pontification on shows like the west wing or studio 60 or whatever.

Posted by dj superflat | October 9, 2006 12:07 PM

FYI - They replayed the episode sunday morning I believe. My crappy wanna be tivo got it then too.

Posted by crack | October 9, 2006 12:16 PM

Not everyone is a fan. No follow-up to this post at NRO by Jonah.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmI3MTJiNjE5NTg1MmQ3NzJiMThkNDNiOGI0ZWNlZjc=

Friday, October 06, 2006
Tonight's the Night [Jonah Goldberg]
Battlestar Galactica season premiere. Two hours of BSG goodness. I hope you've been watching your webisodes!
Posted at 8:19 AM

Posted by Rick | October 9, 2006 12:37 PM

What this means is that they're doing something even *MORE* unheard of in US Television-- it's one thing to sympathize with the Iraqi insurgency, but quite another, more historical taboo to break to humanize the Palestinians...

Right. All they need now is a Charles Krauthammer-esque Cylon newspaper columnist who condemns the humans' baseless, culturally-imbued anti-Cylonism

Posted by M. Duss | October 9, 2006 12:58 PM

VFX: Devastatingly witty blog comment.

Posted by Christopher M | October 9, 2006 1:22 PM

it's funny to me that you see the show as (unequivocally?) humanizing the palestinians. roslyn, the moral compass of the show, says that what they're doing is inhuman, because it slaughters innocent civilians. even the other soliders, such as chief, criticize the suicide bombings, and chief's generally a more likeable guy than tai (aside from the whole beating his wifetobe in a crazed nitemare, helping kill another officer in trying to protect sharon, etc.). so the show instead seems to demonstrating that all sides have performed morally questionable acts.

also, don't ignore that in the show much of the carnage is visited on cylon toasters, who we don't really see as equivalent to humans, or one of the numbers, who can just download again. so there's no real human pain inflicted on the opressors, which makes things easier to justify.

(also fun that the show has everyone wishing the election had been stolen after all.)

Posted by dj superflat | October 9, 2006 1:31 PM

I agree with superflat above -- this analysis strikes me as too shallow by half. What BSG is actually doing is far, far more interesting than a straightforward "humanizing the insurgency/intifada," and I won't be surprised when folks like Jonah Goldberg start outing Ronald D. Moore as anti-American as a result of that interpretation.

But the show, thank the gods, has much more up its sleeve. Yes, it presents the classic moral defense of suicide bombing in a way that viewers are meant to take seriously and see the logic of. (Even more strikingly, in my opionion, is the first class representation of the infuriating horrors of detention.) But anyone who suggests that show has simpleminded support for the suicide bomber needs to go rewatch the episode.

See this interview with RDM, in which he makes it clear that BSG is going for a insurgency/intifada/Vichy pastiche:

http://www.nj.com/columns/ledger/sepinwall/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1160151303160440.xml&coll=1

For my money, this is way way better than the literal-minded alternative.

Posted by arut | October 9, 2006 2:10 PM

The writer of the show, Ron Moore, has tried to make it pretty clear in his many interviews and commentaries that this was about any war or occupation much more than the iraq war. There are references to vichy france, the palestinians, the American revolution, and event roman occupation of Gaul.

Iraq seems a particularly bad comparison, since while it is tragic the cost in American lives, the biggest problem is the Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence and the near-certainty of Sunni genocide when we leave. I don't see any parallel to that here.

At the moment my sympathies tend to lie with the cylon pacifists, and I really wish they were able to forge some new sort of culture based around "not killing eachother". I think they're the group of course most likely to have their heart broken.

Posted by Tony v | October 9, 2006 2:13 PM

What this means is that they're doing something even *MORE* unheard of in US Television-- it's one thing to sympathize with the Iraqi insurgency, but quite another, more historical taboo to break to humanize the Palestinians.

I disagree here on two points. First, it doesn't really work as an Israel analogy. The Cylons want to believe that what they're doing is for the humans' own good, which is like America's Iraq policy, but not at all like Israel's Palestinian policy. The Israelis are (to be generous) trying to protect themselves from Palestinian attacks or (to be less generous) trying to take the choice bits of Palestinian land; the Cylons aren't doing anything like either of those things.

Second, in purely chronological terms there's a clear precedent for pro-Palestinian American sci-fi in the portrayal of the Bajorans on Star Trek: TNG and DS9.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | October 9, 2006 3:11 PM

geek awesomeness -- i see your BSG, raise you DS9 and TNG (wasn't that a prince band?). is familiarity with prior SF a requirement for loving BSG? do you need to hear (e.g.) echoes of data and the nexus6 to fully appreciate cylon meditations on what it means to be (quasi)human?

Posted by dj superflat | October 9, 2006 3:31 PM

I think the service the show does is illustrate how insurgency predictably plays out. Of course the humans turn to suicide bombing. Faced with extinction and the loss of so many friends and family and against such an undeniably more powerful occupier, it would be surrender not to press any advantage possible. And humans don't surrender well, especially to an enemy that has already taken so much.

As Ti's speech illustrated, there is no difference between sending someone to their death in a Viper versus strapping themselves to a bomb. Thus, there is no difference between bombing a military target and killing 20 civilians and blowing oneself up to kill the enemy. We like to make a moral distinction but it is a very thin distinction. Rooting for the Humans against the cylons helps us see such thinness.

And I don't know about you guys, but Ti seems much more suited to lead an insurgency than to command a starship. He is in his element. And as much as I don't really want to admit it, his tactics are correct. He needs to press his advantages, force brutal retaliation from the cylons, and turn it into an all-out war where everyone wants to join the insurgency. Otherwise, the humans will be forever enslaved by the cylons.

Posted by kj | October 9, 2006 3:47 PM

"He needs to press his advantages, force brutal retaliation from the cylons, and turn it into an all-out war where everyone wants to join the insurgency. Otherwise, the humans will be forever enslaved by the cylons."

Sounds good to me. Is this show a metaphor for foreign occupations, or domestic American politics.

Posted by bob mcmanus | October 9, 2006 3:53 PM

Oddly enough, I though the Baltar as Maliki "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" thing was the most facile element of the premier. Much better was what amounts to the mental rape/brainwashing of Starbuck. As horror, it was absolutely brilliant--the level of pure *unease* that it caused me when watching is far, far worse from what I've normally encountered in genre horror.

Posted by Andrew R. | October 9, 2006 4:41 PM

Dear Matthew-

Watching you put your entire intellectual weight into discussing the real-world validity of "Battlestar: Galactica" is just heartbreakingly cute. It's like reading a fourth-grade girl's exhaustively researched and achingly sincere report on her imaginary friend.

My only warning is that if you're still doing it when you're thirty, people are not going to take you seriously anymore.

J

Posted by Jimbo X | October 9, 2006 5:43 PM

Damnit, MY beat me to the BSG post. But not to the Battlestar: Iraqtica pun.

Posted by Kriston | October 9, 2006 5:55 PM

Jimbo X, your condescension is completely misplaced here. Why should the sci-fi genre not be a place where you can have incisive political commentary? I've never even seen BSG, but I am not so narrow-minded as to think that serious people can't discuss it. Your post is not sophisticated, merely narrow-minded.

Posted by nolaboyd | October 9, 2006 5:58 PM

I wrote a long piece about this on my own blog (see "Return to Iraqtica"... so I made the pun too).

The show's politics are always slippery--but then, that's true of almost any great TV show, from "The Prisoner" to the "The Simpsons." And BSG is, hands down, the best thing on TV in many years.

Posted by dajafi | October 9, 2006 6:08 PM

One small thing that came to me while reading this thread - remember that Tigh is a screw-up, for the most part. He's a drunk, who is only in the service because Adama pulled strings. When Adama was out for a few episodes, Tigh screwed things up unbelievably.

It's quite likely that, at the end of this season, Adama and Tigh get back together, and Adama is horrified/disgusted with what Tigh did. With the added possibility that Adama is disgusted because he didn't have to deal with what Tigh dealt with.

Posted by Barry | October 9, 2006 7:50 PM

yeah, you're right jimbo, it's silly to think that scifi can be a valid critique/commentary on contemporary politics, which likely explains why 1984, brave new world, fahrenheit 451, etc., so quickly lost all relevance/resonance.

Posted by dj superflat | October 9, 2006 7:53 PM

Dear Jimbo X:

Your condescending cultural bullying is stale and trite. Every generation makes their own meaning, and attemping to shame MY with your snobbery demonstrates an exceptionally weak and uncreative mind, not disimilar to Christian Fundamentalists.

Your "I sniff with disdain at those who have different taste than I" attitude is a lovely example of tolerance and acceptance, just the kind of thing that makes Democrats shine.

Posted by jb | October 9, 2006 7:57 PM

Second, in purely chronological terms there's a clear precedent for pro-Palestinian American sci-fi in the portrayal of the Bajorans on Star Trek: TNG and DS9.

That identification never occurred to me, perhaps because I only watched occasionally. I thought the Maquis were obviously a negative portrayal of Palestinian resistance. Sisco once lectured a Maquis leader on how he was the bad guy for giving people false hope of returning to their lost homes. That would make the Federation-Cardassian treaty an analogue of UNGAR 181, treated as a painful but wise and necessary compromise.

Posted by David Tomlin | October 9, 2006 9:06 PM

That was one of the best 5 DS9 episodes, although the conclusion of Sisko nearly committing genocide was never dealt with properly.

Posted by Gabriel Rocklin | October 9, 2006 9:20 PM

I saw it another way. New Caprica is the US and Gaius Baltar (GB, in a rather too overtly referenced character giving it a bit of that laugh factor) is W. The Cylons are Cheney and his minions from the Nixon/Ford era, born of our world but completely out of touch with its people and remade in their own image of an ideal. The violence taken up by the humans is an allegory to the fact that so many wingnuts would have protest of the new leadership outlawed.

Posted by Bugaboo | October 9, 2006 10:34 PM

There are times, dear friends, when these comment threads seem like the script for some acid-addled knock-off of 'Being John Malkovich' but featuring the inner vision of some homeless street crazy instead of the estimable John M. The glimpses into the utter helter-skelter that is the letist mind keeps me coming back here despite often feeling, afterward, as though I should immediately jump in the shower and thoroughly scrub my frontal cortex to get the weirditude out of my head.

The Bajorans as Palestinians? Wow, as Chris Walken would say. That is an illogic leap of truly Olympic gold medal magnitude.

Tibetans, maybe, if you leave out the pacifism. Palestinians? You are quite mad, sir.

Myself, I think the fictional portrayal most closely analogous to present-day Palestinians - and unintended by the author, to be sure - are the Orcs in LOTR. They are raised from birth to do nothing but kill and revel in killing. Check. Their goal is the extermination of their enemies. Check. When there aren't any enemies ready to hand, they'll happily fall to killing each other. Check.

I could go on, but it's a depressing litany.

Still, the idea of Bajorans as Palestinians is at least no nuttier than the idea that putting allegorical criticism of the foreign policy of a Republican president into a work of fiction for television is an act requiring bravery of any kind. If you really believe the latter, I guess maybe the former is not such a leap.

Posted by Dick Eagleson | October 9, 2006 11:56 PM

The Cylons are Cheney and his minions from the Nixon/Ford era, born of our world but completely out of touch with its people and remade in their own image of an ideal.
To up the Trek cross-referencing, you can bring in that "Rise of the Vulcans" book on Cheney, Rumsfeld & Co.
Also, my DS9 memories are a little fuzzy, but I remember feeling like the Trek writers always shied away from taking sides on the palestinian/israeli issue--the Bajorans played Palestinian stand ins at times, but at others they were very much the Jews to the Cardassians' Nazis. Episode 1 of season 3 was much creepier--I caught myself almost hoping that 'Duck' guy wouldn't wuss out...

Posted by max | October 10, 2006 12:05 AM

Hey Dick,

Perhaps you forgot to read the thread you were commenting on, as the bravery was portraying suicide bombing and terrorism in a somewhat sympathetic light. That actually is brave.

And your Orc/Palestine comparison is grossly silly. Seriously, Palestinians are raised to kill? You're not that dumb or perhaps you've been scrubbing your frontal cortex a little too hard.

What's your next analogy? The monkeys in the zoo remind you of Black people? Or beans remind you of Mexicans? Don't be a racist, you clown.

Posted by kj | October 10, 2006 12:19 AM

I think Battlestar is one of the few shows that actually has better production values and direction then it does writing. These extremely heavy-handed allegorical elements are strangling everything. They even call it an "insurgency" for gods sake, I thought "did they set up a human police force", then out it comes. It just isn't subtle enough. It completely takes me out of the world. Like the completely asinine episode on ABORTION in the 2nd season, and Roslin dropping Reagan quotes in debates. It is just awkward. It worked better as a post-apocalyptic on the run show, it had to move on, but this new found political "relevance" just isn't working for me. The other thing is I think we've gone 2 seasons and 1 episode without a single scripted joke. That's a pretty horrendous failure.

Posted by almril | October 10, 2006 12:26 AM

I confess I haven't seen the new BG. Did the original do "issues" too? I have the faintest recollection of that show, although my principal concerns at that time were whether I was going to play with the Star Wars actions figures that day or Legos (or else draw disturbing apocalyptic naval battles from the Third World War), and which pair of Underoos I was going to wear that day.

Posted by Linus | October 10, 2006 1:07 AM

Perhaps you forgot to read the thread you were commenting on, as the bravery was portraying suicide bombing and terrorism in a somewhat sympathetic light. That actually is brave.

It's not brave. It's moonbat lefty conventional wisdom as revealed by the Prophet Moore (mass be upon him). Toeing that particular party line in Hollywood is about as "brave" as yelling 'Nigger' at a Klan rally. And of equal moral standing.

And your Orc/Palestine comparison is grossly silly. Seriously, Palestinians are raised to kill? You're not that dumb or perhaps you've been scrubbing your frontal cortex a little too hard.

Nothing silly about it. The Palestinian education system is built around a core of Islamist grievance-mongering, poor-put-upon-little-us victim-cultism and Jew-hatred. Oh yeah, and glorification of "martyrdom" for the Holy Cause. Since the Palestinians have generally neglected to build a self-sustaining economy these last six decades, the children growing up aren't distracted by the possibility of living what most of the world would regard as normal lives - working for a living, raising a family. But there's always work at Hamas or the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. The Palestinians didn't start out to be Orcs, but then neither did Tolkein's Orcs. Nonetheless, that's what they have become.

What's your next analogy? The monkeys in the zoo remind you of Black people? Or beans remind you of Mexicans? Don't be a racist, you clown.

Why no, actually, they don't. Oddly, Peter Jackson's Orcs seemed to remind a lot of your co-ideologues of black people. I'll confess I missed that resemblance too.

I'm curious. Is it actually possible for you people to make a reply that is not larded with ritualistic non-sequitir denunciations of racism? It's like some weird form of Tourette's or something. No matter how irrelevant to the subject at hand, it always seems to be on your minds. Pitiful.

For the record, I have low regard for Palestinians because their alleged grievances are a load of self-serving crap and their beliefs and behavior are horrendously evil. The fact that they have, in the main, brown complexions doesn't figure into the matter at all. For what it's worth, I have much the same opinion of Serbs and they are white. Vicious bloody-mindedness is an unattractive national characteristic no matter what nationality possesses it.

Posted by Dick Eagleson | October 10, 2006 3:16 AM

A much more apt comparison I thought, was Baltar's psychotic insistance that "we do not torture, never torture" in response to Roslyn's litany of their crimes. That obsession over that denial, particularly the focus on the single word torture, was much more remniscent of modern times.

And anyone who thinks any talk of insurgency can only be about the war we are currently in and not about the centuries of human history that have been defined by guerilla warfare, is far too self-obsessed to get decent writing anyway.

Posted by Tony v | October 10, 2006 10:24 AM

It's not brave. It's moonbat lefty conventional wisdom as revealed by the Prophet Moore (mass be upon him). Toeing that particular party line in Hollywood is about as "brave" as yelling 'Nigger' at a Klan rally. And of equal moral standing.

You are obviously confusing your disagreement with the message with whether or not it is brave. Not only that but you are further demonstrating your remidial analogy skills. BSG is not broadcast only to liberals in Hollywood. Its following is diverse as evidenced by its popularity on the Corner. Comparing BSG to a person at a Klan rally is some more gross silliness.

I had no idea you were an expert on the Palestinian education system. You might consider that your understanding of their educational systems derives from a deep bias you harbor. Let's just say that I'm highly skeptical of your hyperbolic description of Palestinian school children. Although I did hear a similar line in "Jesus Camp". (See IMDB if unfamiliar). Besides, if they are trained as killers from near birth, they're pretty poor at it considering Israelis kill Palestinians at about a 3 to 1 clip.

And excuse me if racism is the wrong word. How would like me to refer to your prejudicial and stereotypical comments toward an entire culture? Too bad we just can't nuke those Orcs, eh?

Posted by kj | October 10, 2006 7:28 PM

So if I say an ethnic group is a bunch of sub-human monsters it's bad, but if I say they're a bunch of fictional sub-human monsters it's OK?

Posted by daveNYC | October 10, 2006 9:36 PM

You are obviously confusing your disagreement with the message with whether or not it is brave.

No, I'm not. Bravery presupposes the possibility of suffering damage of some kind in consequence of some action taken. If there is no risk then, whatever else an action might be, "bravery" doesn't enter into the scenario.

What possible adverse consequences are we to assume lie in potential wait for the "brave" scribblers in the BSG bullpen? Getting fired? Please. The writers of BSG operate in the borderline psychotically left-wing environment of Hollywood film and TV production. They'd be likelier to pick up an Emmy nomination that a pink slip for their work.

Declining ratings? BSG is now in, what, at least season three? Four? I don't watch it so the original air date is not sharply etched in my mind. In any event, most of those in the potential BSG audience who might be put off by "sympathy for the devil" stuff either never watched the thing in the first place or tried it early on, didn't much care for it and are long-departed.

There is obviously some audience for this pretentious drivel. On the evidence here, it seems largely to consist of people in general agreement with the political tastes of the writers. Preaching to the choir isn't "brave" either.

BSG is not broadcast only to liberals in Hollywood. Its following is diverse as evidenced by its popularity on the Corner.

I don't read NRO with any regularity either, not being a conservative, though I'll admit it's fun to watch Derbyshire beat up the creationists and IDolaters once in a while. There is no accounting for some personal tastes.

Not only that but you are further demonstrating your remidial analogy skills. Comparing BSG to a person at a Klan rally is some more gross silliness.

My facility with simile is certainly debatable. A pity your own ability to accurately parse English text renders your contribution pretty much a non sequitir. I was not comparing BSG to a Klan rally. I was comparing the alleged "bravery" of the BSG writers' output to an equally unbrave and puerile form of public expression that is unbrave and puerile precisely because it is made in a social context within which such expressions are explicitly affirmed.

I had no idea you were an expert on the Palestinian education system.

Expertise is hardly required. The nature of Palestinian educational materials - textbooks, etc. - is well-documented. If you are as utterly innocent of such knowledge as you imply it can only be because you are either unable to use search engines or - far more probable - simply prefer to maintain deniability, however implausible, about matters which might threaten part of your carefully constructed cloud-cuckooland view of the Middle East.

You might consider that your understanding of their educational systems derives from a deep bias you harbor. Let's just say that I'm highly skeptical of your hyperbolic description of Palestinian school children.

I freely admit to a bias against propagandizing children about the non-humanity of one's neighbors and the nobility of suicide bombing as an ultimate aspiration. Your skepticism is the product of either willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty. The facts are what they are.

Although I did hear a similar line in "Jesus Camp". (See IMDB if unfamiliar).

I'm aware of 'Jesus Camp.' As an atheist, I have no particular sympathy for adult-organized fiestas of hyper-religiosity involving youngsters. Hence my distaste for the Palestinian education system, which can be accurately characterized as a particularly malignant type of "Allah Camp."

Besides, if they are trained as killers from near birth, they're pretty poor at it considering Israelis kill Palestinians at about a 3 to 1 clip.

I never said the Palestinians were good at being vicious, just that they were pervasively and implacably so.

And excuse me if racism is the wrong word.

Okay. But it is the wrong word.

How would like me to refer to your prejudicial and stereotypical comments toward an entire culture?

The phrase "spot on" comes to mind. Look, guy, the facts are what they are. The fact that the facts about Palestinians pretty much put them outside of any rational definition of "good guys" is, indeed, unfortunate, but it is not false. I simply point out that Palestinians are not nature's noblemen. A very sizable percentage of them are, in fact, blood-mad savages. I know it's a core assumption of the Left that non-white and non-English-speaking cultures are, by definition, blameless and beyond criticism. This is part of the obvious idiocy of the Leftist worldview.

As for making "prejudicial and stereotypical comments toward an entire culture," the comments on this, and every other left-wing site are rife with such. The targets of the opprobrium and ad hominen are, of course, Western culture, in general, and American culture in particular. The vicious nonsense spewed here and elsewhere against white Americans, Southerners, Christians, Red-Staters, Republicans and other designated demon classes are noteworthy for both their bile and their lack of factual basis. What I have said about Palestinians is, to be sure, not pretty and not positive. It does, however, have the saving grace of being true.

Too bad we just can't nuke those Orcs, eh?

It's not really a question of can or can't. We obviously suffer no lack of ability, whether the putative targets are Palestinians or other Muslims in other places. The real question is whether or not there will ever be a necessity to do so. Personally, I'm a cautious optimist about the prospects of positive reformation in Islamic, and especially Arabic, societies. But Pollyanna, I'm not.

Posted by Dick Eagleson | October 11, 2006 4:11 AM

dick, just so you know, BSG is not some liberal echo chamber show like the west wing or somesuch. if you've read the comments here, it's far more subtle/thoughtful than that and in many ways could be interpreted to support the right at times (just like, e.g., team america and the other gems from the south park guys, which seem to implicitly or overtly criticize everyone). (what i've never understood is why it wouldn't be obvious that both right and left are open to significant criticism, and something that questions both sides shouldn't be anomalous but instead common, well-received, etc.; admittedly, the people who choose up sides tend not to see it that way.)

Posted by dj superflat | October 11, 2006 12:35 PM

Having finally watched the premier (thanks, iTUNES) Matt, I think that while THE RESISTANCE was, basically, a Palestinian-Israeli type scenario, the new season is both occupations on top of each other.

Posted by parabasis | October 11, 2006 2:29 PM