David Sirota

David Sirota
Location
Denver, Colorado,
Birthday
November 02
Title
Columnist
Bio
David Sirota is a political journalist, best-selling author and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist living in Denver, Colorado. He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future , the founder of the Progressive States Network and a Senior Editor at In These Times magazine, which in 2006 received the Utne Independent Press Award for political coverage. He also blogs for Credo Action. and the Denver Post's PoliticsWest website. His two books, Hostile Takeover (2006) and The Uprising (2008) were both New York Times bestsellers. In the years before becoming a full-time writer, Sirota worked as the press secretary for Vermont Independent Congressman Bernard Sanders, the chief spokesman for Democrats on the U.S. House Appropriations Committee, the Director of Strategic Communications for the Center for American Progress, a campaign consultant for Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and a media strategist for Connecticut Senate candidate Ned Lamont. He also previously contributed writing to the website of the California Democratic Party. For more on Sirota, see these profiles of him in Newsweek or the Rocky Mountain News. Feel free to email him at lists [at] davidsirota.com

David Sirota's Links

Salon.com
Editor’s Pick
MAY 21, 2009 12:16PM

"V" - The Right's New Favorite TV Show?

Rate: 7 Flag

I've heard that Battlestar Galactica is a favorite of neoconservatives for its supposedly metaphorical allusions to Bush foreign policy. I've never seen that show, but I am planning to watch ABC's remake of "V" - and by the looks of the preview, it's possible that show may become conservatives' new favorite TV show:

 

Am I crazy or does this preview make the show seem like a not-so-subtle fringe-right-wing criticism of Obama and Obama followers?

In questioning Obama's citizenship and heritage, conservatives have always portrayed Obama as an alien visitor. They've also constantly implied that behind Obama's friendly veneer are sinister motives - and they seem to believe that while most of the public are gullible fools believing in Obama as a savior, they and their tea-party protestors see the "real truth" of those motives.

Now, didn't I basically just describe that preview? I think I did - in fact, I took notes on the preview. Check this out:

1:00 "The world's in bad shape - who wouldn't welcome a savior?"

1:10 - "Thousands are flocking to see the mothership in person"

1:20 - "We're all so quick to jump on the bandwagon, but before we get on let's at least examine..."

1:40 - "Gratitude can morph into worship"..."You two are obsessed with the V's"..."You know what the V's - they call it spreading hope"

2:15 - "If you could speak to the protestors, what would you say? That embracing change is never easy, but the reward for doing so can be far greater than anything you can imagine"..."They gain trust when all they are really doing is positioning themselves as the saviors of mankind"

2:40 - "They are arming themselves with the most powerful weapon out there: devotion."

It's all there, right? The idea of V/Obama as a "savior" with "thousands flocking to see" them. The religious right, represented by a priest, warning everyone not to "jump on the bandwagon" for V/Obama. Warnings that support for V/Obama can "morph into worship," and the V/Obama followers defending themselves by saying it's not worship, "they call it spreading hope." Then a highly scripted media event in which V/Obama soothingly says "embracing change is never easy, but the reward for doing so can be far greater than anything you can imagine" - and another warning from a self-styled truth-telling protestor insisting that it's all a sinister farce, that Obama/V deceptively "gains trust when all they are really doing is positioning themselves as the saviors of mankind" (recall this McCain ad against Obama making almost exactly the same charge). And finally, the harrowing warning that Obama/V "are arming themselves with the most powerful weapon out there: devotion."

Now, it's certainly possible I'm just seeing it this way, and that the directors of this show have absolutely no desire for this to be any kind of echo of the right's anti-Obama narratives. But I'm not actually making any accusation at all. I'm just noticing the storyline of the slick, unknown false prophet using charisma and charm to foist a sinister alien plot on an all-too-gullible world of sycophants, and the courageous tea-party-ish protestors heroically braving Establishment scorn to get the "truth" out against the odds. That's how the fringe right views reality and itself these days, and that's exactly the frame of this new show (which is kinda weird for an alien invasion plot, which typically portrays the aliens as overtly and brazenly evil, rather than as tricky hucksters who seem good at first).

Is it life imitating art imitating life? Or has the silly right-wing narrative become so ingrained in our culture that it is everywhere, whether deliberately or inadvertently? Or, as I wondered already, am I just crazy?

Certainly possible it's the latter...but it is eerie (oh, and yes, I will definitely be watching the show, as I was a big fan of the original "V").

UPDATE: Time's James Poniewozik picked up on this theme, too:

 

Remake of the classic alien-invasion miniseries plays in the trailer, weirdly, like an allegory of the Obama election: aliens come to Earth, promise "hope" and "change" (words actually used), inspire cult-like devotion, but have creepy intent and are secretly lizards. Maybe I'm reading too much into it. But it has potential to be Glenn Beck's new favorite show.

Again, it's creepy...

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Spoiler alert...

"It's a cookbook!"
Well, I think this might be reading a bit too much into a 2 min 30 sec trailer, if you ask me. In the original mini-series (made way before Obama was even on the national radar), weren't the Visitors portrayed in much the same way - almost revered by certain humans?

This is not to say that conservatives might read whatever they want into this, but I seriously doubt that the show is intentionally making allegories between the enthusiasm Obama inspired, and the religious hysteria that the Visitors will apparently be causing.
Follow up from this episode description of the original mini-series pilot (http://thevisitors.info/episodes/v1.html):

"the Mother Ships send a signal announcing their arrival and requesting a meeting with the Secretary General of the United Nations. In the media event of the century, all eyes watch that evening as a shuttlecraft descends from the New York Mother Ship and lands on the roof of the U.N. building. The alien who emerges from the craft is remarkably human in appearance — except for a reverberating voice and an aversion to bright lights. He introduces himself as John, the Supreme Commander of the "small" fleet around the planet. He announces that the Visitors have come to Earth from Sirius IV because they need help producing certain chemicals to save their environmentally-ravaged home world. In exchange, John promises to share knowledge that will solve Earth's environmental, agricultural, and health dilemmas. Then the Visitors will leave as they came — in peace.

The Visitors are quickly integrated into Earth society. In Los Angeles Humans and Visitors work side by side at the Richland refinery, the first U.S. plant retooled to produce the alien compounds. By popular demand, the youth group "Visitor Friends" is created for children and young adults to learn more about the Visitors. Kristine Walsh, a reporter with romantic ties to Donovan, is made the Visitors' official spokesperson. The aliens soon permeate all aspects of society from children's toys to dinner parties. Visitors are even the objects of others' affections. "

Sounds like the images in the trailer line up with what was shown in the original mini-series.
The original mini-series (if not so much the second one and the short-lived series) used the same ideas and included a huge helping of Holocaust imagery. It was clumsy, but effective. Of course, I was eight, so who knows.
I am one of David Sirota's biggest fans, but I think this is a stretch. Is it a slow week, David? Are you short on material?
When one lives in fear there is a monster in every closet and a troll under every bed.

Try to relax David.

You have nothing to fear until the GOP invites you for dinner..........hehehehehehehahahaahhahuhuhuuh!!
To Serve Man...

With barbecue sauce and some coleslaw and that Cool Whip fruit salad with the coconut...

I knew we were in for trouble when it was discovered that the right wing fringe consider Steven Colbert one of their own. Somethings you just can't explain but I guess that is why I have never, until recently, been a Colbert fan. I always felt that his mocking of the fright wing wasn't quite mocking enough. Now we find out that it's true. Now I watch to see what the fright wing could make of his show and I'm uncomfortable with what I see.

Conservatives don't do nuance. They never have and probably never will. But hey, that's ok... I know many liberal democrats that think that the democrats in congress are on their side...
Wasn't there a show called the Visitors in the 70s? Is this a rehash of Visitors and Alien Nation.
This is tin foil hat material.
I loved the original series.....it was campy enough to keep me interested, so I will be watching this one too.....
The original V has a curious history. The producers wanted to simply to a version of Sinclair Lewis's it can't happen here, the 1935 novel about a fascist takeover of the US. The network said that an American audience wouldn't believe that a fascist takeover of the US was possible (!), and they wanted a sci-fi story to cash in on the Star Wars phenomenon, so a miniseries about a space-alien mediated fascist takeover was born. If there is any political undercurrent left to the story, it is probably the original liberal one from Lewis.

As for Galactica, the article linked to in the original post points out that by the third season the whole show could only be read as a vicious allegorical attack on the Bush administration.
It certainly looks like only the priest who is right with God is able to see through the evil hopemongers. And this is ABC: might it be the same people who made the 911 movie that was full of fabrications?

I recall the firs tseries clearly, and it was a left-win take. There was a minor character in the original who was a priest, but the main character was a daring reporter who had exposed attacks on civilians by a conservative government in Central America. Teenagers were taken into a Hitler Youth organization that encouraged turning in parents for disloyalty, and the minority targeted as enemies of the state were scientists. I guess the right is ready for some revenge.

But if conservatives found affirmation in Battlestar Galactica, well, they think The Colbert Report is conservative, so I wouldn't put much stock in that.
where to start? David's question... yes: crazy is the answer.

and did you even *read* the article on Battlestar Galactica? You know... the part where the right lost their reverence for BG when the show became an alagory for the US invasion and occupation of Iraq? BG was one of the only shows on television actually making a coherent commentary on current political happenings (that and Boston Legal).

Put whatever it is that makes you so paranoid down. You will live longer...
I'm 100 percent with David Sirota here. Sure this is a remake of an 80s anti-fascist movie with the same plot (and extreme Reagan symbolism), but the Obama symbolism is there this time around, beating the audience over the head. That doesn't mean this movie will be evil and right-wing - it's just tapping into the zeitgeist. Had they remade this five years ago, it would have beaten the audience with Bush symbolism (for instance, you'd see a visitor strutting around an aircraft carrier).
I see they took the hot-alien-babes page from the Battlestar Galactica playbook.
reading too much into it. :)
Hah hah! Rob’s killing me. He’s killing me.
But . . . it's got Morena Baccarin and Alan Tudyk in it! I have to watch it, don't I? How can a "Firefly" fan resist?
The original "V" just a regurgitation of the old Red Scare stuff from the '50s and early '60s, there's always the needs for an enemy no matter who's in the White House. Let's not get ahead of ourselves connecting the Visitors to the Obama Administration, any more than BSG to the Bush White House (BSG had more to do with who to trust and who was a threat than anything else).

And to Rob St. Amant: The title of the book was "How to Prepare Man." Great reference though.
You raise some interesting points here, but the right had plenty of issues with BSG as well, particularly during the part of the series where the humans were the insurgents running suicide bombers into Cylon buildings.

As others have pointed out, people will read what they want to into these things. But this is a central theme of science fiction and it crosses more mundane party lines.

As a remake, the reimagined V theme appears pretty consistent with the original. In Gene Roddenberry's "Earth Final Conflict" (executive produced by his wife, Majel), a race of aliens came in piece and improved humanity's existence only to later on reveal a more sinister plan. In the Stargate series, a race of seemingly all powerful beings pops up demanding worship from lesser beings (the leader of which for a time played by Morena Baccarin). In Babylon 5, the more powerful races use humans and other "lesser" alien species as pawns in a game of intergalactic chess, for a time. The list goes on.

If anything, science fiction writers do a wonderful job in letting the viewer see what they want in shows like this. One can as easily attempt to view this 2.5 minute trailer as an allegory for Obama as one can for W (W as the savior against all non-American evildoers). We see what we want to see.
Depending on how much dust is on the jacket, I always thought it was How to Cook for Forty Humans.
I have it now: "TO SERVE MAN"... after they broke they code, they discovered it was a cookbook... kudos to Rob St. Amant for keeping it simple while I kept it stupid......
"Am I crazy or does this preview make the show seem like a not-so-subtle fringe-right-wing criticism of Obama and Obama followers?"

Yes, you are crazy.
Hopemongers from Space! :-D

Of course, the aliens among us is an old Cold War standard. It should work just as well in the age of the War on Terror. But I think we're seeing art imitating life here. The fear of the Other is always a good storyline, because it's something we often feel.

Nothing new under the sun.
I, REPUBLICAN doth complain- Can't we "entertain" ourselves too? You have Doonesbury. This is what happens when you get to produce YOUR own fantasy; thats what Hollywood is, the DREAM FACTORY ... and we is DREAMIN that Obama is an alien. Also, don't forget we take our myth very seriously despite all evidence to the contrary and this guy is so DIFFERENT from US that he must be the Anti-Something ...

I, REPUBLICAN Sayeth ... so it must be 21% true
You are not crazy! It's a clear and overt attack (or jab at least) on people who dare to possess an ounce of idealism. As we are trying to move on to a new era, i would have thought a film like this could of portrayed what happens when people are engulfed in fear, submit to a theocracy and give away their rights... you know, like what happened these past 8 years.
I think you're stretching. Looking for subtext in sci fi is like looking for humor in a Susan Faludi speech.
Wow, I had no idea. Hollywood's track record for new things being abysmal and TV drama in general losing viewers to reality shows or Jay Leno, I just figured "V" for a retread, (albeit with way cooler special effects) of a 1980s show that, in the manner of interesting sci-fi everywhere, itself borrowed from an Brecht work. But yeah, it's ripe for interpretation, also in the manner of interesting sci-fi everywhere, so let the games begin. Those that will believe probably already do...
Science fiction has always had a bit of a conservative streak (or libertarian at least). But what science fiction does best is to give a scenario that ideals can be wrapped around, instead of the opposite. It may seem like an Obama allegory to a rabid right-winger, or a metaphor for Bush-esque protectionist policies for a left-winger. Don't read too much into it. I'm guessing it's no more a commentary on Democratic policies than Firefly was about state's rights. It's just a cool set-up.

And I hate that the words hope and change still can't be used without political connotations. Fuck Obama. I want those words back. They're good words.
Haven't seen anything else about the series...but if it works out the way David sees it going, one of the things that will happen is that a significant faction of the "V" will turn against the Supreme Commander of the Armada...and write scathing criticisms of him at every opportunity.

Looking forward to more about "V."

Hating the thought that so many progressives are so willing to trash Obama for not plunging headlong into an abyss for them.

David, you seem to be one of the more progressive correspondents not jumping on that "Obama is a traitor" bandwagon. I hope you never go over to that side.

In any case, can't wait to see what the new science fiction series is all about.
The first show was pretty much like this. The Visitors were portrayed as amazing and wonderful ... and then it all went to hell. I think it's just a commentary on how quickly people pony up to the Savior Bar, like little lemmings.

I don't think it has much to do with our current political situation, honestly. It's pretty much the regular science fiction stuff--you know, aliens come to Earth and start taking over, while the human race sits around wondering if the aliens are evil or not, until it is too late.
This is so overt, its hardly subtext at all. Of course, the right wingers aren't very bright -- they missed it in The Dark Knight, they'll probably miss it here.
You obviously didn't read any of the commentary on the original series, which had all the same issues of devotion as the new one. The original series was a political commentary on Hitler and the Nazi's using hope and devotion to brainwash a country into terrorizing the world. Your admittance that the new series mirrors Obama is simply an admittance to the similarity of Obama to Hitler, and we know how popular of a topic that can be. You could literally put the aliens in SS uniforms and you would have the history channel. Next thing you know we will have a remake of "The Wave" (1981) and everyone will draw conclusions to Obama until they unveil Hitler at the conclusion.

The thing that everyone forgets when comparing Obama or anyone to Hitler, is that when Hitler began he was hailed by the world for bringing hope to war torn Germany (WWI). He boosted their economy and brought them dignity, but he was laying the groundwork to potentially take over the world. As soon as anyone is brave enough to compare Obama to Hitler in an article they raise the red flag and say "but they aren't the same because Obama hasn't committed genocide”. True, but we shouldn’t compare the beginning of Obama's career to the end of Hitler's. The beginning of Hitler's career looks really similar to Obama's; obscurity and inexperience, a book about personal life struggles, and rousing speeches about hope and a bright future. Maybe we should just sit back and see how similar the middle of their careers will be.

The thing that everyone forgets when comparing anyone to Hitler, and especially Obama, is that when Hitler began he was hailed by the world for bringing hope to war torn Germany (WWI). He boosted their economy and brought them dignity. He was laying the groundwork to potentially take over the world. As soon as anyone is brave enough to compare Obama to Hitler they raise the red flag and say "but they aren't the same because Obama hasn't committed genocide". True, but we shouldn't compare the beginning of Obama's career to the end of Hitler's. The beginning of Hitler's career looks really similar to Obama's. Obscurity and inexperience, a book about personal life struggles, and rousing speeches about hope and a bright future.
The struggle against fascism is made even more clear in the ready collaboration of police forces in the Visitor occupation and the resistance of average citizens, from Elias, , int the background, the street hustler who can get the goods in the new black market, to Sancho, Mexican gardener whose grandfather fought with Zapata, to the diminutive medical student Julie, who eventually becomes the resistance leader. The fact that the human resistance was denounced as terrorists by the Visitor controlled media also drove home the fact that film was speaking to the "resistance fighters of the past present and future."
War Airplanes
Rob--heh heh

Truthfully, they can have it. V is very very very very very boring. You think it'd be out of the park easy as an interesting hit. Good idea. Good actors. Built in fanbase.

It is one of the dullest who cares about this shit shows I've ever seen. Sad.