Monday, 25 May 2015

Spartacus: Marxism And Rome (1/2)




During a recent holiday weekend I finally had the chance to revisit a classic ''Swords and Sandals'' epic. I knew Spartacus was ''a bit Left Wing'' and I was also aware that Spartacus as a historical figure was an icon of Marxist revolutionaries the world over. However, on further investigation I became fascinated by the movie, both its background and what was happening on screen. To be brief, during the 50's conservative white Americans began a belated, and ultimately, doomed attempt to regain control of the Movie industry which they now recognized as being in the hands of Marxists, the vast majority of whom were Jewish. Spartacus was a reaction from the ''subversive elements'' while at the same time  containing more of the Marxist themes and subversive ideas which had angered white conservatives to begin with. Jewish actor Kirk Douglas was the driving force behind Spartacus, eventually settling on Jewish director Stanley Kubrick to direct, David Lean having turned it down and Jewish director Anthony Mann not being able to handle the vast scale of the film.


 The plot of Spartacus is well known and does not need to be explained at length here, set in the Roman Empire, Spartacus tells the story of slaves and Gladiators rebelling against the Roman tyranny seeking either to escape Italy completely or destroy
Rome itself. Within Rome we discover tensions are at an all time high with the Patrician Class and Plebians vying for power. One side as represented by a brilliant Olivier playing Crassus, who is what we would think of as a ''Radical Traditionalist'' and Gracchus, equally well played by Charles Laughton, who represents the Liberalistic Plebians, or ''The Mob''. 
 Spartacus opens with a monologue which concludes:


 There under whip and chain and sun he( Spartacus) lived out his youth and his young manhood, dreaming the death of slavery 2000 years before it finally would die.

 In actual fact just several decades before Spartacus was made Judeo Marxists had created and were operating the largest system of human bondage and slavery ever seen by mankind, the Gulag in the USSR. But the critique only ever emanates from one direction and has only one target, Western Civilization and the people who built it. In this case it is Rome, but it could just as easily have been the Russian Empire, Germany, Europe in general or modern day America. The method is also consistent, the marginalized and the ''oppressed'' being led by Jewish people into rebellion and war against the European. In Spartacus the rebellion begins when Crassus demands the Gladiator school force two men into a death match, Spartacus and a Negro are chosen.
The Negro defeats Spartacus but rather than kill him decides to sacrifice himself for the ''Brotherhood of man'' and directs his trident toward Crassus, Crassus stays put and swiftly dispatches the Negro with his knife. Crassus is no coward, no pampered aristocrat.
 The Negro represents the plight of blacks in America at the dawn of the Civil Rights movement, which was, of course, Jewish led. Spartacus' slave army is multi-ethnic in make up. And so we begin to see where and what the message is, Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis, both Jews, heading the oppressed masses into violence against the European system. Crassus is the conservative, the Patriarch, the Fascist, he revers Rome precisely because of its power and glory and despises the Mob of Gracchus as weak and corrupt. It's interesting to note that Gracchus, like present day Liberals, views the potential of a ''tyranny'' under Crassus as worse than the destruction of Rome at the hands of the slave army ''I'll take a little corruption over the tyranny of Crassus any day of the week''. Gracchus also mocks Crassus's love of Rome ''Most of us see Rome as a kindly old mother, Crassus is intent on marrying the old girl, to put it politely''. But what Gracchus does not recognize but Crassus does, is that the Brotherhood of man ideal poses an existential threat to everything Rome stands for. What we are witnessing is a clash of what Nietzsche called ''Master -Slave Morality''

 "...the Jews achieved that miracle of inversion of values thanks to which life on earth has for a couple millennia acquired a new and dangerous fascination--their prophets fused 'rich', 'godless', 'evil', 'violent', 'sensual' into one and were the first to coin the word 'world' as a term of infamy. It is this inversion of values (with which is involved the employment of the word for 'poor' as a synonym for 'holy' and 'friend') that the significance of the Jewish people resides: with them there begins the slave revolt in morals."

  To Be Continued....




No comments:

Post a Comment