It wasn’t the election of Lincoln the person per se, it was the lection of Lincoln despite him not being on any southern ballot. It meant that the southern states could be bound to follow a policy they didn’t support because the President didn’t need their input in order to be elected.

“left and right are ideological arguments about how to run a state” and nothing more. He says what we should be doing is trying one, voting it out if it doesn’t work, and then trying the other one. “But we’ve made it into ‘good and bad,’” he said, which made politics a “moral issue,” and he said that’s “fucking…

Yeah, that’s the fucking argument.  You seem really bright.

Tolstoy should’ve stuck with that title 

Well, yes and no. The Power of the Press is what got those large swathes to start denying what was right in front of their face, or start parroting ad verbatim that “maybe a little authoritarianism is what we need”.

I’m ok with him keeping the movie somewhat ambiguous in terms of politics. It seems people can’t get past the whole plotline about Texas and California joining forces.

Hey awesome! Best of fortunes with that. I look forward to seeking it out.

Oh hey, another opportunity for me to drop that Don’t Look Up was trash. Always a welcome opportunity!

Yeah I already can visualize that.  "I think black people deserve rights, but these aggressive protests are wrongheaded and will only result in more division etc etc."

Hey could I ask you an off-topic, hopefully not stalkery question? I’m sorry I can’t DM it.

Are you working on a documentary about the Eastland Disaster? I feel like I might have interacted with someone on Reddit with a similar writing style/general perspective. I respect the historical insight that I’ve noticed you…

I’d hate to see what Alex Garland would have said in the 1950s when the Civil Rights movement was labeled radical

Yes it’s so courageous to say that “orange man bad” like everybody including literally everybody in Hollywood. He really is a coward for not doing it.

This guy and Kyrsten Sinema should really meet up. I bet they’d have a lot to say to each other. Plus, I hear she’s got some free time opening up in the near future.

“Picking a side potentially alienates half of my most lucrative movie market, so this movie about American political divisions has nothing to say about American politics, promise!”

Seriously, this quote is some clueless white guy goober shit, the sort of thing you only say when your basic rights are always pretty safe…

I’m not willing to die in a Project 2025 Internment Camp just to ‘try out again’ a man who openly states he intends to be a dictator.

The most unbelievable aspect to me is the idea a significant number of American minds can be changed by the power of the press and honest reporting. I think we’ve burned that bridge.

Did Aaron Sorkin ghostwrite this stupid movie or something? Imagine writing and directing a movie called “Civil War” about the most powerful country in the world tearing itself apart, and instead of interrogating any meaningful causes and consequences all you have to say is something utterly facile like “left and…

I think it’s interesting to contemplate whether Garland’s British-ness is an important consideration, here. Britain has been remarkably resistant to fully committing to any ideology or government type. They clipped the monarchy’s nuts, but not completely, and didn’t get rid of it. They clipped the House of Lords’…

The movie that dares to ask

Look, I like Garland’s films and this may yet be a great film, BUT...

“He said there are politicians and people in the media “on both sides of the divide” who are “wonderful” and that “left and right are ideological arguments about how to run a state” and nothing more.”

This both-sides-ism is complete BULLSHIT and I am…