Factually, that’s what he did during his time in office as well. I’m not sure what they thought had changed.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The movie is a counter point to the romanticism of political conflict. It intentionally doesn’t go into the specifics of politics that lead to the war as that would be saying “this political side is bad” which wasn’t the point. The far right romanticizes a civil war, the far left romanticizes a revolution. What you see in the movie is what it would look like if there was a wide spread political conflict. It shows the gory details to ask people on both extremes “is this what you really want?”

      For a lot of people the best case scenario is to end up in that refugee camp in the football field. Worst case is to end up in a mass grave because some psychopath decided you’re from the “wrong America”. Does the politics matter to people that wind up in those outcomes? Does it even matter to the soldiers storming the Whitehouse? Just seemed like they had a mission to accomplish, the politics aren’t all that relevant anymore at that point.

      People sometimes feel like using violence may achieve a better political outcome. But the reality is everyone is just worse off because of it. That was the point.

      • eran_morad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        IMO, “war bad” is just so fucking pedestrian as to be a complete waste of the capital that goes into a film.

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Methinks you have a romanticized notion of a civil war (or revolution) and don’t like having that bubble burst.