(sorry, I couldn’t find a cleaner quality than this)
Wtf is Jesse talking about, Tolkien fought in world war 1, not 2. The Hobbit came out in 1937. Mordore was inspired by his participation in battle of the somme, or so people say. Tolkien always publicly denied being inspired by the war.
The Hobbit came out in 1937
Not saying the meme is true, but it’s worth noting that The Two Towers, which this meme references, was published in 1954.
To me, there are two take aways from Tolkein saying “I was not inspired by my experiences with the war”
- Something that traumatic was always going to seep into his world view and messaging for the rest of his life, even if it wasn’t intentional. We always write what we know. The closer something is to something we know, the more compelling we can be when writing about it. Tolkein wrote something VERY compelling. Probably because he wrote what he knew, and what he knew was a world war.
- He did it, knowingly, but the constant questions about the influence of the war on his writing was exhausting and traumatic in its own way. LotR was probably the most he was EVER going to be willing to write about it on account of how horrid and awful it was, and his saying “I didn’t take inspiration from my war experiences, that shit was too awful to revist” was him saying “Stop asking about all that, I’m not ready to talk about it and I never will be.”
Personally, I think with many things in life the answer does not lie in either binary, but instead in a blend of the two. I think there’s some stuff Tolkein put in there knowingly, and some stuff he did accidentally. I think him saying “No, no inspiration, stop asking” was both true in certain contexts, and a way to say he wasn’t willing to talk about it in others.
I’ve heard this take before. Idk if I’d conflate elderly tree-loving pacifist democrats with Hoover/FDR Era American politicians.
One big reason Japan bombed Pearl Harbor was our military support for allied China and Russia, as well as our military occupation of the Philippines. Even back in the late 30s, we had naval bases and military alliances all over the Pacific.
Americans weren’t pacifists. It was more an issue of divided loyalties. Ford/Hoover/Bush Republicans had strong economic and ideological ties with Nazi Germany.
AKSHUALLY… The allegory doesn’t have to be perfect, just symbolic. The point is the slowness and inefficiency. Tolkien was just making a point, not a perfect analog.
Tolkien was just making a point
Tolkien himself has said that WWII was not a direct influence to any of the events or storylines in his writings, and that most of them were established before most of the events of WWII took place. He wrote about it in the forward of later editions to the Fellowship of the Ring, conceding that while no artist can deny being influenced by their surroundings, LotR is not meant to be a metaphor or analogy for anything, going so far as to say he prefers stories to be just stories.
The US was heavily involved in both sides of the wars in Europe and Asia prior to their official entrance. They weren’t slow or inefficient. They were simply reluctant to actively mobilize a trans-oceanic invasion.
The US was also not a forest of walking talking trees. Explain that one! You can’t!
The US was also not a forest of walking talking trees.
Probably the best case for the analogy was how powerful the American military was on making landfall at Normandy.
It’s the “too democratic so they are slow and argue a lot” metaphor that breaks down.
The US was heavily involved in both sides of the wars in Europe and Asia prior to their official entrance.
Spreading misinformation is not kosher.
It. Is. Not. Supposed. To. Be. A. Perfect. Analogy.
It’s not even a good analogy.
Well, that’s fine. Why don’t you write an internationally beloved fantasy epic with a better one?
Because The Poppy War already exists.
God please tell me this is sarcasm
Idiotic take.
The US has never been “isolationist.” And their fake democracy is about just as “efficient” as any other in the (so-called) “liberal democratic” world.
The US has never been “isolationist.”
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/american-isolationism
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”
- USMC Gen. Smedley D. Butler (ret.)
Do tell… does it only count as “isolationism” when you’re not interfering with white countries?
Do tell… does it only count as “isolationism” when you’re not interfering with white countries?
Yes, that is literally how the US defined it in the 1930s. The link I shared basically says the same thing, intervention in South America was totally fine, Europe and Asia wasn’t.
Yes, that is literally how the US defined it in the 1930s.
In the 30s, eh? So why are people here still buying into it now? What else does a pack of imperialist thugs get to define for you?
Lol this is what all theory and no history does to a mfer.
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”
- USMC Gen. Smedley D. Butler (ret.)
Do tell… does it only count as “isolationism” when you’re not interfering with white countries?
Do imperial powers see it as intervention when they’re interfering in the politics of what they consider to be their colonies or backyard? You’re right — the idea that the U.S. was ever truly isolationist in the strictest definition of the term is a myth. What they actually were/are is a kind of imperial exceptionalism: the U.S. avoids entanglements with other empires while actively dominating weaker nations, usually outside the scope of mainstream historical narratives. ‘Isolationism’ is a term imperial nations use to describe their non-interference with peer empires — not their restraint toward the rest of the world. So yes, it often does only apply when you’re not interfering with other white or Western powers. It doesn’t mean they weren’t acting imperially elsewhere — just that they weren’t stepping on another empire’s toes. That doesn’t make imperialism right — it just means your use of the term ‘isolationist’ is historically inaccurate. Something something, don’t use the master’s tools.
Also the point of democracy is to be inefficient. It slows the process of enacting law so other people can voice their concerns. If you’re looking for an efficient government, some dictator telling everyone what to do is super efficient. It gets a lot done real fast.
What they actually were/are is a kind of imperial exceptionalism:
Then that is the term that should be used to describe US policy before WW2.
Something something, don’t use the master’s tools.
You mean… like using a term to describe history specifically invented by perpetrators of historical atrocity to mask said atrocities?
Can you people just stay on .ml so the blocklists work instead of making us read the dumbest takes this side of VK?
No.
the US has never been isolationist? my brother in Christ, that’s our entire history from the Munroe doctrine to the 45th/47th president
my brother in Christ,
We are not brothers.
that’s our entire history
Maybe read some of it, then… then you can explain to me how a (supposedly) “isolationist” empire based in the continental Americas manages to have a gigantic naval base in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
SUPER easily. you’re describing anti-imperialism, not isolationism. anti-imperialism: we shouldn’t interfere in anyone’s affair. isolationism: no one should interfere with what we’re doing, no matter how vile and evil.
some examples of isolationists:
- james munroe
- thomas jefferson
- andrew jackson
- jefferson davis
- adolf hitler
- josef stalin
- every single member of the un clan
- vladimir putin
- george w bush
- donald trump
you’re describing anti-imperialism
So you don’t actually know what words mean - that explains a lot.
SUPER easily.
Will this be taking long, then?
So you don’t actually know what words mean - that explains a lot.
No. I do. You don’t. I can understand your frustration that “isolationism” sounds like something it isn’t, but unfortunately it is what it is, and it has an established meaning and you not liking that doesn’t change the fact that it means what it means. I saw you in another comment saying we shouldn’t use the world the racists created for their concept, which I do agree with but most of the time we don’t have the luxury of time to establish that I think it should be called something explicitly stupid like “fartpoggin” so that the sound of it is dumb enough to discourage people for falling into isolationism of fascism because the word the originators chose for it made it sound like something else or something sexy. But again. Most of time time we’re talking to other people about things and the most expedient way to do that is to use established terms as they’ve been established. I WILL NOT be carrying a conversation where you try to convince everyone that America isn’t isolationist because it’s imperial. I’m sorry, but I just don’t have time for that. Let’s have the conversation about that America tortures the planet and the isolates itself from consequences by refusing to agree to the terms of the ICC, the Paris Climate Agreement, the fucking Treaty of Versailles, you fucking name it, we isolate ourselves from consequence ALL THE TIME (hence the term Isolationism)
Will this be taking long, then?
It wouldn’t have if you were willing to listen to others, but here we are. Still spinning our wheels because you don’t understand what a word means and you think everyone who isn’t you doesn’t understand it. At a certain point this conversation will simply need to end because you’re not paying attention to what anyone else is saying because you have the world’s dumbest axe to grind and are getting in your own way of making coalitions with people who do basically agree with you, but you require purity of terminology in online discussions and drag a conversation away from what matters into administrivia that absolutely fucking doesn’t
and it has an established meaning
Established by whom? The same people who applauds when the US “tortures the planet and the isolates itself from consequences”?
but you require purity of terminology
Am I the only one who understands the propaganda value of terminology around here? Perhaps we are “still spinning our wheels…” but I’d say it’s rather because the propaganda machinery of the status quo is still running rings around us if we even allow them to dictate the meaning of words at us.
Next you’ll be telling me we should also not reject liberal’s definition of things like democracy or justice.
Next you’ll be telling me we should also not reject liberal’s definition of things like democracy or justice.
See. That’s the opposite of what I’m saying. We need to get them to understand that “isolationism” is a bad term. It’s a bad thing. It’s bad to be isolated from the rest of the world. We as individuals are meant to be connected into the context of the community around us. These fuckfaces want to be isolated and insulated and alone. This scales downwards. They want our imperial nation alone, they want their party alone, they want their city disconnected from others, they want their family alone, they want to be alone. They want to act and behave without consequence or reinforcement from anyone around them. But what a sad life! We are meant to have connections with our family, with our friends, with the people we encounter on the street, with visitors from other places. We’re meant to go out into the world and meet other groups and bring all of that wisdom home with us and enjoy the fruits of our own labor returned to us as gifts from a mutually beneficial lifestyle of cooperation.
It’s easier to repackage the emotional context of these words than it is to re-establish their meanings. Re-establishing meanings is new speak, it is a weapon of the enemy and I will not use it. Re-establishing the way these words impact us and each other, these are our weapons. This is the power that we have. Fighting fire with fire will only leave the whole world burned. It’s better to fight fire effectively by isolating it with a fire line, starving it of fuel, and then dousing it.
We are not brothers.
Whew big radgie man who can’t take a joking phrase lol
We are not brothers.
Sheesh homie didn’t realize he was playin with a ice cold badass muhfucker.
