Fantastic Beasts - A no-free world is preferable?

During the weekend I watched the two movies "Fantastic Beasts" that describe the years before Harry Potter was born.

The movies 

It certainly is not about inclusion of people who are different. Yes, the main character tells everyone to love animals, even when they look scary.

But the main storyline is about humanity who tells those who are different to fit in and not to behave different from the majority, to spy on those who are different and report them when they want to be themselves and thus differ from the average person. Of course, in such a society some flip to live a miserable live with a depression that may result in self harm or violence. The first part ends with the removal of any evidence of the existence of those who are different, even when it are good memories while the aggression was because a young man was told to live a secret life and another man was angry because he no longer wanted to betray other persons who are different and that need to be punished with imprisonment. The second film seems to suggest that people who want to break free and relieve the world from those who oppress others are in fact those who consider themselves as better than the rest who want their freedom to gain world dominance and thus are the bad ones. The third film may proof me wrong but than the release between part two and three is too long.

The "Fantastic Beasts" don't seem to be in favour of liberation movements

Real life

It reminds me how women, LGBTs, people with a different skin colour were told to know their place and be happy with what men gave to those who were happiest to serve such as women who married into a rich family after which these women didn't mind to command other women instead of helping them to emancipate. Even today this is true in many countries and within individual families. Women who rebelled were called bitch or worse and often were punished so they would remember their place. An example today is the ruler of Dubai who doesn't seem to be very kind to his daughters who want to be free. LGBTs knew to be quiet, marry, get kids and shouldn't get caught when having extramarital relationships with someone of the same sex. Today in a number of countries it is still a curse to be gay such as in Chechnya with the agreement of the Russian president who now even wants to include in the constitution that people of the same sex can't marry as he needs the support of the Russian Church to continue remaining in power. Also people of colour no longer accept that they miss job opportunities because of their skin colour. The film industry is an example where still few black actors and actresses are able to win Oscars.

Many children find it hard to hide who they are in order to please others, often including the parents who should defend their children no matter who they are. Many children will feel insecure and some may become angry with everyone, with those who deny them to be as they are but also with those who seem to accept the situation and are happy with the life they live.

In the end, the movies seems to suggest the right thing to do is side with those who tell you to live a closeted life while those who want to express themselves openly and be happy are on the wrong side. No, it should be possible to live your own life as you wish as long as it doesn't hurt others. Yes, not all people who want to liberate themselves have noble ambitions; however, many leaders suffered when they battled for equal rights for everyone and were ridiculed, imprisoned or even killed. Today, few will agree that women, LGBTs and people from other ethnic backgrounds have to return to a life as before: in the closet and obedient. No, today many people are angry that equality is still not reached and thus come on the streets to protests for women rights, LGBT rights and against racism and today most of us understand why they and even support them. A return to the past, few will agree except those who lost influence and as a result of the emancipation of ordinary people. And yes, some want progress for themselves and not necessary for the benefit of others.

And thus, for me, the movies seem to suggest that the fight for equal human rights is not fought by people who really want that everyone can live a good life but instead is fought by people who want to rule over others from the perspective they are better than the rest and thus in effect reverse the seats as they would do the same to others as those who prevented them from being able to be themselves. And thus the message seems to be that those liberation movements need to be stopped as in many countries in the past but even today happens. The third film may change this but in that case should have been out already.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

(18l) Belgium, king Leopold II and Congo

Image
Leopold II in Congo Belgium has a terrible human rights track record because of its second king Leopold II (1835 - 1909) during whose reign millions of people in Congo died. People may say he is not personally responsible but the same can be said of Hitler. However, Leopold II could have ruled only Belgium but this he considered too small and thus he lobbied to gain Congo for himself and succeeded on the condition he would treat its people correct, something he refused to do from day one. Therefore, he is responsible as he actively searched for this expansion to enrich himself so he could enlarge his own glory in his kingdom Belgium with neglect of his "subjects" in Congo. And people in those days had already a conscience because the king had to replace the first ambassador who refused to collaborate to expand the king's personal property.   To have an impression of the terror Leopold ii allowed in Congo is a picture in this article that shows a black father who l
Read more

(12z) Don't blame animals for the climate crisis

Image
In today's society, many people comment how animals are a main contributor to climate change. However, we should stop blaming animals for the production of too much methane as they are victims because of the industrialised meat industry and habitat loss due to human activities, and thus the resulting climate change. Animals release methane, but are not responsible for climate change As usual, nowadays many people in comments under articles about climate change accuse animals that they produce too much methane and, although animals release methane (a potent greenhouse gas), humans are mainly to blame as we pack animals together so locally animals produce high levels of methane. Therefore, we should condemn the practice of today's meat industry, an industry whereby animals are considered to be things that are locked up with too many animals in cages that are too small so animals can't move. Therefore, they are given antibiotics to prevent they become ill and thus to prev
Read more

Extreme left joins extreme right over Ukraine. Hard to understand

Image
Russian journalist Dmitry Muratov analyses 2023's Russia Russia's Nobel-winning journalist Dmitry Muratov, whose newspaper was closed by the authorities, speaks about Russia's war in Ukraine . Does president Putin have a support base he asks? He answers himself: an enormous one of mainly elderly people who see Putin as their own grandson as they are pleased he wishes them each year "Happy New Year". Many of those elderly wouldn't mind sending their real grandchildren to die for Putin. In contrast, many younger people oppose the war against Ukraine, and many of them are now even imprisoned. So, he hopes the future of Russia will be different.  But yes, while Russian propaganda tries to convince Russians that even nuclear war may be something positive, there are also people in the West who create their own propaganda to justify their support for Russia, and condemn Ukraine because it wants to remain a free democracy, and therefore opposes Russia's invasion.
Read more