MAOIST.WS
Maoist Information Web Site
Maoist movie reviews
"Valkyrie" suggests kinds of struggle found in imperialist countries
Valkyrie
Directed by Bryan Singer
Starring Tom Cruise
United Artists, Achte Babelsberg Film and Bad Hat Harry Productions
PG-13
120 minutes
2008
2009 January
"Valkyrie" has allegorical potential for representing the United
$tates during a war the United $tates is losing. This reviewer was
reminded of "Red Dawn" (1984), depicting an invasion of the United
$tates. "Red Dawn" is Cold War anti-communism and depicts Amerikans
as victims of aggression opposing invasion, whereas "Valkyrie," based
on the July 20 plot of 1944 to assassinate Hitler, depicts an
attempted coup in an aggressor country, but it seems that both "Red
Dawn" still and "Valkyrie" have something to say about an invasion of
the United $tates, and it has to be said that both "Red Dawn" and
"Valkyrie" are accurate representations of what Amerikans would do.
This reviewer can't remember the exact context, but there is a line
in "Valkyrie" about rats deserting a sinking ship. Cruise's
character, Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, who mutters some things
against the killing of civilians and concentration camps at different
points in the movie, suggests higher principles in trying to
overthrow Hitler. However, rats leaving a sinking ship sums up the
movie. Stauffenberg wants the war to end on better terms for Germans
than if the war were prolonged. After himself being recruited to a
group conspiring with officers in the German army to overthrow
Hitler, Stauffenberg tries the enlist the help of both friends and
careerists.
When the oppressed are on the offensive and the oppressors sense
their doom, one can expect some of them to try to cut a deal or make
a bid for peace. "Valkyrie" raises the idea of not wanting the world
to think all Germans were bad. Underlying that could be a desire to
avoid being tried for war crimes or defend German imperialism from
the image Hitler gave it. In fact, the group that Claus von
Stauffenberg joins envisions a post-Hitler Germany governed by
Germans. Stauffenberg clearly fears for his family's safety from the
looming Allied forces, but Stauffenberg also is part of a movement
that would a install government made up of German elites in place of
an occupation. Historically, Stauffenberg himself preferred an end to
the war that would have preserved some of Germany's territorial
gains. When it became more clear to Stauffenberg that such a peace
was not going to come, Stauffenberg's ambitions changed to the point
where he undertook what could be described as extreme public
relations operations on behalf of so-called good Germans, just to
benefit the global post-war reputation of Germany. At least, that is
how Stauffenberg may have tried to justify continuing to try to
overthrow Hitler against increasingly difficult odds.
Any resistance within or against their government by Amerikans will
mostly be like rats abandoning a sinking ship, not proletarian
revolution. There will be either "rats deserting a sinking ship" or
die-hard resistance to the invaders as in "Red Dawn." In various ways
(for example, Stauffenberg is portrayed as being more capable and
reliable than civilian conspirators), "Valkyrie" raises that
imperialist country military officials may have more foresight and
resistance capacity than other people in their country, but if
civilians in the First World aren't going to support revolution,
proletarian revolution isn't going to be made by some members of a
First World military. MIWS would say that is obvious, but some
counterrevolutionaries calling themselves "Maoist" have suggested
that a U.$. military bringing war to the Third World might substitute
for a revolutionary working class in the United $tates. Historically,
Leon Trotsky said that German soldiers would become revolutionary
during World War II, suggesting that they would be more advanced than
German civilians.(1) As for present resistance to U.$. policies and
"Valkyrie's" possible influence, this reviewer can imagine "Valkyrie"
inspiring some Christians in the United $tates to attend a protest or
sign a petition to relieve their guilt, but not much else. Dialogue
and other things about the movie suggest that "Valkyrie" has the
potential to support a politics of guilt and redemption that is
inward-looking. As an allegory for what Amerikans wanting to stop war
should do in the future or now, "Valkyrie" is lacking. Besides
actions leads up to a coup attempt, it seems that only symbolic acts
are possible. This leaves out a range of actions that would help the
oppressed's struggle.
Stauffenberg opposes Hitler out of love of Germany. Hitler is bad for
both the world and Germany, Tom Cruise's character says. He loves
Germany, but most Germans love Hitler and would react against a
public confrontation with Hitler, making certain courses of action
necessary. Stauffenberg knowingly commits high treason -- for
Germany. In the United $tates, various people claiming to oppose war,
including so-called socialists, openly love Amerika. Others, calling
themselves revolutionary, love Amerika and would oppose any invasion
of the United $tates as being "reactionary," but try to hide it to
swindle people in the Third World. Such people, themselves
social-patriots, may be found opposing nationalism and supporting
"revolutionary defeatism" in Third World nations facing U.$. military
attacks. But, even if there were a large movement in the United
$tates with anti-Amerikan rhetoric and anti-patriotic rhetoric that
made itself visible, it would, probably more than anything else,
serve to confuse people outside the United $tates on the need to
fight U.$. imperialism without thinking that Amerikans will
eventually rise up against imperialism. Globally, the notion of any
"Good Germans" in the United $tates primarily serves to disorient the
oppressed, who benefit from an anti-Amerikan orientation.(2) U.$.
imperialism will not be done away with until it is smashed by forces
outside the Euro-Amerikan nation. Amerikans will try to hold onto
whatever privilege and vestiges of privilege they have, including by
using the idea of progress in the United $tates to weaken the
struggle against U.$. imperialism and allow it to continue
exploiting, occupying and repressing other nations. "Valkyrie" raises
the idea of good Germans, but does not show how large or small the
resistance was in Germany as a whole other than suggesting that
alternatives to a violent coup would have failed because of a lack of
support in the establishment or society. Similarly, there is little
scientific connected to the idea of good Amerikans.
Anti-Amerikan ideas can even be combined with pro-Amerikan actions.
Claus von Stauffenberg expressed some thoughts that could be seen as
supporting the enemy of Germany, but the movie emphasizes that he was
not anti-German, when not being anti-German concretely meant
supporting German imperialist country interests, as Stauffenberg did.
Just wanting to minimize bloodshed and save the lives of some people
who happened to be German would not have been a good reason for
Stauffenberg to not identify with an anti-German movement. If
Stauffenberg was not anti-German, it was for reasons other than
wanting to prevent needless loss of life in Germany. Many of those
verbally or mentally "supporting" resistance to the United $tates,
including revisionists, social-democrats, and the pre-scientific, are
distinctly pro-Amerikan in their other actions. In the United $tates,
modern conscious and unconscious revisionism and social-democracy
sometimes appear to support U.$. imperialism's defeat in some
struggles.
On the surface, "Valkyrie" is against Nazism. If a military coup in
the First World were to happen within the next decade, though, it
would probably be connected to the rise of fascism, rather than its
demise and some large-scale progress brought about a parasite
minority. So, "Valkyrie" isn't perfect as allegory on one level.
However, "Valkyrie" suggests the kind of domestic resistance that one
can expect to a regime in an imperialist country facing occupation.
After all, everyone knows how the war ended for Germany. Germany was
occupied, as it had to be. Germans weren't able to overthrow the
Hitler government and replace it with something better by themselves
before Germany was occupied. Today, defeat and occupation are the
destiny of nations that don't have a revolutionary class. First World
nations will be defeated and ruled by the international proletariat
until they have adequately changed. "Valkyrie" depicts a nation on a
downward spiral, where coup and assassination conspiracies arise to
get the nation out of a situation that had little chance of being
prevented by way of domestic obstacles, such as a revolutionary
working class. There is some truth to "Valkyrie" of a general kind,
the historical accuracy of this movie aside. At a few points, the
unfolding of events even comes down to Claus von Stauffenberg's own
discretion in situations that lacked certainty, and things such as
how fast Stauffenberg is able to put an object in a briefcase and
whether or not he saw what he thought he saw with his own eyes. It
relates to the individualist perspective of the movie, but also shows
how desperate the situation in Germany was for the resistance
movement, that it was working futilely against overwhelming forces.
The German resistance is unsuccessful, as it is obviously going to be
in any movie supposedly based on a true story, but it is implied that
Stauffenberg is redeemed by the fact that people are now aware of
what he did (the movie itself fulfills this), that at least he and
others won glory as individuals. Stauffenberg got what he wanted, a
memory of German resistance, when he knew there was little chance of
success, but that is all. Historically, the so-called resistance
movement involved people who wanted to sue for peace with the Western
allies but continue the war with the Soviet Union, which the West
could have had an interest in. Imperialism had to be defeated, and it
was defeated in Germany by a Soviet-led united front.
"Valkyrie" raises overthrowing a "Hitler" during fascism and
replacing him or her with a better nationalist bourgeois leader, but
fascism in Germany, Italy and Japan ended with occupations of those
countries. In spite of this, George Bush and others are compared to
Hitler in election campaign contexts. The idea of opposing a Hitler
in these contexts serves to legitimize not just electing particular
leaders, but the political process in the First World as a whole and
continued First World hegemony. The Bush-Hitler comparison within the
United $tates, made by everyone from Lyndon LaRouche supporters on
the "right" to so-called communists on the "left," has always been
mainly connected to a push to elect Democrats. Democrats have
criticized Republicans for comparing Barack Obama to Hitler (and
LaRouche has also called Obama a fascist), but the truth is that
Obama has more in common politically with Benito Mussolini than
George W. Bush does, and Bush will be gone in a matter of days at the
time of this writing, making Hitler even more irrelevant. In raising
this comparison, between Obama and Mussolini, this reviewer does not
mean to suggest that someone better than Obama will or should be
elected in 2012. There is no domestically induced end to U.$.
aggression in sight, and there is no majority vehicle in the United
$tates for progress. As "Valkyrie" implies, fascism's strength has
something to do with imperialist country majorities in the first
place. Only a minority will capitulate to the united front against
imperialist aggression. At the same time, most of this "capitulation"
will take the form of leaving one sinking imperialist ship for
another.
Notes
1.
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/classics/wetoldyouso/text.php?mimfil
e=trotskyonnaziarmies.txt
2. Example:
"If there is not a strong showing from the anti-war movement against
this whole direction outside the convention, it will signal those who
make war and the victims of these wars around the world that the
people of this country will go along with continued occupation, with
McCain or Obama sending many more troops to Afghanistan, and with
threats to Iran. The Bush regime promised a war to last generations.
Are we against this, or not?
"Whether one plans on voting for Obama or not, we all must be in the
streets making our clear opposition to torture, bloody occupations
and any new war against Iran vividly clear. People are traveling the
country to campaign for Obama. With a strong call from the anti-war
movement, some will be willing to bring an anti-war message to
Denver."
"Whatever differences exist, they pale in comparison to the
responsibility those of us who are not at peace with being at war
have to stop the U.S. occupation of the Middle East. The world needs
to see us in the streets in Denver, marching together on the eve of
the convention opening."
In other words, the world needs to see allegedly anti-war Obama
supporters in the streets.
"An Open Letter," 2008 July 16,
http://revcom.us/a/138/WCW%20open%20letter-en.html
The Revolutionary Communist Party,USA, a phenomenon of the
Euro-Amerikan labor aristocracy, uses rhetoric that is sometimes
similar to genuine scientific communists', partly to recruit
pre-scientific petty-bourgeois-type Amerikans worthless to the
proletariat and partly as part of psychological warfare against the
oppressed.