The simplistic claim is it's a metaphor for US treatment of minorities. Maybe Latinos or African-Americans here in the US? Except, no, we don't have paramilitary groups forcing minorities to run across minefields for sport. And I don't believe we ever will. Even in our worst periods of institutionalized racial violence, you don't have anything this violent at more than a local level in the last 100 years. The video doesn't really work as a metaphor for our inappropriate violence against Afghanis or Iraqis, either, since it doesn't relate to the complicated military security situation in those places.
I'm left thinking she highlights redheads because her previously trendy terrorist organization was finally dismantled.
What experience? Being oppressed for being a redhead? Being beaten by US paramilitary? Her friends being forced to run across a minefield?
Take the gingers, for instance. "Ginger" is clearly a stand-in for ethnicity. But "ginger" is presented as an arbitrary signifier: i.e., ethnicity as ahistorical and without social construction. As such, it presents ethnic conflicts as interchangeable, as grounded in whim, and as not requiring any location, time, or culture-specific understanding. Not good.
Ethnic cleansing campaigns are, almost by definition, the opposite of arbitrary.
They are often systematic, involving pre-planning, vertical orchestration for political gain, as well as horizontal collaboration at a local level.
I think it could have been a lot more poignant if, instead of throwing together a bunch of random elements, it had focused on something that was inconveniently—and viscerally—real.
« Older Time-lapse assembly video... | Happy 5th birthday YouTube! WY... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt