Saturday, September 14, 2024

Groupthink Abounds


“I don’t know what we’re fighting for. Not even a clue. I just want to go home.’’

“Starting a war is very easy. But to finish it — try that.’’

“This whole war is like a stagnant gonorrhea.’’

“They said the only way back to Russia is feet-first.’’

“If I’d known this would happen, I’d be damned if I’d sign up.’’

“Let Russia and the people of the world know what’s going on.’’

The above are a few excerpts from the film Russians at War,  the subject of Canadian government efforts at suppression, as I have written about in recent posts. In today's edition of The Star, columnist Rosie DiManno writes:

There is nothing about the documentary “Russians at War’’ that glorifies, justifies or in any way spreads disinformation about the brutal conflict that President Vladimir Putin has inflicted on Ukraine for the past two-and-a-half years. And on his own citizenry.

What it does is humanize Russian soldiers. And that’s not a crime. Because it’s the young men and women who pay the price — in blood, in limbs blown off, in tens of thousands of lives lost — for the folly of one autocrat’s delusions of grandiosity.

Some of these fighters, most of them achingly young, are dead by the end of the two-hour-plus chronicle from Moscow-born, Toronto-educated filmmaker Anastasia Trofimova. From the rear to the frontline to the graveyard.

Despite the pressure exerted by Chrystia Freeland, who likely has not even seen the film, DiManno challenges the government position on it:

“Russians at War’’ is as far from propaganda — for which it stands accused — as any of the journalistic reportage and drone footage that has come out of the Ukrainian battlefield, showing devastated villages and ruined towns, the unforgivable handiwork of Putin’s unprovoked military assault.

“Russians at War’’ is a documentary that cries out to be seen. But now it won’t, not at the Toronto International Film Festival anyway, which on Thursday announced it was pulling — “pausing’’ — the Canada-France co-production, a flip-flop of its position from 24 hours previously, due to “significant threats’’ against festival operations and for public security. Is that all you have to do to bend someone, or some organization, to your will? By threatening to disrupt an event, even though neither TIFF nor cops have revealed the nature of those threats? Toronto police told the Star in a statement that TIFF organizers made the decision to send the film to Coventry “independently’’ and “not based on any recommendations from Toronto Police.’’

Indeed, there seems little basis for the official interdiction of the film: 

Freeland’s office, in response to questions I sent, said “the government’s position is not about whether (the) film should have been made or whether people should watch it. Canadian public money should not be used to support the production or screening of media that attempts to whitewash Russia’s war crimes.’’

The question not answered: Has Freeland actually seen the film? The same query put to other prominent “Russians at War’’ bashers — Ukraine’s ambassador to Canada, the consul general in Toronto, Canadian senators, MPs and MPPs. None of whom responded to my emails and phone calls by deadline.

It has been said that the first casualty of war is truth, something the film tries to combat:

It serves the purpose of every side in a war to demonize the enemy. But Trofimova has tried, valiantly, to depict the humanity of the enemy, documenting in real time the sobering realities so poignantly rendered in classic movies such as “All Quiet on the Western Front’’ — the German remake of which won four Oscars last year.

Truth is something we should all aspire to, a daunting challenge in these days of social media, misinformation, and government messaging. The alternative, groupthink, is a willing suspension of critical-thinking, hardly a good fit for a healthy, thriving democracy. 

 

 

8 comments:

  1. I'm sure both Russia and the Ukraine would rather be playing football.
    https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/the-real-story-of-the-christmas-truce
    It is those that started this and other wars that need to be taken to task; Putin and Netanyahu come to mind.
    I wonder if Freeland would apply the same decision to the Israel ,Gaza conflict!
    I think not.
    TB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the link, TB. The leaders of these atrocities almost never to have to pay for their choices, a sad truth.

      Delete
  2. Count me Disgusted .. I don’t blame the Government - let the Facts speak for Themselves & Whomever deigned to create the ‘imbroglio - & every single word they uttered - including Context or Location - if Relevant ! Which individuals have Interfered in this matter ? Counting Ms Chrystia Freeland as at least one - on record 🦎🏴‍☠️

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are many questions that will likely remain unanswered, Sal. The question I would like answered is who in government circles thinks it is a good idea to suppress information the public has a right to?

      Delete
    2. who in government circles thinks it is a good idea to suppress information the public has a right to?

      Everyone who might be embarrassed, whose job/personal liberty, might hang on it, or in more serious cases, anyone whose policies the public might detest or personal liberty might hang on it.

      If you are asking about Cabinet-level, my guess, in Canada, ministers or their immediate political staff would want to suppress information about program boondoggles and gross financial mismanagement within their departments. It can be very embarrassing to find a, say, a 100 million dollar program to house the homeless has actually help subsidize middle class homeowners.

      I do not mean any deliberate malpractice. Just a poorly designed and targeted program. Large scale program design and delivery is extremely complex. That is why we have the Auditor-General of Canada and each department and agency has a program evaluation unit.

      In some cases, I just think the blocking civil servant thinks it is presumptuous that a member of the public should question him or her .



      Delete
    3. Indeed, I am sure when one works in government, groupthink abounds more than it does among the general population. An "us against them" mentality would not be uncommon.

      Delete
    4. I doubt it. Work in any large organization or belong to any reasonably large organization---large church or the Lions Club--- and you likely have the same thing. The thing is that you develop an organizational viewpoint and have extreme difficulty realizing there are others because you almost never hear or see them. So, everybody in the organization will tend to react the same as they are all working on the same assumptions.

      The near destruction of the North American auto industry by the Japanese probably is an example. All the executives in the NA industry "knew" that people in Canada and the US wanted large cars and trucks. OOPS.

      Delete
    5. Point well-taken. We all have our filters. I know that when I was a teacher, that was certainly true.

      Delete