Yes, this has been the best “24” season, and yes, the gamble of replacing nearly the entire cast has paid off, and the suspense level is at an all-time high for the show. (Even though its plot continues to strain credulity at every turn, especially the way they allowed a singular computer hacker- played by the guy who was Big Pussy’s FBI handler on “The Sopranos”- the authority to shut down the nation’s entire nuclear fleet, even though he wasn’t sure he knew what he was doing. Don’t think the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would quite go for that- not to mention that a simultaneous outage of that magnitude would likely immediately cause blackouts and/or an energy crisis.)
But another tempest has arisen, behind the scenes, as Muslim activists are upset that the show has dared to depict the terrorists this year as Islamists. Lileks did a memorable fisking yesterday of one of the more egregious articles about this, and star Kiefer Sutherland read a cringe-inducing PSA during Monday’s episode which stated that “the American Muslim community stands firmly beside their fellow Americans in denouncing and resisting all forms of terrorism.” Since we know that sleeper cells DO exist- some even tied indirectly to retired NBA superstars- that blanket statement is simply false.
This is the fourth season of “24,” and the second that has featured Islamists as villains. The first season, which aired immediately after 9/11, featured evil Serbs (one of whom was Dennis Hopper). The second had Arabs who were doing the bidding of an (American) consortium of oil interests, while the third started with a pair of bumbling Mexican drug lords, who later gave way to a Bond-movie-style evil-Brit mastermind.
The structure of “24,” in which the heroes are the Counter-Terrorist Unit, necessitates that the villains must always be terrorists. And in choosing villains, I feel as though they’ve gotten it just about right. Because for a show about counterterrorism, in the post-9/11 world, to run for four seasons without any Islamist villains would not only be gutless, it would be downright dishonest.
At any rate, this work of pop culture devolving into a political game- as they so often do- has inspired me to launch a feature I’ve been meaning to try for a while now. It’s called “Liberal or Conservative?” Inspired by a free-for-all argument in one of my college film classes over whether “Star Trek” is liberal or conservative, I’ll pose the question, take answers from commenters/e-mailers, and then post on it a few days later. It’s a way to engage in rank partisanship, while mocking its excesses at the same time.
So here we go: “24: Liberal or Conservative”?
Posted by Stephen Silver at February 9, 2005 09:56 PMI don't think the show has, or is written with, a clear political bias. But it is worth breaking down things we have seen for sure.
David Palmer: He is specifically referred to as a Democrat, we see little of how he governs. He could be an extremely conservative Democrat, or maybe he just didn't make speeches in support of abortion rights and affirmative action on the days we've seen him. He favored intervention in Yugoslavia and he was perfectly willing to pound three Muslim countries until he had doubts about their guilt. Bias: ?
Jack Bauer: Jack has yet to demonstrate that he even considers politics. He's strictly utilitarian, doing what he needs to do. He is unconcerned with the understanding the motivations of the terrorists, unless he needs to know in order to bring them down. No bias.
The War on Terror: If anything, the show tells us that terrorists are a very real threat and that need to be confronted, preferably by bullets. Though many liberals favor the War on Terror, this is generally a conservative value.
Torture: Neither Jack nor anyone at CTU have a problem with torture, so long as there is little time and we really need that information. I favor torture under these conditions, but I wouldn't want to call torture a "conservative" value.
Big Business: They tried to nuke LA and start a war in order to control the OIL! If that's not a super-Liberal value out of the ANSWER playbook, I don't know what is.
The Government: The officials of the U.S. government and its agencies, outside of the main characters, are portrayed as a bunch of petty, self-interested bureaucrats who take advantage of the situation in order to further their own careers. In this, the show is quite libertarian.
The Military: There is clearly an evil wing of the U.S. military, willing to cooperate in the worst of atrocities. As I didn't want to label torture as conservative, I'll decline to call this liberal.
Islam: Sayed Ali was depicted as a devoutly religious Muslim willing to blow up the city, who was balanced by the agent from an unnamed country who helped Jack. The Araz family has been shattered by dueling religious and secular concerns. Split down the middle. The show is willing to look at the worst of Islam, but I can't call that conservative while the President continues to tell us about the Religion of Peace.
I guess I have no idea where the show's bias lies. Which probably means they're doing a good job crafting a great story instead of fostering their political beliefs.
Posted by: Bill McCabe at February 9, 2005 11:22 PMWay to long of a blog entry! Get over yourselves BLOGGERS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: A at February 10, 2005 12:01 AMYou know, we do this for ourselves. Not for you.
Posted by: Bill McCabe at February 10, 2005 05:58 AMi got 24 problems but a bitch aint one
Posted by: LilB at February 10, 2005 10:00 AM“the American Muslim community stands firmly beside their fellow Americans in denouncing and resisting all forms of terrorism.” Since we know that sleeper cells DO exist- some even tied indirectly to retired NBA superstars- that blanket statement is simply false.
well, that's the funny thing about generalizations. They're never 100% accurate. If there are some American Muslims involved in terrorism, the overwhelming majority might still be law abiding citizens. Just as the "fellow Americans" Sir Kiefer refers to, also include a small minority of persons whom rather than denouncing or resisting terrorism, are active participants. Tim McVeigh and John Walker Lindh come to mind.
"Strain credulity?" Credulity had a massive hernia somewhere in the middle of episode 1, season 1. This show is a comedy.
I thought it was interesting that a middle-aged white guy had to tell me that the American Muslim community stands against terrorism. Did CAIR disband without telling anybody?
Posted by: Jim Treacher at February 14, 2005 10:17 PMI think 24 has a clear conservative bias. Our hero, Jack Bauer, is a white cop who must battle evil and sinister Muslims who are hell-bent on destroying America. He routinely violates civil liberties by torturing prisoners, ordering illegal phone taps, or lying about his law enforement status. But is he ever depicted as being in the wrong? The implications of Bauer's actions are that it's OK to break the law if it involves terrorism, and this is certainly a conservative stance that has resulted in things like the PATRIOT act. Liberals maintain the sanctity of the law and deplore conservative constitution-trampling. Interestingly enough, season 4 saw the show's first overtly liberal character, and for a while it looked as though he was going to be connected with the terrorists. Subtle implication? Liberals are probably terrorists. I love 24, but the bias is written on the walls.
Posted by: Evan at April 12, 2005 01:58 PMThe biggest implication I noticed was throughout season 2, where they depict Marie as a freakish Liberal nutjob who aligns herself with terrorists. This is a strange implication to me.
I also have to be a little shocked at the overt attempt to peg all terrorists as non-whites, mainly Muslims.