posted
I would argue that in the world of "V for Vendetta" the government V is attempting to overthrow is far more guilty of killing civilians and spreading terror than the man who seeks to overthrow it.
As for deaths that might have occurred due to V's actions, V gave warning of his intention to destroy Parliament, and I'm of the impression that the present legal system was not making use of the Old Bailey. And had the government not been using terror as one of its own principal weapons (and thus been afraid of anything that appeared to be mocking its power,) no civilians need have died due to V's distribution of masks, either.
To my mind, a good part of what makes a terrorist is a willingness to kill blindly to achieve goals, perhaps to the point that the killing is more the point than the stated goal. If what we typically think of as a "terrorist" in this day and age is a demolitionist, V, by contrast, was a surgeon.
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: In a totalitarian regime I don't believe there is much difference between a "civil" project and a "military" one. The TV anchor reading what she knows to be government manufactured lies is equally as culpable.
By saying this you are dooming everyone living in said regime to either be a co-conspirator or unemployed... what about Gordon (the TV comedian)? He was actively opposed to the regime, yet he did work at the TV station, and could as easily have been the one shot, rather than a knowingly dishonest reporter etc.
If you think this is true then legitimately everyone who works in the state would be right to fear reprisal from V. I'm not saying that there isn't a grey area (e.g. the reporter that knowingly lies for the state) but I would say there is still a largely clear distinction between actively supporting the regime (e.g. defense contractor) and just doing a job that happens to fall under the state's purview (e.g. TV camera man, power plant worker, teacher...)
I agree that most of V's actions and intent are indeed very controlled and meant only to harm the genuinely evil individuals who form the core of the government and those willing pawns who know full-well at least some portion of the evil they support. I do, however stand by the judgement that in my eyes V is still a terrorist. Perhaps a relatively begnign and good-intentioned terrorist, but a terrorist nonetheless.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gordon only threw out the censor approved script once he knew V was real and still alive.
Yes everyone is complicit, because the choices are "co-conspirator" or "unemployed". Bad things happen when good men do nothing.
Gordon's defiance such as it was in collecting the forbidden objects was purely a selfish one, he never did much for anyone else and was acting strictly for his own self preservation until Evie.
posted
I wonder how that phone call went when Vader told the Emperor the Death Star had been destroyed.
As far as the terrorist thing goes, I don't think I personally have any permanent criteria on what is and isn't a terrorist. There's too much that can change from situation to situation to make any sort of clear divisions on the subject.
If V was a terrorist, then I still think what he did was good and necessary. The things he did were NOT meant to cause terror, they were meant to point out and counteract the terror that the government was producing.
What do you call a man that fights against a government that is full of terrorists?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
BannaOj, then by admitting that everyone is complicit aren't you saying that in fact everyone is a valid target for V and in principle should be afraid because of his actions? Though admittedly the same line of reasoning considers everyone a combatant, so there would be no "innocents" left to be killed in a terrorist action.
While certainly some blame can be placed on the general populus for allowing these travesties to occur, I don't feel we can place equal blame on everyone.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree all blame isn't equal. However since the society as a whole shares *some* blame, the collateral damage while going for the biggest culprits doesn't bother me as much.
posted
V even said in his speech to the people that while it was everyone's fault, he didn't really blame them, it was all in the past, and now it's time to stand up and correct their mistakes. He understood why they did it, and tried to make them realize it too, and understand it, and get over it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It depends on if you think the government was unjust within the film? If you think it was, then no he was a freedom fighter. The only difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is that the winner of the war writes the history that people will remember?
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
