Nathan Key

Don't Panic

​
Contact Me

What do Terminator and Matrix have in common with Hotel Rwanda?

5/29/2009

 
Picture

What do Terminator and Matrix have in common with Hotel Rwanda? Namely, they all deal with power struggles. OK, it may seem rather strange that I’m drawing a correlation between these films, but bear with me for a moment while I explain my position. It seems to me that most conflicts eventually rest on one of the following two areas: Values and Resources

Value conflicts are wars and battles that spring from a clash of ethnic, ethic, or moral disagreement. While there isn’t anything particularly wrong about an individual defining themselves by their nationality, religion, or ethics, once they take a stand on these things it inevitably causes small conflicts. Even at the most basic level, when one assesses themselves by a certain criteria; he tends to assess other people by these criteria as well. So if I’m proud of my American, Christian, and Pacifist ways I may hold myself in an elevated position over someone who doesn’t share the same beliefs. Even subtle criticism like this lead to bigger conflicts as I interact with those I disagree with. The outworking of my own pride can eventually become war if it’s not tended well.

Watch the Terminator series with this sort of idea in the back of your mind, and you’ll see the direct correlation between Skynet’s decision to wipe out humanity with this value conflict. The self-aware AI, of course, makes the jump from criticism to war much faster than humans would, but the principle seen in the film is very similar to what we can read into historical events like the Inquisition, the Holocaust, and Hotel Rwanda.

Each of these are value-based conflicts where the self-proclaimed superior/powerful group does its best to eliminate or convert those who don’t meet their standard.

Resource conflicts are any kind of disagreement or battle that deals with scarcity. When resources are unlimited and there is plenty of land, food, etc to go around for everyone, competition isn’t nearly as fierce and normally doesn’t result in war or death. But as soon as there are limits in place, humans always try to get as much as they can- even at the cost of others.

When we watch ads from two politicians, trading jabs, it’s basically the same thing. There can only be one President of the United States and so anyone running who wants to win will do whatever they can to grab the most votes. Votes are the limited resource.

I used to work for Universal Orlando Resort where our theme parks were continually “at war” with Disney for market share. We wanted as many tourists as possible to visit our park- rather than Disney. Time was the resources we were fighting over.

If you read into the history of Matrix movies, they basically boil down to a war based on resource problems. Robots need power and after humans nuke the sky- crippling the machines’ ability to gather solar power- their only source of fuel is the humans themselves. Humans are only enslaved because the robots want to continue functioning.

So as we watch movies like Terminator, Matrix, and Hotel Rwanda, I think it’s important to get to the bottom of conflict if we really want to avoid the violence depicted within each film. The bottom line is, we still need to answer these questions if we’re going to do anything about wars and interpersonal conflicts:

What can we do to lessen the value and resource conflicts before they grow out of control and threaten our very lives?

Jeff
5/30/2009 04:51:25 am

Jeff link
5/30/2009 04:55:07 am

Hmm. I don't know how that happened above: my name just appeared there, I think somehow the submit button got pushed before I wrote anything. Anyway...
I wonder about something:
Could you point to a movie where the conflict is not about value or resources?
I think that conflict is necessary for story, and I'm not sure that there's any other fundamental root to conflict other than values or resources... I think, therefore, you could connect any movies ever made based on these criteria.

FTP Blog link
5/30/2009 05:59:09 am

That is a very challenging question, should one consider the nature of human beings. However, when one looks at the fact that human's are learning beings, beings that are able to create relationships between elements of his/her surroundings, relationships that can always be improved; perhaps it is then pragmatic solutions gradually reveal themselves. In addition, we are social creatures. So that, in my opinion, it is better for a community of humans to thrive towards fulfillment; cooperation in lieu of competitive survival. If resources are scarce, is it not insulting to our intelligence to fight each other for them? Is it not noble, however challenging, to share; be it resources or values? Just because you see life one way, doesn't mean that you are right or know it all, or that another point of view is wrong. We are creative enough to bridge across differences; to realize that differences make for uniqueness. To learn, to further into the garden of knowledge, so to speak. To see that knowledge is but a way to keep us engaged with reality? While I believe that there are principles that are timeless; I also believe that knowledge changes. For instance, what would The Inquisition say to G. Bruno, Galileo and countless others should they come to face each other in today's world? After all the conquests of Genghis Khan, Napoleon, or even Alexander the great; what did they come to learn before their deaths [at least according to some sources]?

We can create a world where conflict need not give way to atrocity. Conflict arises out of our uniqueness; however it is no necessary call for blood or suffering. Part of the problem is the will of those in positions of power and influence. Another part is that the people do not understand or appreciate the power they do have over institutions. A lot of us are asleep.

This is a very in depth question, and I'm not sure I can even begin to answer it in one sitting. It does provide something for the brain to munch on though.


Comments are closed.

    About Nathan

    Nathan Key likes to think about faith and philosophy and talk about it with others. He lives with his family in New Hampshire. He doesn't always refer to himself in the third person.

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.