The results of the presidential election plunged Hollywood, where massively supported Clinton, in a real shock. However, after a couple of months of stars, including the “heavyweights” of modern cinema, ready to go on the attack on so unpleasant to them trump. However, the question arises, not waiting to see whether America changes including in the sphere of relations between the state and art?
Information noise around picking Meryl Streep and Donald trump is not only not subside, but rather, is gaining momentum.
“The recent presidential election exposed the political bankruptcy of the institution of the stars”
In support of the Hollywood stars and icons of the modern actor’s art EN masse was made by her colleagues, including Barbra Streisand, George Clooney and Ben Affleck. Press Secretary of the incumbent President of the USA Josh Ernest said that the actress expressed “carefully thought-out point of view”.
However, his performance on “the Gold globe” Strip of hurt football and mixed martial arts, saying that, if Hollywood to throw out the “foreigners and strangers”, is the only thing left to watch.
Russian officials are also not left behind. The representative of the Russian foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova said that the words of the celebrated actress of that disrespect begets disrespect, and violence engenders violence, to fully belong to yet the current US administration: “Insulted and humiliated, even pointless and getting the opposite result – that is the motto of the outgoing team.”
Public sparring Strip, trump actualized the theme of the extreme dissatisfaction of Hollywood elected President. After the elections in a few weeks she withdrew into the shadows, including obviously under the influence of shock from the fact of the victory trump.
In Hollywood (and in General in California), Hillary Clinton was the undisputed favorite in the presidential race, and gathered around him a very impressive support group in the form of Hollywood stars of the first magnitude. The election campaign was accompanied by loud statements and promises from a number of famous actors to emigrate from the U.S. to move to Canada in case of a victory trump. All the promises were, of course, quickly forgotten when it became a reality, and gave them were forced to give funny explanations.
Now the theme of the battle between Hollywood and the new owner of the White house once again came to the fore, so that the coming years promise that the current conflict will not be the last.
Hollywood has traditionally been a stronghold of liberal ideology (in the American sense of the word). It has long been the most stars and most influential people in the American dream factory joined the Democratic party and its leaders, including the President. Barack Obama with his policies (Obamacare prior to the legalization of gay marriage) embodied the perfect Hollywood President.
Stars to openly support the Republicans in the USA, in principle, much less. The best known are, apparently, Clint Eastwood and Arnold Schwarzenegger. However, even Eastwood, who is known in Hollywood for his outspoken and politically incorrect, was very careful in its attitude towards Trump in the election campaign and, in fact, distanced itself from him. As for Schwarzenegger, he does trump and is in open conflict.
But this topic goes far beyond issues of personal, human or political aversion to Hollywood Donald Trump.
On the one hand, there is nothing special in the fact that the White house is not exactly pretty Hollywood people. In the end, unlike Russia, the USA film and in General show industry more than self-financing and could not afford to love a particular person the head of state, including releasing it to the address pins a greater or lesser sharpness in his work. Hollywood no need to worry about possible cuts in government funding for various projects or government interference in the creative process because the allocation of it budget.
On the other hand, the recent presidential election exposed the political bankruptcy of the institution of stars. During the last decades the political influence of the stars is actively pumped media, the more political and other activism among them is really a traditional popular. Hillary Clinton drew on the support of his candidacy, many of Hollywood “heavyweights”, these household names, that is, people who really know in every American home.
The result revealed quite banal, but almost forgotten in recent years, the truth that fame and popularity does not equal influence. People can love movies, TV shows and transfer actors and Directors, but do not think this is an impressive argument to listen to their opinion on political and other important for their lives and country.
So, despite the fact that hardly antaranews minded stars threaten at least some “repression” for their position, they obviously unpleasant current clash with reality – knowing what place they occupy in the life of American society. An unexpected irony that Hollywood, as a substantial part of Russian intellectuals, too, went to “the wrong people”.
At the same time, despite all of the above, it is possible that friction between Hollywood and the new U.S. administration can take an unexpected turn.
Under normal conditions, this really would not be anything special and it’s not would entail no serious consequences: trump is not the first President who doesn’t like Hollywood.
However, in U.S. history there is an exception to the rule “the government does not intervene – at least openly – in the business of show business”. This is a fairly grim episode, known in history under the name “McCarthyism”. At the end of the 1940-1950-ies and anti – Communist and anti-Soviet paranoia led to a large-scale “witch hunts” in the United States. And Hollywood was one of the most affected by this process.
This does not mean that America expects a return to those dark times. It means something quite different.
First, the United States simply no hard and fast rules and immutable rules of the game. If the state will see the threat of the creative class, it will apply to all the measures deemed adequate to the situation.
Secondly, at the moment, States face a number of serious systemic challenges, both internal and external. Plans trump and his team to respond to these challenges suggest a very strict measures in an obvious way will cause discontent among many social groups in America (including the inhabitants of Hollywood).
In fact, the United States in the foreseeable future will undergo a very dangerous and difficult period with the worsening of many internal conflicts (class, race, etc.), the responsibility for that would carry the President-elect and his administration. In this situation, any “bandwagon”, such as support (even indirectly) some star racial riots, can be critical.
In this situation there is a logical question: if under normal conditions, actively expressed (including in work) dissatisfaction with the personality of the national leader and his policies do not entail any consequences for the creative class, would it remain the same in the conditions critical for the country’s stage of transformation? Not going to see Hollywood and in General American show business one more unpleasant encounter with the reality in which the state will begin to openly dictate what can be said and what is not, and the disobedient to use repression?