Posts tagged ‘liberty’

April 10, 2013

“The Great Dictator 1940” – Until Now

by mkleit


In 1940, Charlie Chaplin’s controversial speech in the famous movie “The Great Dictator” was marked as one of the best that were ever done.

Whether it was by context or content, the speech showed Adolf Hitler, the leader mimicked by Chaplin, in a very “big brotherly” mood and seemed more gentle than aggressive as is shown by media.

From this, the first remark that would catch a viewer’s attention in Chaplin’s speech is the first phrase said: I’m sorry, but I don’t want to be an emperor. A phrase which contradicts with Hitler’s aim in authority and he was considered the most famous dictators ever.

Another aspect would drive the viewer’s attention would be emotional baggage placed in the words such as brutes, greed, humanity, freedom, democracy, and slavery etc… He used reasonable arguments to support his speech such as referring to the Saint Luke’s Bible while appealing to values of brotherhood, the people, and liberty.

Moreover, this would probably be the most concrete factor of performing a great speech: timeliness. If a person would hear Chaplin’s speech in 1940 or nowadays, the same aspects mentioned in the speech would be applied to any dictator and would still have the same effect at any time.

In the field of imagery, Chaplin succeed in reflecting the “big brother” image by wearing a normal soldier’s uniform and not one of a general filled with stars and medals. But he kept the look of the leader by standing firm and still until the end of the speech, where he finished it by raising his arm when screaming the phrase: “let us all unite!” to send the crowd into raptures, while relying the whole time frame of the speech on facial expressions and head movement, which actually gave each loaded word its right and power.

The power of several words was key features of the dynamism of Chaplin’s speech. In general, it was very systematic. In that sense, the speech was organized in a way that it went from broad to specific.

At first, Chaplin talked about humanity and the power of goodness and unity, to then point, with his face, towards the soldiers and talk about liberty and fighting against slavery; the speech was finished with a return to the first point mentioned: freedom and liberty.

From that explanation, the speech would mark repetition of words such as machines, brutes, dictator, progress… and a perfect ascendance in pitch, tonality, and pace, at some parts of the speech, but mostly during the break of dynamism at the middle.

Yet the speech also marked a sudden cut, where Chaplin returned to the original tone and re-mentioned the supreme values which he was using at the beginning.

Probably the speech would not be perfect, but the level of emotions embarked in Chaplin’s is outstanding as well as phenomenal. The speech that was given in 1940 mimicking Hitler would still be applied now and referring to nowadays leaders.

The usage of the fear factor, emotions, values, logic, and supremacy are perfect examples of this. Nevertheless, Chaplin was perfectly able to embody the dictator of all time.


Charlie Chaplin from the film The Great Dictator


Speech text:

“I’m sorry but I don’t want to be an Emperor — that’s not my business — I don’t want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone if possible, Jew, gentile, black man, white. We all want to help one another, human beings are like that.

We all want to live by each other’s happiness, not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone and the earth is rich and can provide for everyone.

The way of life can be free and beautiful.

But we have lost the way.

Greed has poisoned men’s souls — has barricaded the world with hate; has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed.

We have developed speed but we have shut ourselves in: machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical, our cleverness hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little: More than machinery we need humanity; More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.

The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world, millions of despairing men, women and little children, victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me I say “Do not despair”.

The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress: the hate of men will pass and dictators die and the power they took from the people, will return to the people and so long as men die [now] liberty will never perish…

Soldiers — don’t give yourselves to brutes, men who despise you and enslave you — who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel, who drill you, diet you, treat you as cattle, as cannon fodder.

Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. You are not machines. You are not cattle. You are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don’t hate — only the unloved hate. Only the unloved and the unnatural. Soldiers — don’t fight for slavery, fight for liberty.

In the seventeenth chapter of Saint Luke it is written ” the kingdom of God is within man ” — not one man, nor a group of men — but in all men — in you, the people.

You the people have the power, the power to create machines, the power to create happiness. You the people have the power to make life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy let’s use that power — let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give you the future and old age and security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie. They do not fulfil their promise, they never will. Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people. Now let us fight to fulfil that promise. Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness.

Soldiers — in the name of democracy, let us all unite!”

September 4, 2011

The “Rael” Standards and Optimism

by mkleit

The Israeli reality is far from caring for the citizens in their state. The extremist Jew government’s interest lies in its extremist Jews and religious fanatics, neither the city of Tel Aviv nor Haifa, not as if the security of the state is not a matter of concern, but Ariel settlers of Hebron are a main focus as the state of Israel itself…

Palestinia Libré - Alaa Kanaan

As Palestinian extremists refuse the state of Israel and recognize it as an occupying state, Netanyahu has the same view in favor for Israel. Moreover, the maintenance of the support of some Palestinians, Arab, and Muslim nations and vanishing the idea of mutiny against the Jewish state. But we’re taught since birth the hatred towards Israel and not recognizing its state.

Eventhough, truth is much more evident when Palestinians have recognized the 1967 borders of Israel as valid to place their security forces as well as placing their state laws in. In 1993, the White House hosted the late Yasir Arafat, PM Rabin, and former US president Clinton. The reason behind that: signing an agreement for cross-rights recognition between Israeli and Palestinians. Since then, that agreement was not tampered until a few months ago when Netanyahu the Oslo agreement would be revoked if the Palestinians go to UN.

The advantage coming out of this step to Palestinians is their ability to solve their problems with Israel on a political level with a different perspective. How? UN would recognize the Palestinian state so they would have ability to negotiate with the problematic issues with Israel not as a supplement state of a stronger one, but as an equal state in control.

The status quo is an important asset to Netanyahu’s government, regardless of the backfire that could resort to having all neighboring countries as harsh enemies, losing strategic positioning with Turkey, and preventing a critical war with Iran. Its main goal is continuing to impose the “Vito” of Obama’s government on the Palestinian demands in the UN council.

September 20th 2011 is the date when the UN will vote over the recognition of the state of Palestine, but the thumbs are skeptic in getting up when it comes to the US and its allies votes. Netanyahu posses a strong lobby roaming the White House and other presidential and royal houses in control of other nations, but Palestinians still builds hope that the US and its counterparts of nations would be the minority in the vote for recognition which would strengthen the Palestinians and would probably place doubts in Netanyahu’s strength to carry on his mission.

But the hopes are beyond real, they are just “trampolining” on a thin line between success and defeat. Nevertheless, the people of the occupied nation are still hanging by threads of optimism and anticipation to return back the state that has been taken from them since 1948 and spray on the blood covered walls: Freedom-Pride-Palestine

On Towards Filistin - Mhamad Kleit

July 23, 2011

The “Same” Change

by mkleit

Basis of the Code of Ethics

“Arab media coverage is like a person on a plane looking down.” One Sudanese Member of Parliament and political activist Salih Mahmoud Osman said when criticizing the Darfur coverage. Media is a tool to sustain, as well as it is an instrument of change, and a catalyst to flourish freedom and uphold it. But the way that informative media is used decided nation courses, dictatorship or egalitarianism to be more specific, giving both sides the same time to express, articulate, and thus unify. Apparently, the action justifies the intention, in times of turmoil, journalists, whether they like it or not, are the followers of their leaders. By will or not, they are bounded by certain parameters given from higher authority, as Edward Herman and Naom Chomsky declared in Manufacturing Consent:”The media serve, propagandize on behalf of, the powerful societal interests that control and finance them.”

Domestic coverage requires the pursuance of instructions, as mentioned before, when Jordanian journalist Sameh al Mahariq said:” As long as you don’t write about the king, the military, religion or sex you can cover anything you want.” A small amount of news is to be given, senseless and mindless, just to keep hands off certain issues and distract the audience of true happenings.

Nevertheless, some progress in Arab media coverage is viewed, though the ratings are low. For one issue, you have 22 Arab states covering, thus 22 different agendas, but the type of reporting mainly, if not always, stays one. Hide the truth to avoid problems. Amani Tawil of the Al-Ahram Center for Strategic Studies explained the previous circumstance:”Selective information. Television reflects the special agenda of each government in the Arab region, while newspapers have a tendency to marginalize stories about other Arab governments.” It’s a non-democratic system they are in, so the expectations of journalistic freedom are too close to bite the dust. Even though in certain cases journalism is done properly, but it depends on the predicament. When Arabs are being shot and killed, no journalist can be objective, for a reason that it’s a humane sentiment to protect the helpless. But if a phone call from some politician, ally to the owners of the broadcasting channel, the sense of humanity is left behind the rocking doors of the news desk office, alongside the pens of truth and blank papers that are supposed to filled with reality coverage and honest reporting.

%d bloggers like this: