Tuesday, July 28, 2026

All Art is Propaganda: Reflections on Orwell and Netflix Noir


 July 28, 2026

Finnish title screen for Deadwind – Fair Use

Born in 1942, a month after Pearl Harbor, I was unable to experience the Thirties directly, but I experienced it vicariously in the afterglow of an explosive era rattled by the Spanish Civil War, the anti-fascist cause, the young Black men known as “The Scottsboro Boys” and lefty books by writers such as Howard Fast (Patrick Henry and the Frigate’s Keel ), Erika Mann (author of School for Barbarians and the sister of the German novelist Thomas Mann) and the songs and music of Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie and Lead Belly with his 12-string guitar. I plead guilty to nostalgia for a time and place I never actually knew and that can be as dangerous and addictive as any drug.

I remember my mother, a CP member, telling me about battles with landlords and about a performance of Clifford Odets’ play Waiting for Lefty which brings to life a group of New York taxi drivers and their cause. At the end of the drama, actors on stage, along with members of the audience who cry, “Strike, strike, strike” which made me want to go on strike. I would not do that until 1968, a good year to go on strike.

I spent much of my boyhood waiting for Lefty, or someone like him and eager to meet striking taxi drivers. What I got was Beckett’s existentialist play Waiting for Godot, and later the TV show Taxi. In the 1950s I wanted to go back to the 1930s when, my mother explained, art was supposed to advance the class struggle and unite the exploited and the oppressed against the exploiters and oppressors. I cheered Rebel without a Cause, which was better than no rebels at all, and The Wild One which was superior to the Doris Day/ Rock Hudson kitsch movie Pillow Talk.

In college I accepted and echoed George Orwell’s notion that “All art is propaganda, but not all propaganda is art.” The trick, if you can call it that, was to make something that was both artistic and propagandist and didn’t compromise one or the other. Orwell’s notion landed me in trouble with the anti-communist ex-communist professors at Columbia who hailed the Orwell who gave the world Nineteen Eighty-Four not the Orwell who wrote Homage to Catalonia, an imperfect work that captures the factionalism that afflicted Spain during the civil war.

Professors such as Lionel Trilling endorsed art for art’s sake or art that gave the appearance of being apolitical such as the novels of Henry James, but were embedded with messages about class, sex and money and about the American bourgeoisie and the European aristocracy. In 1968, when those same professors denounced the student strike at Columbia, I endorsed “agit-pop” as Yippie Abbie Hoffman called it, a contemporary version of agitprop, which included guerrilla theater actions like tossing money to the floor of the NY stock exchange and running Pigisus, a pig for president. In the 1970s I also wrote leaflets and pamphlets and aimed to walk the walk that journalist John Reed had walked when he left bohemia in Greenwich Village, bounded to Russia and chronicled the Bolshevik Revolution in Ten Days that Shook the World, a classic of reporting about revolution.

These days with a kind of “quiet desperation,” as Henry David Thoreau would call it, I follow my own drummer and look for both agitprop and agit pop and for forms of cultural expression that are both artistic and propagandistic. I look closely at film noir which I once assumed was inherently subversive, but which now looks and feels like it has found a respectable nitch in mass media empires like Netflix. As Jack London, the author of the dystopian novel, The Iron Heel, observed, “Yesterday’s heresy is today’s orthodoxy.” Noir is now more than ever before an industry.

Mostly, I don’t find what I want and think I need. Maybe I’m looking for subversive art in all the wrong places, much as the Miss Lonely Hearts of the world look for love and “Mr. Goodbar” in all the wrong places. I have binged on two Netflix cop dramas: Marcella, which is British noir, and is set in London, and also in Belfast, a natural environment for noir; and Deadwind which takes place in and around Helsinki and in neighboring Estonia, with the Estonians cast as the baddies.

Both Marcella and Deadwind feature fearless and seductive female cops who break the law and who are played seductively well by two actresses (Anna Friel in Marcella and Pihla Viitala in Deadwind) who inhabit a wide range of emotions and attitudes, from rage to tenderness and madness.

In old noir from the 1930s and 1940s, the women characters were almost always the “femme fatale” (beautiful but deadly) who seduce and mislead male detectives like Sam Spade (Humphrey Bogart) in The Maltese Falcon and Jeff Bailey (Robert Mitchum) in Out of the Past. In the third series of Marcella the undercover woman detective doubles as the femme fatale. In Deadwind the female cop is a step-mother and a killer who trusts no one, takes the law into her own hands and shoots and wounds her male partner in an attempt to rescue her kidnapped son. Marcella has far more fucking than Deadwind; Deadwind has more violence than Marcella.

Both shows make attempts to create believable evil characters who are drug dealers and petty criminals as well as characters who belong to wealthy, powerful families of the sort lodged in Roman Polanski’s neo-noir classic, Chinatown from 1974. Chinatown focuses on the twisted incestuous relationship between a father (Noah Cross) and a daughter (Evelyn Cross Mulwray), who is also the mother of their daughter. Polanki’s LA is polluted, toxic and poisonous.  In Deadwind and Marcella the dramatic tension is driven by the entanglements that exist between mothers and daughters, with good mothers doing bad things, and bad mothers doing good things.

No one in Deadwind and in Marcella is pure and innocent. Everyone is guilty of something, including the cops. That’s what my private investigator brother told me about the cases he handled, and not everyone, he added, was guilty of the crime for which they were accused. In Chinatown, the political element is water, which makes perfect sense since it’s set in California where water is king. In Deadwind and Marcella, the political element is corporate greed and government corruption, plus the smuggling of drugs and arms across borders and boundaries.

It has probably been unrealistic of me to expect a mass media empire such as Netflix to make and distribute films that are subversive. They probably wouldn’t get past internal censors. If they did, the Trump administration would likely charge them with endorsing terrorism. It’s probably more difficult now than at any time in the past 75 years for Hollywood to make a film like Chinatown. Still now and then subversive lines surface. They’re a small consolation.

In Marcella, Marcella says, “rich people don’t go to jail.” The film reinforces her statement. The Maguires— a wealthy, ruthless and powerful Irish family, headed by a matriarch, implodes— Marcella herself escapes with a child who is the only surviving member of the criminal clan and with all their money which she has transferred electronically from their bank account to one of her own. Computer and phone savvy is essential in today’s noir.

In Deadwind a minor character tells the detective’s daughter, who is a drug addict, a drug dealer and a killer, that in the wake of climate change and global warming she ought to stop eating meat and become a vegetarian. Coming from his lips the words sound cynical. “Rich people don’t go to jail” also sounds cynical, coming as it does from Marcella.

The two female detectives, Marcella and Sofia Karppi, both work for corrupt police departments; so they have little or no choice but to work mostly alone, or to be practical and expedient and to team up with tainted officers. Both shows pay homage to the cult of the individual and offer propaganda about the solitary and the lonely souls of the world . Marcella and Sofia are both supercops who, like Superman, fight never ending battles. They don’t travel faster than speeding locomotives or leap taller than skyscrapers, but they extricate themselves from impossible traps, dark prison-like tunnels and labyrinth-like underground passageways.  You want to scream at the screen, “Don’t go there.” But they go there again and again and have to be rescued. It’s all too predictable,

I wouldn’t mind a Netfix show in which the community plays the part of the detective, solves the crimes, while the terrorists belong to a cabal that includes the fictionalized likes of Putin, Trump, Netanyahu , the corporate heads at Fox and a cast of thousands who cry “Strike, strike, strike” or simply shout “Fuck You.” I’ll probably keep on watching noir on Netflix hoping against hope for something that George Orwell would have raved about.

Jonah Raskin is the author of Beat Blues, San Francisco, 1955.

Pakistan: The Country Both Sides Call When the Bombing Starts


 July 28, 2026

Photograph Source: Kskhh – Public Domain

On Tuesday, as American aircraft struck Iran for a tenth consecutive night, Iran’s interior minister Eskandar Momeni flew to Islamabad. He was carrying a direct message from Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. When he arrived, he sat down with Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir.

Tehran is at war with the world’s most powerful military. Its list of trusted messengers is short. It chose Pakistan.

This is the part of the 2026 war that the daily coverage keeps walking past. The reigning story is a duel: American firepower against Iranian defiance, with the Gulf monarchies and Israel filling out the cast. The actor holding the quietest leverage, meanwhile, is a sanctioned, debt-heavy, non-Arab state that wants nothing the war can hand it, and both sides trust it for precisely that reason.

Pakistan is not a bystander to this war. It is the reason there was ever a pause in it. The memorandum of understanding that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif signed in June as mediator, the ceasefire that held through the spring, the shuttling between Washington and Tehran: all of it ran through a country neither combatant can afford to alienate.

Why Pakistan, and not one of the richer capitals lining up to host talks? Because Pakistan is the rare state both sides read as honest. It shares a 900-kilometre border with Iran and cannot wish the country away. It is Sunni-majority but never enlisted in the Saudi and Israeli project of isolating Tehran. It takes American money and American weapons, yet it declined to join anyone’s war. To Iran, that makes Islamabad a neighbor with no stake in its defeat. To Washington, it makes Islamabad a partner that can actually reach the other side. Very few governments on earth are trusted in both Tehran and the Oval Office on the same afternoon.

None of this is new. When Richard Nixon wanted to reach Mao in 1971 and had no way to speak to Beijing, he routed Henry Kissinger through Rawalpindi on a Pakistani flight. Pakistan was, in Kissinger’s own account, a friend to both sides. It has played switchboard ever since. It has been the channel to the Taliban in Doha, the back-line for messages nobody could send in daylight. Great powers keep a number for Islamabad because they keep needing it.

For 20 years, the Western commentariat filed Pakistan under one heading: problem. Then, last summer, Trump hosted Munir at the White House for lunch, the first serving Pakistani army chief received that way without ruling as a dictator, and told reportersthat Pakistan knew Iran “better than most.” The label did not change because Pakistan changed. It changed because Washington finally needed what Pakistan could do.

The stakes are counted in barrels. Brent crude sits near $90, American pump prices have climbed to $4 a gallon with midterm elections months away, and the fighting keeps threatening the Strait of Hormuz, where roughly a fifth of the world’s oil moves. Iran struck a tanker there this week. The Houthis, Tehran’s allies in Yemen, have declared a maritime blockade of Saudi Arabia. Insurers are repricing every hull that transits the Gulf, and the cost lands in fuel bills and grocery prices from Karachi to Ohio. Every day the war runs, the world pays a toll. The only people working to shorten it are the mediators.

The map of the war is widening faster than the diplomacy can keep up. Iranian missiles have crossed into Jordanian airspace twice in two days, Kuwait says it intercepted drones aimed at its territory, and three more American service members are now dead. Each of those incidents is a door to a bigger war, and each one raises the price of the message only Pakistan seems able to deliver: stop before the war becomes uncontainable.

Here is what the vocabulary of great powers gets wrong. Mediation sounds like weakness, the consolation prize of a state too small to fight. It is the reverse. Real leverage is being the one actor both enemies need in the room. Riyadh and Abu Dhabi can write checks. Only Islamabad can carry a message that Tehran will accept and Washington will believe. That is a harder thing to buy, and Pakistan holds it without spending a dollar or firing a shot.

The work is also dangerous, which is the part that should earn Pakistan respect rather than suspicion. Qatari and Pakistani mediators floated a joint 10-day ceasefire package this week; if it collapses, Islamabad will own a share of the blame. Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei was killed in February in the opening American and Israeli strike, leaving President Masoud Pezeshkian and the leadership in Tehran navigating an opaque decision-making environment. A middle power that wedges itself between a superpower and a wounded theocracy is one miscalculation from being blamed by both.

Pakistan keeps taking the call anyway, because indispensability is the only durable currency a state its size will ever hold, and it has learned to bank it. Standing in Washington, leverage over trade talks, a seat at a table it was long kept away from: this is what the diplomacy buys.

There is a lesson here that reaches past South Asia. The order that lectures the Global South about restraint and responsibility did not prevent this war and cannot end it. The institutions built to keep the peace have been reduced to issuing statements. The people actually trying to stop the bombing are a soldier from Rawalpindi and a foreign ministry in a small Gulf emirate. For a Western establishment used to owning the peace as well as the war, that is an uncomfortable truth.

So, watch the dateline on the next ceasefire, whenever it comes. It will not read Geneva or Vienna. It will read Islamabad. And the capitals that spent two decades trying to discipline Pakistan will have to make their peace with a harder truth: the road out of this war runs straight through Rawalpindi.

This first appeared on FPIF.

Imran Khalid is a geostrategic analyst and columnist on international affairs. His work has been widely published by prestigious international news organizations and publications.

Huxley’s Soma…and Ours


 July 28, 2026

In November it will be 30 years since California voters passed Proposition 215,  legalizing cannabis for medical use. Last Sunday at the state fair some of the activists involved in that campaign were given awards –heavy medals that said “Pebbles Trippet Lifetime Achievement.”

I made the drive to hot, flat Sac to see the trailer of a film about Pebbles and a documentary about the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club, original headquarters of the Prop 215 campaign. Fairgoers were checking out the vendors’ wares and showing almost zero interest in the OGs. Like the “Cannabis Cup” of yesteryear, the highlight of the event was an awards ceremony at which growers were honored with blue ribbons that will facilitate sales in the year ahead.

The show-runners hardly paid lip service to “medical use.” People were enjoying themselves.  So this is our victory, I kept thinking: access to soma that’s safer than Prozac (or was, until Whiteman did to marijuana what he had done to coca and poppies).

 In  Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, one of the slogans promoting soma is “a gramme in time saves nine.” By pure coincidence, probably, Eli Lilly promoted Prozac as”First in line for all nine symptoms of depression.” These were defined in ads as, “depressed mood (sic), loss of interest, fatigue, sleep disturbances, weight/appetite change, lack of concentration, slowness/restlessness, guilt/feelings of worthlessness, thoughts of death.”  Five yesses and you qualify.  Is there an adult in the US who doesn’t?

Huxley was swacked out on mescaline when he wrote his prophetic novel in the late 1930s. He foresaw planetary unity with the rich/poor system in place. Genetic engineering for the sake of “social predestination.” Earlier onset of puberty for the workers. Electroshock in the nursery to create a reflex aversion to books and flowers.

A character called “The Director” explains, “A love of nature keeps no factories busy… It was decided to abolish the love of nature… We condition the masses to hate the country, but simultaneously, we condition them to love all country sports. We see to it that all country sports shall entail the use of elaborate apparatus. So that they consume manufactured articles as well as transport.”

Subliminal messages are played for the sleeping children (who are clones, of course): “Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they’re so frightfully clever. I’m really awfully glad I’m a Beta, because I don’t work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid…” After the Elementary Class Consciousness lesson ends, the subliminal voices adapt demand to supply. “‘I do love flying,’ they whispered, ‘I do love flying, I do love having new clothes… old clothes are beastly,’ continued the untiring whisper. ‘We always throw away old clothes. Ending is better than mending, ending is better than mending, ending is better than mending. The more stitches, the less riches…'”

The universally worshipped figure is Henry Ford, the Elon Musk of his day. The sign of the T is sacred. Vibro-vacuum machines are available. The dissidents are called “Simple Lifers” and get mowed down. (How timely can you get?) 

A wee sample:  “Lennina and Henry were dancing in another world –the warm, the richly coloured, the infinitely friendly world of soma-holiday. How kind, how good-looking, how delightfully amusing everyone was!  ‘A gramme in time saves nine,’ said Lenina, producing a bright treasure of sleep-taught wisdom. Bernard pushed away the proffered glass impatiently. ‘Now don’t lose your temper,’ she said. ‘Remember, one cubic centimetre cures ten gloomy sentiments.’ 

“‘Oh for Ford’s sake, be quiet!’ he shouted.

“Lenina shrugged her shoulders. ‘A gramme is always better than a damn,’ she concluded with dignity, and drank the sundae herself.”

Fred Gardner is the managing editor of O’Shaughnessy’s. He can be reached at fred@plebesite.com