I use my Apple TV when I work out and noticed Gone With the Wind at the top of the home menu.
A quick Google search told me what I suspected. HBO Max temporarily pulled Gone With the Wind so consumers went to Amazon and Apple.
HBO Max dropped the movie for now, but when it comes back, the company will include a discussion about the historical context and denouncement of the racist stereotypes.
Because, you know, no one knows what it’s about or what happened during the time period. We also totally think HBO is racist for airing the classic movie.
Oh! Paw Patrol, another show people have targeted, is in the #5 position for DVD/Blu-Ray sales.
It’s also a top movie on Apple:
Isn’t capitalism awesome?!
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
A great movie, a classic, being opposed by stupid, racist jackasses.
JusticeDelivered: A great movie, a classic, being opposed by stupid, racist jackasses.
Great movie, a classic, and racist in its depiction of blacks and its idealization of the South.
Idealization? You and I apparently watched totally different versions of Gone with the Wind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd7oftWOo8M
Everyone and every group have flaws. So are much worse than others.
Yet, we have one group with really glaring flaws pretending otherwise, while making demands of the rest of us. Very high criminality rate, unprecedented bald faced liars, delusional, comparatively dull witted, demanding that we wash their feet.
Gone With the Wind is a classic, if you don’t like it, then don’t watch it. Do not try to prevent others from enjoying the movie. In the meantime try being quiet and remember to crawl back under your rock.
Next they will be going after Carol Burnett
because of her WENT WITH THE WIND………….
GWTW is such a part of the culture that its absence would leave many references hanging and flapping in the wind with no anchor for reference. Same with Bugs and Elmer. It’s amazing how much trouble some thin-skinned people will go to just to be insulted.
.
But so many of those references are already unmoored. So much of our culture is passing away, being slowly drained by an obsession with youth and a politically correct religion (progressivism).
Make no mistake, these people are not thin skinned. They don’t care about the issue du jour at all. They just love to bully others with claims of racism, sexism, etc etc etc
It was a marketing scheme! And we fell for it!
A marketing scheme for who, though. The publicity certainly didn’t do HBO any good.
HBO MAX is a new service that was going nowhere. Now everyone knows about them. And Amazon is now making a killing too.
I literally wouldn’t make it through the day if it weren’t for the quiet times my 3 toddlers are watching Paw Patrol.
Love it when this happens! It is essentially a way people raise the middle finger right back at the SJW outrage mobs!
gonna try getting it into internet archive but the iso is 42gb so…trying IA bittorrent retrieval now to see if will scrape it correctly
Because, you know, no one knows what it’s about or what happened during the time period.
Actually… LOTS of people don’t have a damn clue about the Civil War and the southern antebellum period leading up to it. Very few understand the internal struggles over secession. Too few understand the place of slavery – the hatred of it even among some southerners.
Context would actually be welcome. Unfortunately, I doubt the context HBO gives it will be helpful or true.
(Yes, there used to be a lot of people who grasped the context of GWtW. Some of those people have abandoned their minds to appease the gods of progressivism. Many have shuffled off this mortal coil – and been replaced with ignorant children to whom they did not pass their knowledge, relying instead on the corrupt education establishment.)
I’m sure HBO Max pulled it because of the scenes of Atlanta burning. Don’t want no Jedi Mind Trick having them burn down Atlanta, Minneapolis, NYC, LA …
I was going to come and say that exact thing.
Another thing – it portrays the South AFTER the War in a realistic light – the south was hurt. It was struggling. It was paying for its sins. Many of the plantation owners DID loose everything. But the way the SJW talk, the South – and slave-owners – never had to pay for their sins. The movie makes you sympathetic to people like Melanie, and we cannot have that.
Also, I always thought Scarlet was the epitome of a strong woman – not a feminist, exactly, but one who did not depend on men. Oh sure, she used them but did not depend on them. And she kept picking herself up and going again, no matter how many times she got knocked down.
My sister-in-law hates the movie because she thinks Scarlet is a snot. She is, but she also loves. She loves deeply, and she will do anything to take care of those she loves.
Morning Shunshine: It was paying for its sins.
And for penance, the KKK lynched blacks, enacted race laws, then erected statues to Confederate figures, ending the dream of equal protection for generations.
All thanks to the Democrat Party, which started the war to keep the slaves in chains.
And come to think of it, the Democrat Party really hasn’t changed much since them. Armed hooded terrorists promoting race war while killing, burning and looting – yup, that is Antifa all right.
Recovering Lutheran: All thanks to the Democrat Party, which started the war to keep the slaves in chains.
Largely correct. The Democratic Party was the vehicle for preserving the institution of slavery, then for the passage of race laws after the war.
It’s an irony of history that the Democratic Party is now home for the vast majority of minority voters.
By this point there are so many Americans who would be utterly bewildered by a movie set in post-WW2 Germany. They would literally not understand what was being portrayed, and why.
GWB: Very few understand the internal struggles over secession. Too few understand the place of slavery – the hatred of it even among some southerners.
The confederates made very clear that slavery was the fundamental issue leading to secession.
Very people people understand that slaves represented a huge capital cost, and that what was being offered in compensation was a pitance.
To be clear, I am not from the south. Historically, the civil war was about economics, most leaders in the north did not care about slaves one way or another. If they had, they would have acted to improve former slaves condition.
JusticeDelivered: Historically, the civil war was about economics, most leaders in the north did not care about slaves one way or another.
The North fought for union. The South made clear they fought for slavery.
The south was fighting because they were facing an economic disaster. If the north had offered more reasonable compensation, the civil war may not have occured. The truth is that mechanization would have ended need for slaves.
Both north and south paid dearly, something which our current crop of grifters give no consideration. These people make McCarthy look like a saint.
It looks to me like it may take another war to settle the matter, I have a pretty good idea how that will work out.
JusticeDelivered: The south was fighting because they were facing an economic disaster.
What economic disaster? You mean the eventual end of slavery? You mean returning the freedom they stole to their rightful owners?
JusticeDelivered: Both north and south paid dearly, something which our current crop of grifters give no consideration.
As already noted, penance for slavery included the KKK, lynchings, race laws, and generations of continued oppression.
Articles of Secession:
The Texas perversion of the Declaration of Independence into white supremacy is particularly ghastly.
HBO Max don’t know nothin about birthin no babies
GWTW is a great movie. Sadly, a lot of young woke idiots will never see it because they’ve been told that it’s evil because it glorifies slavery. But while there’s some truth in that*, what the film says about slavery is only a small part of what GWTW is.
*Obviously, the movie fails to depict any cruel aspects of slavery. Other than Scarlett’s slapping of Prissy after Melanie goes into labor, there’s no suggestion of any mistreatment of slaves (is there?). So it doesn’t represent slavery accurately, and for that it certainly constitutes “bad history.” But so what? If it were realistic in that sense (or in any number of other ways), it wouldn’t be GWTW. It’d be, I dunno, 12 Years a Slave or something.
The idea that the world depicted in movies has to be “the real world” goes against the whole idea of movies. And the idea that audiences must only be shown “real” depictions of the world or they’ll be unable to separate fiction from the truth goes against the whole idea of human intellect. Seriously, who watches GWTW and thinks, “yeah, this is what life was really like in the antebellum South?”
It was realistic though, from the POV of the slave-owners; or the dream of what they remembered their bucolic antebellum life to be; and that part of the story is short. The first 10 minutes, maybe before news about the war breaks out and all the men rush off to defend the Glorious South. And why not – they also had a story to tell. It doesn’t mean their story was invalid. It is just different.
Many, perhaps most slave owners weren’t cruel, and didn’t mistreat their slaves. The movie portrays their experience fairly accurately.
It isn’t a documentary about slavery, so there is no reason it should depict every possible aspect of it. But how many movies that are about slavery omit the better parts because they’re less spectacular? How many mention all the slaves who were sent to live in the city, to find jobs and housing and run their own lives more or less independently, and simply send a percentage of their earnings back to their owners? That wasn’t freedom but it was a far cry from the plantation.
Milhouse: Many, perhaps most slave owners weren’t cruel, and didn’t mistreat their slaves. The movie portrays their experience fairly accurately.
They could sell your children if you misbehaved, or if the master falls into debt. Harriet Beecher Stowe covered this aspect of chattel slavery in her novel, Uncle Tom’s Cabin.
Milhouse: It isn’t a documentary about slavery, so there is no reason it should depict every possible aspect of it.
Gone With the Wind is part of the Lost Cause narrative that was a foundation for Jim Crow, and still has currency today. “We treated our slaves well,” “You must be firm with inferiors, but you must be gentle with them especially darkies,” “The war was over tariffs, not slavery,” etc.
I’m not sure the Lost Cause narrative was the foundation for Jim Crow. I would assume that abject racism was the foundation for Jim Crow, whereas the Lost Cause sought to justify the Civil War in terms of states rights and NOT on racism. But putting all of that aside, even if GWTW depicts the Civil War from a “Lost Cause” perspective, so what? Does that mean people shouldn’t be exposed to GWTW for that reason? What about actual Lost Cause histories (i.e., books and essays). Should they be pulled from library shelves and burned? The point is, books and movies that people don’t agree with shouldn’t be censored. People should be able to still view and take whatever enjoyment they can find in works like GWTW, whether intellectual or aesthetic.
Scrape: The point is, books and movies that people don’t agree with shouldn’t be censored.
No one is censoring. Gone With the Wind is readily available from other sources, and HBO Max will soon have the film back in their catalogue.
“No one is censoring.”
What a load of crap.
Indeed they could. And that was frightening for a slave with a kind owner; even when slavery was relatively good there was no security, no guarantee that it would stay that way. But what has that got to do with the topic? It remains the fact that many or most slave owners were not cruel and did not treat their slaves cruelly, so the portrayal in GWTW is accurate.
Milhouse: It remains the fact that many or most slave owners were not cruel and did not treat their slaves cruelly
Chattel slavery was inherently cruel, as documented by Harriet Beecher Stowe.
It is interesting that letters which mentioned early slaves referred to them as being like children, that is consistent with those slaves likely having an IQ in the mid sixties. It is also consistent with the discipline issue. Teen mindset would have been like a 6-8 year old.
Slavery was common, probably going back to the dawn of humanity, people of nearly all races have been enslaved, all except American blacks moved on, in large part because Americans have been willing to put up with their crap. Their current tantrum is alienating the same people who have been willing to cut them some slack. I WAS one of those people. I doubt much sympathy will be left when the dust settles, I no longer have any.
The idea that the world depicted in movies has to be “the real world” goes against the whole idea of movies.
The idea it has to present the entire picture of everything influencing a moment in time goes against the whole idea of stories.
And, in FACT, just how many slaveholders, in FACT, misgtreated their slaves? Slaves provided labor. They were farm machinery before farm machinery was invented. You don’t abuse useful tools.
One does not see Farmer Jed going out to the barn and take a hammer to the engines, blades, controls, and tires of his farm machinery. Why would his mythical great great grandfather “whup” his slaves just for the sake of doing it?
No, I think you’re wrong if you think that taking good care of slaves in order to get the most out of them (I’m paraphrasing) was anything like a universal practice among slaveowners. Slightly off point geographically, but slaves in central America or the Carribean were routinely worked to death within weeks because it was so cheap to replace them. Of course, that was generally worse than what took place in the U.S., but the point remains that concern for maximizing labor didn’t always lead to the best treatment of slaves. Obviously, there was a lot of physical abuse as a means of deterring escapes and simply to get slaves to work harder. There’s no point in denying this. It was a cruel system, even if the amount of cruelty experienced varied from one person to another.
I think we should all be considering rather or slaves who ended in America are better off today than people who remained in Africa? I think they are, just the IQ boost they received here is of great value.
When my children were young, and I gave them a treat with was often meant with a complaint that they wanted more, I explained to them that a better approach was to accept the gift, consume it, thank me, and nicely ask for more. Then I did not allow more at that time. They did learn the lesson.
There were some philosophical dimensions to slavery which are not always grasped by non-historians.
A striking peculiarity of the Southern plantation squireocracy was the conviction that it was the Southerner’s right—more, his divinely ordained duty—to rule. Hence the instant rage across the South when some backwood Illinois yokel was elected President in 1860, rather than a good ol’ Southerner. The issue was not quite the same thing as protecting the institution of slavery, because Lincoln was not an abolitionist (although the Republican party had a strong abolitionist component). Secession began even before Lincoln took office; nobody waited to see if he would do anything remotely abolitionist. But a compromise which never actually existed was understood to mean that the South would rule. And since there was no rational basis for that belief, there was no rational way to convince a Southerner that his idea that he’d been cheated was entirely unreasonable.
Personally, I suspect the strange “right to rule” notion was a natural outgrowth of the good Southerner’s unquestioned right to rule a large slave population. From slaves to small farmers up north, or millworkers or traders, may not have been a large conceptual leap. We rule slaves? Hell, we should rule everybody. Now of course small farmers in the south didn’t have slaves and didn’t share this delusion; they tended to be hostile to the plantation squires. Mountain people were particularly hostile, the premier example being West Virginia. Sherman had some fine Southern troops with him during his march from Atlanta to Savannah; they wanted nothing to do with slavery or any other plantation fantasies. Sherman had in fact spent some time as the head of a cadet academy in the South. It had been founded so that plantation owners could impose some discipline on their sons, who otherwise planned to devote their lives to riding around the fields whacking people left and right with their horsewhips. One of the major outcomes of the Civil War was the destruction of an emerging American oligarchy.
The Friendly Grizzly: You don’t abuse useful tools.
No, you amortize them, then when worn out or acting up, you sell them for scrap.
The Friendly Grizzly: Why would his mythical great great grandfather “whup” his slaves just for the sake of doing it?
Some people do get angry at machinery. Some people do bang on the equipment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9wsjroVlu8
Some people enjoy inflicting pain or raping people they have power over. And some people very rationally “whup” slaves when they misbehave believing this will keep them from doing so in the future.
How long until Amazon bans it like they did the Confederate battle flag? Can you still get the Dukes of Hazzard?
You can still buy the Soviet Union flag, and using Amazon Prime discount, no less. Weird, huh?
Try finding a German flag.
Isn’t capitalism awesome?!
It is . . . until Bezos decides to protect us from it. As he does from time to time.
So two properties that have come under fire have shot up in sales. It makes one wonder whether the impetus for the fire came from the property owners themselves. It reminds me of the era when book publishers would proudly label their products as “Banned in Boston”, so as to boost sales everywhere else (and Bostoners could always buy them under the table, at a premium).
Oh, good grief! If the pearl-clutchers and perpetually offended people weren’t enough, along comes the mad quoter to show all of us, in our own words, how wrong we are according to his opinion.
I never had any intention of ever reading or watching “Gone With The Wind”. It’s a four hour movie and I don’t have the attention span to sit that long to watch a movie even with breaks. I can’t imagine how boring the book will be.
However, because of HBO Max’s stupidity I have decided to buy this movie, TWICE (a streaming copy and I found a reasonably priced Blu-Ray which will never be opened) and I bought the book. It is my way to rebel against the nonsense and foolishness of the Left, who are far worse than any Christian Puritan could ever dream of being. Please. These guys are destroyers. Destroying everything in sight because it goes against their sensibilities and warped sense of morality.
To which I say, “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn” about your sensibilities and warped sense of morality.
Watch it on double speed……
With all of this banning of anything considered racist, I have not heard anything of a demand to ban or change the face of cash. After all, it depicts presidents who owned slaves. A convenient oversight.
I’m pushing 50 and have never seen it, I’ve seen parts of it, I just couldn’t get into it. However I do love a good SJW backfire.
Before you hate on my classic moving tastes; I own Casablanca and watch it once a year along with It’s a Wonderful Life. No worries, they’ll be coming after those movies too for their multicultural issues some day soon.
Yeah, I’ll be 50 later this year. I’m sure you recall Gone With the Wind was on network TV once a year, as was Merry Christmas Charlie Brown, and The Wizard of Oz (There was always a commercial when the lion runs off from the wizard. I wonder what the woke find wrong with THAT movie). Anyway, I’ve probably seen GWTW 10 times, but in pieces. I have never sat and watched the whole enchilada. Man, pre-internet times were so much simpler. Organizing a mob with a social app post was an impossibility (folks managed to to that extent anyway). Kids could go out and play without parents worrying over their children being abducted. I got away with quite a bit of mischief as a teen that would be impossible in this era of cellphone tech; we’d leave the house and no one knew where we were, imagine that! People had COMMON SENSE! If only the young could see what we have.
isn’t the purpose of art to stir the emotions? to stir one’s own imagination? to kindle(or re-kindle)one’s childhood sense of wonder?
gone with the wind succeeds famously on many levels–that it is a topic of intense discussions nearly eight decades after its debut is a testament to its quality, to the skill and dedication of its creators
in the best explanation have ever read in print, in a short story by an american author from the 50’s, a character observes that: ” all science, at base, is an effort to explain a miracle we will never understand and art is an interpretation of that miracle. ”
indeed