By Rocco Arizzi

Normally, if one wants to get glimpse into what “progressives” are all about, one would have to obtain a copy of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals (maybe from a local ACORN office), gut through a few select tomes from the collected works of Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky, or order the last several seasons of “Law and Order” on DVD. But if you’re looking for a 2 hour and 42 minute crash course on left wing philosophy, you need only visit the nearest movie theater, don some nouveau-gauche black 3D glasses, and watch James Cameron’s “Avatar”.

It comes as no surprise to anyone who pays attention that a Hollywood movie would feature both subtle and overt themes that lean politically left — this happens more often than not and seems to be a prerequisite of screenwriting in the philosophical echo-chambers that big studios have become. But “Avatar” is such a complete encyclopedia of liberal thought that it stands out and bears further scrutiny. I tried to keep plot spoilers to a minimum, but be warned… there are a few below.

The groan-inducing, hackneyed narrative of an imperialistic, militarized technocracy preparing to raze and pillage the sacred land of peaceful nature-loving natives is made evident very early in the film. In order to collect a rare and unfortunately named mineral called unobtainium, Earthlings have invaded the quiet jungle-moon of Endo… I mean Pandora, in the year 2054. Efforts to mine this material threaten to displace local giant blue humanoids, the Na’vi, from their home and ultimately endanger the entire balance of life on the moon itself. The parallels to deforestation here on Earth are drawn conspicuously by enormous bulldozers indiscriminantly mowing down everything in their path.

The Green motif goes deeper than the rain forest analogy over the course of the film into some of the more mystical and paranoid tenets of environmental hysteria. The interconnectedness of all life into a single sentient entity is made into a literal, plausible truth on Pandora to the delight of Gaia-worshippers everwhere. It was even said that the visiting humans had already “killed” their Earth-mother (presumably by driving SUV’s and eating steak) due to their negligence back home. I didn’t stick around for the credits, but if Al Gore wasn’t on there I’ll be a blue-macaque’s uncle.

Of course the motivation for all of this eco-carnage is none other than good old fashioned corporate greed. What movie would be complete without the evil, white, American CEO with nothing on his mind but the bottom line? References to the Na’Vi as savages to be cast aside for the benefit of stockholders are as abundant as they are cliche. The only reason that the Giovanni Ribisi’s cookie-cutter corporate goon character even considers attempting to coax the aboriginals off of their valuable land before using force is to avoid any bad public relations for the company.

Of all the insults hurled in this film, none were more egregious than those clearly directed at the United States military. The predictable barbs at U.S. foreign policy ticked with clockwork regularity: phrases such as “fighting terror with terror” and “shock and awe” belied an obvious but unsurprising political agenda. But the portrayal of the Marines in the film as bloodthirsty brutes gleefully dispatching their innocent, overmatched foe exposes a deep disdain for our fighting men and women. The cartoonish Marine Colonel (The same one we’ve seen in a thousand movies by now) that led the troops was depicted as a cold, cruel, sociopathic war monger.

Even the issue of universal health care managed to make a brief cameo appearance. The movie’s war-injured protagonist, played ably by Sam Worthington, could get an operation to cure his spinal cord injury, allowing him to walk again… but alas such a procedure is only available to the very wealthy on future Earth. I can only assume that the procedure involves embryonic stem cells in some way.

The notions of respect for all life and for indiginous populations are not things to be derided in and of themselves, but in this film they are red herrings. It is the contrast made between those principles and the invading “Sky People” that is so noteworthy. In a way, the corporation and its attendant Blackwater-esque mercenary force become a collective “avatar” of all that liberals hate about America. The military-industrial boogeyman that hides under progressives’ beds at night is gratuitously personified, and the portrayal of the greedy, callous robber-baron is reminiscent of the waning days of MacGuyver.