Le Titanic nazi – Veni Vidi Sensi #16

Hi you, the propaganda lovers, as I would be a terrible far-left propagandist, obviously As it happens, I’m going to discuss propaganda right now Well… You’ll see things are not so clear I was very happy when, near one year ago, many of you liked the video I made about the Titanic and the conspiracy theories So I told myself to tell you about another aspect of the sinking that interests me a lot : the way of which he was picked up for cinema, and not by anyone : the Nazis Indeed, in 1943, a film, plainly entitled “Titanic”, came out and was shot in Joseph Gobbels’ demand, someone who wasn’t anybody as he was “Mister Propaganda” of the Third Reich So necessarily all of that raises a lot of issues : first, how to use this kind of tragedy in the frame of a far-right ideolgy propaganda ? Secondly : is this kind of propaganda really efficient ? Through which bias it passes ? And I think, for us, in a more interesting way : what is the heritage of this kind of propaganda ? I’m going to answer these question through the frame of this story that I think frankly interesting furthermore [Episode 16] [The Nazi “Titanic”] [Thanks to Malte Fiebing-Petersen, from the German association of the Titanic, for having provided one great part of the images illustrating this episode,] [and for this book about the 1943 Titanic film, a canonical source of information about the topic.] [The Titanic, a buoyant topic for cinema] Firstly, I’ve to show you to what extent the Titanic’s tragedy is linked also to cinema as it happened in 1912 : a moment when cinema began to develop seroiusly so you can find a lot of shot news images By the way, the Titanic itself was shot ; well… there’s only one extract – a few seconds during the end of the construction There’re also other extracts of its twin, the Olympic, which have been used a lot while being indicated as the Titanic ones, to give a bit more class and fame to them Anyway, already before the sinking, the ship has been immortalised on film rolls And straight after the sinking, anew, as soon as april or may 1912, by the way, films about the Titanic was prepared There was several : two as soon as spring 1912 The first one, very interesting, is called “Saved from the Titanic” ; you can’t watch it anymore as the copies have been destroyed by a blaze in 1915 so at first glance all the copies of the film have been lost But what’s very intersting and makes it’s still recalled nowadays, is that it was shot with Dorothy Gibson, as main actress, a silent films actress, whose career stopped quickly after that, and a passenger of the Titanic who survived the sinking, by the way she appeared in the movie with the dress she wore the night of the sinking in order to push realism to the end At first glance, it was a means for her to exorcise what she lived Plus, it seems his boyfried of the time, a director, was quite interested to shoot the story fastly Finally, the film was a story of the sinking told by this woman ; she tells to her lover and her family Evidently, this quite-short movie had a big succes at the time, but only bills and promotional images remain so anybody will never have the chance to watch it again Another film, this time shot in Germany, called “In Nach und Eis”, which means “In Night and Ice” ; this is the same thing, came out in summer 1912 ; this is a sort of feature film, a big production for the time, it lasts more an half an hour You can also find the great clichés about the Titanic story : the captain dying as a hero at the end, the radio operators working to the end, the ship’s luxury By the was, it was shot partly on a German ship of the time So this film played also on the sinking and the emotion it stirred up And as it happens, we thought a long time this film was lost until 20 years ago when it was turned up ; so you can even see it today in a restored version on YouTube So already from the beginning there was a tragedy which has marked the artistic world In the 1920s, there was also a big production for a film called “Atlantic” : in this instance, it didn’t named the Titanic, but well… a luxury ship touching an iceberg is quite clear And in the same way, this film has been shot with huge conditions as there was at once an English and a German cast

to shoot two films with different actors in order to the film to be broadcasted on both sides of the Channel, so it was quite interesting So I arrive in 1943 with the issue of the Titanic in Germany [The roots of a project] In the 1930s, a new trend about the Titanic’s sinking appeared aroused by a book by Josef Pelz von Felinau, an author who wrote actually a novel, which was supposed to be the ultimate summa, at the time, about the Titanic for the Germans It must be said that the access to archives was very limited at the time, obviously : most archives are in the UK or in the US so the Germans had a few access It must be said too that the access to witnesses was quite limited Yet, the Germans thought they had an ace witness, a certain Max Pittmann who affirmed to have been an officer on the Ttitanic It’s interesting to note his name was “Pittmann”, with double “t” and double “n” And indeed, there was on the Titanic a third officer whose name was Herbert Pitman, with one “t” and one “n”, really British Actually, the German one took advantage of the likeness between both names to set a swindle up, recounting he was anofficer on the Titanic and his authentic story By the way, he prefaced Felinau’s book, which shows he had set his swindle up well, so it gave an historical endorsement moreover as the officer of the Titanic had prefaced the book So it was totally phoney but thanks to that this movement already existed in the 1930s It’s true the Titanic’s story has something buoyant anyhow : it’s shows the clash between mankind and nature, eventually The greatest technial creation of mankind which took a giant ice cube : there isn’t any other metaphor more beautiful to depitct the clash between mankind and nature ; mankind’s pride faced to nature’s reality So that has a very important meaning, and a meaning that carries quite much, universally, but it had a particular resonance in Nazi Germany So in the early of the 1940s came the idea to do a propaganda film around that It stemed from Felineau’s book, by the way ; that has amazed a lot when it was discovered since Felineau was in all likelihood Jewish and stopped working with the production very quickly, but there’s the first script he had prepared found annotated by Goebbels, so there was really the connection between the book and the film but of course the film, reworked by the Nazi propagandists, had really a tone that would’ve been anti-capitalist, so in the Nazis’ mind, anti-capitalist meant anti-Semitic That would’ve been also anti-British In this goal, the film had a scriptwriter, Walter Zerlett-Olfenius, a fervent Nazi, so everything has been set to create a script which would’ve corresponded to the Ministry of Propaganda’s expectation [The Titanic, a political symbol] Then, you could ask what was the interest for the Nazis to make a propaganda film about the Titanic’s sinking To do this, I’ve to come back to the context, 1941-1942 It was a moment when one of the main enemies of the Nazis was the Britons The UK was bombed a lot at that moment, and the Britons posed a problem from the war propaganda standpoint For the Poles, and wider eastwards, it was easy to play with the ancestral hates of the Germans regarding the Slavs, for the French, there was also an old rivalry, for instance with recovering the Alsace-Lorraine But for the Britons, especially the English, remained more a “brother” people for the Germans By the way in the early the Nazis would’ve liked the UK to make peace fastly so they could’ve turned to the Soviets The problem was the Britons kept on fighting so the Nazis had to unite the Germans against this enemy that is not as “hereditary” than the other ones So an anti-British propaganda film had a sense It had a sense and it was very practical to show the Britons to be a form of enemy Yet, the history of the Titanic had the interest that the ship was British, a sort of symbol of anglo-saxon capitalism however its passengers came from everywhere : especially in the third class, there was many people coming from the Axis countries, even though, of course, the Axis didn’t exist at the time : there was plenty of Germans, people coming from Austria-Hungary, there was a lot of Bulgarians,

and finally, all these people, even the Scandinavians, could be connected to the Germans, to create at last a leaning with the “nice people”, the “poor Germans”, “the victims of the greedy bad Britishs’ rapacity” That appreade a lot in the film for example with the main actress, playing Sigrid, a very beautiful woman, of course, also very coveted, and coming from the Baltic states Yet, the Baltic states was allied with the Nazis at the time to fight the Soviets so it worked well In the same way, the hero of the film, the classic stereotype of the guy feeling coming the disaster, who warns everybody they must be careful, but anybody doesn’t listen to him a stereotype as old as cinema, well… he was a fictional German officer in this instance It was inspired by much-vaunted impostor Pittmann, he was renamed “Petersen” so it sounds even more German ; so he’s the officer hero of the film, the one anybody doesn’t listen to but despite everything he remains heroic, saves everybody and tries at the end to make sentence in a trial the White Star Line showing everyting is their fault, it’s the evil British people’s rapacity’s fault In this instance, the villains of the film are the capitalists In the film, the White Star Line has financial troubles and its survival is decided on a terrific broker takeover : if the Titanic wins a speed record, the company is saved and the shareholders happy The shareolders are represented by character Bruce Ismay, the real CEO of the White Star Line, here the real villain, and John Jacob Astor, the richest man aboard the Titanic an American billionaire who becomes there a Lord That’s funny because Astor was descended from a great German line, and then he was turned into a pure sidekick of anglo-saxon capitalism As it happens he didn’t have any link with the White Star Line historically, in fact, but they fixed that in the film So there’re really the bad shareholders ready for anything, actually, any sacrifice, like cutting back on all costs, to make the ship profitable winning a speed record, at the risk of putting it in danger despite every warning The script is quite typical Of course all of that is just hot hair as Ismay, for about ten or fifteen years, and already his father before him, had withdrawn the White Star Line from speed competition It was too much expensive, proportionately to coal price, the more the ships was big the more it was ruinous So much as the other companies kept on making that competition at the time, the White Star Line withdrew since the end of the 19th century That made even though the Titanic would’ve wanted do it, couldn’t have beaten the absolute speed record Even at full speed, it was way below the record of the moment So here is a first point quite ironical as the legend of the Titanic which wanted to beat a speed record, and so on, is false Furthermore, and that’s also interesting, the White Star Line wasn’t listed on the stock exchange Moreover, it had a good financial health when the Titanic was building, by the way it paid it on its own, and it even didn’t need to request the American trust which owned it ; that was discovered quite recently, so this hint shows it had a very well financial health so it didn’t need such a publicity stunt to save this health So this is interesting because it’s not a lie totally brazen actually but something the authors may’ve believed in honestly, that can be found in press earlier and sometimes today in anlyses of the Titanic’s sinking by rule of thumb by people who don’t know well the theme So the german propaganda is also interesting there because it didn’t base only on hot air : it’s completely false but it wasn’t only base on analyses that would be just “Made in Naziland” ; that’s really wider It based on theories of the moments, whether they was scientific or historical and obviously Nazism seized upon them and transformed them but sometimes it didn’t transform them a lot Of course, many of these theories are false or misconceived or transformed, for instance with darwinism So here is something important to note : the building up wasn’t made only with hot air but also with other things, even when they’re totally false [A chaotic film directing] Once the script was written the film had to be shot Then occured the first problem In the early of 1942, the budget was estimated to 3 million marks, but it was way exceeded a priori The second problem raises a question : how could a blockbuster be shot

when Germany was at war with almost whole Europe, even the whole world actually ? How was it possible when an offensive is made against the USSR, the US just went in war, Germany suffered bombings…? Well, despite everything, the film is directed quite spectacularly and with many means For instance, they made a quite-honourable model, honestly it wasn’t bad, especially when you know people who made it didn’t have the ship plans, it looked good A big model on a pool, put on rails so it could move but also sink as the interest of the Titanic’s model is to practise the sink So from this standpoint, the special effects was quite spiffing for the time The film wasn’t “cheap” at all, the Ministry of Propaganda especially offered plenty means for the project, so it didn’t trifle with it The director was Herbert Selpin, who wasn’t really a great Nazi neither a pro-militarist as you’re going to understand, then again he really ned to work and Selpin took the piss out of the authorities really so he could have right to shoot on a real ship so it became more realistic That’s how the shooting took place on a docked liner, the Cap Arcona I’m going to digress about this liner because its story is very interesting and very linked to Nazism The Cap Arcona was built at the end of the 1920s to serve South America It went from Germany to South America and in the early of WWII, this liner, as may others, is thus requisitioned and transformed in a war aim as it became a school for submariners At the end of the war, it was linked to one of the worst tragedy of the war end, one of the biggest horrors in the midst of Nazism’s ones : the evacuation of a concentration camp, when a big part of the prisoners was stuffed on several ships The Cap Arcona recovered at least 5,000 of them It was in the harbour, in the early of may 1945, the very end of the war It’s supposed the ultimate aim was to drown the prisoners while scuttling the ship offshore as all rescue means was had been removed But actually the Nazis didn’t have time to do that since an attack of the Royal Air Force sank the Cap Arcona with everybody on board A very few people could escape and anyhow even one part that escaped by swimming prisoners, gaolers or sailors, was blazed by the planes In total, at least 5,000 deaths just for the Cap Arcona tragedy and several thousands on ships around So this was a complete horror ; by the way, the Royal Air Force pilots learnt only decades later they killed prisoners so this was quite awful But in 1942 the Cap Arcona was just berthed, and turned into a submariner base training on the liner so Selpin got the right to shoot scenes in it, especially the much-vaunted liner-evacutation scenes, from this liner But that caused problems because especially then, any night shooting was impossible as a night shooting makes light and the naval base is often the target of bombings in the night so it was out of question to shoot at night That was quite annonying because the Titanic sank between midnight and 2 a.m., so the scenes should’ve been shot by night The other problem was that there was on the same ship very pretty actresses and very young and very handsome submariners so all these people began to get it on with quite a lot, by the way the actors and the submarines got bladdered together so they come into the shooting totally pissed and they wasn’t capable of reeling three lines off, the shooting ran late a lot and was extremely hellish, the relation between, on one hand, the militaries and, on the other hand, the film production became tense, and, as I said you, Herbert Selpin wasn’t a manifest Nazi, moreover he was basically anti-militarist, at first glance He ended up blowing a fuse on the shooting, insulting the liner captain, telling that Wehrmacht was shit anyway, that Germany was going to loose against Russia necessarily, a lot of things that wasn’t acceptable in the Nazi world Finally, when the shooting on the Cap Arcona was finished, at the end of July 1942, everybody went back to Berlin to shoot the studio scenes and then, in all likelihood, Seplin rowed gradually with the scriptwriter, I remind the latter was a fervent Nazi, and ended up rowing too many So the scriptwriter moaned to a SS who worked also to the management of cinema affairs, finally Selpin was called in to the Ministry of Propaganda

then he was arrested, and shortly afterwards, he was found hanged with his braces in his cell Well Did he commit suicide or did somebody make his death look like suidice ? The question is still discussed today even though it’s unlikely him to be helped to commit suicide as long as in the same time Goebbels had to tackle a similar suicide in the cinema world, a few time before, that sparked off a lot of rumours So maybe he didn’t want to add one more and maybe Selpin just killed himself Anyhow, the subject was declared totally taboo on the shooting set and another director was found to replace him, a young promising one, Werner Kingler, who made a good career after the war, and to whom it avoided to go to the front, so it was just as well Similarly, the shooting was made also by quite a few French technicians, actually French prisoners of war who worked in the cinema world before the war, so they have been requisitioned So French people participated in the shooting and narrated it afterwards Finally, the shooting was finished, Goebbels could watch the first versions of the film : he thought the panic scenes was very convincing but however thought the actors played woefully But at the end of 1942, the film was ready to be broadcasted But the atmosphere had changed a lot and things was really complicated with broadcasting [Censorship and broadcasting] Indeed, in 1943, the film posed enough problems to Gobbels so the première took place not in Germany but in Paris And eventually, the film wasn’t broadcasted in Nazi Germany Why ? The reasons are quite speculative First, it’s known at this moment the Ministry of Propaganda was bombed and some film copies have been lost so this excuse has been often used to justify the absence of broadcasting But actually there was broadcasts afterwards, in Paris, so it’s not enough to justify this However, maybe above all Goebbels wasn’t satisfied by the film’s aim and message First because it was 1943 : things began to go ill for Germany, which lost on all grounds, so the fact of showing Ismay, aboard the Titanic, ready to accross the Atlantic flat out without worrying about the risks, eve if he chucks it against a big ice block, can pass for a not-subtle metaphor of Hitler making hurry Germany to disaster without worrying about consequences So here’s probably one of the reasons that was decisive about the fact the film wasn’t broadcasted As far as in bombed Germany, a disaster movie isn’t the thing people would’ve wanted to watch And generally, maybe the propagandist aim of the film was failed The film shoul end with scenes of the White Star Line’s trial as Ismay was saved by the brave German officer who wanted him to pay for his crime, and the trial ended with Ismay’s acquittal, of course, as “the judeo-anglo-saxon capitalism always copes” And there would be some text screens showing the capitalists was really awful and many good people, especially German ones, was dead The problem is this message is drowned by the emotion aroused by the film I mean in a disaster film, you’re with the ones who may die firstly, and finally you don’t pay attention really to the villains What matters above all is the harship people are living So rather to create a situation like “we, the nice ones, against them, the villains”, it created a general empathy for people on board So maybe Goebbels thought this film wasn’t the propaganda film he had wanted So that may be why the film hasn’t been broadcasted It’s interesting to note the film hasn’t been lost for all that since the copies have been recovered by the winners and from the 1950s, the film was broadcasted in East Germany by the Soviets Indeed, it came at the right time because when the film is removed from its most outrageous scenes, even scenes that don’t make a big difference by rapport to the original film, the film isn’t great shaked from the propaganda standpoint and finally the message enters well into the Soviet message of the time Eventually, it works very well for being anti-capitalist and anti-British So the film is broadcasted in East Germany and came within the local scope really But there’s something more interesting, don’t believe this was just between the Nazis and the communists and finally they’re all the same, it was also considered to broadcast it in West Germany in the 1950s Finally this wasn’t made because the UK yelled

But from the 1960s, once the West Germany occupation was over, the film was broadcasted without any problem because finally, for the German republic, a bit socially conservative but also a bit reactionary without being Nazi, the anti-British, but above all anti-capitalist, film’s aim, a run-of-the-mill anti-capitalism it was also accepted finally The film was really accepted Eventually, the heritage of the film isn’t so linked to Nazism, it was rather a film which had many broadcasts under many ways Once it’s removed from its most outrageous passages, the film becomes quite malleable ; that’s something very interesting I think because we often imagine propaganda as very outrageous, but there it’s subtler, at least enough so it could be broadcasted everywhere By the way, the film remains watchable in its shortened version As I haven’t watched the long version, the “Nazi” one, I can’t really judge the differences, but I read the work of someone [Malte Fiebing] who saw bot versions and compared them and I rely on him on the fact that finally even the total version isn’t as outrageous as it can be feared so it can be rather adapted to other ways of propaganda That’s interesting to see that finally, the Nazi speech has anchorages in reality I’m going to revisit it [The heritage of the film] Because this Titanic film has an heritage that doesn’t stop with Nazi Germany Actually, you can find really quickly films about the Titanic For instance, one 10 years later, also plainly entitled “Titanic”, shot in an atmosphere totally opposed to Nazi Germany, I mean Hollywood And what’s interesting from the propaganda standpoint, I know that only the communists and the Nazis would do propaganda, but nonetheless, this one, in the frame of the McCarthyist US, also quite socially conservative at the time, the film conveys a certain number of values Well… The film had the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and I really don’t understand why because… watch I, honestly it’s sidesplitting and that’s not intentional First, the special effects age very ill, but also the dialogues are sometimes so caricatural that it drove me to cry laughting But what’s interesting is that there’s a pile of stereotypes : the ageing couple where the wife wants to go because the husband isn’t ace, but finally the husband has such an heroic death and becomes such a good father in the last seconds of his life that eventually the spectator is so sorrowful and tells itself that they could’ve a great life together, and the wife is very sad because, well, his death redeems passed violences ; the alcoholic priest, disowned by the Vatican, but finally, this is the same thing, he sacrifices his life for God’s love, so it redeems the whole rest This two-bit moral, at once religious, conservative about family and so on, is present a lot and it’s very interesting to watch it too The film released in 1958, five years later, is more interesting ; made in the UK, it was adapted from a reference book, at the time, about the Titanic’s sinking, “A Night to Remember” by Walter Lord, an historian who had collected plenty records, and as it happens most of them are true, even if he was fooled by impostors And this book was adapted to cinema very quickly, because many people liked it, so in this case, there was really the yen to do something very historical : some sets had been reconstituted from the plans, a surviving officer, a real one this time, had given his record and brought his advice, there was a survivor of the sinking who rocked up on the shooting while he was 70 and tried to gatecash on the set, telling he wanted to sink with the Titanic a second time, he may be quite a funny one In short, this was already more serious Guess what : in this film, some shots come from… the Nazi film Well… The shots aren’t particularly connoted actually these was just techincal shots of the model, shots of the ship’s flood It lasts only a few seconds, you’ve to look sharp to spot them, but that demonstrates the Nazi film had been made with adequate means so 15 years later it remained usable in a leading feature film But you know the film which recovered the most the Nazi film The film is terrific, Céline Dion sings at the end and it hurts : James Cameron’s film It’s undeniable Cameron saw the Nazi film

and copied a lot of passages He copied a lot of more-or-less-innocent scenes but you can see the similarities when you watch both films A sub-plot with a stolen necklace then the person accused of the thief isn’t the good one ; a blue diamond – this can be found in both films ; a trapped traveller who sees the water rising, and someone releases him with an axe, this can be found in both films A heroine in love with a man but who has to marry another one because that’s what her parent wants, this can be found in both films Finally, the heroine embarking in a lifeboat, watching the man she loves when this one doesn’t leave, this can be found in both films I could do a series as there’re quite a few share things and a quite clear inspiration at once in the script, at least some aspects, and in the staging, but also in a certain political view Without having made anti-Semitism, of course, Cameron is convinced his film, “Titanic”, is “almost communist” according to his own words Indeed, there was social classes in the Titanic and they fought for surviving, so this was the class struggle Well… I’ve made an article to revisit the idea of Titanic and class struggle as it had made “Le Monde diplomatique” laugh a lot And I understand it… Communism seen by Cameron is like Karl Marx reread by Casimir Very… Very basic : “the rich are bad when the poors are kind-hearted,” “and they know well how to enjoy” “when the rich spend their time thinking you’re the dog’s bollocks” “and it’s very annoying with them…” “And the poors may well be quite brave” “but they’re the victims of the bad richs fighting for surviving beofre them…” Well Here’s a view share by both films actually and that’s interesting : stereotypes pass on from one film to the other one, but reality is often subtler than this So the political messages of the Titanic’s sinking are subtler than this so once again I refer to the article I’ve just made reference In Cameron’s film, character Bruce Ismay who becomes a conceited idiot, a tosser who wants to beat a speed record So all of that is also very forced and you can fin a lot of things that was in the Nazi film, even if the caricature isn’t the same way and even if the whole is removed from the anti-Semitic impact of course That implies it explains why the 1943 “Titanic” could’ve been reused in East and West Germanies because finally its anti-capitalism is sweet and not much else An anti-capitalism which can satisfact almost everyody, from Mélenchon to Asselineay, if you go in the current French political spectrum, because it consists in only telling the rich are bad and that’s all So it doesn’t reach to criticise the system, of course : the Nazis never think with systems, they just say it’s the Jews’ fault, the Americans’, the Britons’ They think only in terms of “them and us” and simplifications like “they’re bad and we’re nice…” And I think it’s interesting to note to what extent this thing surpasses ideologies because it’s there you can see some things, such as today with plenty far-left anti-capitalists but who can be easily tempted by the other side (far-right) by the very simplist rhetoric of the 1%, that is sometimes dangerous too because it can imply and avoids to understand the realities of capitalism’s working Capitalism isn’t just the 1% but the fact that even when you’re a SMB boss, you’ve got a domination relation with your employees, even though you aren’t part of the 1% So you’ve to look deeper into than believe these simplistic analyses which suits finally rather far right, generally Then people to whom capitalism means before anything else Rothschild, Soros… In short, oddly, the coming names are the ones of Jews Things like that Or capitalism is represented with claw-like fingers, because why not…, without being conscious it refers to a very connoted iconography So I think this film is also a warning to remember the Nazis had anchorages in reality, that, as Johann Chapoutot demonstrated well, when you read his book and not settle for insulting him on Twitter like the so-called “philosopher” Vincent Cespedes, Chapoutot did demonstrate Nazism wasn’t only inspired by German racial theories but it took also ideas in colonialism from other countries, in the US Segregation,

in darwinism, precisely Spencer’s social darwinism, a quite obvious diversion of the theory of evolution, but that you can still find today Eventually, it took plenty theories in many things So today, when some bring eugenism out again with many good intentions, well, that’s the same kind of things, be careful, the Nazis wasn’t the only ones having this idea, even if they pushed it further So I think the film calls this mistrust : if you watch it, you can see thus the Nazi propaganda isn’t necessarily caricatural at the same level as the film “Jud Süß” it can be much subtler and much more clever and finally, what the historians specialised in propaganda show too, is that propaganda works above all on people already malleable in this way I mean if you’re far-left, feminist, anti-racist, you can watch Éric Zemmour 24/7 without end up thinking like him ; quite the reverse : you would be even more annoyed by him Whereas if you’ve already accepted a few bases of his ideas, not necessarily very shaped, just, for instance, a racist uncle making jokes during the meal, and it makes you laugh a bit, in this case, if you guzzle somme Zemmour everyday, you do willl end up thinking like him much easilier, that’s going to reinforce you Nazi’s propaganda work the same way : it’s not made to brainwash totally-averse people ; those ones are rather sent in camps, or they flee before it goes tits-up The real propaganda’s aim is rather to convince people who, through their world, family, education too, a lot of things, are already likely to adhere these principles People opposed to can’t be conviced by propaganda So in the case of the 1943 “Titanic” actually, I could even ask if it’s really a propaganda film Yes it’s as long as the Ministry of Propaganda banked on it really but not to broadcast it, so that proves it didn’t reach its aim On the other hand, it’s possible to tell about a message film, but actually “message film” is very stupid because even “Petit Ours Brun doesn’t want to lend his toys” carries a message which affirms : “if you don’t want to lend your toys, you’re a fucking moron” “and you’re going to wind up alone,” “and it’s funnier to lends your toys.” So if there’s a message even there, that means there’s a message everywhere And that’s why the arseholes yelling that Hollywood is politicising, becoming a real Social Justice Warrior and so on, and regret the good old times when video games and films was apolitical, actually these arseholes didn’t understand anything Art is always political even when the creators aren’t conscious to be so, by the way In this case they just support a dominant system without thinking really actually, they didn’t even ask a question But at any rate, I think there’s a film, you can watch on YouTube by the way, that doesn’t have necessarily as much as the (Nazi) connotation you can think And I think that’s what make it more pernicious, and that must be a warning for us : the harmful ideologies don’t always come with a great ostentation When they do, you can see them far away and be careful They become more dangerous when they come discreetely, much more while leaning on things we agree, because finally, in the Titanic story, it’s true less rich people died than poor ones So telling all of that was the bad and egoist rich’s fault is easy to affirm if you don’t look deeper into the case The problem is this is one thing on which you don’t need to be Nazi to agree, but once you agree about it, the fact telling this was totally the British capitalism’s fault so the Britons are bad, is just the next step on which it’s easilier to go then, once you’ve been prepared, and to tell that there wouldn’t have any difference between the Britons and the Jews, there’s also only one step to accross and as you’ve been prepared by the previous ones, it evolves easilier So I think we must be careful with that Propaganda isn’t necessarily something much that makes laugh, not necessarily the very kitsch Soviet posters you can see in textbooks, but much subtler things, much more reusable with other aims, as is evident from the fact, as I told you a Nazi film can be reused in East and West Germanies, two places theoretically opposed from the ideology standpoint, and from both side had a certain success and speak to people for different reasons So propaganda doesn’t have necessarily the forms you can think

We’ve not to trust it under any form, the less it’s much, the more it’s dangerous ; I think this conclusion is important I let you with this and I hope also thus that a film, or widelier a speech, that claims to be anti-capitalist hasn’t necessarily laudable intentions ; being anti-capitalist is one thing, but you may it cleverly And that’s also an aim of the channel giving you speeches more toned than simplistic anti-capitalism Because becoming a circumspect anti-capitalist is bloody better