Dinesh D'Souza's documentary, "2016: Obama's America," has brought in 6.3 million dollars at the box office this weekend, surprising and irritating some commentators, many of whom have dubbed the film as "Anti-Obama."
The Hollywood Reporter notes that the film is officially "the top conservative documentary of all time." Not too shabby for a film whose main advertising was done on AM radio and word of mouth. As could be predicted, the reviews are not exactly charitable, despite the clearly painstaking attention to detail and lack of judgement in the film. The criticism is vague and unsubstantiated.
Based on D'Souza's New York Times bestselling book, "The Roots Of Obama's Rage," the documentary explores Obama's mentors and traces his life from childhood, focusing on the influence of the president's absentee father, who died in a car accident in 1982.
The LA Times reports that when the film took in $2.4 million when it debuted in Houston and "expanded from 169 theaters to 1,091 locations this weekend. In total, the film has sold $9.1 million worth of tickets." This, despite the fact that several reports state that the film has been "hidden" from the public. The Examiner, for example, reports:
...many people who want to see the movie are having a very difficult time finding where and when it's playing in their area. Reportedly one of the most popular sources for movies, "Yahoo! Movies," didn't have the movie listed in its database as well as many other online sources available to movie-goers.
This is not surprising, as many academics and journalists share the same anti-colonialist view as the President. This movie, to them, is offensive because it exposes that view for what it is: flawed.
Anti-Colonialism
If this movie could be summed up in one word, it would be "anti-colonialism," which could be used interchangeably for "anti-imperialism". The word evokes a strong emotional response in many who believe that rich countries rape poor countries of their resources and leave them in poverty, while only getting richer themselves. For those with this worldview, the only "justice" is for rich countries to give to the poor countries; contradicting the American ideal of promoting prosperity of all countries.
The "eat the rich" mentality displayed loudly in the Occupy Movement also pushes this view and fits hand in hand with anti-colonialism, as if taking the money from successful producers is somehow going to solve poverty.
Thomas Howell explains,
"Whatever its factual weaknesses, it is an emotionally powerful vision [anti-colonialism], to which many people have dedicated their lives, and for which some have even risked their lives. Some of these people appear in this documentary movie, as they have appeared throughout the formative phases of Barack Obama's life."
Although the film has been deemed "anti-Obama" by such sources as the Huffington Post, the Hollywood Reporter, the Wall Street Journal, and ABC News, the documentary presents more as a matter-of-fact probe into Obama's early years, and shows that the influential people in Obama's life are all of the anti-colonialist world-view.
With this anti-colonialist vision in mind, one that is taught (hammered) in universities today, D'Souza shows that some of the seemingly perplexing decisions made by the president, eg, the "apology tour," and the return of the bust of Winston Churchill, make perfect sense.
This mentality of anti-colonialism also explains Obama's promotion of drilling for oil in other countries, while issuing an oil moratorium in the United States. Interestingly, many of the documents related to the oil moratorium are still in dispute. Instead of building upon the greatness of America, Obama's goal is to level the playing field, or "spread the wealth".
During a recent interview with Laura Ingraham, Dinesh D'Souza explains:
I think that Obama actually has a very different goal for America than we often think. He wants to redistribute money away from America and toward the rest of the world. He wants to block oil drilling over here but promote it in other countries. He wants America to have a smaller footprint in the world and specifically in the Middle East.
Ultimately, the documentary paints a picture of the president as one who has been heavily influenced by an anti-colonialist mentality that has been pervasive throughout his life.
Watch the trailer here:
**Photo Credit: 2016themovie.com
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 55
Its something though, that this countries own citizens put this president in the highest office of the land,just to tear it down... Its almost like the old commercial of the American Indian looking at all the trash that is littered about with tears in his eyes... I too, feel the same way.. With tears in my eyes. So many people fought and gave up everything throughout our History just to have it taken from their ancestors.. What did they die for, if not freedom from government, tyranny, unfair taxation, free to worship as they choose...This is what we are.. The Constitution was made for us... not for a bunch of foreign influenced ideas...
I say this to Obama and his cult followers... Leave America alone... If you dont like it here or its policies then the solution is simple.... Leave... You are still free to go... BUt remember one thing, do you think that in another country you will have the same freedoms as you have here? I think before, all is said and done, these followers will be begging to come back to the good ole' USA...
So many people fought and gave up everything throughout our History just to have it taken from their ancestors.. What did they die for, if not freedom from government, tyranny, unfair taxation, free to worship as they choose...This is what we are. Beautiful!
If you dont like it here or its policies then the solution is simple.... Leave... You are still free to go... BUt remember one thing, do you think that in another country you will have the same freedoms as you have here? You are on a roll!!!
Thank you, Vickey!
THIS, ladies and gentleman, is the ROOT of President Obama.
This country elected a man we knew NOTHING about.
Bad, big mistake.
Hmmm, and here I thought Right is Right and Left is Wrong.
It sure can't be Left is Right and Right is Wrong as that makes no sense at all.
Right is Right and Wrong is Left?
Right is Left and Wrong is Right?
Aw, nuts, now I am REALLY confused! I am lost out in Right field somewhere. Oh, wait, maybe I am lost out in Left field. No way, I am surely lost out in Wrong field!!!!
There is British Colonialism and there is Colonialism. The Colonialism I know that my country undertook was one of integrating into the community and helping that country to develop, Yes we did it for a reason and it could be called a selfish reason as it made Britain the country that it became but at the same time we left most country's far better off than they were when we first colonised them when we left. When the time came, we gave back those country's their independence and they chose when they became independent to stay part of the UK an you can see that in the form of the Commonwealth country's all 54 of them and all of them voluntary. So Britain must have done something right in its Colonial past
Then there is the colonialism of the South Americas where they decided to not integrate but to exterminate the population which most managed to do with dexterity that would have made the Nazis proud.
It’s interesting to see the present President’s stance on colonialism as his ancestors came from Kenya and Kenya of course is part of the British commonwealth. One notable person in all this is his Granddad who was actually part of the Government system and who actually betrayed his employers in the Mau Mau rebellion and was supposedly given a few good beatings in the two years that he was detained. I am under no illusions that this did not happen when I first Joined my country's Armed forces the Mau Mau rebellion was still raw in many British soldiers minds and many had fought in that rebellion and the atrocity’s that were carried out by the Mau Mau on white families and many black family's as well something that has been conveniently forgotten were mind blowing that would I think make the average psychopath feel sick so he got of lightly when they gave him those beatings.
It’s also an interesting fact that the rebellion held back Kenya because the rebellion was so sickening that the British Authority's gave Kenya its independence far too early.
To be quite honest I see Obama as one of the biggest bigots and racists in America.
It’s also interesting to note that that when a photo appeared from an artist in Spain that showed Obamas wife's head on a semi-nude image of a black slave questions have been asked as to the racist Europeans. On my Facebook page last night this question was asked by an American African person!! Wow, do Europeans anywhere not respect black people in general and black women in particular anywhere on the planet?
http://www.kulturekritic.com/2012/08/news/why-did-spanish-magazine-publish-photoshopped-image-of-michelle -obama-as-half-naked-slave/
It did not cross this persons mind that he was insulting every European this side of the pond and he himself could be classed as a racist. When I pointed this out I was met with! Are you actually in private a racist as from experience from living with RACISTS my whole life that is one of the things they do go on the attack against someone who calls them out.
I find that these people do this sort of thing quite often whenever you question what they are saying or doing an I find it quite repulsive. It’s as if they CAN SAY ANYTHING I LIKE ABOUT YOU, BUT DON'T DARE SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ME or I will call you a racist. It actually beggars belief
In the entire known history of the planet, ONLY the British built an empire by building schools, building roads, building railroads, and in general built the empire WITH THE HELP of the population of the colonies. As a result, it became the largest empire in history, an Empire upon which the "sun never set."
All other colonizing powers failed because, when they colonized, they DESTROYED the population needed to build their empire. Those colonizers were limited by the size of the colonizer's own population as to how large an empire they could build. And they were also limited because they were always at war with the local populations, spinning their wheels instead of going forward.
As a result, the British, though small in number, were able to build a world girdling empire, the greatest in the history of man. Were they perfect???? Hell, no!!! No human is perfect. BUT THE BRITISH AS A WHOLE TRIED TO BE PERFECT.
Funny story, I received a private FB invite to a group for my university, that was only open to people who have been in an "ivy league" school and the name of it actually included the word "elite". I am invited to these parties where people discuss "the masses" with disdain.
These pompous asses, they are bringing this country down with their pretend "expertise" that is rooted in indoctrination and we must stop it. THESE are the fools teaching America's youth and we are losing our place in the world! THIS is who goes to anti-capitalist Occupy rallies. These people do not believe in America.
"There is British Colonialism and there is Colonialism. The Colonialism I know that my country undertook was one of integrating into the community and helping that country to develop... we left most country's far better off than they were when we first colonised them when we left. When the time came, we gave back those country's their independence and they chose when they became independent to stay part of the UK an you can see that in the form of the Commonwealth country's all 54 of them and all of them voluntary. So Britain must have done something right in its Colonial past"
Britain does have a much better track record of leaving behind functioning socities, often democratic, in their wake as their empire dissolved than anyone else. Still, you paint a rosier picture than it was. As much as the Spanish/Portugese colonization of South America killed off most of the native dwellers the English/French colonization of North America took the same approach to the aboriginal population here, even deliberately spreading small pox to kill off an estimated million 'Indians'.
Which brings us to the actual Indians, whose country was not merely given back to the Indians when they chose, but had to be struggled for before England would back away. England also used their tactic of divide and rule in India, leaving a fractured population that has fought several wars over the divisions exacerbated by British machinations.
In Ireland they did far, far worse. Ireland was oppressed as heavily as any nation on Earth ever has been for more than 700 years. The Irish fought for their freedom from Britain repeatedly over those centuries and even when they finally succeeded in breaking free (and did not remain a part of the Commonwealth, which is not the same thing as being part of the UK) the British imposed an arbitrary and artifical division on the Irish which only now, a century later, is beginning to settle the violence which that division sparked.
mmerlinn ?. Aug 28, 2012, 12:30pm EDT
BUT THE BRITISH AS A WHOLE TRIED TO BE PERFECT.
No, they did not. THough on the whole they did a lot better, what they did in some of their colonies. especially Ireland, was deliberately done.
And don't forget how their taxes to pay for European wars fomented the American Revolution.
Good question about which dream will we follow into 2016. I choose the dream of the Founding Fathers!
Keep up the good fight.
Have you seen it, Renee?
Renee's article made a lot of comments about the criticism directed at the movie, which would have been clearly baseless had she not seen it herself. Since she did not make that clear, and since she made a point of saying that it was hard to find information on where it was playing, it was a natural question to ask. Why she chose to ignore it I have no idea, but that only served to strengthen the impression I had that perhaps she had not and was only blowing smoke.
But I have no egg on my face. I made no accusations, only asked questions. And that is what anyone wanting to draw informed conclusions does: they ask questions. Once the answer finally came forward I dropped the matter. There was apparently no fire behind this smoke.
;-)
It presents Obama's views, that everyone basically agrees, are negative (for the country).
Why do so many want to shoot the messenger?