The Wind that Shakes the
Barley
Cillian Murphy, Padraic Delaney, Liam Cunningham
Freedom fighter (def.): One engaged in armed rebellion or resistance against an oppressive government.
Terrorist (def.): Individuals who use serious violence against military, police, government and especially civilian targets by irregular combatants to advance a religious, ideological or political cause.
Ever heard of a little thing called the Boston Tea Party? Terrorist act or not? As the British marched to Lexington and Concord, colonialists hid behind trees and walls taking potshots at the Redcoats and then would runaway. Terrorist act or not? Rioting in major east coast cities that often led to destruction of private property and the deaths of innocent civilians and soldiers. Terrorism? At least that is what the British thought at the time. Our founding fathers were labeled at the time as smugglers, cowards, thugs, and terrorists who clearly a majority of individuals living in the colonies did not support. It would be hard to argue that there was not a bigger bunch of terrorists to ever come down the pike than the South during our American Civil War. Yet, there is not a more fictitious and romanticized movement, complete with Gone With the Wind garbage than these individuals who fought for the freedom to own people. John Brown was considered a hero in the North and a terrorist in the South. Can you tell me who made the following speech in 1945. “All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. This immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. … Nevertheless, for more than eighty years, the French imperialists, abusing the standard of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, have violated our Fatherland and oppressed our fellow-citizens. They have acted contrary to the ideals of humanity and justice. In the field of politics, they have deprived our people of every democratic liberty.” Answer: Ho Chi Minh. Was he a terrorist or a freedom fighter? Nelson Mandela, Ghandi, and Menachem Begin, were all considered terrorists at one time. What about someone like George Custer who attacked an otherwise peaceful Indian village? Our embassy in Iraq will be the size of 80 football fields and cost half a billion dollars. One of the eight permanent bases that we have built is 15 square miles in size, complete with a Pizza Hut and car dealership. We are planning to be there for a long, long time and don’t think the Iraqis don’t know this. We overthrew threw a dictator because he operated torture chambers and built huge palaces, and to the everyday Iraqi Joe, it looks like we have just put out a sign that states “Under New Management”. It is why I believe that there are terrorists in Iraq, but we have to admit that some of those picking up arms against us consider themselves freedom fighters. I am not saying that we are not in the right. Rather, things get dicey when you try to find the moral high ground and the winners ultimately decide who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter.
Ireland is a case in point. Most of my life I have looked at the English as pretty great people and could never understand why the residents of Ireland would engage in terrorist attacks against them, especially because like most Americans I got my history of the conflict from the movies. Yet, when you start to study the situation, the more your head hurts and the more confused you get. Since the 17th century, the Irish have been the sand in the English shorts. In time, inspired by the American Revolution, the Catholic population longed for greater autonomy and self-rule. By 1798, they were in full rebellion and difficulties have continued ever since. The English considered the Irish animals, the lowest thing a white man could be. It is why many Irish coming to America were greeted with signs that stated, “Irish need not apply.” Who’s to bless? Who’s to blame? Who really knows? You know that nation building works so well.
The Wind That Shakes the Barley takes place in the 1920s, shortly after the Easter Rising of 1916. The movie opens with Dr. Damien O’Donovan (Cillian Murphy – Batman Begins, 28 Days Later) is preparing to leave his Irish home to further his career by working in a London hospital. In the process of making his good-byes, he stops by the home of Peggy (Mary O’Riordan) when a bunch of British soldiers (called Black & Tans) arrive to announce that all public meetings, including sporting events, are banned. Things turn ugly, when Peggy’s grandson , Micheail (Laurence Barry) is beaten to death in a nearby barn. Much to the delight of his brother, Teddy (Padraic Delaney), Damien decides to stay in his homeland and join the Irish Republican Army. He is soon operating as part of a guerrilla band and steals weapons from a police barracks. These weapons are used in the slaughter of some British officers. The British seek reprisal and round of the usual suspects, including Teddy. They torture him and Teddy barely escapes with his life. On the lamb, things get much more complicated for the brothers when the British Government and representatives of the Irish Republic reach a treaty that leads to a two-state solution. Catholic Ireland would be given its own country while a smaller section of the country, Northern Ireland, where most of the Protestants live, would maintain home rule within the larger Irish Free State, unless it opted out. Not surprisingly, the Protestants decided they didn’t want to be a part of the larger state. One little problem, there were a lot of Catholics living in the area around Belfast, who found themselves with no voice in their government. Soon, the brothers find themselves on different sides of the issue.
It is a sympathetic look at the problems in Ireland, and clearly, it has an unfair portrayal of the British, but then again, what person whose country is being occupied does not have an unfair opinion of the occupying power. It is the way it is. Occupiers can have all the best motivations in the world and things usually go badly. Just look at American history. In Cuba, we went in to overthrow Spanish rule and protect American sugar interests. Promising to get out as quickly as possible, even passing a law, the Teller Amendment, promising to remove all our troops once Cuba was free and democratic. Not so fast, we decided to stay and later decided to install a series of dictators. Reaction: in 1959, Fidel Castro, when seizing power, repeatedly stoked the fire of American resentment. Iran, in1953, was a democratic nation in the Middle East, but the government decided to nationalize the oil industry, which we didn’t like. We installed the Shah. He is overthrown in the 1970s and now we have the problems of today. Every time our Imperial Hubris steps in to fix a problem and interfere with the natural drive towards democracy, we make things worse for ourselves. Imagine a world with a Democratic Iran and no Castro, a world where Ronald Reagan had not supplied Saddam Hussein with chemical and other weapons, had not financed and trained Osama Bin Laden and his followers, and had not monkeyed with so many countries in Latin America.
Verdict: An Award Winning Film