The West wing: Charlie on Terrorism and Gangs
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- This is the episode titled "Isaac and Ishmael" which isnt an actual episode of the west wing but rather an episode that aired just after the 9/11 attacks where the cast talk about the various issues that surround terrorism. In this clip Charlie talks about the relationship between terrorism and gangs in America. I really like this episode and encorouge everyone, even if you are not fans of the west wing to watch this episode in its entirety to learn more about terrorism. Season 3 Episode 0.
“Men are men, and men will seek pride.” I believe Charlie’s point is if someone cannot find a positive source of dignity, then he will find it in something negative.
Even if, and especially when they can stand upon someone else who they perceive to be weaker. It strengthens their own image of their power. And power is the ultimate goal.
Well said. I give you an A
Spot on mate.
Explains the Andrew Tate followers of today
You might have missed it because it's not part of the main continuity of the show; it's from a special episode they did right after 9/11.
Charlie represented the line between civilized America and total anarchy. He was what everyone in the West Wing fought for, and maybe half of them knew it. Maybe. If we lose the Charlies of this world, we lose America. We lose the Rule of Law. We lose faith in our better angels. Charlie is the load bearing stud that holds the roof up o'er the White House.
just say u meant blacks.
@@Juzgames you are an idiot
@@Juzgames Wow, this is a first for me. I've never seen anyone announce so quickly and so readily that they're a card-carrying, bigoted, racist klan member....
I see charlie as the reason why the president and his staff are in charge of the nation. And the reason why they do what they do.
You lost the rule of law some time ago. And there are way too many Charlies on death row.
This is an incredibly important point. Terrorism is really not about the idea or goal that unites a group. Its about the emotional and psycho-social needs, it fulfills. I truly believe that terrorism is not caused by a political doctrine, or a religious vision. Its a lot like other forms of cultism. People decide to make a moral big leap to validate and justify a violent anti-social set of tactics, because it fulfills a very fundamental need to belong to a very disciplined union of 'soldier-brothers' willing to subjugate everything else and every other loyalty as a constant affirmation of that union. In short, if it was not one cause or one group, they would latch on to another that filled the same pscho-social and emotional void.
That is, in fact, 90% of what makes the extremist groups of the world exist. They continue to exist, because they give identity. Or as Charlie just said, they give dignity. They give, to people who do not have it already, a sense of being, belonging, and connection. Humans are social animals. We must have connections and contacts with others, no matter how introspective or introverted we are. Or how uneducated, naive and ill-informed we are. There are those who are so frustrated at their lack of "something" that they will suspend their ability to logically and critically evaluate whatever is presented them, in the face of having a cohort to which they can belong.
Wow. I think you just explained why MAGA nuts are so blindly loyal.
WOW! I thought I had seen every West Wing, but I must have missed this one! What a great and accurate way to "flip the script" on people's perceptions of gangs and why people join them. As usual - excellent!
Pat Doyle It was aired just after 9/11, as a sort of tribute I think.
This episode was called "Isaac and Ishmael".
Yes it was aired after 9/11, and then shortly thereafter, the WW production disavowed any connection to the episode, walking back many of the points that were made in the process. I remember hearing/reading Aaron Sorkin explicitly saying he wished he never had written it.
It told far too many truths, and got A LOT of heat from many of the interest groups that those on the Left call friends, so they threw the episode under the bus. It is never aired anymore in syndication- that's why many people never have seen it. It is craven behavior, but unfortunately it is who they are.
"Did you hear what Tito said? *Either you're with us or against us. Sure doesn't give you much of a choice does it? And that's how fights start, and gang wars and world wars. And all it takes is two sides who have a disagreement, won't compromise…* This was supposed to be a funny speech by a funny person, a guy who liked to make people laugh. But instead, here I am, crying. His name was Fernando and...he...was killed last night, trying to stop a *gang war.* Fernando used to joke that he wouldn't forget us... when he became famous. *All he wanted was a chance to grow, but a bullet took away that chance.* Well, *maybe he won't become world-famous, but he'll always be famous to his friends”* -Fat Albert, Gang Wars
Sam did get it a little wrong--terrorists can be college graduates who can't get a job they were promised and see the corruption in the royal family who runs their country poorly. In the 1980's, terrorists were college students from the middle class families who turned their back on their "bourgoise" parents, like Carlos the Jackal, and there were doctors who also joined the Palestinian cause, like the PFLP. In the wake of 9/11 we forget what it was like to travel abroad in a
us military uniform or carry an American passport--you were the next to get shot after the Israelis.
Charlie isn't wrong to compare terrorist groups to gangs. the motivation is different, but many european countries shut down their "red army" terrorist groups by arresting them like criminals--which some were when they found money to be made in selling coke and guns rather than robbing banks "for the cause".
Great comment. Those middle class kids often are extreme post-modernist (white) lefties who are more radical than the underprivileged groups they claim to represent. And then there are the white supremacist types. So far left and far right.
1:22 that No Man...was perfectly executed. The door opening sound was uneccesary tho
I watch youtube videos of west wing just to check the comments sometimes and feel good about myself that I live in a world where there are people who have the capability to look at individuals as objectively as possible and defend creeds and ethnicities they do not have any relation to. Be it Jews, Muslims, Christians, or Arabs, Pakistanis, Israelis or Americans, if feels good to read from people made from the same mould Aaron Sorkin, Oliver Stone and countless others are made of.
Faisal Iftikhar Hell's Bells do I agree with you.
In the spirit of RUclips, I must disagree and make fun of both of your funny sounding names. As a human being however, I completely agree and I love you both. You give me hope and that is a precious gift.
Fast forward to 2020 and this country and a good part of the world tearing itself apart. The US has become so tribal I truly fear it may never recover.
@@NT-fo3me especially after the election when trump did exactly what he said he would do!
This is my all-time favorite episode in my all-time favorite show. Well done, West Wing.
Try stargate sg1. Brings some amazing real elements in science fiction. Look up sg1 origin. The way they argue about religion is so deep.
Really? This is your favorite episode from The West Wing? They got several things wrong here.
Beautiful episode.
We need another west wing with Charlie as president.
I would dig that so much. I´d also take Sam as President for the first 4 Seasons, with the whole gang back together and Bartlett as a sort of advisor.
After that, Charlie running and winning. I am in dire need of yet another rewatch.
Goodness, the character would be a good age for it, assuming we can accept the idea of a president under 75 years old.
. We've seen since this episode that anyone from any economic class can be radicalized.
It's a lot easier to "radicalize" people when they're poor. There is a direct line from poverty to extremism that many of our leaders like to pretend doesn't exist, so they can continue to demonize and marginalize the very people their ineffective leadership has failed to elevate. You are right that affluent people can be radicalized too, but they tend to be radicalized by fear. They are made to blame the "other" for any perceived problems in their own lives. It's why so many Americans blame immigrants or the poor (punching down) for our declining economy, rather than blaming the greedy corporate interests and corrupt politicians at the top that are actually responsible for America's decline. Many Americans are a gullible lot, easily manipulated to further the interests of corporations and the ultra wealthy. Divide and conquer, the oldest trick in the book.
Love Dule Hill!!
I want to watch more
Netflix: i can fix that.
Very interesting take.
☮
Why did you cut his speech short? You should have played the entire thing.
I'll have to search it out. Knowing when it was run will help a lot - thanks.
"Isaac and Ishmael" was the name of this episode
At the time this was made, we thought of extremists as coming from places of abject poverty, as they say in the clip. Most of the 9/11 hijackers turned out to be from middle-class backgrounds. I have heard the extremists prey on young people whose families moved and who don't feel like they fit in. It still think it's amazing they convince people to do something so horrible.
They should show this episode to every social studies class in High School.
No, they shouldn't. Aaron Sorkin got several things wrong as usual.
Religious Class also works the same way.
He was a Broadway Dancer before West Wing.
I still refer to this episode when people try to lump all 'arabs' or 'muslims' or 'people in the middle east' into one basket! I say "ok well if all arabs are jihadist extremists, then by that logic all american's are KKK..." which is generally followed by the other person looking blank until I explain. :D
The difference being the KKK never tried (to my knowledge) to kill people in foreign countries. It's quite alright to be a jihadist in Jordan, the KKK aren't bombing your mosque. The reverse can't be said. That fear can't be ignored.
Only a tiny amount of terror attacks are exported to other countries. Most take place in the nations the terrorist is born in. Usually to recruit more terrorists. Its easy get distracted, because it literally closer to home. But most Jihadi's aren't attacking the US.
As for the KKK, every racist in the world has heard of them, and plenty of racists over here (in the UK) are inspired the KKK.
So I think the analogy applies.
The kkk, nice comparison if they had any power, more than hundreds of people and not funded by governments. Also blaming Islam is not blaming all Muslim just the cult that fosters a bronze age ideas. If the klan was Fostered by governments had massive followers, attacked embassies, killed people in the name of zeus. We could talk about zeus ideas
@@prospero4183 You really don't know anything about the KKK, do you? At their peak, the KKK had millions of members and were in pretty much every level of govt, including law enforcement. They were absolutely supported and funded by the govt.
@@capnskiddies That makes moraly no sense. If you kill some one in your neighbourhood or 1000 miles away, dosent make a difference. if Life has a worth, the worth is not different just by a politcal border. Killing is not bad because you do it abroad, killing is just bad, here and there.
Man when you belong in a group or place then you may end up in an echo-chamber. When it comes to gangs, you ask yourself, these violent people care about me and gave me a place to belong, what has the government given me?” You are in poverty and you have to survive when those who are supposed to help you dont give a fuck.
Gangs often care for the families of the murdered and incarcerated. When I was teaching high school in NYC, the gangs took way better care of their own than any government or religious/welfare organisation.
Does it not strike anyone as odd or ironic that the worst terrorists intent on attacking the United Sates today are citizens of the United States? White men like me. The difference between me and them is that I know life is not a zero sum game. I know that if someone succeeds it does not come at my expense. I did not lose because someone else won. I am willing to admit that someone was smarter or faster or maybe better then me. In my mind that means I have to work a little harder. In their mind it's someone else's fault for their failure. They shouldn't have to work harder because they were raised to think they were better and when that false reality comes crashing down they lash out. That is what we saw on January 6th, 2021.
As much as I love The West Wing, I do not like this episode. It was just too simplistic. I would also say that Charlie's character was the guy that carried the Presidents luggage and opened doors for him. The show made him seem like senior staff.
Yes, the one man who is by the King's side at all times and thus has the same access to knowledge as the King and all the of Ministers. His position makes him essentially one of the 10-15 most powerful man in the government, its subtle form of power, but its power never the less. Why do you think such position where so sought out in the Old kingdoms of Europe, same as today, titles change, power is still power.
As much I loved Charlie Young, the work he did and his relationship to the Bartlett family....In this explanation about gangs he forgot to mention, if gang members are jailed THEY DONT STAY LOYAL. Its not one for all for one.
He didn’t say they were a family, he said it was a sense of belonging. They’re proud to be in the gang, but that doesn’t mean they won’t snitch. Pride is a sin, afterall
@@charlesbronson2926 I think what David is saying is that gang members snitch on each other to get less time. Terrorists don't snitch. Otherwise, they fail in their ultimate goal. This is what Charlie doesn't get. I've always felt like Charlie tried too hard to impress others because he's a young, black man. He tries too hard in this scene and in many scenes with Zoey.
@@partyguy101ify Terrorists also don't normally get caught. They aren't criminals. The vast majority of terrorists are one and done. Also, even if a terrorist is part of an organization they don't normally know what others in the group are being tasked to do. Charlie wasn't equating gang members to terrorists. He was saying that abject poverty and powerlessness can lead to systemic violence even in "civilized" and "western" societies in the US.
I adored this whole episode. It was well written, and spoke to our emotions and fears of those days. And I loved CJ saying sometimes you need a busboy with a gun and a silencer to get things done. Loved seeing super liberal CJ going all rogue on the office bunch. She said what we all were thinking, 'kill as many of them as you can'.
That's what YOU were thinking. I was utterly horrified at the bloodthirsty slavering going on after 9/11. The only person who publicly said anything sane about it was Richard Gere, who brought up the supposedly Christian virtue of turning the other cheek and got nothing but hate for his observation - and he's a BUDDHIST. It was sickening how much paranoia and violence was in the air.
Did it work tho, did any of that BS work? Or did you people just simply let go of reason to embrace all the nasty side of humanity vengeance bring to the surface and entirely ruin decade if not century of cultural developement (talking about just the U.S here )
it's still going on, in fact it's contagious.
I love TWW. It got me thru GWB’s disaster of a presidency & it’s healing my soul during The Orange Menace.
That said, every time I hear one of the characters say something like Josh’s “fishnets” line to a coworker in a work scene that includes others (here, students), I want to slap the writer (probably Sorkin).
Laura Trucano-Harp if this were other than the post 9/11 special episode to try to make some since of it, that remark likely would have had its time under the spotlight. But there was a different purpose for this episode.
@@flea10x6 not back when it originally aired!
Something I think is very important: Sam is WRONG here. Statistically, recruits to terrorist organisations don't come from the very bottom of society. They actually tend to be more from higher up on the ladder in terms of education and household income. Those drawn to these groups tend to be people who *expected* a better like and didn't get one, rather than hose at the abject bottom.
This part was cringy.
Yes culture and race def have no factor in it unless you are white and Christian lol
Nice and interesting, still blames everything apart from that which allows the "gang" to fester while being chummy with very very slightly softer gangs with stuff the US wants. West Wing, telling people how to kinda deal in theory with a problem but not really.
That's because there's no real "right" answer, short of "kill everyone". That's not a very tenable solution, either...
The real world doesn't have a clear "right" and "wrong", which is part of why it's so frustrating to people. Everyone wants a simple answer to a complex issue - those just don't exist. The most we can manage is "one which screws over the least number of people in the process".
Or we can keep settling for answers like "whatever benefits me and mine the most". I'm sure that can't go wrong.
worst episode ever. corny, preachy and predictable in the extreme. but, i forgive, because i otherwise love the show.
swerdna1970 so true. I love the show. But this episode jarrs.
I was disappointed, too, but really, what did you expect? Did you really think the show would take a controversial tack just after the country had been attacked on our own soil? Dream on. I gave them credit for the small amount of balance they were able to shoehorn in there.
This is basically my take on it too. West Wing might be my favorite show, but I would struggle to think of a worse episode on any network television program in history.
Jesus, did he tell CJ 'to get into some fishnets and head to a bar," in front of impressionable teens. Funny how WW can slip into some serious sexism for such a liberal. This whole episode was pretty lame.
Liberals 20 years ago tend to be the more conservative type today. Yes, they fought for healthcare expansion, but the Bartlet administration turned a blind eye to homophobia. The Santos administration probably waffled on abortion since Santos considers himself is pro-life. Nowadays, a Democrat would end his or her career if he or she didn't support gay marriage or abortion rights. The West Wing ended right before partisan politics got significantly worse.
Possibly the only decent scene in this farcical show