I do think the lack of being able to escape politics in general has been ramping up for the majority of people.
On the other hand, I want to remain blissfully ignorant and just keep a love of one of the few things I have left in life.
I think when things are unsettled, and people start asking questions about fundamentals in society, that there's certainly a degree of this desire to escape the political. I think, and not everybody would agree, that the ramifications of the modern political programs of those in power and those dispossessed are far-reaching, because the answers from each side seem to reek of the totalitarian, which means everybody is along for the ride whether they like it or not. And I'd say most people like their lives, if not their governance (another political paradox seemingly enshrined in our everyday lives).
On the right, I personally see democracy losing ground as a political system, and on the left, I see the legitimization of voices to abolish private property and almost every tradition that flows therefrom; including basic family units and even such core concepts as body integrity certitude. Compounding the problems with the radicalism of ideology is that for each side, the radical iterations of both left and right have been adopted by the two colossus parties in America. Perhaps that seems like an extreme overreaction or a misdiagnosis, but the rhetoric and philosophical underpinnings seem to not betray that. I've seen
First Things, a conservative magazine that has pull with conservative thinkers, openly arguing for a decrease in democratic institutions because they can no longer raise their children in America as they want to without intrusion from the other side, or at least they argue. Some even hold conferences hoping for the rise of monarchy, I've noticed. Then I see the other side calling for the abolition of property, police, gender determinism -- the belief that everything deterministic should be abolished so that we get to live our tabula rasas, and I'm given pause by the desire to completely eradicate institutions under the guise of one cause or another.
This is what a lot of people have an inkling of, I surmise, but they don't necessarily see eye-to-eye with my contentions, either. In their world, there's just something amiss and wrong, and they can't put their finger on it. To a lot of people, power is beyond their control in economic and political structures, and they'd like it back to a degree, but they don't explain it like me, nor necessarily believe that what I'm saying is the case -- I would of course argue I'm correct and the people certainly haven't sussed out the ramifications of the political programs proposed to them.
But yeah, as far as relating back to Hollywood goes, I think they see Hollywood infusing itself with politics, politics that are either shaping the public or that the public is reacting negatively to. To your latter point about wanting to but not wanting to see examples, I'll just say that there are examples, but a lot of the examples given would be thematic. By that I mean that the whole process serves ideological premises that are functions of certain philosophic constructs. I can't speak for Andy, but his walking away from movies doesn't surprise me in the least given his comments in the Shark Pool, of all places. I think his is a dissent from the general disposition and thematic nature of the issues and stories Hollywood chooses to tackle and how they tackle them. The problems and their solutions, let's say. I'll let him speak further on it if he wishes, but it's like Ilov mentioning Potter Stewart: You know it when you see it.
So, yeah, by way of answer, there ya go.
