Whitewashing in Quantum of Solace

When Quantum of Solace, the latest James Bond film, came out in 2008, I commented on its plot and production. Recently I finally watched it, so I can talk about it in more detail.

The plot revolves around the overthrow of the Bolivian government. Bolivia's Indians make a few minor appearances, but the plot is implicitly about them. That makes it fair game for my blog.

[* spoiler alert *]

The plot

To be specific, the plot revolves around Dominic Greene, a phony eco-philanthropist who's secretly head of Quantum, a global crime syndicate. His latest scheme is to overthrow the Bolivian government and restore a brutal general to power. All he wants in return is a supposedly worthless parcel of desert land.

In reality, he's amassed 60% of Bolivia's water supply under the land. When the general is in charge, Greene plans to charge him an exorbitant rate to continue supplying Bolivia's water. Because that's apparently easier than earning money the old-fashioned way.

Okay, this is kind of the standard comic-book plot seen in old Bond movies. In those days, it was Goldfinger trying to corner the gold market. Now it's Greene trying to corner the water market.

But these days we expect more sophisticated plots--or at least I do. Quantum of Solace has several major problems that make it a mediocre Bond movie.

First, Bolivia is headed by Evo Morales, a popular and democratically elected Aymara Indian. With his pro-indigenous, anti-capitalist agenda, he's a player in regional and even world politics.

The idea of overthrowing his government without massive international repercussions is flatly ridiculous. A Bolivian coup would play out roughly as the recently turmoil in Egypt or Syria has. There would be massive riots, troops trying to keep the peace, diplomats trying to broker a solution, constant media coverage, etc.

Bolivia isn't some sleepy backwater Latin "republic" in the mid-20th century. Morales has made it a showcase for government based on indigenous rights. Which means it's in the world's spotlight.

Cornering the water supply

Greene's plan to corner Bolivia's water supply is equally ridiculous. Bond falls into a sinkhole and discovers an underground dam that's created a huge reservoir of water. He surmises that there's a whole network of dams corralling the water.

Never mind that Bolivia is a country of high plains and mountains. That much of its water comes from glacier melt. Let's assume that there are indeed underground aquifers within easy reach.

So Greene's plan is to dam this underground water? Building a dam is a colossal effort requiring millions of man-hours, mega-tons of equipment, a transportation network, international financing, etc. Between spy satellites and local observers, there's no way Greene could build even a single oil derrick without everyone's knowing it. Building a series of dams would be a hundred or a thousand times more difficult.

And underground dams? Even harder. I'm not aware that manmade underground dams even exist, yet Greene has secretly built several of them.

Tying the two points together, Greene meets with the general to sign agreements. First, to put the general in power; second, to charge him for the water under the land he just acquired. Hello? As far as the movie is concerned, the Evo Morales government is still in power. There's been no hint of an actual coup. The general has no authority to 1) give away Bolivian land or 2) sign utility agreements for water. He's a disgruntled nobody, not the head of state.

The water-privatization plot supposedly was based on the 2000 Cochabamba protests in Bolivia. But the reality of these protests shows how superficial the movie is:The Cochabamba protests of 2000, also known as the Cochabamba Water War, were a series of protests that took place in Cochabamba, Bolivia's third largest city, between December 1999 and April 2000 in response to the privatisation of the city's municipal water supply company Semapa. The new firm, Aguas del Tunari–a joint venture involving Bechtel and Suez Lyonaise–was required to invest in construction of long-envisioned dam (a priority of Mayor Manfred Reyes Villa), so they dramatically raised water rates. Protests, largely organized through the Coordinadora in Defense of Water and Life, a community coalition, erupted in January, February, and April, culminating in tens of thousands marching downtown and battling police. One civilian, Victor Hugo Daza was killed. On April 10, the national government reached an agreement with the Coordinadora to reverse the privatization. A complaint filed by foreign investors was resolved by agreement in January 2006.The key points are the people's awareness of what was going on and the large-scale protests against it. No way does something like this happen in secret anymore. If they ever did, indigenous people no longer bow down to their colonial "masters."

The missing Indians

The Aymara Indians are most notable by their absence. Bolivia is something like 60% Aymara, but there are no obvious Indians in the initial Bolivian scenes. Quantum's version of the Bolivian capital La Paz is white and bland enough to be any European city.

Eventually we get three scenes featuring the Aymara. First, Bond walks to an Aymara village where the well is conspicuously running dry. Second, back in La Paz, a saloon is suddenly full of Indian types, and a couple are shown in the streets. This is a notable change from the previous Aymara-free scenes.

Finally, Bond leaves Camille, the latest Bond girl, in what looks like an Aymara town. The only residents appear to be Aymara, anyway.

Note: Quantum of Solace was filmed in Panama and Mexico. I presume these Indians are Panamanian. But they wear Aymara-style clothing and look reasonably authentic.

And about that Bond girl: Camille is a member of the Bolivian secret service. Her father worked for the corrupt general, and the general killed her family. She could be an immigrant, but all this plus her brown skin and her return to the Aymara town implies she's a Bolivian native.

But, she's played by Olga Kurylenko, who looks like an exotic Caucasian, not an Indian. In fact, she's Ukrainian:Olga Kurylenko was born in Berdyansk, Ukraine (then part of the Soviet Union). Her father, Konstantin, is Ukrainian, and her mother, Marina Alyabusheva, is an art teacher of Russian and Belarusian descent, who was born in Irkutsk Oblast, Russia.Okay, let's forget about using a Native actress. That would be too much to ask for. But what about the thousands of talented Latinas who could've played a Bolivian agent?

Quantum's producers supposedly conducted "extensive casting searches for a Latina actress from South America." Great, but what about Latina actresses from North or Central America? Not to mention Native actresses?

Kurylenko supposedly got the job because she was the only one who seemed "comfortable" doing action scenes with Daniel Craig. Uh-huh, sure. In other words, the producers were more comfortable with a hot Euro-model type than someone who could look and act Bolivian.

So Quantum of Solace whitewashes the complexity of Bolivian politics. It whitewashes the indigenous Bolivian populace. It whitewashes the female character who should, by all rights, be an Indian or at least a Latina.

Not the best Bond

As for the rest of the movie, Roger Moore summed it up well, saying Craig was a "damn good Bond but the film as a whole, there was a bit too much flash cutting [and] it was just like a commercial of the action. There didn't seem to be any geography and you were wondering what the hell was going on."

I agree. I could follow perhaps 80% of the plot and 80% of the action. Like a trailer, it was chopped into pieces so you couldn't follow it more closely. I guess this is a trend in action films: to cover up your lack of special-effects money or skill with a collage of confusing shots. Whatever the reason, it's inferior filmmaking.

Quantum of Solace isn't as good as Casino Royale or other Bond films. Because of all the action sequences, though, it's moderately entertaining. Rob's rating: 7.5 of 10.

For more on the subject, see The Best Indian Movies.

Morales: Obama takes vengeance against Indians

Bolivian President Evo Morales on President Obama:  “I Can’t Believe a Black President Can Hold So Much Vengeance Against an Indian President”AMY GOODMAN:  We’re talking to President Evo Morales, the president of Bolivia. Yesterday at the Earth Day rally, the foreign minister of Ecuador said that the US had cut two-and-a-half million dollars to Ecuador because they didn’t sign onto the Copenhagen Accord. He said he would give two-and-a-half million dollars to the United States if they signed onto the Kyoto Protocol. Bolivia, the US cut two-and-a-half million dollars, or $3 million, because you didn’t sign onto the Copenhagen Accord. Can you explain what happened?

PRESIDENT EVO MORALES:  [translated] The thing is that there’s permanent sabotage and blackmail from the US government. I cannot believe that a black president can have so much vengeance with an Indian president, because our grandparents and our populations, black and indigenous, have been excluded, marginalized, humiliated. That’s where Obama is coming from, from that experience and that suffering. And me, too. And so, it’s one who’s been discriminated against discriminating against another who’s been discriminated against, one oppressed who is oppressing another oppressed. So much blackmail, and the so much blackmail we had experienced before, and now I’m being subject to $3 million blackmail.

But it’s with great pride and humility that we’re now better off without the United States. We’re better off economically. And in terms of macroeconomic policy, we’re better off without the International Monetary Fund.

AMY GOODMAN:  What was the $3 million supposed to be for, before it was cut?

PRESIDENT EVO MORALES:  [translated] Of course, for social programs, as well as environmental programs, but that’s just $3 million. In terms of fighting drug trafficking, they have the responsibility to make an investment, and that it’s not just a question of cooperation, it’s a matter of an obligation on their part. Nonetheless, they have pulled out, and we are facing drug trafficking alone—some crumb to make it seem like something, certainly. And so, for example, I had information that they were going to invest in the Millennium Development Account, like $600 million, and they withdrew all of it. And so, we worked this out with other countries. We’re talking about investment. One is not going to raise that claim about this. We are a country of dignity.

But what they do is take vengeance, intimidate. And that is why my doubt is, one who has been subjugated, one’s family has been subjugated to discrimination, is now president; how is it possible that he can discriminate against another movement that has been discriminated against? It is the peoples who will hear.

AMY GOODMAN:  Do you see a change between President Bush and President Obama?

PRESIDENT EVO MORALES:  [translated] If something is changed, it’s just the color of the president that’s changed.Comment:  Sounds petty of Obama to withhold $3 million in aid because Bolivia refused to sign the weak Copenhagen Accord. Especially since the US didn't let Bolivia, other small nations, and indigenous groups negotiate the accord.

For more on the subject, see Climate-Change Conference in Bolivia and Indians Fight Back in Latin America.

Evo Morales on The Daily Show

Briggs:  Bolivia’s president for changeMorales deserves the attention of North American Indian leaders because he often talks about values that indigenous peoples share. For one example, he routinely mentions Mother Earth by name as a consideration in world politics--everywhere from the United Nations General Assembly to the “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.”

“It is my suggestion that in his new millennium it should be the millennium of life here, in Cuba, Venezuela, Africa,” Morales told the Daily Show in 2007. “We must come together to save humankind. At the U.N. I heard talk about global warming, climate change. Where does this come from? It comes from the Western culture of excessive luxury, of over consumption.”

Morales pointedly ended the interview, joking, “And don’t call me the axis of evil,” getting a laugh from Jon Stewart.Comment:  For more on The Daily Show, see Native American Mascot Culture.

Morales meets Indians at NMAI

Evo Morales, Native leaders gather in friendship, solidarity

NMAI hosts Bolivian presidentEvo Morales, Bolivia’s indigenous president, attended a historic meeting with North American tribal leaders at the National Museum of the American Indian Nov. 19.

The private event, which was requested by Morales and facilitated by the Bolivian Embassy, saw more than a dozen tribal and Indian leaders join the leader to share cultural insights. Many brought him gifts from their tribes and nations, and he, in turn, offered his gratitude and a few jokes that somehow transcended any language barriers.

Of Aymara descent, Morales is widely viewed as a hero among indigenous populations worldwide. He was first elected in December 2005, and won re-election with 67 percent of the vote after a recall referendum last August. He is Bolivia’s first indigenous head of state in the 470 years since the Spanish Conquest.

In an interview with Indian Country Today after the meeting, Morales said there wasn’t much time for philosophizing with the Indian leaders, but he shared his vision of what it means to him to be an indigenous leader.

“In indigenous culture,” said Morales, “equality is so sacred. It’s a profound difference between our model life in indigenous communities and the model of life put forward by a capitalist society.

“… The indigenous culture is very important in terms of keeping people honest. That’s what I was telling people during the election, that our ancestors gave us a law: Don’t lie, don’t steal, and don’t be lazy. This worldview that we inherited from our ancestors has now been enshrined in our new constitution.”Comment:  For more on the subject, see No Time for Indians and Peace Prize for Morales?

No Time for Indians

Tim Giago claims "The 2008 Time 100: The World's Most Influential People" unfairly excludes Indians. The reality is more complex than that.

Time Magazine Snubs Indians AgainThere are the usual suspects of movie stars, rock singers and politicians on the list and I am sure they have exerted some influence on some people or activities in their lifetime. But again I ask, why no Native Americans? Could it be that the editors of Time magazine are, as the editors of other mainstream media, so ignorant of the Native Americans in their midst that in their minds they do not exist? To go from the predominant culture to non-existent in 500 years is truly amazing and frightening.

Every Native American can probably name 10 Indians that deserve to be on Time's list of most influential people. The problem is nobody asks them. Out of sight out of mind does not lead to a cohesive means of communications. White and black editors see who is around them in their own little world and Native Americans are not a part of their world.Comment:  Giago goes on to name Ernie Stevens Jr., John Echohawk, John Yellow Bird Steele, Wilma Mankiller, and Eloise Cobell as candidates for the list.

I wish there were more influential Natives. But I don't have a problem with Natives not being on the list. We're talking about the 100 most influential people in the world. Heads of state, of religion, of multinational corporations. Newsmakers and celebrities whom millions of people listen to and emulate. Does any Native person really compare to that?

Stevens or Cyrus?

Consider Ernie Stevens Jr. He's been a great leader for the Indian gaming industry, but how many people does this industry affect worldwide? Not that many. If he hadn't existed, would the industry be substantially different? I doubt it.

Or consider Elouise Cobell. She brought a great scandal--the lack of payments on trust fund accounts--to light. But so far there hasn't been a definitive court ruling requiring payment. And even if the US did pony up billions of dollars, how many people would it help? A few hundred thousand? That's less than 1/10,000^th of the world's population.

Giago compares Stevens to Miley Cyrus:Stevens has managed to pull the gaming tribes together in a coalition that has stood as one to protect their rights. I would say that his influence is much more consequential to a people than say that of a Miley Cyrus.This shows the problem with Giago's position. The list isn't of the 100 people whose influence has saved the most lives or lifted the most people out of poverty. That would be a different, more narrowly focused list. This list is about the most influence, period.

It doesn't matter whether the influence is good or bad, consequential or inconsequential, short- or long-lived. If millions of people are following you, it doesn't matter where you're leading them. You have influence by definition.



Giago makes a mistake

If you look at Time's list, I think you could argue against most of the people on it. If I were making the list, it would consist mostly of world leaders and CEOs with a smattering of inventors and celebrities. No way would I include Robert Downey Jr. (who isn't really a millionaire playboy industrialist) and leave off Pope Benedict XVI. But I doubt I'd add any Natives.

Actually, Giago has overlooked one Indian on the list: Evo Morales. As Time put it:When union organizer Evo Morales was elected President of Bolivia in 2005, it was the first time in the country's history that the indigenous people, who make up roughly 60% of the population, had one of their own as President. He moved quickly away from the neoliberal policies of his predecessors to try to help his community, the vast majority of whom live below the poverty line.Morales, an Aymara Indian, is the kind of Native who should be on the list. For starters, he's trying to transform an entire nation. More than that, he's providing a vision for indigenous movements around the world. That's a lot bigger than leading a tribe, nonprofit, or trade association in the United States, no matter how well someone does it.

Let's look at the numbers. There are roughly 50 million Indians in the Americas. Most of them--about 95%--are in Latin America. These Indians comprise slightly less than 1% of the world's population. (50 million = 1% of 5 billion.)

If you went by the statistics, you'd expect to find one Indian, a Latin American, in Time's 100. Lo and behold, that's exactly what you find. Far from being biased, Time has fairly and accurately gauged the relative importance of Indians.



Who's the most influential?

Unfortunately, Time didn't rank the people in its list. Humorist Joel Stein explains the problem:Numbering a list is a journalistic rule so obvious even E! understands it. But TIME's editors won't stoop to rank the TIME 100. No, they're afraid of hurting people's feelings or making a mistake.Stein, who is proud of having no mathematical abilities, came up with a formula for ranking them. It's based on such factors as number of Google hits and mentions in the British Financial Times.

To me this seems like a valid approach. The number of times we talk about people is a rough guide to their influence. As someone who does have a mathematical background, I approve of Stein's effort.

With that in mind, here are Stein's top 10:

Vladimir Putin
George W. Bush
Ben Bernanke
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
Evo Morales
John McCain
Tony Blair
Kevin Rudd (Australian PM)
Dalai Lama

Not bad. According to Stein, a Native is the sixth most influential person in the world. Morales is the third highest world leader, the second highest non-Caucasian (after Obama), and the highest person from the "Third World."

Of course, one could argue with this ranking also. Clinton, Obama, and McCain won't have a significant world influence unless they're elected president. Blair is out of office. No one from Australia has significantly influenced the rest of the world.

For more on the subject, see The 200 Greatest Pop Culture Icons.

Below:  Someone can be influential even if he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.