On The Media #3

Cartel Land- Fighting Violence with Violence

For this week's show I decided to listen to the interview with Matthew Heineman and Bob Garfield about the documentary, "Cartel Land." I heard about this film when it came out and those that saw it. said it was a must see and very well made. I never got around to seeing it and had forgotten about it until I saw it pop up in this weeks lineup. I'll admit, I probably should go and watch it before writing this post but I think I can still write a good analysis based on the interview itself.

The first thing I thought about is this idea of civilian "armies" and how that may coincide with civil disobedience. I think this is a huge social issue that people feel the right and duty to act. I really believe there is an appropriate time and place for these two things. I think if the people feel unsafe or unheard or threatened by something that the government is unwilling to act on, they have every right to take up protest or arms to defend themselves. That being said, there are always ways this right can be abused, for example the battalion against the cartel that this documentary examines. When I read the original synopsis for the film, I thought "good for them!" and how inspiring that this group of people are willing to put their lives at risk and fight this violent and powerful organization. Then my eyes were opened a little through this interview and hearing/seeing clips from the film and hearing Matthew's perspective on things. It was a little shocking to me what these vigilantes were willing to do and what they felt they "had" to do. So I guess that is the question, where is the line when fighting something you believe to be evil?

Of course, my answer to this question is going to be subjective to what I believe is right and wrong and certainly shouldn't be generalized to everyone. I don't think it's as easy to say you can't fight violence with violence because unfortunately it is necessary sometimes. If someone is shooting up a place, do you think it would be best to fight them with your words? Most people would agree, that you need to equally meet the gunner with a gun and take him/her out. However, if you are trying to fight against this gang because they are doing violent and illegal things and yet you are fighting through means of violent and illegal acts.. who is the criminal now, or I guess maybe the "worst" criminal? This whole idea, I think is very psychological and individual to what one person believes to the next. I found it very interesting that Matthew experienced this same cognitive dissonance throughout filming of trying to keep track of who was the "bad guys" or the "good guys." As Matt said, it's hard to say if you are against the torture or violence of someone who is always doing those things and maybe wouldn't think twice of doing it to your family if the situation arose. The humanistic side of me says that there is never a place for torture to get information or to punish yet the logical side of me thinks if there was an individual who had critical information of something much greater like a terrorist attack or who the "boss" was.. maybe it's okay?

As the interview shows, in our culture, media seems to portray vigilantes and acts of civil disobedience as negative and wrong and maybe sometimes it is but I do believe most of the time it is warranted and done non-violently. I really like and appreciate that Matthew was able to stay objective and that his motives for the film was to show every side of it and to put you in his perspective and observations of it all. I still can't believe he did put himself in those situations of such high risk and vulnerability. That brings up a whole different topic of media and the cultural context of what some journalists and filmmakers are willing to do these days to cover a story or an issue. Unfortunately, after all of this, I still don't think I've been able to come to an official stance on this. As I said, I really need/want to watch the film to fully appreciate all of the angles and information that's presented. I will reiterate that I think there is a validity to civilian armies and acts of civil disobedience but I also think there is an issue with what is ethically and morally right when doing so.