"Dr. Strangelove. or How I Stopped Worrying About The Bomb.

Valid point meta agnostic, the movie did do that, it also pointed out it was being done, which. giving some the knowledge and impetus to question it. It short it's a dual edged sword, still your idea was the outcome with a higher probability. As I said my Dad was aware of it at the time, he also wasn't in favor of it, I'm sure he wasn't alone in his objection.
 
This is the scene about the fluor in the movie. Very good! Very funny. After all, this General is the representation also of the PTB. So Kubrick is telling us that the PTB know about fluor.

This movie is critic of the Powers and about our ignorance of the PTB and how dangerous they are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2bSL5VQgM
 
loreta said:
This is the scene about the fluor in the movie. Very good! Very funny. After all, this General is the representation also of the PTB. So Kubrick is telling us that the PTB know about fluor.

This movie is critic of the Powers and about our ignorance of the PTB and how dangerous they are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2bSL5VQgM

Thanks for posting the scene, loreta. The youtube comments under the video are a perfect example of what I'm talking about. The first comment is someone saying he uses the video to troll conspiracy theorists and from there a lengthy discussion ensues with a back-and-forth of "why don't you look at real evidence?" " you conspiracy theorists only look at evidence that supports your preconceived views anyway." Lower down, someone complains they don't understand the context of the fluoridation remarks. Is Kubrick criticizing fluoridation or making fun those who criticize it? Of course some quick-witted know-it-all is quick to reply: examine the character speaking those lines. Original poster: so it's just crazy talk? Responder: definitely. OP: Thanks!

I did a search of duckduckgo to try and find an interview or something indicating what Kubrick's actual opinion on water fluoridation might have been. I just put in "Stanley Kubrick water fluoridation". All I got back was pro-fluoridation article after article using the movie as an example to show how crazy anti-fluoridation activists are (maybe a very few just described the scenes in the movie without taking a side). Does this make any sense as a way to make a logical argument? Of course not! It's a 50-year-old satire and even if it were entirely clear what position Kubrick and Southern were taking, which it isn't judging by these articles, all of the issues should still be re-examined in a modern context. But is it effective? The next time you encounter someone who might be on the fence regarding fluoride, ask them what they think of Dr. Strangelove and see what they say.
 
Back
Top Bottom