Oh, that poor defenseless little girl — what did she ever do to you to deserve being condemned to read THIS? I may have to toss in a few girl-friendly flicks out of pity.

But seriously, hearing something like this is great. Kids learn about these things by osmosis. i grew up watching all sorts of things that my Dad put up on the TV, stuff like THE SEARCHERS that I never would have bothered with otherwise, and over time it changed my life and made me the conservative I am today. Kids have a much greater capacity to view and appreciate old movies than we give them credit for, especially if there is a lot of explanation and context to go along with it. Kudos to you for home-schooling your daughter, and for thinking about this aspect of her education. Makes my day to read comments like that.

Alas, the fix is in, at least for Round 1. The film I chose for 1939 has, in my estimation, a much more pointed interest for conservatives, but gets talked about far too little in my opinion. Let's hope you like it. But I'm with you — three cheers for MR. SMITH!

Thanks for refreshing my memory, and I can understand how your reading of those lines gives you pause. I would note by way of rebuttal that he also says the battle was to "protect the lives of women and children and loved ones ONLY A FEW FEET AWAY." That's a distinction of immediacy, not morality, and hardly a sentiment fraught with Leftist nonsense.

You seem to be reading the word "dark" here to mean "evil, nefarious," whereas I took it to mean "not illuminated, obscure," which resulted in a very different interpretation for me. I saw Dunbar as a wayward, suicidal loner in search of meaning, purpose, and later love, family and acceptance — all things I would loosely file under "civilizational confidence." Granted, by the end he has found it all in a DIFFERENT civilization — but I never saw his embracing of the nobility and humanity of the Indians as a de facto repudiation of the nobility and humanity of their conquerors.

When you say the film tries to float an "Indian better" meme, I find myself recalling the scenes of Indians murdering settlers, scalping a defenseless wagon driver, and stealing horses, as well as the scenes that depict the courage and kindnesses of our side (I especially liked the General's heroic charge and rout of Tucker's men, along with his promise that "As God is my judge" Dunbar will keep his foot.) In light of those moments, I've never been able to consider the movie's subtext as simplistic as, "White man fight for land, Indian fight for food. Indian better."

Your POV has given me much food for thought about one of my favorite films, and I thank you for it. it will probably be awhile before I address DANCES WITH WOLVES in essay form, but when I do I'll try to give your take the respect it deserves.

"It was hard to know how to feel. I'd never been in a battle like this.
There was no dark political objective. This was not a fight for territory or riches
or to make men free. It had been fought to preserve the winter food stores…"

Somehow, fighting on the prarie for food was morally superior to fighting to make men free, a "dark political objective." White man fight for land, Indian fight for food. Indian better. It's leftist nonsense.