Read through the list of films here. Just as I would have expected, it's obvious simply from reading a few of the titles that the films are selected in large part because of their 'politically correct' content and messages.
See the list at the link, and the descriptions of the titles as well.
For example:
''Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment (1963)
Robert Drew was a pioneer of American cinema-verite (a style of documentary filmmaking that strives to record unfolding events non-intrusively). In 1963, he gathered together a stellar group of filmmakers, including D. A. Pennebaker, Richard Leacock, Gregory Shuker, James Lipscomb, and Patricia Powell, to capture on film the dramatic unfolding of an ideological crisis, one that revealed political decision-making at the highest levels. The result, "Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment," focuses on Gov. George Wallace’s attempt to prevent two African-American students from enrolling in the University of Alabama—his infamous "stand in the schoolhouse door" confrontation—and the response of President John F. Kennedy.''
and:
El Mariachi (1992)
Directed, edited, co-produced, and written in two weeks by Robert Rodriguez for $7,000 while a film student at the University of Texas, "El Mariachi" proved a favorite on the film festival circuit. After Columbia Pictures picked it up for distribution, the film helped usher in the independent movie boom of the early 1990s. "El Mariachi" is an energetic, highly entertaining tale of an itinerant musician, portrayed by co-producer and Rodriguez crony Carlos Gallardo, who arrives at a Mexican border town during a drug war and is mistaken for a hit man who recently escaped from prison. The story, as film historian Charles Ramirez Berg has suggested, plays with expectations common to two popular exploitation genres—the narcotraficante film, a Mexican police genre, and the transnational warrior-action film, itself rooted in Hollywood Westerns.''
Then there's this one:
Growing Up Female (1971)
Among the first films to emerge from the women’s liberation movement, "Growing Up Female" is a documentary portrait of America on the brink of profound change in its attitudes toward women.''
Enough said about that one.
More:
Hester Street (1975)
Joan Micklin Silver’s first feature-length film, "Hester Street," was an adaption of preeminent Yiddish author Abraham Cahan’s 1896 well-received first novel "Yekl: A Tale of the New York Ghetto." In the 1975 film, the writer-director brought to the screen a portrait of Eastern European Jewish life in America that historians have praised for its accuracy of detail and sensitivity to the challenges immigrants faced during their acculturation process.''
A few more examples: The Iron Horse, a silent film which ''celebrated the contributions of Irish, Italian and Chinese immigrants although the number of immigrants allowed to enter the country legally was severely restricted at the time of its production.''
Further, 'The Negro Soldier', from 1944. 'Stand and Deliver', from 1988, I am sure is familiar to most of you. Likewise, 'Porgy and Bess.'
I am not sure how films like Forrest Gump and Silence of the Lambs qualify for this list; do they have a PC angle of which I'm not aware? I did not see either of those movies but I have heard plenty about them. Neither of them would qualify as great artistic achievements by my standards, but then I am not on the same page with the people who select these films, obviously.
The 'Librarian of Congress' says of the films, generally:
"These films are selected because of their enduring significance to American culture," said Billington.It's clear that 'our' government is very much in line with the cultural Marxist agenda, and very committed to furthering that agenda and the multicultural viewpoint, celebrating anybody and everybody except old-stock Americans. All governmental bodies that supposedly have to do with preserving our history or promoting the arts in this country exist, apparently, only to push the cultural Marxist, anti-White, anti-traditional agenda.
It's all redolent of the Soviet propaganda promulgated via the arts in the days of Stalin, described here.
''The visual culture of the Stalin era was both a façade and an instrument of power.[Emphasis mine]
[...]
Because of its realistic form, this art seemed to be agreeable, unproblematic, and easy to understand for the masses, yet it was a completely ideological venture both in terms of contents and objectives. It does not present itself as a portrayal of life but visualizes the collective dream of a new world and a new man.''
It seems the 'hopes and dreams' are not unlike those of the Stalin era, in which the goal was to promote the idea of 'a new world and a new man.' The 'new Soviet man' was to be part of ''a new Utopian mass culture that comprises all mankind.''
Here, the 'new man' is described:
This man was to be free from ethnic affiliations, see no sense in private property, be always ready to sacrifice himself for the benefit of society, have no doubts that he originated from an ape or something like it (certainly from a beast) and that nothing will remain of him after his death. In other words, he was to be a one-hundred percent materialist and atheist and must know that the meaning of life is in the person's usefulness to society and the supreme goal is in a better, wealthy and happy life of future generations. Recognizing this, he would necessarily be happy.''
However, as certain classes of people would impede such plans, they were made objects of vilification:
''They were made a bugbear, an object for mockery, incited against each other by encouraging their mutual denunciations and accusing them of deviating from the ideology.''
It seems that the powers that be, via subtle means in many cases or by flagrant and obvious means, wants to recast our society and people into the utopian one-world mold. It is now identified by catchwords and phrases like 'diversity and inclusion' or multiculturalism, or 'global citizenship.' But it's all the same old 'new man' effort to recreate human nature along lines that are anything but natural.
If the LOC and other governmental bodies wanted to show real ''diversity'' and ''tolerance'' they would choose materials that represented more than just the 'celebrate diversity or else!' school of thought. They would not be attempting at every turn to rewrite history with our ancestors either airbrushed out, or cast only as hateful villains.
Usually when I bring up the subject of propaganda in the arts and popular culture, there are a few people who object that ''it's just entertainment', and that I should 'lighten up and just enjoy it.' But it is obviously taken seriously by the powers-that-be, or they would not go to such lengths to present a monolithically PC point of view, and to disparage and exclude all differing points of view. They take it seriously, and so must we.
