Capitalism in the Movie Avatar by James Cameron

The movie Avatar takes place in a futuristic time on a planet called Pandora. On Pandora lives an indigenous people called the Na’vi. The Na’vi people live in perfect peace with nature and worship Eywa, a mother goddess. However, a large corporation called RDA is on a mission to mine a mineral called Unobtainium. Jake (the protagonist) is sent to this planet because his brother was murdered. His is brother was killed for money and Jake is sent on a mission to ultimately take these minerals for a profit. The RDA Corporation from Earth wants to mine a precious mineral on Pandora and appoints Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) as head of the operation and Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) as head of private security forces. Selfridge and Quaritch send the handicapped Marine Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) to infiltrate the Na’vi with the use of an “Avatar” identity. During the encounter with Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), the Na’vi chief’s daughter, Jake realizes that the Na’vi way of life is in harmony with the world around them and he finally falls in love with Neytiri. When security forces of the RDA Corporation come to evict the Na’vi from their homeland, Jake betrays his mission. He does not fight for the RDA Corporation any more. Instead he leads the Na’vi to defend their home and their way of life in a war against the greedy humans.

Striking similarities exist between Avatar and Cameron’s other films (with True Lies most likely being the only exception) in terms of an ideological and worldview tilt. Like previous Cameron films, Avatar continues to be a cinematographic description of the power struggle between the working class and the capitalists. The working class in Avatar is represented by Neytiri and her aboriginal Na’vi people on Pandora. The imperialists/capitalists are characterized by Selfridge and Quaritch, the two bad guys who lead the industrial-military complex from Earth. Like most of Cameron’s previous films, Avatar features a protagonist (Jake) who betrays the capitalist system and joins the working class, just like what the female protagonist did in Titanic. In Avatar, people representing capitalist interests (Selfridge and Quaritch) are cast in an extremely negative light. They are greedy, ruthless and have no compassion. By contrast, as the exploited underclass, the Na’vi residents are praised and even romanticized. The Na’vi people may not be rich by the standards of the capitalists, but they understand and appreciate the value and beauty of the environment. They live in a perfect harmony with the world around them, which is lacking on Earth. In the same vein, Jake is portrayed as warm-hearted, brave, compassionate and intelligent because he betrays his capitalist background. Such characterizations of protagonists and antagonists indicate that Cameron is standing with the working class.

However, noticeable differences between Avatar and Cameron’s other films in terms of their underlying worldview are worth exploring. First, unlike Cameron’s previous films, Avatar explicitly 660 Yong Tang CC: Creative Commons License, 2011. critiques U.S. foreign policy when it describes the RDA’s military attack against the Na’vi as one of “shock and awe” in which they will fight “terror with terror”. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was also known as a campaign of “shock and awe” (“Shock and Awe,” 2003).The similarity of wording indicates an implicit condemnation of the United State’s occupation of Iraq and the U.S. global war against terror. Second, unlike Cameron’s previous films, Avatar features a classic class struggle beyond national borders. Like Marx and Lenin, the movie critiques colonialism and imperialism. As Marx (1976) has noted, colonialism is another form of capitalism, capitalists used colonization as a means to achieve primitive accumulation, the “original sin” of capital (p.873). Lenin (1917) observed that imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. Lenin's critique of capitalism still remains relevant today (Fuchs, 2010). Avatar is also a critique of contemporary neoliberal imperialism as an ongoing primitive accumulation that is based on accumulation by dispossession (David, 2003; Fuchs, 2011; Fuchs, 2010). Film critic Clover (2010) pointed out that Avatar contains an anti-imperialist overtone. Another movie commentator Davidson (2010) suggested that Avatar is “countercultural” (p. 14) and reflects a modern age “environmentalist” worldview (p. 14). In fact, Avatar has been applauded by a number of leftists around the world. For example, American socialist Nagesh Rao (2010) contended that what “really stands out” in Avatar is its ruthless critique of corporate greed and its “inspiring tale of solidarity and resistance” against occupation (p. 1). Rao (2010) claimed that Avatar “reenacts” the genocide of indigenous populations by “colonial capitalism” (p. 1). What hypothetically happens in the movie Avatar is actually unfolding in the tropical forests and mountains of Central and South America, according to another social commentator, Carlos A. Quiroz. Quiroz (2010) wrote that corporations on Earth are trying to take over the indigenous peoples’ ancestral lands “in complicity with the local puppet governments” (para.3). It is really an interesting irony that a big-budget blockbuster like Avatar relentlessly attacks the capitalist system, but without such a system, the film could never build its success at such a massive level.