cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/14981
In an interview for his new Avatar sequel, James Cameron showed his understanding of why people in Palestine, Ukraine, and Sudan are standing up to their oppressors like Israel:
James Cameron… a surprisingly real interview. https://t.co/2ArGdLnoOh
— Brandon Davis (@BrandonDavisBD) December 19, 2025
Given that the Avatar films are explicitly anti-imperialist, it’s not surprising Cameron would think like this.
James Cameron: “it’s existential”
In the video above, the host asks:
You capture all-out war in this movie. Good guys are killing bad guys. They’re each killing each other. They’re each killing each other’s animals and creatures. And yet I feel like when we see the sort of suffering, we only see the pain, mostly see the pain inflicted on the good guys. As if you’re trying to make sure we don’t empathize with the bad guys. Can you talk about how fighting for what’s right, and walking that line, requires that sort of portrayal?
Cameron responds:
It’s a fine line, right? Because we go down, we go into Tulkun culture and they say, you know, killing only leads to more killing, an endless expanding spiral, right? And that’s the world we live in right now. That’s what we’ve seen. We’ve seen it in Gaza. We’ve seen it in Sudan. We’ve seen it in Ukraine.
And you know, you’re doing an action movie. People are going to fight, right? But are you fighting for a just cause? Are you fighting for what you believe in? Are you fighting from a place of hatred or revenge?
There are some fights that are righteous. And total annihilation is a reason to fight. It’s existential.
Cameron and his friends George Lucas have made similar comments in the past:
James Cameron: “In Star Wars the good guys are the rebels, they’re using asymmetric warfare against a highly organized empire, I think we call those guys terrorists today.”
George Lucas: “When I did it they were Vietcong. That was the whole point.”
pic.twitter.com/SVW9rlZ22Q— cinesthetic. (@TheCinesthetic) December 12, 2025
Featured image via Raw Pixel
By Willem Moore
From Canary via This RSS Feed.
No, Cameron is describing the false “cycle of violence”. This is liberal Zionism and disconnected with reality. If I wrote any more I would just be restating a comment I’ve made before, so I’ll just link it: https://hexbear.net/post/1949601/4648254
I can tell you’re one of those people that claims there is a “cycle of violence”, but there is no cycle. There is no circular causality. Israel’s genocide is not caused by violence from Palestinians. It is caused by an ethno-nationalist ideology and the colonist invasion used to implement it. Every bit of violence that you will associate with a Palestinian is a justified response to being trapped, starved, beaten, deprived, and killed.
Palestinians do not do anything to cause the continued violence of Israel. If Hamas completely dissolved and no Palestinian child ever threw a rock at an Israeli tank again, they would still be getting genocided, having their homes and land continually taken from them. Because Israel and most of its citizens want this to happen. No, “we” don’t need thousands of people to die. Israel needs it.
Which is surreal because the script in avatar 3 stressed that the human’s started it and would keep attacking until they had total dominian.
James Cameron is pretty good for a liberal but he’s still a liberal
Yeah in discussion with Lucas, Cameron is constantly trying to steer it back to hippie-ish platitudes about “the man” and Lucas is being much more direct and literal about what represents what.
Very true, could easily be interperated by zionists as for them too. Very both-sidey.
I think you got a different reading from the quote than I did. The first paragraph when he’s talking about the cycle he’s talking about “Tulkun culture”, but then he goes on to directly refute this idea, saying that “There are some fights that are righteous. And total annihilation is a reason to fight. It’s existential.”
Yours is not a valid reading.
It’s a fine line, right? Because we go down, we go into Tulkun culture and they say, you know, killing only leads to more killing, an endless expanding spiral, right? And that’s the world we live in right now. That’s what we’ve seen. We’ve seen it in Gaza. We’ve seen it in Sudan. We’ve seen it in Ukraine.
He says “an endless expanding spiral…[is] what we’ve seen…in Gaza.” Those sentences are back to back. You are inserting something vague from a different paragraph that doesn’t even negate this part. He literally says “that’s the world we live in now”.
All he say is “some fights” are righteous. He doesn’t even name which ones, and you are assuming he’s referring to Palestine, without reason. Given the liberal, anti-materialist analysis of the first uninterrupted paragraph, it’s much more likely he’s talking about Ukraine.
But either way, your quote isn’t relevant to what I was responding to, which was two back-to-back sentences that call “Gaza” a cycle of violence.
eh as quoted it seems like he could be referring to either side. zionists all say their apartheid nuclear statelet is at risk of annihilation from the ten thousand kids they have to kill every year. I don’t think Cameron is saying that here. but the statement is not particularly clear.
Is there a single anti-Zionist billionaire on Earth?
