The Post

Political discourses, ones that are done on a purely academic fashion, are fewer and far between, especially the past two years. The atmosphere has gotten so polarized that discussions that are meant to be a great mental exercise has often involved personal attacks and emotional blackmail. Relationships have been strained over debates concerning people (e.g., presidents, lawmakers, governors) who don’t even share the same dining table as the parties who are bickering over them. It’s sad because hearing perspectives from a person who has a dissenting, but not hostile, voice is a source of endless fascination. For me, at least. Although I love (and prefer) having my opinions validated by someone who sees things the way I do, I also enjoy the edgy tone of a friendly debate. 

Yet, as much as I enjoy political discussions, I wasn’t looking for one when I told people that the movie, The Post, is a must-see. I was told that the reason I enjoyed this Spielberg-helmed film is because it was such an in-your-face statement to the current US President who has been compared to Richard Nixon on several occasions. It is indeed that, but I loved it because it broadly stressed the immensity of the impact of fulfilling the mandate of the position in society that you find yourself in. It specifically told of how Katharine Graham (Streep), the owner of The Washington Post, had to make a choice between keeping her company solvent and performing the role that the country expected her to do, that is to be the avenue of truth and hold leaders of government accountable in the process.

At a time when the truth seems arbitrary, often viewed depending on which side of the political aisle you’re on, it has become incumbent on the citizenry to take everything with a grain of salt. Because even the media has become hyperpartisan. One news outlet says one thing and the other refutes it. Who do you believe? The attack on the truth or the distortion of it, sadly, is not exclusive to politics. People, I find, are more inclined to bluff than own up. But truth comes out one way or another, right away or 20 years later, as alluded to in the film. 

The movie also highlighted the evolution of women’s role in society. Meryl Streep portrayed Graham’s insecurities with such conviction that when she finally develops enough gumption to stand up to her male counterparts, you would feel like giving her a standing ovation. Several women, like Graham, went through various forms of discrimination and disrespect before they were heard but their tenacity paved the way for future generations of women to have the rights and recognition that are sometimes taken for granted.

Finally, the film’s thrust to underscore the necessity of preserving the freedom of the press in order for a democracy to truly work was successful. Biased, tainted, or hyperpartisan though they may be, the heart of a free nation lies in its unfettered ability to speak up, offer a different opinion, and stand up to what it thinks is an injustice without the threat of persecution. Wars were waged, blood was spilled, and lives were sacrificed for that right. The least we could do is stand up for its preservation. 

No, we would not always agree on several issues and we would often criticize each other’s views. We have a right to do so. But my hope is we would keep in mind that at the end of the day, we are all in the same boat and we’ll sink or swim together. So let’s hear each other out with respect, keeping in mind that our relationships with our friends, families, and colleagues are more important than proving a political point. 

How does democracy look like?