Trump has yet to take office, but he has already replicated Joe Biden's attempt to conjure world peace through magic incantations.

Not so long ago, when Iran threatened to bomb Israel into oblivion, Biden famously said, "Don't." We all know how that turned out:

...President Joe Biden issued a warning to any state or hostile actor considering attacking Israel: "Don't, don't, don't." And yet, Israel has faced relentless bombardments from multiple Iranian proxies for the last six months. The ineffectiveness of Biden's strategy was on full display again this past weekend, when the president issued a similar warning to Iran against striking Israel, this time with a single "don't." Predictably, this did nothing to halt the rogue state, which launched 300 drones and missiles at Israel late Saturday night. Almost all were intercepted, thanks to the combined efforts of Israel, the U.S., the U.K., France, and several Arab states. [links omitted]

I had forgotten that Biden had tried this cantrip multiple times, all to similar effect.

Have no fear! Trump's followers will say Trump will soon straighten all of this out.

Indeed, just as he has lost no time in making dubious cabinet picks, Trump has been communicating with hostile international figures, including Putin and, if rumors are to be credited, Iran's mullahs.

Trump, who is aggressively dovish and imagines that anything can be smoothed over with a "deal" (i.e., diplomacy) appears to have a foreign policy much like his successor/predecessor, absent (we hope) the arms embargoes to Israel.

The embarrassing man-crush may have a bigger chance of surviving than American deterrence. (Image by the Kremlin, via Wikimedia Commons, license.)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has already waltzed right past a pointed warning from the MAGA leader, sending tens of thousands of soldiers to the Ukrainian war front after Trump told him not to escalate the situation.

...

Trump had spoken with Putin over the phone on Thursday, reportedly advising the foreign leader not to escalate the war, reminding Putin of America's military capabilities in Europe, according to The Washington Post.

Don't wasn't effective coming from Biden's lips and the same word won't become effective by the magic of being said by Donald Trump.

As with anything else, the Republicans are going to fool around with the theory that "our guys" doing essentially the same things (e.g., diplomacy, deficit spending, and central planning) the Democrats did will somehow make it work, and they are going to find out otherwise.

-- CAV

This movie is a microcosm of civilized humanity. In fact, the word humanity is perfectly used in Conclave. The movie’s been adapted by Peter Straughan (who adapted John Le Carre’s Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy for film) from the 2016 novel of the same name by Robert Harris. It’s directed by Edward Berger, who’s known for directing a Netflix remake of the 1930 Oscar Best Picture winner, All Quiet on the Western Front, itself based on a novel by Erich Maria Remarque (read my recently published analysis of the 1930 movie in Unlikely Stories).

Director Berger employs a curious method mixing the close-up and emphasis on audio-visual cues with a smattering of neatly composed shots. For example, the respiratory system is a focal point. I don’t want to overthink or overanalyze here, which I have a tendency to do, but it strikes me that Berger makes a point to stress that to expend the effort to think is to breathe life into one’s choice of action. Thinking, in other words, is like breathing: it’s vital. I don’t think this gives Berger undeserved credit. At key intervals, a character’s breath marks Conclave’s progession.

A conclave is an assembly of Roman Catholic cardinals to elect a new pope. This is the plot premise. The plot-theme, however, is that the rational life is the byproduct of focusing not on “tradition but…[by focusing on] what we do next.” What comes next and how to prepare amounts in this context to promoting human life here on earth.

Characters in this claustrophobic movie are interesting if predictable. So is the plot. At least it was to me, though I may not be a representative audience sample given that I’ve seen and analyzed or reviewed scads of movies. I saw Conclave’s plot twist coming. It’s an intriguing twist. One can take it any number of ways. I take it in a very particular way. Ultimately, I think the twist serves both plot and theme.

Among the characters are various cardinals competing to become pope. In this sense, Conclave is like a good sports or courtroom drama. It’s engrossing if only by virtue of its suspenseful tension over who will be elected pope. There’s never any question whether anyone will be elected. Conclave depicts the highest Catholic contest.

The Vatican and papacy are an unmistakable metaphor here for civilization. Leading the cast is Ralph Fiennes (The White Crow) as Cardinal Lawrence, a relative voice of reason (to the extent this is possible in the Vatican). Among the cloistered priests and nuns are Stanley Tucci (The Devil Wears Prada) as a liberal American cardinal. Other cardinals come from various continents across the globe, including an African cardinal who thinks gays are going to hell. John Lithgow (Third Rock from the Sun) costars as a popular cardinal. There’s a contingent devoted to the cardinal who holds the old, classic Italian traditionalism, too. As Sister Agnes, Isabella Rossellini (White Nights) gives one of her best performances, particularly in a scene opposite Fiennes.

As shuttered cardinals debate and discuss various scenarios and cut deals and alliances in shadows and stairwells, the world outside the Vatican goes on and attempts to intrude. A sparse musical score punctuates and never overwhelms. The Vatican’s luxury and monastic simplicity permeates Conclave. Catholic ritualism remains complete with white smoke, gallantry and theatricality with all the ribbons, ceremonies and robes, and, of course, a Bible. Curiously, the cross and crucifix are rarely seen, a directorial choice which supports Berger’s decision to portray the Vatican as a metaphor for civilized society.

Among those competing or contesting include a new cardinal from Afghanistan. Action and discourse begin with the death of a pope who remains something of a mystery and yet was mostly admired. One of the cardinals is guilty of simony. Another is a gentle, reasonable guide and advocate for logic in electing the new pope. Introspection about one’s goals, motives and ethics drives the plot, which depicts a psychological puzzle inviting the audience to think about what moves your choices and your life. Human action is the point of the studious Conclave.

Among the considerations: whether to seal, (later, whether it’s proper to break the seal), to a room filled with mystery—whether women can and ought to have a serious role in human affairs including the Roman Catholic Church—what constitutes virtue in the innermost crises of one’s soul.

Ralph Fiennes comes off well, giving another outstanding performance in a remarkable career. At a time when the newly designated American Secretary of Defense sports a tattoo boasting of the Crusades while religious radicals attack civilization with catastrophic intent to destroy the West, Conclave’s subtext of religious war provokes thought. Berger’s choice to pivot to the Vatican’s exterior, particularly in a scene with umbrellas as the world awaits the election of the new pope, underscore Conclave’s nuances and thematic point that human action is serious and ought not to be taken too lightly. The film’s an argument for taking life seriously, which is to say philosophically—as philosophical as a Catholic can get.

Conclave’s twist, whether you see it coming, as I did, is at once plausible and unsettling. It’s a twist which makes you think. It makes you think twice. It’s not cut and dried. Seen one way, the twist underscores the absurdity of religion both in general and in principle. Seen this way, the outcome of the election of the new pope matches the irrationalism of our times. Seen another, more optimistic, way, what happens at the Vatican is a step toward a brighter, more harmonious world in which everyone can be capable of love. Seen a third way, the twist encompasses the meaning of both of these viewpoints; that the election of the new pope showcases both religion’s primitivism and its simple, existential fidelity to the facts of reality. The pope, too, is human. Conclave concretizes this.

With Latin phrases (unfortunately without subtitles) throughout the film, Conclave ultimately asserts with a sense of conviction that perfection—secular or religious—lies in “peace, truth and intelligence.” Can anyone honestly dispute that this is true? Conclave strives to dramatize that perfection, as Leonard Peikoff argues, is possible.

Related Articles and Links

“When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.”

~ Thomas Sowell