Mark Reviews Movies: BOYS STATE

Follow on Facebook | Follow on Twitter | Become a Patron

Review by Mark Dujsik | August 13, 2020

Every year, the American Legion holds a most unique retreat for teenage boys across the United States. The goal of this program, which has thousands of boys selected by the organization at their departments across the United States, is for young men to learn the ins and outs of civics, politics, elections, and governance by organizing political parties and running a mock government, leading up to a general election for the governor and other executive-branch offices within the group's government.

The idea results a fascinating social experiment, even if that wasn't and isn't the point of the Boys State program. Filmmakers Amanda McBaine and Jesse Moss certainly saw that potential, though, and their documentary about the Boys State retreat in Texas reveals a lot about the younger generation, some of whom will probably be able to vote in the upcoming election, in this part of the country. Some of it is frightening, but most of it is encouraging.

Boys State isn't about judging some of these kids and praising others, though. The film just watches these boys, quite objectively, as their values, their political beliefs, and their senses of morality and ethics are challenged by the electoral system as it has become in this country. It's complicated business, to say the least, and the filmmakers reveal just as much about the nature of politics and elections in this country as they do the participants in this program.

Following a select group of participants from their interviews with the local American Legion to the final election, the documentary offers only a scant amount of information about Boys State. Given the region where this post is located, it should come as little surprise that most of these participants have a conservative bent to their politics. It's not a partisan affair, though (Alumni highlighted in the opening credits range from radio personality Rush Limbaugh to President Bill Clinton).

Steven Garza, one of the film's most prominent figures, is the son of immigrants from Mexico, whose mother lived undocumented in the United States for some time (She has since gained legal residency and made a career for herself), and he became politically active within the presidential campaign for Bernie Sanders. The teen is a self-described "progressive," who participated in rallies for gun legislation following the mass murder at a high school in Parkland, Florida. Steven wants to run for Boys State Governor. This, obviously, is going to be a bit of a challenge for him, considering the political leaning of the apparent majority here.

They're more or less represented by Ben Feinstein, a double-amputee with prosthetic legs and a disfigured arm after a childhood bout of meningitis. Ben is a conservative through and through, listening to speeches by Ronald Reagan in his downtime (He even has a bobble-head figure of the man) and putting forth the argument to his parents that his condition shouldn't provide him with any kind of government assistance. It's the individual person, not the immutable characteristics of a person or group, that should matter in this country.

We spend a lot of time with Steven and Ben, as well as much with Robert MacDougall, who comes across as a young good ol' boy jock (but has some ideas he keeps close to the chest), and René Otero, a Black teen who moved to Texas from Chicago (His mother insists that she's willing to move back, if the politics of Texas get to be too much, but René believes the place needs his political perspective). The filmmakers genuinely care about what these boys have to say, what they hide, and why they speak and conceal what they do.

The individual stories here are engaging. Self-proclaimed political "junkies," unsurprisingly, are as odd and eclectic a bunch as any other strain of fan, but the raised stakes and seriousness of their chosen obsession make those personality quirks seem all the stranger. Those smaller stories are just scratching the surface of McBaine and Moss' real point, which comes from more psychological and sociological perspectives.

Intentional or not, the American Legion's program is a great experiment that seems to have gone untapped for study since it began in the 1930s. It is, essentially, the American Experiment in microcosm, putting people of various beliefs and backgrounds together in secluded spaces, in order to see if they can elect leaders, pass laws, and come away with something looking like a functioning, if fake, government.

It's fascinating, then, to see how these teens—all of them with at least enough interest, knowledge, and comprehension of the workings of politics and government to want and be selected to participate in this program—adapt to the perceived and required needs of campaigning and governing. Upon arriving, participants are randomly divided into two political parties: the Federalists and the unfortunately named Nationalists. They have to form party leadership (Ben and René become rival party chairs) and a platform. There is much arguing, leading the Federalists to adopt just about anything to have a platform and the Nationalists to keep debating even after they've determined candidates. There's even talk of impeachment and the entire fake government seceding from the United States.

The most alternately encouraging and disheartening thing, though, is how these boys respond to the election process. Steven, who seems quiet and awkward, comes into his own with his first campaign speech—a heartfelt and honest plea for unity despite their differences. Robert arrives to the campaign with a lot of personality and right-leaning talk, but seeing Steven start to succeed with his honest opinions and beliefs makes him wonder if pandering is the right way to go. Ben gradually becomes a kind of political hawk, looking for weaknesses to exploit, angles for personal attacks, and ways to call the entire system into question—all of it for the glory of a victory of which he would be the architect.

We see a lot of our current problems in this experiment, and the takeaway is that it's not just one person or party that's to blame. The system as established has as much, if not more, to do with it. Boys State, though, offers hope in at least some of these teens, who likely will go on to great and positive things. Let's hope the Girls State offers enough optimism to counter the great and terrible potential of the rest.

Back to Home

Buy Related Products