Feeling Furor in Response to "The Money Heist" Part I

 

Feeling Furor in Response to Four Seasons of La Casa de Papel,

“The Money Heist” – Part I

 

Like millions of Americans, I have spent hours binge watching episodes and seasons of La Casa de Papel, henceforth “The Money Heist.”  The final scene of the fourth season left me feeling absolute furor. Now, I remain on the cliff until the release of the fifth and hopefully the final season. I assumed that episode would conclude the series with “justice.”  Instead, I am left to wonder whether a repulsive, sniveling, infuriating, hypocritical and contemptible thief, slave driver and terrorist succeeds in a second heist at the expense of his blind followers and the masses whom he claims to represent.

 

I speak of none other than “the Professor” who is the biggest example of everything he opposes.  Initially, I admired him and believed he held minimal redeeming principles.  His criticisms of the banking and ruling classes as it relates to their systemic exploitation, subjugation and oppression of average citizens have appeal.  Throughout the global village, one percent of a nation controls ninety percent (90%) or more of a nation’s wealth.  Daily, ten and hundreds of millions of common people contribute billions of hours of labor to enrich a few thousand people.  Despite their diligence, discipline and hard work, these international citizens barely subsist.  In New York City, the average family expends sixty percent (60%) of their monthly take home income on housing.  The remaining minority percentage pays utility bills, education, healthcare, food, clothing, transportation, insurance, communication, entertainment and other necessary and miscellaneous expenses.  Average persons do not have any liquid income.  They save with fierce determination only if their non-negotiable obligations leave resources for a rainy day.  Recent studies document the treacherous predicament of average families which have approximately $400 in savings available for unexpected expenses.  Internationally, the average family lives on an annual income of $1500 (USD).  Indeed, these structural financial inequities are global.  I hasten to add that I do not advocate communism, socialism or any form of collective ownership.  The expanse of human history proves such economic and political systems simply do not work.  Whereas utopianism is an ideal fictional concept for a thrilling bestselling novel, a level economic playing field and free market, devoid of structural inequalities and regulated by government primarily to ensure fundamental fairness, are possible. 

 

“The Professor” begins the series deceitfully advocating for the common person.  In the first heist, he and his accomplices print nearly a billion Euros and put this “counterfeit” currency into circulation in the global economy.  He cites Spanish and international law in addition to unjust banking regulations and excesses to justify taking hostages and capturing the mint of Spain.  “The Professor’s” hatred of the banking and ruling classes ironically transforms him into one of them.  Not surprisingly, we become the people who we hate.  Hence, “the Professor” joins the oligarchs whom he despises and employs the same machinations and abuses that he condemns.  “The Professor” is not a noble Robin Hood.  His actions reflect a self-aggrandizing man who relegates average people to being pawns on his elaborate chess board of criminality, theft, slavery, felony murder and terrorism.  As I watched the four seasons, my furor about his unbridled hypocrisy boiled to lava like temperatures.  Through his dastardly and despicable deeds, this thief, criminal and hater of the international banking class and political and governmental leaders who do the bidding of the economic elite becomes the people whom he despises. 

He, therefore, does not deserve our admiration or compassion.  “The Professor” warrants universal condemnation.  His hypocrisy makes him a greater criminal than the people he judges and reviles.  His masterfully and meticulously orchestrated theft of nearly a billion Euros would destabilize Spain’s economy and those of the nations of the European Union.  The adverse results of “the Professor’s” grand heist would reverberate throughout international markets.  Chances are it would significantly devalue the hard-earned wages of average hardworking people.  He irreparably would injure the very people whom he claims to advocate.  Imagine the severely reduced food, clothing and housing resources of cab drivers, custodians, cafeteria workers, gas station attendants and other minimum wage workers throughout the globe. 

 

In the episode when he orders the blimp flight to drop hundreds of millions of Euros from the sky onto crowded streets during lunchtime, he explains this act as sharing the loot with the people.  He assures his accomplices that they are keeping this promise to win public favor.  Monetarily, this “gift” equates with pennies on the dollar, pound or Euro for any anonymous person who happened to be on the street at that time.  In addition to demeaning these people by having them grab money as it falls from the sky, he makes them complicit in his theft; and in undermining their wages and devaluing their economy with “counterfeit” money.  However, this fictional series demonstrates the need of international citizens to demand pragmatic honesty and progressive leadership abilities from anyone aspiring to public office.  “The Professor” embodies someone whose self-aggrandizing character and hypocrisy would rule him out of consideration.  “The Professor” hardly exemplifies Robin Hood as his actions reflect that he does not believe any of the principles he espouses.

 

Guilty of several counts of felony murder, kidnapping, grand larceny and multiple infractions of Spanish and international law, this self-centered coward is a fugitive.  From a hidden location, he prides himself in being the mastermind of two monumental thefts.  He takes no risks.  He cajoles his coconspirators into taking the lives of undeserving persons and risking their own lives.  Consistent with his narcissistic disposition, he resolves that he is too smart to risk being shot.  Yet, he depersonalizes innocent civilians by holding them hostage against their will and forcing them to dig a tunnel, print illegal currency and be fodder should law enforcement rightfully attack.  In the first heist, he offers them a million Euros should they join his forces.  This sum translates financially into a miniscule amount considering the size of the plunder.  Lest we forget, Spanish authorities would discover this arrangement and eventually prosecute any collaborators.  Once again, he belittles the people whom he claims to serve. 

 

In stark contrast, “the Professor” cites Spanish and international law to justify himself.  He insists upon rights and liberties of which he deprives others to ingratiate his criminal essence.  You recall the scene near the end of one season in which the thieves finally cross into international waters.  “The Professor” announces this fact when they exceed the two-hundred nautical mile limit from Spain’s borders.  They celebrate as they giddily conclude they won against the authorities; they succeeded in accomplishing an unrivaled money heist.  That moment fueled my incredible disdain for “the Professor” and his reprehensible deeds and incongruence.