Writer-director Daniel Ragussis has long been fascinated with the evil that men do. From his devastating short HABER, about the World War I-era chemist who invented Zyklon B, the world’s first chemical weapon of mass destruction, to his first features film, IMPERIUM, concerning the very real and growing existence of radical white supremacy, domestic terror groups that politicians seem to be afraid to call out by name. The film is based on the experiences of undercover FBI agent Michael German (renamed Nate Foster and played by Daniel Radcliffe), who worked his way up the ranks of one such group.
IMPERIUM is both a wake-up call to the rest of America and a sickening education about the world of organized hate. Above all things, the film feels scarily authentic, with a staggering level of detail and knowledge that I’ve never seen outside of documentaries on the subject. I had a chance to chat with Ragussis recently about the film, which is in limited release currently. With that, enjoy my talk with filmmaker Daniel Ragussis…
Daniel Ragussis: Hi, Steve.
Capone: Hi, Daniel. How are you?
DR: Good. How are you?
Capone: Excellent. I know that you made a short film a while back about a world-famous chemist who invented Zyklon B, which was used by the Nazis during World War II. And now you’ve jumped ahead to modern-day neo-Nazis. What is the fixation with these groups?
DR: HABER is actually about a World War I chemist named was Fritz Haber. But the connection that you’re making is still there, because out of doing all the research on World War I and becoming interested in that era, I then became interested in World War II and the Nazis. I was doing research on that era and reading “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” and would go on YouTube and watch some of the famous speeches that Hitler had given, and there would be just hundreds and hundreds of comments in English basically saying “This is the greatest leader of the 20th century. Adolf rest in piece.” All this crazy stuff. That was ironically how I stumbled upon the neo-Nazi community, and I immediately was just stunned and thought “Who are these people? How can this be possible?” So that really got me interested in the community and then the more I went into it, the more I realized how deep and broad and widespread that community really is.
Capone: Was it through the research of the neo-Nazi groups today that you stumbled on Mike German’s story?
DR: Exactly right. So yeah, once I became interested in the movement and in that community, then it was sort of looking for a way in—how would you tell a story about that community? And then while I was trying to figure that out and doing a lot of Googling and research, I came across Mike German and I thought “Well that seems like the perfect way to see it, through the eyes of an FBI undercover agent. That would be the perfect way into the group and would also provide us as an audience a proxy, a way though which to experience that group from the outside.
Capone: Two things jumped in my head as I was watching it. One was the film BETRAYED from 1988. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen that.
DR: No, I haven’t.
Capone: The Costa-Gavras film, which essentially puts Debra Winger, as an FBI agent, in a community not dissimilar from this one.
DR: Now I’m going to run and go see that as soon as we get off the phone.
Capone: I remember seeing it and being really, really blown away by it. Joe Eszterhas wrote it.
DR: Sounds great.
Capone: There was a documentary a couple of years after that called BLOOD IN THE FACE, which is I’m sure a term you’re familiar with, but that’s supposed to be how you tell if someone is really white—you slap them and their face gets red.
DR: Actually, with all the research I’ve done on this movement, that one is new to me. See, I’m learning more from this interview than you are. [laughs]
Capone: The thing about your film that reminds me of BETRAYED is the way you feature those everyday aspects of that lifestyle, not just the most extreme versions. The wedding or the barbecue—people being people, except they have this one major difference. You have to be aware as a visual artist that there are certain images—paraphernalia, literature, and the burning crosses—that get a visceral reaction from just about anybody. How do you make sure that these messages are done with the right balance and doesn’t feel like exploitation?
DR: Yeah, absolutely. Well, let me start with the last part of it, then I’ll go to the first, which is let’s remember these movements and these groups and these organizations have chosen these images for exactly that reason. This is not accidental. This is actually a calculated process on that part. That’s why Hitler adopted the swastika. That’s why a lot of these groups use the images that they do, because they’re so powerful, then of course when you pair them with the horrible historical associations they have, then they become even more powerful.
But these groups in general thrive on visual iconography and employ it as a very basic means of causing a reaction, both in support of their movement and even in protest, in counter-reaction, which is something that can also be useful to them. The other thing I would say is that to people within these organizations and within these groups, these symbols occur to them as symbols of pride and heritage. I know that sounds crazy to people like us, but they do. So in the research I was doing on the neo-Nazi community, for example, they regularly employ swastikas in all sorts of means. That bit with the [swastika-shaped icing on] cupcakes, that’s actually something that I actually saw.
Capone: Oh, that was crazy.
DR: I know, right? [laughs] it’s funny, I read something that sais, “Well, the film goes a little too far and becomes unbelievable.” And I was like, “Well, that was something that I saw.” [laughs] I’ve seen things where they’ll put a swastika on the kitchen floor and have their daughters dance around it. All sorts of things like that. Now of course, anybody that’s in a movement like this is going to be in some basic state of confrontation with the majority of society, and they know that. Everyone is aware that they’re also being provocative when they’re using these symbols in that way. It’s not like they’re ignorant of that fact, but to them it’s almost like a conversation starter in the sense of “We’re going to put out there what’s important to us and what we think is important about history and then we’re going to let you react to it.”
So maybe that has answered the first part of your question. I’ll say one more thing: it was always from the beginning very interesting to me and very important to me to try to show these people in their everyday lives, because it struck me that, for whatever political beliefs they have, for whatever they may do, they are people, they have families, they have jobs, they eat meals, they share jokes, they fall in love, they do all of these things. They have barbecues, they have get-togethers, they listen to music together. So it was very important to me to try to communicate that. I think the thing is when you see groups that are this politically oriented, and when their politics are so inflammatory and abhorrent to the rest of society, there’s going to be a natural way in which they’re used to the symbols and iconography is going to be sensational. I think that’s just a natural function of who they are.
Capone: You do such a great job of immersing us in this world, that the bomb plot almost becomes secondary, not to put down the rest of the movie.
DR: [laughs] No, I don’t take it bad at all. I hear you. And look, I’m cognizant of that too and what’s fresh and what’s new.
Capone: I’m sure this is the question you get asked the most, but Daniel Radcliffe being in this film at all seems like an unlikely choice. How did his name even make it in the mix of actors you considered for this part?
DR: There were two dual inspirations for the film. One is what we were primarily talking about, which is trying to get inside this community in a way hopefully that we haven't seen before that was fresh and interesting and authentic. The other was to try to portray undercover work in a way that hopefully is fresh and interesting and authentic. What I mean by that is, when I first met Mike, he was nothing at all like what I imagined an FBI agent would be. He was this very sort spoken and charming and literate and cultured guy. Not physically imposing in the least. And I said to him, “I have to admit, you’re not what I imagined you would be. I thought you would kick the door down and order everyone on the ground.”
And that’s when he made the point which then became another touchstone for the movie that undercover work is not about physical dominance at all. It’s not about beating people up, it’s not about shooting at them like it says in the movie. It’s about social skills. It’s about being the most liked person in the room. It’s about being someone that everyone likes and finds endearing and trusts and wants to talk to. So once it turned into that, then the casting of someone like Dan just became ideal. Natural qualities that I felt that he brought to the role, all those things that I just talked about I felt were there, and I felt would be perfect for the role. So that’s how it happened creatively. Then in terms of actually casting him, we got the script to him though his agents, he really responded, which was great. I was just really fortunate to be able to have him in the movie.
Capone: The point is made during the film that he is almost too smart and thoughtful to be a part of this group, and with the people he comes into contact with initially, that is true. But as we get deeper into this group, we start to realize there are people like that in the group like him, and that’s almost scarier. Sam Trammell’s character is maybe the most terrifying, because he is so level headed and normal, but he’s also willing to die for this cause. Those people are the ones that scare me more than the guys with the shaved heads and the jack boots.
DR: That was one of the real discoveries for me too and something that was very important to try to show in the movie, and it’s real, and it’s out there. It would only take you one or two Google searches to find “scholarly” journals written by people with PhDs that are all about Holocaust revisionism and Jewish bolshevism. It’s out there, it’s being published, there are conferences, all of these sorts of things. There’s a huge intellectual tradition behind it, and that to me was also something that I wasn’t familiar with, and that, yeah, it’s both revelatory and frightening.
Capone: Then there’s the Tracy Letts character [playing an inflammatory talk radio host], who made me the angriest because he’s more of an opportunist. Do people like that exist?
DR: Oh, for sure. Most definitely. The movement is filled with them, and in fact, there is even a great deal of grumbling within the movement about people like that. There’s a lot of sentiment among people that “Some of these guys, they’re just out to make money, they’re just out to sell books.” There was a whole controversy, for example, when William Pierce, who is the author of “The Turner Diaries,” which is mentioned in the movie. I guess some copy of it got put online, and I don’t know whether he filed a lawsuit, but he took it down, said people had to buy the book, and there was a huge, massive outrage in the community. “He’s supposed to be trying to spread the word, and all he wants to do is make money.” So that phenomenon is both a real thing and something that people within the movement often grumble about and are displeased about—the lack of true believers and the people that are just in it to make money or sell stuff.
Capone: There’s a familiar saying that there’s no such thing as bad publicity. By just putting these ideas out there, even though you’re obviously being very critical of them, are you worried about opening up new eyes to these ideas? You always see the stories about AMERICAN HISTORY X and the fact that skinheads love that movie just because it portrays them accurately. Were you at all concerned?
DR: Yeah, I asked Mike German at the beginning “How does the community react to AMERICAN HISTORY X?” And he was like, “That’s every skinhead’s favorite movie.” I said, “I don’t understand. Isn’t it a repudiation of the lifestyle?” And he goes, “Yeah, well they would say it takes a ridiculous Hollywood twist at the end, which is absurd, but it’s about their community.”
But I would say this: it’s my firm belief—I could be wrong—that the only way we’re going to transcend these ideologies and move beyond this stuff is to have an open debate about it and to talk about it, and that the reason we live in a democratic society, so anyone can voice their views, however abhorrent, because it’s only through the voicing of those views and our ability to counter-argue and to point out very explicitly and directly that we can say, “Here’s why those views are wrong, here’s why they’re damaging to society, here’s why they’re hurtful to people, here’s why they don’t work.” That’s the mechanism through which these things get dispelled.
The other thing is, I certainly was living in a bit of denial about how widespread and mainstream these views were, and I think it’s important that we know that. When I was shopping this script around, I can’t tell you how many times people said to me, “Well, that stuff doesn’t really exist anymore, right? That’s not a thing, is it?” It’s like “No, it’s a big thing as much as we would love it not to be.” And not acknowledging that and not being aware of it, I don’t think ultimately that’s helpful towards the goal, which is to try to transcend these things and not have them captivate our society the way that they so often seem to do.
Capone: The question comes up at different points in the film: how do you change somebody that is this far gone? You don’t attempt to answer that, but you do provide a sliver of hope at the endwith that kid talking in front of the class. How do you stop something that is so engrained in someone’s beliefs?
DR: I wish I had an easy answer to that. I think that one of the things that’s very dark about the subject matter is not just the beliefs that these people hold, but the absolute conviction with which they hold them. They have constructed a very philosophically and ideologically rigorous way of looking at the world that takes every fact on the ground and works it into this larger conspiracy that they have. If you where to get into a philosophical debate with them, every point of evidence that you would bring to bare, they would have a way of incorporating that and using it as proof of their own world views. That’s very disturbing and challenging, so I don’t have an easy answer, but I also think it should be observed that people come out of this movement all the time. Things like that happen where people transcend it. I was reading a memoir of a skinhead where the kid happened to get a job a furniture dealer who was Jewish, and he was like, “This is a really great guy.” And that’s what snapped him out of it.
A lot of times, it’s not going to be counterargument, it’s going to be life experience. And I think as we become more diverse and progressive as a society, people are exposed to the people that they “hate” and realize that they’re not who they thing they are. I think that’s part of it. I think open discussion and debate is part of it, because I think one of their chief complaints is “We can’t air our views. This isn’t a free society. We don’t have freedom of speech, we can’t talk about these things, we can’t say what’s on our mind,” and that’s why I personally don’t want to support a culture that makes them feel that way. I want them to feel “Yes, you can express whatever is on your mind. You can say what you think. That’s what I was saying before. That’s what democratic societies are for. Now I’m going to tell you the reasons why I don’t think those views are correct, and I can show you very clearly how they lead to death, destruction, and misery for everyone.” I think you need to have that kind of transparent debate and discussion in order to do what you’re talking about, which is help people get out of these systems of thought.
Capone: I have to imagine in the last year or so you’ve been even more eager to get this movie out there, because some of these ideas are a little less in the shadows than they used to be.
DR: Mike said once, “What is disturbing to me is I was doing cases 20 years ago, and what was being talked about in dirty basements and dark garages is now being talked about on national TV.” But the point I would make is in a way, it’s good it’s being talked about on national TV, because it was always being talked about in garages and basements. It’s not like that changed. It’s not like millions of people suddenly started believing in this stuff; it’s just now it’s being talked about, and to me again, it’s through conversation and dialogue and awareness that we’re ultimately going to be able to move beyond it and realize what’s going on so that we can actually deal with it.
Capone: Daniel, thanks and best of luck with this.
DR: Thank you so much, it’s been really talking about it. I really enjoyed it.
