In this piece of writing, I will be comparing the governments in reality and In the Hunger Games to answer the question: How might the government in the Hunger Games be described as ‘oppressive’ in the hunger games?
To begin with pointing out the obvious, the government of The Hunger Games make teenagers from each district fight one another to the death. The reason that the Hunger Games are held every year is so the districts know that the Capitol is "the one". The reason there are Hunger Games is because the districts did not like the way the Capitol was running things, so they started a rebellion. They caused a lot of trouble, but eventually the Capitol took over again. To prevent another rebellion, they have the Hunger Games. It is to show the people how strong the Capitol is and that they actually can kill everyone if they want to-since they are letting kids from 12-18 die. They just want the people to understand that they are still in charge and make them pay for what they did. To make the idea seem more ‘fun’, this became a reality TV show, so everyone could watch the children murder each other shamelessly for their own entertainment.
Whereas in reality, all of this is illegal and some sort of ‘show’ that related to this in any way would be banned and the directors are likely to be arrested. Any rebels in reality are likely to be arrested, and being imprisoned means they will not make the same mistake – or at least not until they are released. If so, the rebels will probably be arrested again.
Another oppressive measure of the Hunger Games government is keeping food supplies scarce, so citizens are always hungry and scared. This is probably another punishment against the rebellions. Again, in reality, this would be an unlikely idea. However, our government does raise the prices of food and other supplies, meaning money and food might be scarce for those short of money, creating a similarity between the two governments.
The Capitol has ‘Peacekeepers’ to enforce the law – not police. These Peacekeepers are dressed in white armor, most likely dressed appropriately for another rebellion. In the book ‘The Hunger Games’, Katniss Everdeen (the main character) says,
“Most Peacekeepers turn a blind eye to the few of us who hunt because they’re as hungry for fresh meat as anybody is”.
This shows how Peacekeepers don’t seem as harsh as our police today, and they will let the little things be committed because they understand how the few who hunt feel, and probably get some of the meat that is hunted down.
Another detail about the Peacekeepers is very important: In the Hunger Games – Catching Fire, they brutally attack Cinna and drag him away before Katniss’s very eyes. This is something one of our police will not perform unless the criminal uses a weapon against them, or if they fight back. Which is something I doubt Cinna would do.
Contrary to this, our police men and women are very strict with law, and will not let these little things slip because they are not as deprived as the people who live in Panem. They have a big salary, and basically work with the government to control the law and keep things in order. Any crime committed will result in an arrest until the prisoners release date. Police today are much better than peacekeepers, who, again, will not brutally attack any criminals unless it is severely needed.
To conclude, with all the evidence gathered, I think that the government in The Hunger Games might be described as ‘oppressive’ because of one rebellion that they want to prevent from happening again by making innocent children brutally murder each other, by keeping food supplies scarce, so that citizens are always hungry and scared; and having ‘Peacekeepers’ enforce the law. All of which can come across as oppressive acts.
* * * * * * * *
I did not write this - it is the work of another of my granddaughters. Megan Withers is the author here and the piece was written about two years ago when she was about 15 years old.