The Dictatorship
Why the Netflix adaptation of ‘Lord of the Flies’ is so utterly terrifying right now
ByHannah Holland
Netflix’s series adaptation of “Lord of the Flies,” which premiered this past week, begins with the character Piggy. He is lying on wet, soft earth, his glasses are askew and clouded. It’s shot from above with a fisheye lens, as if the viewer is leaning over him, hungry or paranoid, or both. The boy looks fragile, his cheeks are red — bloody or flushed with heat, we don’t yet know.
Then we meet the other boys, single-name references in their own right: Ralph, Jack, Simon, Roger.
Created by Jack Thorne, who also wrote and produced the 2025 award-winning series “Adolescence,” this mini series adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” stays close to author William Golding’s original source material.
It is impossible to encounter “Lord of the Flies” in 2026 and not consider the current conversations about masculinity and the crisis men and boys are facing.
The premise, for those few who may not remember from high school assigned reading: A plane carrying British schoolboys, from young children aged five or six to pre-teenagers, crash-lands on an uninhabited tropical island, with the boys as the only survivors. Without the moral and social guidance of adults, the boys are reduced to their worst impulses. They are careless and reckless, and then violent and cruel.
“Lord of the Flies” has remained an enduring classic because of its commentary on leadership, the fragility of society, and human nature. Thorne’s version is episodic, broken down into four parts, four perspectives, centering on our primary characters: Piggy (David McKenna), Jack (Lox Pratt), Simon (Ike Talbut), and Ralph (Winston Sawyers).
The boys, particularly the power-hungry and ruthless Jack, are afforded more dimension than in the original text. Jack is often portrayed, and therefore analyzed, in a single note: as a sociopathic villain. The show takes interest in the motivations behind his behavior and his relationships with the other boys.
It is impossible to encounter “Lord of the Flies” in 2026 and not consider the current conversations about masculinity and the crisis men and boys are facing: where so-called men’s rights activist lay regressive and violent blame on women and feminists for the lack of community, disenfranchisement, and the personal struggles of modern men. There’s a temptation to reduce the story, including Thorne’s adaptation, as an examination of a certain toxicity inherent in all men and boys.
But I think that misses an important point about this series, and about the reality of where so many young men find themselves today. Thorne told Esquire“I don’t think this is about boys in a state of nature. I don’t buy any of those sorts of arguments. […] It’s about a group of kids that come with a culture and a socialization that they then reenact on the island.”
I watched Thorne’s adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” as a nuanced yet universal story of the importance of vulnerability, the perils of social conditioning and the fragility of coming-of-age.
Thorne’s “Lord of the Flies” and “Adolescence” could almost be treated as companion pieces, equally emotionally demanding, equally painful to witness. Although both are works of fiction, “Lord of the Flies” exists in the grey, in the symbolic, where “Adolescence” exists in the black and white, taken straight from news headlines. They’re both devastating, but for different reasons: “Lord of the Flies” because it makes you wonder what others truly are capable of, “Adolescence” because it shows you exactly that.
Although the cultural markers of manhood have shifted since the 1950s, vulnerability has consistently been seen as antithetical to masculinity.
Although the cultural markers of manhood have shifted since the 1950s, vulnerability has consistently been seen as antithetical to masculinity. Simon, almost Christ-like in his adherence to morality, collapses to the ground in the first few minutes of the first episode. Jack scoffs and proclaims him “the least capable.” Piggy, the arbiter of intelligence and practicality, is ridiculed for being overweight, bespectacled, and frequently coughing from asthma. As in the book, both boys are murdered.
Their deaths are meant to be outrageous and profoundly emotional. For much of the audience, they are. But in a world increasingly culturally and politically dominated by President Donald Trump, his cult of personality, and men like self-described “misogynist” Andrew Tatefringe streamer Sneako, and their hordes of manosphere imitators and followers, it isn’t hard to consider an audience who would sooner align themselves with a Jack or a sadist like Roger, than with a Piggy or a Simon.
At its core, “Lord of the Flies” is a compressed coming-of-age story, a rapid loss of innocence. Nick Cutter, author of “The Dorians” and a stirring modern adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” called “The Troop,” described this to me as “a crucible.”
“It is a time when you would consider [boys] to be generally innocent. The idea is, you put the [boys] in a crucible, that forces them to take on adult decisions at a point when they really shouldn’t have to.” Here, there is a failure of moral guidance, emotional permission, as well as safety.
I consider my own adolescence, my own coming-of-age experience as a heteronormative girl. No one ever asked me to cleave any parts of myself away to fit into the restrictive space of accepted womanhood. Even now, in my early 30s, I am allowed to express myself in ways that feel as intuitive today as they did at seven, at 13. I wonder if my brothers, my friends, and my husband, most of whom were raised in households as loving and as charmed as my own, were permitted the same. Were they allowed to hold on to skipping rocks and face paint and sleepover parties and glitter glue and asking their mothers for help?
An island is not required for these young men to find themselves in a place without empathy, vulnerability or kindness. It doesn’t take a crucible for young men to adopt violent and backward notions about women, about their own identity and self-worth, about what it means to be a man. All they need to do is scroll their TikTok feeds.
My best friend is pregnant with a boy, due in the middle of summer. We talk about who he will become all of the time: the curious toddler, the brave child, the fair-minded adult, the loyal friend, the loving dad. We talk about the person that she and her husband intend to raise him to be and how they will do that.
I suppose, if nothing else, Golding, Thorne and their pack of boys are a reminder of the importance of providing moral guidance, nurturing empathy and a willingness to speak up. We must demand men stand up to other men, boys to other boys. We must demand men and boys take an active part in stopping the systemic violence against women and girls. Pollyannaish? Maybe. For now, though, these lessons, the work of parents, and community and peers, are our best antidote for the worst-case scenarios that Thorne explores in his work.
I think, when you finish the series or close your worn copy of “Lord of the Flies,” you’re left with two fundamental questions: Would you rather raise a Simon, a Jack, a Piggy or a Ralph? And does your answer scare you?
Hannah Holland
Hannah Holland is a producer for MS NOW’s “Velshi” and editor for the “Velshi Banned Book Club.” She writes for MS NOW.
A federal judge in Washington has denied a bid Wednesday brought by a watchdog group to immediately block the Justice Department’s “anti-weaponization” fund, for now choosing to trust the department’s assertions that it is not moving forward with the fund.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled immediately, denying Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s request for a temporary restraining order that would have blocked the Department of Justice from taking steps to create the fund.
Throughout the 30-minute hearing, the DOJ reiterated that the administration was not moving forward with the nearly $1.8 billion fund, which seeks to compensate individuals who allege they have been politically targeted or victimized by the DOJ.
Andrew Block, the only lawyer present for the government, repeatedly cited Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s June 2 congressional testimonyin which he said the administration was “not moving forward” with plans to create the fund.
Leon indicated he agreed with the DOJ’s position that the case appeared to be moot, saying he was not persuaded there was an issue for the court to decide regarding the creation of the fund. He issued a stern warning to the DOJ, saying, “Don’t play possum with this court!” — meaning he does not want to be deceived.
The plaintiffs argued Blanche’s testimony did not amount to an official cancellation. Nikhel Sus, CREW’s attorney, said Blanche “refused to memorialize that rescission,” or in other words, put it in writing. Sus said that was “highly unusual.” Leon responded, “This whole case is highly unusual to say the least.”
Leon asked the government twice why they would not just rescind the order that established the fund. Block responded, “I don’t know,” and pointed again to Blanche’s public statements about the fund’s future.
Both Leon and Sus raised the issue of Trump’s continued public defense of the fund. “It can still be an important issue and also not moving forward,” Block said. “That isn’t a direction to move forward with the fund.”
Although Leon rejected CREW’s bid for an immediate block, he indicated he is still considering its request for a longer-term block against the fund.
A block order from a separate federal judge in Virginia remains in effect until at least Friday.
Fallon Gallagher is a legal affairs reporter for MS NOW.
The date when Social Security’s trust fund is expected to run out of money just got bumped up. The fund is now projected to empty in 2032according to a new report released by Social Security’s trustees.
The new depletion date isn’t an earth-shaking change — it’s only a quarter earlier than the estimate in last year’s report. But it illustrates how President Donald Trump’s policies are degrading a program he promised to never jeopardize — and accelerating an approaching crisis in how our government will assist the elderly and disabled.
The report names three factors that contributed to the earlier insolvency date. One is a declining fertility rate, but the other two drivers can be traced back to Trump: a drop in immigration into the country, and the “substantial effect” of the tax policies in the One Big Beautiful Bill he signed last summer.
Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities.
Reduced immigration during Trump’s second term — especially when coupled with a declining fertility rate — strains Social Security because the program is funded through payroll taxes. Those come out of people’s paychecks, and fewer workers supporting an aging population means the program receives less revenue. Indeed, Social Security already has been tapping its trust fund for the better part of the past two decades because the program’s costs have exceeded its cash income. And as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out last yearlast year’s tax cuts were a boon to the rich but a bust for the solvency of the Social Security trust fund.
To be clear, if the fund is depleted, Social Security won’t go belly up. Benefits will continue to be paid out, but there will be a large drop in the amount. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that the “average monthly cut would total $500, which is more than what the average retired household spends on groceries each month.”
That would be a huge blow to the budgets of many older Americans. Social Security is a major source of income for most retirees, and roughly 40% of beneficiaries over the age of 65 rely on it for most of their income. And it would mark the destabilization of the sole source of retirement security for most Americans that is supposed to be insulated from ups and downs — unlike 401K plans. As the CBPP has pointed outSocial Security is “most workers’ only source of guaranteed retirement income that is not subject to investment risk or financial market fluctuations.”
Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities. His cuts to the Social Security Administration have left offices understaffedincreased wait timesand reduced quality of customer service.
Ultimately, Trump is exacerbating a colossal social safety net problem that predates him, and the trust fund will hit dire straits after he has left office. Democrats need to have clear plans for shoring up the program and making it robust for the future — which will require not being sheepish about taxes as a tool for renewing the social contract. And when Republicans try to claim that they, too, are champions of Social Security, all Democrats need to do is point to the truth.
Zeeshan Aleem is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He primarily writes about politics and foreign policy.
Today’s edition of quick hits.
* The latest from Northern Ireland: “The family of a man who lost an eye in a knife attack appealed for calm on Wednesday after the incident triggered a wave of anti-immigrant violence in Belfast overnight, with masked men burning families out of their homes and torching vehicles. The appeal came as a Sudanese man appeared in court charged with attempted murder and as British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and politicians in Northern Ireland condemned the violence by ‘masked thugs’ that had targeted ethnic minorities.”
* In related news: “The British government hit out at X owner Elon Musk Wednesday, accusing him of whipping up tensions online ahead of disorder in Belfast.”
* The tenuous state of a dubious ceasefire: “Trump said the U.S. is going to hit Iran ‘hard’ today when pressed by reporters in the Oval Office about his statement earlier that Tehran will ‘pay the price’ for taking ‘too long’ to reach a peace agreement. ‘Well, we’re going to be attacking them and attacking them very hard, resuming bombing,’ he said.”
* The latest casualty figures from Lebanon: “Israel’s military offensive in Lebanon has killed at least 3,666 people, including 131 healthcare workers, and injured more than 11,300 since the U.S. and Israel began their war with Iran in late February, the Lebanese health ministry reported yesterday.”
* The changing nature of modern warfare: “Ukraine is wreaking havoc on unarmored trucks and trains in the battlefield’s rear, using drones with upgraded engines and batteries, integrated Starlink communication systems and new artificial-intelligence capabilities. The ramped-up attacks are causing fuel shortages, complicating troop rotations and reducing Russian military activity on the front.”
* This seems like a reasonable request: “Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee demanded Wednesday that Bill Pulte, President Donald Trump’s controversial pick for acting director of national intelligence, submit to a full security check before assuming the post, including an examination of his financial holdings and foreign contacts.”
* Some market trends can’t be stopped despite the White House’s best efforts: “Even as President Donald Trump boosts coal over clean energy, solar power is hitting new milestones in the U.S. and remains the leading source of new power. Data released Wednesday by global energy think tank Ember, along with a report by the Solar Energy Industries Association and analytics firm Wood Mackenzie, show the continued growth of solar and decline of coal in the United States despite federal policy. In May, for the first time, solar supplied more of the nation’s electricity than coal, or 12.8%, Ember said.”
* A bizarre schedule for a nonemergency vanity project: “Federal officials are laying more groundwork to begin construction on President Donald Trump’s planned 250-foot-tall triumphal arch, sharing additional documents that detail the project’s scope and an aggressive timetable for potentially completing work before Trump’s term ends. According to National Park Service documents posted this month, the administration envisions 20 hours per day of construction on the arch, year-round, in hopes of completing the project within two to three years.”
See you tomorrow.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
- The small-town voters deciding the UK’s future are demanding change, our focus group found
- Lee Zeldin on rising gas prices, energy dominance and AI data centers
- US to reach $41T debt ceiling as soon as late winter, forecasters predict
- Chuck Schumer is ready for redemption
- US to reach $41T debt ceiling as soon as late winter, forecasters predict
- US to reach $41T debt ceiling as soon as late winter, forecasters predict
- Court denies request to immediately block DOJ ‘slush fund’
- Trump is accelerating our Social Security insolvency crisis
- Wednesday’s Mini-Report, 6.10.26
- Trump embraces inflation after a new report shows it’s spiking
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship9 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words