Every year, as the Academy Awards roll around, there’s a familiar expectation that lingers in the air: Will Hollywood finally “get political”? Will the biggest stage in cinema reflect the turbulence of the real world outside? It’s a compelling idea but also, historically, a misleading one.At their core, the Academy Awards are built on escapism. They are, first and foremost, a spectacle. A carefully produced three-hour fantasy where the world’s biggest stars gather under chandeliers and soft lighting to celebrate art. The tuxedos, the gowns, the orchestral swells, the standing ovations, it all serves a singular purpose: To create a sense of wonder detached from everyday reality. Even in years marked by war, civil unrest, or political upheaval, the Oscars have rarely allowed those tensions to dominate the room. The show must go on, and more importantly, it must feel good.AdvertisementThat instinct toward comfort isn’t accidental; it’s foundational.The Oscars are also a uniquely American institution. For decades, the films that were celebrated, the stories that were elevated, and the histories that were retold largely reflected an American worldview. Hollywood wasn’t just exporting entertainment; it was exporting a narrative. One where America often stood at the moral or emotional centre. There was little incentive to disrupt that narrative with sharp self-critique. Even when films touched on difficult themes, they often did so within a framework that ultimately reaffirmed familiar ideas rather than challenging them outright.In that context, the idea of the Oscars as a radical political stage feels almost out of place. This has never been a space designed for confrontation; it has been a space designed for consensus.AdvertisementThat consensus has also shaped who gets recognised. The Academy’s track record when it comes to awarding non-White actors and filmmakers has long been a point of contention. The #OscarsSoWhite movement was a response to years of exclusion, where entire communities were either underrepresented or overlooked altogether. If the Oscars were truly a politically charged space, one might expect them to have led conversations around representation. Instead, they have often lagged behind.Even in instances where they do try and award films with political or racial overtones, they’re mostly films with simplistic, milquetoast resolutions. Case in point, films like Crash, Green Book or Driving Miss Daisy winning Best Picture over truly game-changing films like Brokeback Mountain, Black Panther and Do the Right Thing.And when the ceremony has brushed up against politics more directly, the results have been complicated. History offers several telling examples. When filmmaker Michael Moore used his acceptance speech in 2003 to criticise President George W Bush and the Iraq War — famously declaring “Shame on you, Mr Bush”— he was met with boos from the audience. The moment exposed the discomfort the Oscars have with overt political dissent.Then there’s the unsettling contrast of Roman Polanski receiving a standing ovation after winning Best Director in 2003, despite his long-standing legal and moral controversies. The applause wasn’t just about cinema, it was about the industry choosing celebration over accountability.Even earlier, in 1973, Marlon Brando refused his Best Actor Oscar for The Godfather, sending Sacheen Littlefeather to decline the award in protest of Hollywood’s portrayal of Native Americans. She was booed. What should have been a moment of reckoning became a moment of rejection.These incidents reveal a pattern. When politics disrupts the celebratory rhythm of the Oscars, the room often resists.you may likeSeen in that light, the 98th Academy Awards feel less like an exception and more like a continuation. The winners were, for the most part, safe choices. The speeches, while occasionally reflective, stopped short of becoming incendiary. Even when political sentiments surfaced, they were measured, contained within the broader tone of the evening.In recent years, the Academy has made efforts to become more international and more inclusive. The historic Best Picture win of Parasite (2020) signalled a shift, suggesting that stories from outside the traditional Hollywood framework could not only compete, but triumph.And yet, even with these changes, the fundamental nature of the Oscars remains intact. It is still a show that prioritises celebration over confrontation, narrative over nuance, and emotional resonance over political urgency. It may occasionally flirt with activism, but it rarely sustains it. The idea that the Oscars might one day serve as a barometer for the political mood of a nation or as a platform for truly radical expression remains, at least for now, more aspirational than real.The writer is a podcast producer and stand-up comedian