Who Watches the Watchmen?

As much as I feared this series, which departs significantly from the Alan Moore canon, would be weighed down by the usual PC nonsense, I never imagined its very first episode would revel in visceral anti-white sentiment and leftist Id-expression fantasies. If we extrapolate from this show’s first episode, HBO’s Watchmen may turn out to be the Left’s spin on the imagined future events of The Turner Diaries. At a minimum, Watchmen (2019) appears to be a continuation of what we have seen to an alarming degree in the past year or so — an acceleration of the cultural normalization of various Leftist positions which, cumulatively, form the new culture war against whites:

  • The curtailing of free-speech for non-liberal whites;
  • The failure to distinguish white supremacy from white nationalism and white identitarianism;
  • The categorizing of white nationalism as ‘terrorism’, from which constitutional due process will not be required;
  • The notion that possessing certain thoughts and beliefs (not just acts) are sufficient to make one guilty of ‘terrorism’;
  • The continuous, surreal rewriting of history to fit Wakandan-like fantasies;
  • The framing of History as that of White Rage, that is, of whites perpetually victimizing, and inflecting pointless violence against, blacks;
  • The depiction of black bodies as innocent, and relatively agentless, victims of the white patriarchy.

“‘Watchmen’ Is a Spectacular Assault on White Supremacy,” screams a review from The Daily Beast:

Unlike in Moore and Gibbons’ antecedent, it’s race, rather than sex, that’s warped the country and its masked inhabitants. That’s the biggest thematic alteration Lindelof makes to his hallowed source.[1]

That a Daily Beast writer, who like other critics appears to have seen the entire season in advance, finds the series a ‘spectacular assault’ is a woeful clue of where this series is headed.

“Watchmen Is a Blistering Modern Allegory,” is the title of Sophie Gilbert’s review in The Atlantic: 

Watchmen is set in a world where there is no internet. But Watchmen itself is the internet. It’s a fictionalized manifestation of the things life online has begotten: polarization, anonymity, doxxing, red-pilling, weaponized nostalgia, conspiracy theories. The supposed imposition of cultural orthodoxy. A sense of victimization that’s twisted into racist resentment.[2]

In terms of how this series fits in with previous incarnations of Watchmen, as well as our contemporary times, Gilbert asserts “the big cultural anxiety of the moment is an overdue reckoning with white supremacy,” the reckoning here being previous subcultural interpretations of Rorschach in particular. “The new HBO series is a stunning, timely departure from its graphic-novel origins,” reads the byline to Gilbert’s piece. The sentiment behind framing the show as a ‘timely departure’ needs no explanation, but despite giving the series kudos, Gilbert worries that Lindelof may have laid on the liberal platitudes a bit too thick:

Almost as often as the show thoughtfully parses the legacy of racism, it digs at what it sees as liberal overreach. Watchmen is audacious enough to imagine sweeping legislation that tries to right historical injustices. It also portrays the ways in which such attempts at reconciliation force Americans even farther apart.

Now it is no secret that the traditional fan base of Watchmen consists disproportionately of young white males, arguably (and much to the chagrin of the liberal Alan Moore) with a conservative slant to their worldview. It would stand to reason, then, that viewers of the series premiere were skewed towards this demographic. With this in mind, and after just one episode, it is worth noting that, at the time of this writing, Rotten Tomatoes feedback is showing an extraordinary discrepancy in ratings between critics and users:

SPOILERS AHEAD —

The pilot episode of Watchmen begins with a small black boy alone in a movie theater, watching a Birth of the Nation­-type silent film, with the hero Bass Reeves (“the Black Marshall of Oklahoma,” hooded, wearing all black, and riding a black horse) taking down a villainous white sheriff (dressed in all white and riding a white horse) for having, apparently, stolen the white, churchgoing townsfolks’ cattle.

We are then presented with a fanciful depiction of the 1921 Tulsa race riot, but with none of the details inconvenient to The Narrative. There is no depiction that the riot began after 19-year-old Dick Rowland (black) was accused of assaulting 17-year old Sarah Page (white). Similarly, there was no depiction that the initial round of violence in Tulsa – which killed 10 whites and 2 blacks — appears to have been initiated by blacks, this being the incident that sparked the ensuing riots. Instead, we are shown blacks (some with firearms, but not really seeming to use them) cowering in fear, as marauding whites, some in Klan robes, wantonly kill various black men, women, and children.

Cut to the present day. As this alternate-reality rendition of America has progressed, we have an all-black cast singing “Oklahoma!” to a largely black audience of theatergoers.

Robert Redford (who is not featured in the show) has been President of the United States for 30 some-odd years, his signature achievement having been reparations for blacks, a massive redistributionism that some whites pejoratively refer to as ‘Redfordations’. Vietnam has become a state in America. A new incarnation of ‘white supremacists’ called Seventh Cavalry (likely an allusion to the 7th Cavalry Regiment, formed in 1866, whose most famous commander during the Indian Wars was the ‘racist’ George Custer) are a throwback to the KKK, but one can make the case that this group is a barely disguised impugnation of the Alt-Right, or, to cast a wider net, white male MAGA types.[3]

The police, who appear to be majority-black, are required to wear masks to cloak their identity and, we presume, to minimize anti-police violence and assassinations. An allusion is made to an incident called the ‘White Night’, when many police officers were killed by Seventh Cavalry in coordinated assassinations, which we will likely learn was by the dastardly white supremacists.

As policy, those who are employed as cops undergo a series of elaborate steps to hide their job occupation. Police sidearms are mandatorily immobilized in their holsters, unless and until the individual police officer (during actual individual situations, as they unfold) requests and then successfully obtains permission to gain access to the firearm. This process typically entails a blasé lawyer or sergeant on the other end of the phone reading through a canned script of questions: “What is the probability of drugs or alcohol in the vehicle?… What is the probability of firearms or explosives in the vehicle?… What is your overall perceived threat level?…”, etc.

This hindrance is illustrated when a black policeman pulls over a white country redneck (complete with the American flag on the redneck’s baseball cap) driving a truck full of lettuce at night, while bopping along to ghetto rap on his truck’s stereo. With the masked cop at his window, he opens his glove compartment to retrieve his registration. The cop gets a visual on a Rorschach hood/mask in the redneck’s glove compartment, which causes him to tense up. Simple possession of this mask is sufficient evidence for being a ‘white supremacist terrorist’. (In a later sequence, we see Seventh Cavalry members donning the Rorschach masks, which appears to be a meta-level riff on the rather based philosophy espoused by the Rorschach character in Zack Snyder’s film Watchmen (2009)).

With the redneck’s license and registration in hand, the cop goes back to his car and immediately radios in, requesting access to his firearm. Alas, while responding to the litany of questions from police headquarters, the black cop is shot by the white redneck via machine gun, which we gather was hidden, likely with other firearms, underneath the lettuce.

The episode contains many other deliberate incongruities, particularly with respect to race. Against news footage of a building structure being demolished on Mars, and a chyron that reads “Dr. Manhattan on Mars”, we hear the voice of the episode’s black female protagonist — Detective Angela Abar (Regina King) – speaking before a class of young, primarily non-white, middle school students. She is in civilian clothes and, with eggs in a bowl, is giving a hands-on demonstration on how to make Mooncakes:

Egg whites are made of protein. When we whip ‘em, we get bubbles, and it’s the proteins that form the walls of those bubbles. If we don’t have walls, it all comes tumblin’ down. Now, those walls are strong, but they won’t stay that way if just even a little bit of yolk gets mixed in with the whites. So, that’s why we gotta separate ‘em.

That the police are supposed to wear yellow masks is a point not lost among the show’s many didactic allegories.

After the shooting of the black cop, the police are sent a video by Seventh Cavalry, which begins with the main speaker (in a distorted voice) wearing a Rorschach mask. As the speech in the video progresses, the video reverse-tracks, revealing about a dozen other Cavalry members, all wearing Rorschach masks, as well as the American flag and a cross behind them (subtle):

Cop carcass on the highway last night. Soon, the accumulated black filth will be hosed away, and the streets of Tulsa will turn into extended gutters overflowing with liberal tears. Soon all the whores and race traitors will shout “Save us!”, and we will whisper… No.

We are the Seventh Cavalry. We are no one. We are everyone. We are invisible. And we will never compromise.

Do not stand between us and our mission, or there will be more dead cops. There are so many deserving of retribution and there is so little time. And that time is near.

Tick-tock… Tick-tock…

After watching the video, Police Chief Judd Crawford (Don Johnson) declares an “Article 4”, emergency 24-hour release of the gun-locking regulation, as well as a relaxation of standard search warrant requirements. “So roll into Nixonville and round ‘em up,” he tells his police, “and drag their asses into the pod for interrogation. One of them’s gonna give up the shooter.”

Det. Angela Abar (Sister Night)

While future episodes are said to focus on other characters, Episode 01 clearly focuses on Angela Abar, a former cop who may or may not still be one, but who definitely assumes the persona of a vigilante known as “Sister Night” and who cooperates with the police when she feels compelled to. Angela is the Strong Black Female with a de-nutted, stay-at-home, Mr. Mom husband (which is itself a one-upsmanship of woke intersectionality fantasizing)[4]. Naturally, despite her genteel nature, she is able to handily kick the asses of grown men twice her size (a now-standard cinematic archetype), and when in uniform adorns more black clothing than a Black Panther.

After seeing the Seventh Calvary video, Angela takes it upon herself to bust down doors, smack a trailer park redneck up aside the head, and throw his ass in the trunk of her big black car. There he stays until she gets the green light to put the no-good, suspected white supremacist into ‘the pod’:

Angela: There’s a guy in my trunk. I knew you were gonna tell us to round up the likelies. I just got a jump on things.

Judd: You knew?

Angela: Yes.

Judd: How do you know he’s Seven K?

Angela: I got a nose for white supremacy, and he smells like bleach[5].

Angela’s redneck is then brought into the ‘pod’, an interrogation chamber that monitors and measures one’s verbal and nonverbal reactions to a series of questions and on-screen images, a technique that harkens to both A Clockwork Orange (1971) and The Parallax View (1974). An early exchange in this sequence serves as a possible harbinger of things to come for the Alt-Right here in the U.S.:

Redneck: I want my lawyer.

Det. Looking Glass: Yeah, we really don’t have to do that with terrorists.

As a series of images rolls by the large, encircling, monitor screens, Looking Glass weaves innocuous questions (“What did you have for breakfast?”) with targeted questions designed to elicit certain responses (“If I took a shit on the American flag, how would that make you feel?”).

The questions that the show’s writers have Looking Glass ask this white male is an object lesson in liberal assumptions about flyover America, and also reveal how non-racial conservative positions (for example, about taxes) are construed by liberals as tantamount to ‘white supremacy’:

Det. Looking Glass: Do you believe that transdimensional attacks are hoaxes staged by the U.S. government?

Redneck: I dunno, maybe.

Det. Looking Glass: Should all Americans pay taxes?

Redneck: Yes.

The associated images seen on the screen also provide an avenue into the paranoid liberal imagination, the sort of mind that sees “OK” hand gestures and milk as secret, party-membership communications between white supremacists. When, for example, the seemingly innocuous breakfast question is asked, we see an image of a milk advertisement from yesteryear, with a young white boy drinking a glass of milk next to the ad’s phrase:  “The Perfect Family Beverage”. Other images flash by quickly: the Confederate flag; Mount Rushmore; astronauts planting the American flag on the moon; cowboys on horseback; Grant Wood’s famous “American Gothic” painting from 1930; George Custer; Harriet Tubman; the Twin Towers; a KKK cross burning; a wholesome hot dog ad; a black power salute; blacks in U.S. military uniform; a picture of Malcolm X; a swastika, followed by the American flag; etc.

After the interrogation, Looking Glass leaves the pod to converse with Angela and Judd:

Angela: Well?

Looking Glass: He knows.

Angela: You sure?

Looking Glass: He’s not gonna talk sans motivation, but he was off the charts on the bias questions. Eyes dilated on all the Rorschachs… Yeah. I’m sure.

Angela (turning to Judd): Like I said… bleach.

And – presto! – just like that, between an interrogation method of dubious methodology, and a black woman’s intuition, a white man is ‘proven’ to be a ‘white supremacist terrorist’.

Judd then gives Angela permission to beat the shit out of the redneck in a basement cell, in order to extract information from him, which she does with zeal and no hesitation. (We see blood rush from underneath the door).

Another harbinger of things to come.

A nighttime police raid, led by Angela of course, takes place on a cow ranch with Seventh Cavalry connections. (Is the placement of cows with the bad guys a nod to #ExtinctionRebellion? Who knows. But would it really surprise you?) Upon realizing the police are raiding them, the dastardly Cavalry members prep themselves with suicide pills; one of them who is wounded by Angela promptly takes one with a smile, vowing unspokenly not to be taken alive.

Remaining Cavalry members hastily board their hidden prop plane and proceed to escape, but not before Judd and a POC female pilot, helming a futuristic aerial craft, shoot the plane down into smithereens, to everyone’s glee. No calls for aerial backup, air traffic support, or satellite surveillance to aid in capturing them. Just shoot the plane out of the sky and kill the inhabitants (it’s not clear what they did to deserve death) simply for attempting to escape.

Damon Lindelof as Showrunner

A natural question is: Who’s behind this crap? The showrunner for HBO’s Watchmen is Damon Lindelof, whose forte is science fiction, having been the co-creator and showrunner of Lost (2004–10), as well as having co-written Cowboys & Aliens (2011), Prometheus (2012), Star Trek Into Darkness (2013), and Tomorrowland (2015). Lindelof’s socio-political views are no doubt shaped by the quintessential Hollywood content-creator arc of his family, upbringing, schooling, and residencies. From his Wikipedia bio:

Lindelof was born in Teaneck, New Jersey, the son of Susan Klausner, a teacher, and David Lindelof, a bank manager. He attended Teaneck High School, a school whose diverse student body he credits with expanding his horizons as a writer. Lindelof’s mother is Jewish, whereas his father was of Scandinavian descent.

Lindelof celebrated his Bar Mitzvah in Teaneck, where he attended synagogue for the Sabbath; he has stated, “I was a Jewish white kid growing up in Teaneck, but at the same time, I had African and Filipino and Asian friends and to have that experience all through high school while getting an awesome education was wonderful.” Lindelof attended film school at New York University, performing briefly in the band Petting Zoo, and moved to Los Angeles after graduating.

In creating and rolling out the show, very much on Lindelof’s mind was the cultural readings of the Rorschach character. In many ways, the show’s handling of Rorschach is a counterpoint of sorts to the liberal imagination’s interpretation of Todd Phillips’ Joker. On the eve of the latter film’s debut, liberal media outlets were practically salivating at the prospects of white incels being inspired to go on shooting sprees, something which did not materialize. Regarding this yin-yang of Joker vs Watchmen, one liberal film critic writes:

Rorschach is by far one of the most misunderstood characters in comic book history.

Plenty of fanboys have put the so-called hero up on a pedestal for sticking to his morals, despite the fact that these ‘morals’ include killing animals and terrorising people – not to mention his prejudice against women, poor people and the entire LGBTQ+ community…

Much of Rorschach’s incel leanings (for the want of a better descriptor) are captured best in the journal he writes throughout the original comic book arc, and even though three decades have passed within Lindelof’s show, the impact of these scribblings are still very much represented by the ideologies of the Seventh Cavalry.

Positioned as a modern-day successor to the Ku Klux Klan, Watchmen’s white supremacist group wear the same mask as Rorschach and directly quote the most frightening aspects of his manifesto. In less-careful hands, the ideals spouted by the Seventh Cavalry could inspire viewers with similar political leanings, but Watchmen never glorifies their position in quite the same way that Joker does. While the following cultivated by Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker is accidentally established at first, he absolutely revels in this adoration by the end, drawing in angry, misogynistic men who feel like they’ve been wronged by society and are therefore entitled to fight back with violence.[6]

In a Vulture interview that addresses the show’s inception, Lindelof notes:

Certainly, the first ten to 12 weeks that we spent in the writers’ room, where we started talking about the vision for the season, that was immensely challenging and not fun. It was work. And, obviously, we’re talking about white supremacy.[7]

In a nauseating Fellow White People move, the interviewer actually poses a question to Lindelof in the following terms:

Q: Given the racial and gender politics of the show, I didn’t want this to just be a conversation between two white men. So I reached out to a group of women of various ethnic backgrounds who wrote a series of essays called “Women Watch the Watchmen” to ask them what they’d want to ask you. The first question comes from Chloe Maveal: “Do you feel like this show is something that can help redeem Watchmen to literally anyone who’s not part of a straight white male audience? Do you, as both a fan of the comics and showrunner of the TV series, feel like the comic books here need redeeming in the first place?”

Note the unquestioned presumption here that, as a storyline and as characterization, Watchmen needs to be redeemed, that it somehow ‘sinned’ in the past. Lindelof’s response to this question is simultaneously respectful of Alan Moore’s original work, but also genuflects towards requisite Woke virtue-signaling:

I don’t think that the original Watchmen requires redemption on any level. In any way, shape, or form. I accept it in its totality as a staggering work of art. I also acknowledge that my relationship with Watchmen is that of a hetero straight male who read it as a 13-year-old, which may be the perfect sweet spot. I am not in a place where I can be critical of Watchmen. I am in a place where I can acknowledge criticisms of Watchmen. I will say that a number of the women who worked on Watchmen — wrote Watchmen, produced Watchmen, directed Watchmen — had found the treatment of women in the graphic novel to be less than ideal…

I get to have those debates in the writers’ room. Those other writers get to say, “Well, here’s how I feel about it.” Of course, in the writers’ room, there was a wide range of whether or not Rorschach was a white supremacist. I said, “That’s not relevant. He’s dead. What’s interesting is that you can make a compelling argument that he was and I can make a compelling argument that he wasn’t.”

Q: That gets to a question from Sara Century: “Why is it important to reimagine Rorschach?”

I don’t think that we are reimagining Rorschach. I think that we are interpreting Rorschach. The meta-ness of Watchmen was critical, I think, to its success.

Time and again, the interviewer returns to the theme of white supremacy. This is insightful in revealing not only liberal anxieties over Watchmen but also Lindelof’s liberal bona fides. How one today views the police seems to be the inflection point:

Q: I worry that the first six episodes, in some ways, can almost be read as a white-supremacist militiaman’s vision of America. Like, “Cops care too much about black people, and they’re cracking down on proud whites like me who just want to see a pure country.” But in reality, the much bigger problem is cops not caring enough about black people. Was that something you thought about? Was that something that worried you?

Yes. I’m not even going to use the past tense. What we’re really worried about, in my opinion, it’s not the television show. What we’re really worried about is a reflection of the real world. The paradox is: How do we feel about the police? When you say “the police,” you can mean it quite literally, which is just people wearing police uniforms. But how do you feel about authority? How do you feel about the law? Is the law just? The answer to the question, “How do you feel about the police?” Well, are you white? Are you a man? Are you a woman? Are you a person of color? What part of the country are you living in? Those are all questions that you should be asking.

We understand that being a police officer is a dangerous job. At the same time, we understand that there are police officers who are not following the law, who cannot be trusted, who do not behave in ways that are demonstrative of equality. This is demonstrated for us over and over again, to the degree where I think anyone who says that there is no issue in the United States in terms of policing and race is a crazy person. That isn’t to say that all cops are racist is any more

We’ll have to see how the series unfolds, and I’m not at all sure I’m going to stick with it, but the action will no doubt involve a second iteration of White Night events, a face-off between the police and Seventh Cavalry, and further caricatures of white nationalists. The plotlines will likely focus on various competing interests within the police force as well as government. Also, given the show’s deliberate association of Rorschach with ‘white supremacy’, will the legacy of Rorschach himself be reframed within the show’s narrative?

The series might very well appropriate more plot points from The Turner Diaries. It’s worth noting that Episode 01 ends with a ‘Day of the Rope’-type incident for a key white ally, putting a rather quick end to Don Johnson’s involvement in the show.

In summary, if this first episode is any indication, HBO’s Watchmen will be a noxious brew of political correctness and Jewish Hollywood virtue-signaling, and will stand as an opportunity squandered.

Endnotes:

[1] Schager, Nick. “‘Watchmen’ Is a Spectacular Assault on White Supremacy,” The Daily Beast, Oct 21, 2019.

[2] Gilbert, Sophie. “Watchmen Is a Blistering Modern Allegory,” The Atlantic, Oct 21, 2019.

[3] Several online reviewers have used the spelling “Seventh Kavalry”, presumably due to this having been revealed in episodes HBO has not yet aired, but which critics have already seen.

[4] Ever see a black couple raising a little white girl? Of course you haven’t. But you will see it in Watchmen, with Angela the loving adoptive mother. Apparently, a future episode will convey that Angela adopted the white girl after her police partner (and his wife) were both murdered during the White Night incident.

[5] As takes place in this scene, it is worth pointing out the little flourishes in the show that embody the disrespect black women have for white male authority figures, such as when Police Chief Judd Crawford enters his office to find Angela with her feet up on his desk, reprimanding him. “Wanna take your feet off my desk, please?” he says to her. She completely ignores his request and the scene continues.

[6] Opie, David. “What Watchmen gets right that Joker got wrong,” Digital Spy, Oct 21, 2019.

[7] Riesman, Abraham. “Like It or Not, Damon Lindelof Made His Own Watchmen And he’s pretty sure Alan Moore put a hex on him for doing it,” Vulture, Oct 17, 2019.

 

Posted in Film, Hollywood, Political Correctness | Comments Off on Who Watches the Watchmen?

Joe (1970)

This is a really bad movie.

Given its premise, I wanted to like it, but it is just plain terrible, greatly impeded by its low budget and hackneyed direction. Joe (Peter Boyle, who while competent here, is unable to do anything with such a poorly written role) is a cartoon caricature of the Angry Blue Collar White Guy circa 1970, when welfare abuse and affirmative action were really cooking.

Dennis Patrick (as the wealthy WASP Bill Compton) gives one of the worst performances I’ve ever witnessed an actor make. Audrey Caire plays Joan Compton, the snooty, fur-wearing WASP wife, who looks down upon Joe and his Edith Bunker-like wife.

Written by a 180-IQ, manic depressive Jew (Norman Wexler) and directed by the second rate John G. Avildsen, the film is sociologically significant for its theme of white backlash against Great Society programs (as manifested in the 1970s heyday of systematic abuse). Joe and Bill team up for a bloodlust killing rampage against sexually licentious, faux-Zen, junkie hippies, not before hypocritically first tasting the fruits of such licentiousness themselves.

As written, the character of Joe predates Archie Bunker (Jewish activist Norman Lear’s contemptuous depiction of the white Christian working class), but is written so over the top — the American flag & “Honor America” poster in his man cave on prominent display; his gun collection; his use of ‘racist’ language; his doting and submissive wife; etc. — that he makes Bunker seem like a moderate.

When Bill first meets him in a bar, Joe goes on a long diatribe that – much like Dirty Harry’s lines, albeit courser and more direct – draws the ire of liberals while conservatives are more likely to silently nod in approval:

The niggers are getting all the money. Why work? You tell me, why the fuck work, when you can screw, have babies, and get paid for it? Welfare. They got all that welfare money. They even get free rubbers. Think they use them? Hell, no. The only way they make money is making babies. They sell the rubbers, and then they use the money to buy booze…

All those social workers are nigger-lovers. You find me a social worker who ain’t a nigger-lover and I’ll massage your asshole… I ain’t queer.

I sweat my balls off 40 hours a week in front of a fucking furnace, and they get as much money as I do, for nothing. They got them living in hotels at $50 a day… $1,000 a month.

Now they want charge accounts. Charge accounts! I ain’t even been inside Macy’s, and they want charge accounts!

All you gotta do is act black, and the money rolls in. Set fire to the cities, burn a few buildings, you get paid for it…

If you can’t read, you got a better chance of getting hired.

And the kids, the white kids, they’re worse than the niggers. Money don’t mean nothing to them. Motorcycles, marijuana, $5 records…

My kid ain’t dumb.  Couldn’t get into college ’cause they let the niggers in first. That’s how they’re saving the cities. They keep the smart niggers busy wrecking the colleges.

Joe then articulates the disastrous effects that ensues when upper class white bohemianism trickles down to the lower classes:

And don’t tell me about communists. How can a kid be a communist? Kids are idealistic… The rich white kids. The worst, hippies… The cars, the best colleges, vacations, orgies… Christmas, Easter… They go to someplace, like a fancy resort, and have orgies… Easter orgies. The day Christ rose, they’re all screwing one another. And the poor kids and the middle-class kids, they’re all copying the rich kids. They’re all going the same goddamn “screw America” way.

Lastly, if you enjoyed the climactic scene of David Fincher’s superb movie Se7en, where Gwyneth Paltrow’s head winds up in a box, then you’ll similarly enjoy the ending of Joe, which was the first movie role of a young, 24 year old Susan Sarandon.

Posted in Film, White Identity | Comments Off on Joe (1970)

The Implicit Whiteness of Rod Dreher’s BenOp Recommendations

A fun game is to spot the implicit whiteness in Rod Dreher’s various BenOp recommendations, which isn’t all that hard to do. (Locations and/or activities that are comprised almost entirely of whites tend to be relatively peaceful, well-functioning, and high-trust, hence contain high levels of social capital).

For example, upon visiting the Bruderhof community in rural NY, Rod was positively ecstatic. But all indications point to Bruderhof not being very diverse. (Rod gets irate when people call him out on this.)

In his recent piece “‘Great Awokening’: A New Religious War”, Rod excitedly points to another BenOp institution with great potential, the school where his kids attend:

I urge you to consider seeding efforts to found new institutions within which the traditional scholarly life can endure this new Dark Age… When I tell people about what the classical Christian school my kids attend, Sequitur Classical Academy, is able to do despite the fact that it operates on a shoestring budget, they can hardly believe it. Just think what Sequitur could accomplish if it had donors? Our little school has 150 or so kids — ordinary kids, not a gifted-and-talented superschool population — who are being taught the Western humanities tradition, from the Greeks and the Romans down through the ages.

Yes, the success of Sequitur has nothing – nothing, I tell ‘ya – to do with the overwhelming whiteness of both the faculty and the student body. (As with Bruderhof, I can find no information at the Sequitur site, or elsewhere online, discussing the institution’s demographics. However, pictures are worth a thousand words. Photos of the boys’ uniforms — khaki pants & white shirts – could pass for a 2017 Alt-Right rally.) This looks, and sounds, like a Non-Sequitur to me.

Repeatedly, Rod will occasionally dip his toes into the water, but then quickly retreats to the banalities and pathological altruism of unreconstructed late Christianity. As such, he is a wonderful barometer of the Death of the West.

Posted in Christianity, Death of the West, White Identity | Comments Off on The Implicit Whiteness of Rod Dreher’s BenOp Recommendations

XTC – Easter Theatre (1999)

It’s an annual LM tradition to repost this gorgeous, Easter-related song by XTC. It is, in my humble opinion, the absolute high point of Andy Partridge’s stellar songwriting career (which I once told him in person.) From the song’s melody, to the instrumentation and production choices, to the earthy lyrics rich with pagan imagery and symbolism, the song never fails to give me goosebumps and, occasionally, a teary eye.

Odin mounts the tree
Bleeds for you and me
Splashing on the lamb
Gamboling with spring’s step

Buds will laugh and burst
Racing to be first
Turning all the soil
As the promptress’ fingers through her spinning script… 

Posted in Music | Comments Off on XTC – Easter Theatre (1999)

Dragged Across Concrete (2019)

S. Craig Zahler, who wrote/directed Bone Tomahawk (2015) & Brawl in Cell Block 99 (2017), is an important filmmaker for the Dissident Right to consider. I previously wrote an essay on Brawl at Counter-Currents, and my essay on Zahler’s new film Dragged Across Concrete (2019) is at The Occidental Observer.

One further aspect of Dragged not included in the TOO piece pertains to the film’s indictment of feminism:

SPOILERS: An interlude in the film begins and ends with a focus on the brief character of Kelly Summer (Jennifer Carpenter). Ostensibly intended to humanize the victims of a violent bank robbery, Kelly’s character also serves as a devastating indictment of feminism and neoliberal materialism, an observation I have not seen a single liberal critic of the film make. When we first see Kelly, she is looking anxious waiting for the bus that will take her to work. When the bus arrives, she cannot get herself to get on it, and instead runs back home to the well-to-do apartment she shares with her bearded, hipster-looking husband Jeffrey (Andrew Dunbar) and their newborn son, Jackson.

In the hallway outside of her apartment door, Summer finds that Jeffrey has chain-locked the door from the inside, so that she cannot enter. With the door slightly ajar, as far as the chain-lock will allow, what follows is a gut-wrenching exchange which emphasizes how profoundly unnatural it is that our contemporary socioeconomic model, in a wholesale gender reversal, routes mothers away from their newly born children and emasculates men by disincentivizing their natural role as providers:

Kelly: Jeffrey, let me in. Open this!

Jeffrey, Jackson, & the consequences of feminism.

Jeffrey: Kelly, please stop yelling… Why aren’t you on your way to work?

Kelly: You are not allowed to answer a question with a question.

Jeffrey: Don’t shout at me, okay? Just… You need to go back downstairs, get on the bus and go to work.

Kelly: Open this right now.

Jeffrey: I can’t.

Kelly: What do you mean you can’t? Of course you can.

Jeffrey: I want to, I really, really do, but I can’t. The maternity leave ended four weeks ago. You’ve used all of your vacation and every single sick day staying here with Jackson.

Kelly: He needed me!

Jeffrey: I’m taking good care of him, and I will continue to do so until you’re home from work.

Kelly: I hate you.

Jeffrey: And I love you twice as much. You need to go to work… today.

Kelly: My job is so stupid. I go there and I sell chunks of my life for a paycheck, so that… rich people I’ve never even met can put money in places I’ve never even seen. How am I supposed to sit at my desk and talk about bank accounts, when my baby is here!”

Jeffrey: Jackson needs diapers, and clothes, and gourmet baby food. Eventually, he’s gonna need school supplies and, if he’s anything like me and my brothers, he’ll need braces too. Now, all these things cost money, and you make way more than I do.

Kelly: Yeah, I know… Can I see him though?

Jeffrey: Just through the opening.

Kelly: I promise, I’ll go if you let me see him just for a second. I need to touch him.

Jeffrey: Kelly, please…

Kelly: I… Just for a second. I swear I’ll go.

Jeffrey: You’ve broken that swear before and recently. Do you swear on the life of our baby that you will leave after you’ve touched him?

Kelly: No, no, no.

Jeffrey: Say it out loud for it to count, that’s how swears work.

Kelly: I swear on the life of our child that I will go to work after I’ve touched him.

Kelly reluctantly goes to the bank where she works. Upon arriving, her fellow employees come out to warmly greet her, but the over-exuberant tributes from her boss Mr. Edmington (Fred Melamed) exudes a phoniness borne of obligation, and expresses the transvaluation of values which attempts to align family formation with the interests of late capitalism, both being symbolic forms of the faux-concern for families that neoliberal capitalism articulates:

Mr. Edmington: Good heavens and praise be to Him. Can that radiant vision of maternity that just walked through our front doors possibly be our beloved Mrs. Summer? Welcome back. Welcome back and congratulations on bringing such a lovely boy child into this world.

Kelly: Thank you, Mr. Edmington.

Mr. Edmington: All of us in the bank have great expectations for your boy, wondrous expectations, on a global scale.

Kelly: So do I.

Mr. Edmington: Well, in that case, our expectations are aligned… Mrs. Summer, your absence was a weight upon us. Your return is a divine blessing.

The fates of all involved here are soon changed forever by the violent forces of nihilism.

Posted in Film, White Identity | Comments Off on Dragged Across Concrete (2019)

The Venom

Posted in Humor | Comments Off on The Venom

Rod Tastes the Wrath

Dreher writes: “The alt-right in the US can’t stand me, considering me a Christian cuck,” before bemoaning how a prog in Australia (fellow white person Nick Riemer) wants to deplatform him.

We don’t hate you, Rod. We just want you to follow through with where your own logic ought to be taking you: identity politics for white people (aka indigenous Europeans) is not “white supremacism”. Also, the term ‘Alt Right’ has largely become useless: it now means whatever one wants it to mean.

White identitarianism ≠ white nationalism ≠ white supremacism. They are 3 very different things. White identitarianism (WI) is rational, and actually rather benign, given how every other ethnic group actively pursues ethnocentric identity politics. WI implies no superiority-complex. It simply recognizes that, in today’s political climate (and with mass migration rapidly leading to displacement), cognizance that ‘white people’ might have a set of common, collective, group interests is a rational conclusion, and that to then articulate these group interests (using the same tropes and chains-of-reasoning that POCs do) is also a rational reaction.

To pin one’s hopes on an idealized utopia where everyone simultaneously drops ethnocentrism is not only naïve but foolhardy and (given demographic changes) dangerous for Western nations that have been built by ‘whites’. Iterated game theory simulations show that ethnocentrism beats out every other strategy. It is not going away.

Reichstag Fires like the NZ shooting allow the Left to perpetually widen their definition of ‘hate speech’. In their eyes, you are no better than a nutty 1488 poseur like Andrew Anglin. If they have their way, the Left will deplatform you just like they have deplatformed voices like Gavin McInnes, Jared Taylor, and many others.

Get used to it.

Posted in Alt-Right | Comments Off on Rod Tastes the Wrath

Why Wealthy White Counties are the Most Politically Intolerant

Rod Dreher makes some observations about The Atlantic’s recent piece on how wealthy (white) progressive counties (with lots of POCs) are the Most Politically Intolerant, while poorer (white) counties are the Least Politically Intolerant.

As becomes apparent, the most intolerant counties are dominated by white liberals, in superzips where only 2 classes of people can afford to live: wealthy whites (overwhelmingly progressive) & much poor persons of color. White working class individuals and families (less likely to have college degrees and so less likely to be indoctrinated by PC) have simply been squeezed out into the hinterlands.

In Watertown NY, 80% of the population is non-Hispanic white. Estimated median household income in 2016 is $37,134, just over half the avg for NY as a whole. 53% of the population over 15 years of age are married.

The following may be the most salient factors: 93% of Watertown residents speak English; 71% of Watertown residents were born in NY; only 4% were foreign born.

For comparison

* In NYC, only 51% speak English (national avg = 79%); 48% of NYC residents were born in NY; and 37% were foreign born.

* In Boston, 63% speak English (national avg = 79%); 44% of residents were born in Boston; and 28% were foreign born.

* In SF, 56% speak English (national avg = 79%); 39% of residents were born in SF; and 35% were foreign born.

In these Low Tolerance zips, one begins to see the following dynamic that may be a root cause of High Political Intolerance. Stratification of income by race becomes even more acute, as the income gap between white (liberal) professionals and POCs gets wider. This, in turn, leads to mounting white guilt over POC failure to similarly rise in socioeconomic status. After all, *they* themselves (who dominate local and state level politics) are ‘good people’, so why is this happening? Said white libs than seek an ‘explanation’ for this income gap (and their own personal status in the new aristocracy): “racism”. IOW, it must be due to that tiny minority of Republicans in their geographic area that is the cause.

BO’s presidency was supposed to “heal” the nation racially. Instead, BO did a lot to worsen race relations, despite the fact that many Deplorables in the white working class voted for him. The failure of BO’s presidency then hyper-accentuated the aforementioned prog white wealthy class sense of guilt. Hence, the uptick in radical prog white rhetoric about racism (the spiraling PC madness we are now seeing consume the Democratic Party) really began taking off around 2013, which was during first year of BO’s second term (see Steve Sailer). This was the era of the Trayvonn Martin case, BO’s (and others’) inflammatory response to it. Then, the Ferguson police shooting of Michael Brown took place in 2014, which led to years of additional gasoline poured onto the fire… by the most prominent Dems in the country.

Combine this with the contemptuous attitudes of white liberal elites (e.g., the Thomas Franks of the country and their contempt for the Kansas’s of the country), as well as Robert Putnam’s findings that more diversity means depletion of social capital (erosion of trust across the board), and one can start to see a picture emerge of how Political Intolerance would spike in the wealthiest, whitest, and most progressive zips in the country.

Posted in Culture, Politics | Comments Off on Why Wealthy White Counties are the Most Politically Intolerant

Dreher vs Prog Race Hate

Rod Dreher is upset at the reaction to Esquire magazine’s cover story on Ryan Morgan, a white middle-class teenager form the Midwest. Even though Esquire’s editor says there will be future pieces on the experiences of LGBT teenagers, black teenager experiences, etc., the SJW harpies are upset that Esquire would provide empathetic coverage of a (gasp) white male.

To Rod, I say: They are going to call you a white supremacist for simply pointing out their anti-white animus. This is not going to stop. Ever. Certainly not as perpetual-victim POC groups (with an insatiable appetite for real or imagined historical grievances) grow demographically, with whites slated for minority status circa 2040. There won’t magically be equality of outcomes and the ‘end of racism’ once whites are a minority. Group differences (based on race) will continue and the Last White Man in the room will be not only be blamed, his relative ‘privilege’ serving as prima facia evidence, but will be punished accordingly. In perpetuity.

The only rational response is for whites to do what every other racial bloc does: establish identitarian groups (e.g., Congressional White Caucus, etc.), not to punish or reward persons based on their race, but simply to lobby on behalf of the collective, shared interests of whites… just as Asians, blacks, and Latinos do.

This is not ‘white supremacy’. Nor is it ‘white nationalism’. This is a rational form of ‘white identitarianism’.

There is nothing irrational or defeatist about it.

The alternative is to be the one racial group vainly pretending that race is not a salient factor in culture and domestic politics. One could argue such a position is tantamount to pathological altruism.

We aren’t going to reverse the massive depletion of social capital and trust that multiculturalism engenders (e.g., Robert Putnam’s findings) with pleas to ‘look past race’.

The late founder of modern Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, is famous for observing: “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.” This axiom led Yew to state, years later, that “multiculturalism will destroy America.”

Posted in White Identity | Comments Off on Dreher vs Prog Race Hate

The Nervousness of the Jew

Excerpt from Abraham Myerson’s “The ‘Nervousness’ of the Jew,” Mental Hygiene 4 (1920): 65–72, reprinted in Hart (ed.) Jews and Race: Writings on Identity & Difference, 1880-1940 (2011):

It is idle, of course, to deny that the Jew has an innate character, different from that of other races, which perhaps predisposes him to psychoneuroses and other mental diseases. Unquestionably deeply emotional, clinging to belief and opinion with a tenacity unparalleled in the history of the world, extremely active mentally, and in point of intellectual achievement to be compared only with the great races of the world, he is curiously passive in his resistance and curiously indomitable in his hold on life and success. Accused of materialism and yet furnishing proportionately more social reformers than any other race; accused of materialism and yet responsible for the two most ethical religions in the world; said to be dominated by love of gain, but the birthplace of the ethics that govern his accusers, the Western peoples; a race of contradictions, inconsistencies, strongly individualistic and extraordinarily social, it may well be that such a soil would produce great failure as well as great success, psychoneurosis as well as genius.

Posted in Jewish | Comments Off on The Nervousness of the Jew