“Nothing causes more outrage than a statement that is both obviously true and fervently wished by everyone to be untrue.” [Audacious Epigone]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmJLh3QCNgM
Last night, I anxiously tuned in to watch the new series Philip K. Dick’s Electric Dreams on Amazon. The debut episode in my Amazon feed was “Real Life”, which is set in a futuristic L.A. Within the first 10 minutes of this episode:
At that point, I turned the show off and swore not to watch any more of this series.
The SJW hi-jacking of Hollywood sci-fi has apparently reached critical mass.
The most famous passage of George Wallace’s 1963 Inaugural Address as Governor, was delivered 55 years ago today, on January 14, 1963.
These 9th Circuit judges either have amazing psychic abilities or an amazing ability to transmit his own inner fantasies into legal doctrine. From Politico:
The federal judge who earlier this week ordered the reversal of President Donald Trump’s decision to end the program protecting so-called Dreamers said in a new ruling Friday that it is “plausible” that Trump shut down the program for racial reasons.
“These allegations raise a plausible inference that racial animus towards Mexicans and Latinos was a motivating factor in the decision to end DACA,” U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup wrote, referring to the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program bestowing quasi-legal status and work permits on undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as children.
Alsup noted that two of the suits filed challenging the decision the Trump administration announced in September to wind-down the program cited Trump’s anti-Mexican and anti-Latino rhetoric during the 2016 campaign, including his description of Mexicans as rapists and of immigrants coming across the southern border as “animals.”
“Circumstantial evidence of intent, including statements by a decisionmaker, may be considered in evaluating whether government action was motivated by a discriminatory purpose,” wrote Alsup, an appointee of President Bill Clinton. “These statements were not about the rescission (which came later) but they still have relevance to show racial animus against people south of our border.”
Acts of Violence (2018) looks like a formulaic, sh*t B-movie and I have no intentions of seeing it. Bruce Willis, who these days will accept any film role offer, then phone it in and collect his paycheck, is apparently in this movie for all of about 10 minutes. Acts of Violence currently has a 0% rating on RT (not that I put much weight in film critics.)
Nonetheless, I would add this film to a growing list of movies geared towards working class white men (e.g., Taken) which depict white men rescuing white women abducted into sexual slavery (or other harm) by brown or black criminal elements. Such films act as a stress-release outlet for anxiety over ‘refugee’ migration into the West. The Jungian collective unconscious seems to be strong on this theme. (See my review in Counter-Currents of the film Brawl in Cell Block 99 (2017) for more on this theme.)
In the case of Acts of Violence, we have the MacGregor brothers, essentially a Midwestern white Scots clan, two of whom are ex-military (one with PTSD and anger issues) going all Rambo on a sex trafficking gang run by a black guy.
One reviewer writes:
In the worldview of Acts of Violence, there is nothing good or decent or right, except for force. It depends, of course, upon who’s yielding that force and against whom the person is yielding it. It’s a movie of supposed moral certainty, although that certainty comes by heavily tipping the scales in the favor of its “good guys.” When coupled with that view of violence, it’s easy to see this as a politically, philosophically, and morally corrupt movie.
It’s cheap and lazy, too, which makes it more difficult to see much of anything beyond the movie’s belief system. Here, the good guys are a trio of brothers, two of them Army veterans, and the bad guys are a gang of sex slavers and drug dealers. The police are seen as a burden, until a cop or two figure out that, under the story’s extreme circumstances, the law is meaningless. The only right response is to take justice into one’s own hands.
People in this movie’s world are either men of action or victims. There’s no in between. The only variation is whether the men of action—and they’re always men in this movie—are doing good or evil.
If the men of action are always men here, it should come as little surprise that all of the victims in Nicolas Aaron Mezzanatto’s screenplay are women. One supposes that an attitude of misogyny means little compared to the movie’s fascistic outlook, but it’s worth mentioning, if only because the two ideas seem inextricably linked within this story.
From The Hill:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) on Friday accused President Trump of “promoting a homogenous, white society” that would set the country back “generations” after he reportedly disparaged immigration from “shithole countries.”
“The president’s expressed desire to see more immigrants from countries like Norway must be called out for what it is: an effort to set this country back generations by promoting a homogenous, white society,” Feinstein said in a statement.
A homogenous white society would be such a dysfunctional horror show. Just imagine what the crime rate would be. And what our inner cities might look like. And just imagine the lack of vibrantly diverse ethnic restaurants to dine in. Why, it might look something like America in 1960.
It gives me the shivers.
The viral nature of a short clip of Jewish liberal Steven Pinker discussing a rational aspect of the Alt Right’s appeal… has caused a meltdown among NYT snowflakes.
In the second half of the video clip, Pinker himself misses the point of what the Alt Right normatively concludes from the group differences he mentions.
This NYT columnist completely misses Pinker’s point in the first half of the video and my aforementioned point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJSucqX53B0
In The New Yorker, Alexandra Schwartz addresses the self-help guru craze. In one section, while discussing Svend Brinkmann’s book “Stand Firm: Resisting the Self-Improvement Craze”, she writes:
“I might not be an expert in Jewish culture (my main source of knowledge is Woody Allen’s films),” he writes, in a section in praise of “kvetching,” “but I get the impression that a general acceptance of griping about things both big and small is actually a cultural conduit that fosters collective happiness and satisfaction.” I can assure Brinkmann that the concepts of collective happiness and satisfaction are all but alien to the Jewish people, but if kvetching works for him he is welcome to it.
Why is it that when a Jew makes an observation about Jewish collective behavior, it’s acceptable material for The New Yorker and its cultural cousins, but when a Gentile makes the same observation about Jewish collective behavior, it is deemed anti-Semitic stereotyping?
First, it was Lemmy and Phil “Philthy Animal” Taylor both passing in 2015.
Now, original Motorhead guitarist Fast Eddie Clarke has passed at the age of 62.
After leaving Motorhead, Clarke formed the short live band Fastway, whose pseudonymous debut album from 1983 was very good, sounding like what Led Zeppelin might’ve sounded like had they survived into the ‘80s.
Here’s Fastway’s best song “Say What You Will” from that debut album.
Normism: The Philosophy of Norm Macdonald, a short book I wrote about the late great comedian, is available on Amazon.
