SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
No bio...
User ID: 853
No. I want the small whiney kid to get his teeth kicked in.
Yup I misread.
The writer was Jewish and the story is allegedly semi-autobiographic.
Yes, exactly... These myths in popular culture have esoteric meaning, the characters represent ethnic conflict. In Karate Kid, in Revenge of the Nerds, in Happy Gilmore, in Caddyshack. It's an incredibly common and powerful mode of waging culture war. It matters who the producers have you rooting for and have you rooting against (spoiler they have you rooting for symbolic representations of themselves and against symbolic representations of you). It affects the psychology of the laity.
I want to watch Johnny Lawrence kicking the shit out of short whiney Daniel LaRusso, but I'm tall and good looking. I'm not the target audience for much of popular entertainment.
Interesting fact about that film is that Daniel LaRusso's (who is an east-coast transplant) character name was originally written as Daniel Webber, implying another esoteric Jew-Aryan faceoff where the Jew wins and steals the Aryan's girlfriend to boot.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
9hr ago
Haven't seen that but good one. Michael Douglas also kills a neo-Nazi store owner in that one.
George from George of the Jungle was inspired by George Eiferman. So the character was based on a Jew originally, and the hunter villain is a WASP with an Oxford accent.
Brendan Fraser is not Jewish, although that's a popular misconception because Fraser played the role of David Greene in School Ties:
David Greene (Brendan Fraser), is a working class Jewish high school student from Scranton, Pennsylvania, who is awarded an athletic scholarship to an elite preparatory school in Massachusetts during his senior year in 1955. His fellow students come from rich families, and he learns that most of them are antisemites, which forces him to hide his Jewish background.
Of course his identity his exposed by Charlie (Matt Damon) and the whole school turns on him- bullying, Swastikas, etc.
The point is not that all myths or movies feature a "Jew versus Gentile" conflict, but to say "Jewish hero and Gentile villain" is a very common esotericism in film that transmits a certain, particularly Jewish perspective of ethnic conflict into the consciousness of mass audiences. Caddyshack and Happy Gilmore are two examples.
The same phenomenon appears in Hollywood mockery and criticism of Fraternities, like in Accepted, Revenge of the Nerds (who join the Black fraternity (!) to get revenge on Alpha Beta), Animal House, etc.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
11hr ago
I mean yeah, if Catholics made Caddyshack and Happy Gilmore with Catholic protagonists wouldn't the analysis apply there the same? Wouldn't you agree the film/mockery/criticism is derived from the Catholic perspective in that case? I wouldn't call it an "organized conspiracy" to note that the films in those cases would have been motivated by the Catholic perspective of a cultural conflict, a perspective which they then transmit to mass audiences via popular culture like the very movies that are so iconic.
I am interpreting the most iconic and influential cultural artifacts that elevate the Country Club golfer as the villain and the outsider, styled to represent the antithesis of Country Club culture, as the hero.
Happy Gilmore is one example, the other most influential film that explores these themes is Caddyshack where we also see a Jewish outsider, Al Czervik played by Rodney Dangerfield (born Jacob Cohen), come into conflict with the Gentile Judge Smails (played by Ted Knight). Interestingly, Czervik tells Smails he did not come to the club as a guest in order to acquire membership but to buy the club. So there's another layer of meaning there- Czervik is not trying to gain access as a member he's trying to take over the institution. There's no question the film is getting at a deeper message of new Jewish arrivals, "guests", acquiring financial success and coming into cultural conflict with the WASP "old guard"- expressing as a struggle over the control of cultural institutions, and the criticism of those too closely associated with Whites.
It's a much stronger and less useful claim to say that these films "started the trend" of ressentiment towards Country Club golf culture, my claim is merely that they represent it through a highly influential medium. And in both cases the conflict between the Country Club golfer and the low-class or homo novus outsider is ethnically coded as a conflict between Jews and Gentiles, with the Jews winning and the Gentiles being humiliated. It demoralizes those who identify with that culture and moralizes the people who hate it, whether that hatred is derived from ethnic or class resentment.
There's no question that there are many instances of Country Club Critique in other films, like this comedic bit in Better Call Saul where Goodman causes a scene by accusing the Club of being antisemitic. The most iconic and influential films that explore this theme are encoding an ethnic conflict along with a class conflict, and that's largely why they are compelling to this day.
yet here we purportedly have one assaulting a woman because she reaches for his golf club
This is what I mean though. You don't see this ad as a member of the group participating in a promotional skit, you see her as a woman reaching for a golf club being assaulted. The bit was supposed to be a parody of Obsession for what that's worth.
I don't have anything against the country club culture, but I think they regard themselves too highly, believing their exclusivity and luxury improves their character, while they ultimately pursue shiny things and creature comforts like the rest of us.
I'm a Country Club man, my experience is it's especially males but also families enjoying themselves among like-minded people in a high-trust environment, which can be a breath of fresh air in many places. Often for making friends, networking professionally, etc. And of course it retains a White identity, even though I enjoy shooting the shit with the Jewish members as well. The Outsider seething of the country club is a much more notable phenomenon. The ressentiment is downstream from a mixture of class resentment and ethnic resentment, often blended together in cultural criticism such as Happy Gilmore, the most popular Golf film in the past 35 years at least (and yes I do like the film, in large part because it is deeper than slapstick).
With that said I absolutely have my own criticisms of the culture, but they aren't derived from seething about the archetype as an outsider and then elevating the antithesis of the archetype as some sort of good. That's ressentiment.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
23hr ago
That's a bit unfair, please watch this clip and tell me it's not good content. That's a feat > 99.9% of golfers will never accomplish, and it was accomplished on high-quality film with different angles in an energetic setting. What people hate is the youthful vigor and playfulness. Granted, that is probably the best clip of the entire brand but if you golf you will know this whole segment is entertaining and genuinely impressive, with Garrett himself predicting a hole-in-one on a Par 4.
The Good Good hate doesn't make sense because if you don't resonate with it just don't watch it. I haven't watched it since Grant and Micah left, but we should all look for an explanation for why so many people hate young guys making a living off of filming golf.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
1d ago
Can you elaborate on your argument? I've read Dickens but the mockery of the WASP country club that has been transmitted to me, and everybody else who hates Good Good for representing a "country club golf gentleman (fine member of high society)" has not come from Dickens, or Austen, or Tolstoy, it has come from difference sources, like the one I posted.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
1d ago
Do you agree popular culture and Hollywood has engaged in consistent criticism of the WASP Country Club? Are you just going to point and sputter or participate in the conversation?
It's a stark reminder that cancel culture is not dead. Your post doesn't walk through all of the fallout from this ad which was posted briefly and deleted quickly. But every new day is bringing more fallout to the brand from various partnerships:
- Golf Galaxy & Dicks Sporting goods have pulled all Good Good merchandise from their online and brick-and-mortar.
- Callaway has dropped sponsorship of Good Good
- Golf Channel canceled the last episode of their Big Break show which involved a Good Good collaboration.
So much for the "Woke 1.0 was stupid we went too far" conventional wisdom, it seems it never left. All the more surprising the hysteria exploded within golf, a right-coded subculture.
The hysterical reaction to that ad shows why gender equality is impossible. Good Good was obviously not trying to portray domestic violence but the opposite: Alexis the girl hanging out with a group of guys as one of them- a friend and a colleague, participating in a dumb skit to promote a driver. The mob interpretation that this ad promotes "domestic violence" implies an inherent, sexually submissive role of Alexis in a polyandric circle or something. She can't roughhouse with the boys because she's a woman, it would be inherently sexually suggestive for her to do so. Whereas someone who truly believed in equality would not anticipate a problem with Alexis playing this part in the script.
There's another layer to this though, which is that much of the hate mob appears motivated by hatred for Good Good itself, a hatred that is in turn downstream from ressentiment towards the "country club" social organization, a resentment which also comes through directly in OP's post mockingly describing Garret as a "country club golf gentleman (fine member of high society)".
Ressentiment towards the Country Club Gentleman has also long been promoted in popular culture, producing endless films where the Country Club Gentleman is the villain, meant to be humiliated by the outsider protagonist who has no respect for the cultural tradition or decorum expected by these social institutions.
The primary driver of this backlash is ressentiment towards Good Good itself, for the crime of being White young-adults making money from filming golf YouTube videos.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
4d ago
They would also have to deal with having their territorial integrity threatened by a much weaker ally. In the way the dysfunction in Greece percolates to all of Europe. They would need to navigate foreign affairs and security in a far less efficient and political secure manner. An incompetent ally is much more difficult than direct governorship and management.
What if there's economic hardship, political upheaval, or security threats to the Mizrahi Nation? That affects the Ashkenazi Nation but there's only so much they can do as a foreign government even being close allies. I don't see a world where Israel has its influence and status as a set of petty Jewish nationalisms divided along ethnic lines with different languages and governments.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
4d ago
"basically just" is doing a lot of work there. Integrating the Mizrahi into the economy and military is very important to Israel. Their military would be cut in half without the Mizrahi. Israeli GDP wouldn't fall by quite that much due to income inequality but it would constitute the loss of a huge source of labor.
A counterfactual world in which an Ashkenazi from the Ashkenazi Nation can't even hold a verbal conversation with a Mizrahi from the Mizrahi Nation because they speak different languages and have different economies and governments is a world in which they are both easier pickings for their enemies.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
4d ago
I don't doubt Ashkenazis could run their own small state. But imagine if Israel were divided between an Ashkenazi nation that spoke its own language and a Mizrahi nation that spoke a different language. Different governments, languages, militaries, culture. That would be much weaker than the pan-Jewish nation and movement. The Arabs would prefer them to be divided, wouldn't they?
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
4d ago
Yes definitely, pro-NATO as well. Those are the institutions that would be foundational to a movement like that. Of course the current iteration is far away but the institutional authority is already 75% of the way there.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
4d ago
The rejection of the ethnic component of Britishness coincided with the collapse of the British Empire. Likewise you note the loss of ethnic Roman identity circa 400 AD Rome, at the twilight of their own empire. America is TBD but the rejection of the ethnic component of Americanism has led to disastrous consequences within a single generation.
All of those empires grew and thrived under the auspice of a distinct ethnic identity and sense of destiny, and then they wilted when it was lost.
"Ethnic purity" is a false dichotomy. Ethnic purity is impossible for empires but maintaining a sense of imperial ethnic identity is not impossible and is a core feature of building and maintaining empires. For everything you could say about Israel, they do not maintain ethnic purity as dailydogma showed below. Yet they maintain a collective ethnic identity and could not survive without that identity.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
4d ago
And European nationalists should take note of Jewish success in that regard. Where would Israel and Zionism be if it were not a pan-Jewish identarian movement? Imagine if every Jewish subgroup tried to cluster into its own nation with its own language. It wouldn't work, Ashkenazi Nationalism alone could not have built Israel. Its power is derived from being a pan-Jewish movement.
Likewise the European foil to Zionism is not {British Nationalism, Irish Nationalism, French Nationalism, German Nationalism} it's pan-European Nationalism.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
8d ago
What other justice is there but "treat people as individuals"?
"Treat people as individuals" is not a justice because it contradicts the ground truth that people are not individuals, by nature of their identities and indeed race they are members of one or more groups. "Treat people as individuals" is a strategy, and it's not a just strategy because it puts those that adopt that strategy at a huge political and cultural disadvantage to people who don't follow that strategy, to people who operate on the basis of their shared identity. They don't see their co-ethnics as "individuals" they see them as members of their ingroup, closer to an extended family than a random stranger sampled from a planet.
The reality is that strategy is only advocated for Whites and no other group, and everybody who advocates for that strategy is just fine with Whites adopting it while no other group does so. Maybe they will pay lip service to the notion they wish everyone else followed it, but they still advocate following a failed strategy with no rational basis.
It's not just to demand Whites treat everyone as individuals while everyone else organizes on the basis of their ethnic identity for political and cultural power. "Treat people as individuals" is only really justified by HBD denial in the first place, based on the assumption that it doesn't matter what genetic group or ethnic identity someone belongs to, which is false.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
22d ago
SilencerShop is great, they make a semi-complex process very easy. But I wonder if they are hurting their own business model/differentiator by getting suppressors off the NFA. Good for them in any case.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
28d ago
Look, despite what people will say, enmity towards Jews is not my goal. If Jews and Israel took serious, serious, serious steps towards a genuine alliance I would be open to it. But right now what I see is Israel bringing the American Empire to the brink in order to take care of its rival Iran. I'm not falling for anti-Islam b8 and pretending it makes us allies because it does not. It is very possible, likely, that both Islam and Israel are threats to America and Europe, and Israel fanning the flames of anti-Islamic sentiment in Europe is not going to move the dial for me. I haven't seen an inkling of genuine attempts at reconciliation, if anything we are at the cusp of seriously harming the global economy on behalf of Israel. Anti-Islam solidarity does not change the situation. Both are a problem and I don't see that changing any time soon.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
28d ago
I hope now that you are seeing a possibility of the right and Israel having a lot of shared interests against third worldism that we can work together now.
It's a tragic relationship, like Jacob and Esau. In an ideal world they would be formidable allies but they are intrinsically not allies, they are foreigners with a chip on their shoulders. They can't be trusted. Both Third Worldism and Israel are the adversary, and I actually wish that were not true but believe it is. The Anglos in their naivete believed in the possibility of such racial cooperation and we are living in the fallout of that.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
28d ago
Yes, and the same guy who wrote AEI commentary on why Trump made a mistake with the MOA and the US has to institute regime change in Iran:
What needs to happen in Iran today is what happened in Cambodia: Those who wish for ideological reasons to fight to the death should have their wish granted.
For Trump, this should mean not waiting for a unified proposal or falling victim to the regime’s usual good cop/bad cop games, but rather, targeting all the remaining hardliners without mercy. It is time to eradicate those who embrace the ideology of Ghalibaf, Vahidi, or Secretaryof the Supreme National Security Council Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr in Iran and Nouri al-Maliki and Hadi al-Ameri in Iraq. If the regime today is more radical than two months ago, then the conclusion is that everyone who remains in it should be a target.
Germany had the Nuremberg Tribunal. Japan had the Tokyo trials. If Iranian regime leaders do not flee by a set deadline to a Russia exile, then it is time to start planning the Tehran Court, with Iran’s last public hangings being the Guardsmen who themselves sent so many to their gallows.
This is the guy who said Morocco should send waves of migrants to create a crisis in Ceuta because Spain doesn't support Israel.
It's just strange you struggle to see the angle when the angle is directly laid out by Israeli newspapers, and Israel is even doing directly what the article recommends. Why did ultra-Zionist Michael Rubin, representing influential US policy NGOs, directly recommend this back in April? Do you think Rubin being a Zionist Jew had nothing to do with him calling for Morocco to do exactly what it did yesterday, even though Rubin directly cites Spain's enmity towards Israel as justifying his position?
Or to frame it another way, do you think Morocco was involved in orchestrating the crisis? NYT reports being told by multiple migrants they were directed by Moroccan security forces to cross the border.
Ok, so if you admit Morocco was directly involved in the event, then you think it happened totally independent of their military alliance with Israel and totally independent of the enormous enmity between Spain and Israel?
You are saying that it's just a coincidence that Israel's ally Morocco did the thing Israeli advocates and commentators said Israel should support Morocco doing. It's fine to take that position but weird to say you don't see the angle when the angle is corroborated directly from multiple sources.
Italy has suspended Spain from the Schengen Zone, there is going to be huge blowback to the left-wing Spanish government, with elections upcoming, which has been the sworn enemy of Israel for years. To say you don't see the angle makes no sense to me.
SecureSignals
Ere the Sun rises
28d ago
By "out of nowhere" I mean that this wasn't a random migration event. I am well-aware that Spain has been heavily involved in making an enemy of Israel and making the US unhappy- they aren't hapless victims they are paying the price for their politics. There's good reason for US/Israel to not like Spain.
Oh you were subjected to endless cultural veneration all right.
More options
Context Copy link