Sunday, November 23, 2014

Porn in Decline + Moving to Vegas

Things are shutting down in the valley. Porn is moving production to Vegas. Vegas has been involved with porn in the past but it is growing. It is not solely due to the new laws in California. It is not even that the industry is full of idiots and back-stabbing shitheads. The widespread internet availability is killing it. The move to Vegas is as simple as money. The money is gone from the industry. There were two Golden Eras: '70s film Golden Era and '90s Wider Acceptance + Young Internet Golden Era. It is not just filming technology that enabled the barbarism, but the over the counter sales of lubricants after 1980 and widespread use of Viagra after 2000. Tube sites are generating a good chunk of total Internet demand. Those guys then collect tons of advertising revenue from the online prostitution sites and porn distributor sites with even lower overhead. They do not even have to film, and users upload videos themselves. Those few sites can print money. The oft quoted number of an $11 billion industry does not make sense if the Tube sites are destroying sales, so what is keeping the industry alive? Sex, but not on film.

The industry is about money and sex. Always has been always will be. Yes, these ladies perform because many are broken inside, but they are doing it for the money. Newest trend is come into the industry for a quick swing through the higher profile internet companies, and then headline strip clubs with the boost of being a porn star. An interesting story I saw was on a young woman who did maybe four scenes but now she reviews video games (link). I do not know her official stance on Gamergate, but it might be interesting. The interesting thing that has happened to the "studios" in this decline phase is that you have the mega-studios that bought whatever assets smaller studios had as they folded, and then the other survivors are the small niche filming units. Everyone can produce generic action and for far cheaper in a foreign country, but if your studio has a kink (feet, midgets, interracial, etc.), you have a market for steady customers. It's not like there is much overhead, but really, who is buying in the era of tube sites and Chromecast on your big screen plasma? The $11 billion number from 2006 must be revised way down now.


Susannah Breslin constantly says that you cannot figure out a porn producer's income or earnings because it is so fluid, but hint hint, it is a promotion outlet for a web of prostitution in America. Steve Sailer had wondered years back what those Russian guys were doing with the pretty Russian girlfriend for work in the Valley. Well LA Direct Models was paying guys who could speak an Eastern Euro language decent money to be "proxy husbands". Those guys were driving them to and from client appointments on time and to and from filming locations on time. Many of those women were only in town for as long as their first visa lasted, then skipped out when they could not climb (or descend) the ladder. It really is not hard to find the sites, but gee willikers, for high rates per hour, "you too can sleep with a porn star" (NSFW obviously, and I could've linked to many more sites). Pornographic film is just filmed escorting, and private escorting can earn the performers even higher amounts. When they sign on for a scene, they have to show up for hours to collect their scene fee. For one simple hour with a fan that clears security check of the escort agency, they get paid the same or a higher rate. The agency takes their cut of that as well.

In the constant push for porn glamorization and mainstreaming, an ABC 20/20 episode had a segment with a retired porn performer explaining what it is like to be engaged to a male porn performer. A little back story helps reveal the buffoonery of this media nugget. The female, Kayden Kross, was also used in the GQ article on James Deen as the smart girl who read David Foster Wallace and was business savvy. Mainstream media is very careful about who they use to discuss porn. She is pretty savvy to get impregnated by a male porn performer who was looking for more permanent residency in the US. The anchor baby came first, then the engagement. This is laughable considering another of the well paid and big name female performers, Tori Black, did an interview (NSFW) that even if one tenth of it is true, reveals what a broken human being she is and the industry is to prey on these people. A good outcome for a female performer is to marry out quickly or to get a big enough name that you can strip, tour nationwide, and arrange for escorting dates as you tour and stop shooting porn. Tori Black's interview will not get press promotion, but maybe it is because the owners of porn are cousins with our big media owners.

That is part of the reason for the move to Vegas. Yes, there are no silly condom laws like California. Vegas is also a mecca for *wink wink shoulder shrug* prostitution. Vegas pulls in a huge southern California weekend crowd. As multiple books alluded to or explicitly stated written during Vegas' rise in the '00s, the Mob never left Vegas, it just changed its revenue focus. Those little Mexican guys stand on the corner, snapping cards for lower end girls. That fee advertised is just for her to show up. The rest is up to your negotiating skills. What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas except STDs. The higher profile performers do not need to advertise. They have ready and willing clients through the online escorting racket. Those women can headline a strip club, and at the end of the night, some wealthy joker is going to pay good money and be far gentler than her last coworker on the set of God knows what deviancy she filmed last week. The media does not talk about this. It would spoil the fake narrative they have of porn "stars", female empowerment and super awesome, Olympic style sex. The stink of a network of prostitution using dirty videos to generate client demand would be a tougher sell. Better to stick to it as a feminist choice of sex positivism that is tied to our freedom of speech.

Friday, November 21, 2014

Hi MPC

I was checking my blog's analytics information last week, and I noticed a blip up from a site called mpcdotcom. It was a big enough blip for Google's awful traffic stats to catch. You guys found me. Actually, I found you guys through tweets by Heartiste and a commenter here who once in a while drops by to comment by the name GFC. The url in his name brought me to your site. A lot of the things Tweeted in my network usually originate from your forum, which true to the claim is 21st century American samizdat. After a while, I noticed some of you are either commenters here (GFC, PRCD) or in my Twitter network (cold russian, mpctxt). I have received two questions about y'all on ask.fm, and I'll repeat my first answer here.

I find you guys funny often and insightful sometimes. I genuinely and consistently laugh out loud reading posts, and will gladly use specific statistics or charts from your forum with open minded people to help nudge people along the dark path (similar to using the Radish/Unamusement Park flyers). Poz is so brilliant that even my wife uses it for post-dinner or event analysis of our SWPL friends. Pozzed is a perfect word for a vegan wedding reception meal. You guys are heavy on blaming Jews for everything, but there are things on your site you can't find elsewhere. I think any criticism of the DarkEn should be evaluated on its grounds, and you guys do point out good issues. People who poke holes in arguments can make you see something you did not see because of your worldview. You guys also love to skewer the Dark Enlightenment or Dork Enlightenment as you guys put it. I'll get back to this, but here's the second question someone asked.

Anonymous Question: "What if I hit My Posting Career with a hammer?" I answered "They'd hit back and laugh about it". This is not a hammer, and I don't have time for gay Internet battles. I'm not Anissimov. You guys would laugh off any criticism because you're too cool for that. Play it cool and aloof, don't get too attached. It is similar to that lack of sincerity and snark that the left uses to never fully commit themselves to anything. "See I'm being ironic cause God forbid anyone think I am sincere in my belief or fandom and criticize it therefore dinging my status." I hate those progressives, but I dislike that attitude in general. It's why the left hated Tim Tebow so much. He wasn't an athlete thanking God for trinkets (wins), but a real, well spoken believer. Some enthusiastic members of the DarkEn might come across as a dark mirror version of Tumblr kids, but there is a heavy Millenial crew and that is just how that generation of whites will act (see Strauss and Howe). You guys seem a bit older and would also wield a sharp knife on anyone as you guys have a smart core of members. This specific post is not any type of fight, but instead an invitation.

Stop making fun of the dork enlightenment, and start looking at the things you guys already have in common with it. I'll refer to this MPC scale post, but consider themes elsewhere on the forum. Smaller political units, more homogeneous in make up, more traditional mindset to family and gender relations, anti-atomization, anti-DC-NY cabal, breaking up the massive concentration of wealth, Hollywood PC brainwashing, anti-white elite behavior and a need for lessening the complexity of things. Did you guys write that or did someone in the dork enlightenment? Those are running themes within the DarkEn as well as on your forum. Smaller units with ethnic solidarity sounds like the pro-secession or patchwork guys in the DarkEn, and the ethnats would be happy with the homogeneous idea. You guys seem to see differences within groups, religions, races, etc. but are not hard sold on the HBDbot messaging. Outside the autistic, most guys in the DarkEn believe in HBD but would say that the wider rules of society and environment matter. Incentives matter.


You guys lament the lost America, so do we. You guys hate the broken down modern world, so do we. You can read my blog, and others, and see that blame for the current state of things can be laid on a variety of groups, which does include the Jews. I try to be as specific as possible and factual to avoid an avalanche of SJWs as they chased me off of posting effortposts to Tumblr with dox threats due to this post (seriously, I don't get what was bad). The best description of our predicament is from a Tweet series where LB said the psychotic US set up is a mix of Protestant Universalism and Jewish Bolshevism. This is why I wrote about Tom Steyer a year ago (he just spent $76 mil this '14 election cycle). He and his brother are the living embodiment of this unified Prot-Jew elite pushing things.

Before you make fun of the dork enlightenment, think of these commonalities. It is really easy to make fun of Aurini drinking alcohol in a suit in the middle of the woods, Anissimov's bitchy gayness and Idaho plan or 10,000 word blog posts (how often are there 10K word count blog posts). Those items and people are not the entire DarkEn. Should anyone judge your forum solely on Eloh? Besides mocking the mockable, do you guys throw rocks at the DarkEn because it is close enough to look familiar? The DarkEn is not LARPing in medieval outfits. Check out Dampier, Land, Handle, Social Matter, Theden (spotty posting recently), and their blogrolls. Breakdown of the current system is coming. It's either a transition to Brazil Norte (US of Brazil) or a secession movement and possible civil war. Either way, there will be blood. Keep an open mind, look beyond the flamboyant self-promoters and read the analysis.

As far as the description of me, you guys pay attention to my biographical bits here and are correct. With all I write, why does no one think this blog has multiple writers? Thanks for the compliments, including the backhanded ones. I am a FIRE economy middler (great word) with a wife and kids. I am a lucky man and have a great life. If ever in my city, let me know and we can get a beer.


GFC, Shrill Kiners and PRCD: I appreciate the props. Thanks.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Exotic and Not Exotic

A spillover from Twitter correspondence, but the concept of exotic came up on Twitter. A Seeking Arrangement or Sugar Daddies website ad poster was a young black woman who was not good at planning but labeled herself exotic. I tweeted the comedy of backpages, craigslist etc. postings where black American women will slaps exotic on their advertisement to lure people in (black/white biracial women do this in every ad). The use of exotic is also the key to marketing. A standard issue black American woman marketing herself exotic is marketing to a non-black dating pool. Sure, they may be exotic to 50 something white engineers, but it is a funny catch all. A 28 year old black single mom on SeekingArrangement.com looking to exchange sex for money is not exotic. She is residue of our broken American culture. Exotic comes with the connotation of foreign and mysterious due to the element of the unknown. Even nerdy tech guys know what they are getting from the cute, black single mom. There is no mystery.
 
Multilingual Indian Account Executive Who Fills a Skirt Right (English accent a bonus) - Exotic


I can envision Bond saying "Evening Miss Manaypunani"
Note: In Cornell's economics department around 2001, there was a gorgeous Indian girl who spoke with an English accent. It drove every guy in class wild, and the comedy was you'd hear her voice and immediately turn to find the speaker. The visuals did not disappoint.
 

Multilingual Russian Violinist - Exotic


This entire picture's concept makes me laugh

Standard Issue Black Single Mom - Not Exotic

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Britain's Winter of Discontent Was Not In Isolation

Earlier this week, I brought up the Winter of Discontent that shook England. It was not just England. It was not just their specific problems. US-NATO system that was cracking up. The problem of that winter started way back in the late '60s/early '70s as the Bretton Woods system broke down. The closing of the gold window was the detonation moment. Our elites really did worry that everything would unravel. What would unravel was the social calm that was created by the post-War welfare states. During the '70s, it took the petrodollar, bringing back usury, and Volcker taking a hammer to interest rates (after repeal of anti-usury laws) to kill off inflation worries to make it all work. America (and England) also had to switch from a productive economy to a FIRE economy.

1. The Brits had the post-war welfare state that worked for roughly thirty years.
2. The Swedes had a roughly 30 year period where they created their lavish welfare state known as the Record Years.
3. The French had the 30 glorious years after WW2 where they built up a rich welfare state.

These all changed in the tumultuous economic period of '68-'82. Wikipedia and other sources rarely delve into the problem being the shift of the swing oil producer going from Texas to Saudi Arabia, decolonization and nationalization of oil wells, the terrible Bretton Woods set up. The paranoia of everything falling apart with worthless money even made it to the silver screen with Rollover (one of Pakula's conspiracy thrillers). England had the wonderful title and crisis with the Winter of Discontent, but they were not alone. The FIRE economy, declining interest rates, asset bubbles and never-ending immigration to suppress wages and provide new consumers all are tied together and all keep the facade going.

I'm not going into detail because if I ever get my damn Rubin book done, I'll explain more there.

Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Skyfall, Devoid of Humanity

My mental image when I hear the song Skyfall. Guns are loaded, my black suit, gold shirt and tie are securely in place, and I am tossing matches over my shoulder as I walk through the burning buildings of DC. We can dream. Adele knocked that one out of the park. It is the theme to the 2012 Bond film Skyfall. This is an incredibly late review of the film, but this is British week. What else is Bond but distilled Britishness for an American audience. Bond films are foreign films, but this is marketed to Americans. They even tried originally to make a production with Bond remade as an American named Jimmy Bond. Terrible idea. Skyfall is particularly suited for our times, but in reflecting our times, it is missing a crucial element.

This movie is standard issue Bond, cinematic escapsim. For a quick recap, scrapping the realistic introduction "parkour" scene from Casino Royale for the more Bondish, cartoony impossible opening, Bond fights in motorcycles, trains and automobiles. Fighting atop a train, he is shot inadvertantly by a fellow field agent (the hot black chick from 28 Days Later). Bond falls to a supposed death. M looks sad. MI6 is then fiddled with by a hacker (from inside M's office, dammit man!) with an explosion that kills agents and reveals that NATO agents are at risk. MI6 is under attack, and M is under political attack. Bond, who was drinking and banging some hot brunette from an undisclosed Mediterranean looking area, feels the urge to come back. He is in rough shape, yet M sends him out to go after the guy from scene one, who Bond helps them track by pulling out the bullet fragments from his gunshot wound. Bond goes to Asia, fights bad guy, sees a hot chick. Bond then flirts with hot black chick again, goes gambling because of a chip the dead bad guy had, and meets up with hot wh/asian chick to get to head bad guy. On her boat, they have sex and Bond meets the bad guy at a deserted island. Deserted bad guy happens to be former agent and poof Silva (played well by Bardem). Silva is caught by MI6, but oh no, his capture was planned so he could escape and take a shot at M. M appears before some bureaucrats, takes flak, is attacked by Silva, but she and Bond make a run for it. The final fight is at Bond's family residence, Skyfall, and booby traps and shotguns take out a squad of well trained bad guys with automatic weapons. It all ends with Silva finding M, begging her to kill them both, and finally Bond throws a knife in Silva's back. Silva is dead, M dies in Bond's arms as he cries, the hot black chick is Moneypenny, Ralph Fiennes is the new M, and Bond is back well dressed to take on eccentric billionaires with schemes to take over the world.

Sam Mendes directed this with good fight choreography that you could follow without getting a headache, beautiful shot selection to make the settings pop, great pacing as it is a long film but does not feel that way, and a constant theme of old world vs. new world. Bond represents duty to country, the idea of national allegiance (haha modern UK), old ways, old training, about banging broads the idea that human intelligence still matters in our world of NSA sigintel overload, face adversity but overcome it. Silva is a non-state actor, does what he wants usually for a price, no loyalty but to himself, technophile who is much savvier than Bond with computers, cynical beyond Bond, a gay guy, face adversity and become a bitter, angry person for it. At Silva and Bond's first meeting, Silva discusses Britain and M as if they are interchangeable, which is a nice piece of script writing to mix the concepts of Mother England and M herself. MI6 has to move to the underground lair of Churchill's days, which is pretty dumb that MI6 didn't have a predetermined back up command center but OLD WAYS rubes, get it. They bring back the Aston Martin for OLD WAYS. Silva can set up his base anywhere, and he just needs a laptop to win. Skyfall is Bond's ancestral home that he must return to use guile and tricks to defeat the modern, heavily armed Silva crew. Throughout the film, there is a steady emptiness or hollowness to it all. This actually reflects so much of the technological marvel that is our modern world, but also sets up the missed opportunity with the film itself. No humanity.

This was Dench's last spin as M, and the finale for her two decade performance. A missed opportunity through the Dench era was not having either Brosnan or Craig consistently call her "Mum" as a joke on her gender. Could have been a retort for the required "chauvinist pig" comments Dench was forced to say. The mother angle is here to see. Silva and Bond are her boys, Silva is open about M = mommy, and Bond's orphan status is mentioned. Bond comes back for her. He returns to her home. Bond takes M to his childhood home. These are popcorn action films, but if you wanted to add a dose of emotion and humanity, there was the surrogate mother-child issue at play with Silva-Bond-M. Preventing this might be American audience biases in play, where we want to see the stiff upper lip Brits, the cold Brits, and the proper Brits. When Bond returns, there could have been an emotional exchange about M being the reason, M being under attack, M not wanting to let go. In the highlands, Bond and M could've talked of M's affection for him. Silva claimed to be her favorite, and needed to see her eyes, which are the kind of things bitter children say when they get drunk at a family reunion and finally tell off Mom and Dad (or adult homosexuals who want to hurt their parents one more time). In her dying breath, I have no clue what M said, didn't matter. Could we have been given a little "I brought you back, for the same reason I first picked you, you've always been my favorite, I'll haunt you if you leave MI6", something along those lines. Give the little lady a heart.

Have you ever worked for a woman? Not a harpie or one who slept their way to the position. A sharp older woman who is competent. They exist. A woman who entered the business world in the Mad Men era and worked her way up. Think Peggy from Mad Men in old age, not Joan. A woman who might not have kids or just one and then treats younger, favored underlings like surrogate kids. They can play tough because they had to before 1990s sexual harassment laws, but they still have emotions, good and bad. They can break. That moment comes where something horrible happens at work, unrelated you take a personal call on your cell down in the garage and she's hiding down there maybe smoking a cigarette, shaking. You end your call, walk over just to check on her and she ends up hugging you, maybe crying, because she is still a woman. M mentions a husband who recently died but no kids. She's under attack on all fronts, and this is all she has. She isn't going to break down when Bond shows up? The government is trying to take away her baby, MI6, as it is all she has left? If you want to see frightening, watch a childless, old female executive after she knows she is getting the boot. Horrifying behavior no matter how cool they played it before. Couldn't M and Bond yell at each other at least? Was it not put in because we've stripped relationships out of work, and it's just do the job, get results, go home and play?

Some have made Moneypenny being black (demographically highly unlikely) and Silva being gay a little topic of discussion. Gays were killers in the past and usually the association was that to be gay was demented and a killer would be demented to kill. Only recently have we glorified gays in entertainment media productions. Hitchcock liked to use this connection as he had implicitly gay killers in Rope and Strangers on a Train, but yeah, they were gay. Norman Bates was a sexual deviant as well. In reality, the stunt casting is a trade, M goes back to being a guy, but we get a minority for Moneypenny. Naomie Harris had to be the pick since Zoe Saldana and Kerry Washington cannot pull off British accents. This feels off still. Part of the charm of Bond is that despite going to the far off reaches of the Empire, he is still a Brit and MI6's base is still his home. The exotic is out there to sleep and fight with, but he comes home to Mother England. Personally, I would've gone with that hot Indian chick from Slumdog Millionaire, and renamed her Ms. Manaypunani. If there is any casting regrets for the franchise's money making ability, it is that the Bond producers did not offer Christian Bale the role instead of Daniel Craig years ago. Progressivism requires the head nod to diversity and multiculturalism. Bond complies.

This is all why Skyfall is perfectly suited for 21st century westerners. We are surrounded by technological marvels but unhappy. Like Bond, we drink, pop pills and fuck our way through hedonistic, atomized lives. Emotionless. Can we even feel? Do we want to? Diversity and vibrancy is around us, beautifully personified by an exotic, hot wh/asian woman and a cute, competent black chick. Isn't that a bit of reality? You're an upper middle class or upper class white male, you go to an Ivy or have a high paying job, and eventually a Tera Patrick looking woman is going to cross your path and you will run into an affirmative action government lady official. This is popcorn entertainment, but the messages are there. You can let problems dent your psyche forever or you can reconcile and move on. You still need a human element to make anything click and work right. A drone pilot still needs ground intelligence to spot and "paint" the target. We can design technology, but we still need the human mind to synthesize it all. Some decisions still are gut decisions. Sam Mendes is supposedly on board for the next Bond film, so it might help to write and direct actors playing the people needed to make those tough, gut decisions, not cold robots. We are still people in the seats, looking for something real and relatable. We still need to be human and to feel, even if we're 007.

Monday, November 17, 2014

How Progressive Hollywood Shackles Bond

I am an admitted Bond fan. I love action films and spy stuff in general. Throw in Britishness, a couple hot chicks in each film and I am pulled in. My favorite Bond film is On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Roger Moore's version of Bond is my favorite, the duo of ladies in Golden Gun are my favorite Bond girls, and Auric Goldfinger my favorite villain. My favorite terrible Bond pun is "I thought Christmas only comes once a year", revealing that the script picked her name for that specific line at the end of the film. This is not a post on the franchise, which Counter Currents did to perfection. This is on the bias of our Hollywood overlords not properly using a Western spy vehicle to its fullest because of the left's desire for us to understand communists and avoidance of insulting Muslims.

Look through the history of Bond films. While many are adaptations of Fleming's novels with the terrorist organization S.P.E.C.T.R.E., Bond does not go up against communists. This is made all the more comical when post-Cold War Bond films usually have a line from M (played by grammy Judi Dench) about Bond being a Cold War relic or dinosaur of a bygone age. How could this be? He never once went on mission to foil the Soviets. There was no Bond fights the Russkis until the late '80s (License to Kill). This is rather idiotic as MI6 had a hand in crafting how the OSS, therefore the CIA, would behave and look. Fleming based Bond partly on a card playing, womanizing German spy that MI6 developed and then sent to the Americans to use in WW2. The Brits were also the focus of the biggest spy scandal of the Cold War with the Kim Philby defection and the Cambridge ring, including the Burgess and McLean defections of 1951 that set off the FBI on a massive mole hunt creating the FBI's use of McCarthy to go after the CIA. The extra stupidity of this is England's role as former global power with the Empire that turned into America's coach and go between with Europe in the post-war period. Despite all of this, Bond rarely has confrontations with the communists.

That is because from the time of FDR's election to the rise of Putin, Americans were told to fear the Communists by the outer party but told to try to understand the Russians by the inner party. If Americans would only understand the Russian perspective, rapprochement would be possible. The flyover idiots and knuckleheads were holding us back. Gorbachev is quoted as saying George H.W. Bush told him that the block heads and dummies were the supporters of Reagan and his extremist, confrontational approach. The people defending the Commies from knucklehead aggression were the types controlling Hollywood. Instead of a spy knocking heads with our actual main enemy that would be the justification for a large spy network with expensive gadgets, we see movies with cartoonish villains attempting idealistic, fantastic schemes. This same issue is in play now with Bond never dealing with Muslim terrorism. Islamofascist, Al-Qaeda, even home grown Londonistan types could all be worthy villains that would be red meat for audiences. We do not do it because even in the 9/11 era show 24, using Muslims as the source of terrorism plots is not Hollywood's approach. We should not demonize the other, instead we must understand them, do business with them, and keep importing them to our homelands.
 
This does apply to Skyfall. Just change Silva from a muddled European accented guy with blonde hair to a muddled Arabic accented guy with dark hair. Make Silva a former fantastic spy the Brits used in the Middle East and Near East who got burned by M, but then found patronage with a wealthy Arab (Bandar) who is hell bent on getting his way (Bandar) and will use his millions and proxies (Bandar). Brits are aware that the subway bombers were homegrown but had foreign connections, just like the rapping jihadi who beheaded one of the American journalists this year. Sure, the Arabs would cry out stereotyping, but uhhh, it's right. It would also put asses in the seats.
 
One fix I would do with the Bond series from a technical standpoint was sort of executed with Skyfall. Sam Mendes, a competent director, directed the film. A possible approach to the series that might break the formulaic feel to some of the films is actively seeking different directors and give them the freedom to make their version of a Bond film. All directors would give it their spin, but I would be intrigued by a David Fincher, Spike Jonze or even a Tarantino Bond film. Fincher would have it always raining, and Tarantino would give us gore and '70s pop culture references, but it could be an improvement on the normal flow of Bond films. A couple of directors crank them out, and suddenly, some other directors want to give Bond their spin. A portrayal of Bond would not just be the actor's performance and the audience's bias for or against an actor. Plus, they could dispense with he "Will Bond be a lady/black/queer?" tease as the next director would be the tease (Liz Hurley was their best bet for Lady Bond a decade ago).

Audiences will not get that, just as they will not get a Bond fighting Muslims endangering Mother England. Nigel Farage may be picking up support in England, but the mandarins in charge gasp at the slightest reference than immigrants be sent packing. Rotherham's rape crisis should be the tearing down and destruction of the current power structure and their shibboleths, but it is not. The media is sovereign, and the news media and entertainment media are one and the same. Not much in the way of protesting the Rotherham rapes and corruption in England. We definitely would not want a Bond film where he tracks a foreign problem only to lead him back to MI5 and corrupt or compromised individuals allowing the scum of Londonistan to operate freely. That might get the popcorn munching normies to thinking. Whether British or American, we do not want Joe Sixpack and Jane SUV to wonder why the power system works to import problems and manages our nations in anarcho-tyrannical fashion. Watch Bond take on a billionaire Russian bent on cloning perfect humans to create a war on the Korean peninsula. That may sound ridiculous, but it has a better chance of being the next Bond film than Bond battles jihadis.

Sunday, November 16, 2014

Rotherham Confirms the Fall of Britain

It is too easy to mock England or Great Britain as a dead man walking. There are entire threads devoted to England's decline around the Internet. England's decline is basically the West's decline, but it is made even more awful as they were the peak of European colonial reach. While the sun never set on the Spanish Empire before them, the British did it better. The Brits swooped in to improve former Spanish possessions that had suffered neglect like Argentina. England now can host the Olympics as long as they portray their capitol as a hodgepodge multicultural home and talk about health care and rock and roll not the historical imperial glories. Even Glenn Reynolds knows of England's long death march. The recent revelations of the Rotherham sexual abuse scandal are a fantastic example of the collective cultural death of the English because of the lack of public reaction.
 
For those not in the know, Rotherham is a label I am applying to the systematic rape, abuse and sexual trafficking of young white British girls by overwhelmingly Muslim men of Pakistani origin. The problem also involved political correctness to freeze politicians from doing anything, corruption is involved with bought off cops, cops who destroyed evidence of corruption and wrongdoing and a media that has been willing to brush much under the rug.  The parents who did try to do anything were hassled by the police, and public officials who wanted to do anything were hushed up. This long running event should be the destruction of everything about Labour and the modern Western left (PC, immigration, importing Muslims, hushing up anti-white crime), but because the media is in bed with the left, it will not happen. If I were a Brit, I would enjoy a cup of tea, put on "Skyfall" and then burn everything down run by these bastards. We will not get that, and to prove the destruction of the native British spirit, the British cannot even muster up the numbers and spirit of the White March.
 
Trash piled up during '70s strikes
 
The White March is nothing race based or anti-immigrant. The White March was when Belgians took to the streets to the tune of 300,000 to protest police and government corruption over the mishandling of the Marc Dutroux affair. The Dutroux affair and police work reads like the Belgian Keystone Cops or malicious bag men for the ring of sexual predators that Dutroux said he was linked to in the Belgian elite. It is rather Eyes Wide Shut stuff, and the part that gets spooky is the judge who was removed off of the case for doing his job that broke down crying over the pressure exerted on him by "higher forces". Dutroux was linked with a series of rapes and deaths, not thousands like in Rotherham. Dutroux claimed a conspiracy, but the Brits know there was systemic suppression of this crime (a PC conspiracy). Was there a wholesale cleaning of Belgium and revolutionary riots? No. It was all symbolic as nothing really changed. Like in True Detective, Dutroux went to jail but the  broader ring of conspirators, if they were real, was not brought to justice. Still, 1 in 33 Belgians took to the streets to voice their anger. The Brits cannot get 300,000 out on the streets for thousands of victimized girls by "citizens" obviously not of the native stock in an obvious race based crime. This is literally an attack on England's blood by outsiders, and they cannot muster up the fight.
 
Pardon me for going mythological on this fall of England, but the fall is just such a straight line from the fateful decision to align with France and commit ground troops in the summer of 1914. The Winter of Discontent and the dysfunction that inspired the punk album title "Anarchy in the UK" was real, and only truly saved by the development of North Sea oil. Alan Moore has spoken how his "V for Vendeta" was based on the horrible situation of '70s Britain, and how he saw total collapse coming. Alan Moore did not know about oil. Irony being that Moore wrote of a white supremicst fascist government in England when a multikulti, communist government was around him. That was the saving grace that stalled what we see today. The weird part of the 1914 choice was that England, despite hearing Germans say over multiple decades from different autocrats that the Empire could be "intact" if the Germans had a free hand in Europe, still had to play the game of not letting one power rule the continent. They had reached the top, and the danger of the German organization and civilization building skills was too much of a threat for them to just step aside. They probably saw through German pleas and realized Germany could export their model efficiently. Look around us today, German industry does well globally. It was a fight to save what they had, but in doing so killed them collectively. These decisions are much easier in hindsight.
 
I want to believe it is something poetic about Britain that is causing this. It cannot simply be socialist conversion of a nation with constant denigration of the core English identity. I lived in England almost 15 years ago. Even that far back, I was struck by the grade school kids charged at school for getting into a fight and yelling "Paki". I found it odd almost all their churches were tourist attractions or had been turned into gyms, housing or multi-use buildings. As fish in the water, they could not see that the only things that brought them together were alcohol or government organized events. At the same time, the NY Times was trumpeting the diverse, wonderful Leicester, England. Rotherham was ongoing as that Times article was written and would not come out for years later. If Rotherham had come to light in 2001, would the Brits have protested by the hundreds of thousands. Impossible to say. Looking at the paltry reaction to what is horrific in breadth and depth of corruption just a dozen years later, I doubt it. It was a dozen years less of immigration of foreigners and emigration of native Britons. Still, I doubt it. The rot is too widespread to save England. Good-bye Great Britain. May the last John Bull hand over the nukes on the way out.