China, Hollywood And The ‘Correct’ Point Of View

China, Hollywood

And The ‘Correct’ Point Of View


R.E. Prindle


A very interesting story about China and Hollywood appeared in the Wall Street Journal of today (4/19/17). It confirms the continuing marginalization of the US and the threat to the survival of its Constitution.

It seems that Part 8 of Fast and Furious opened in China to 169 million compared to about 70 million in the US. (Inflated to 99 million in the reporting by including Canadian receipts, so China can now dwarf North America. (US, Canada, Mexico). Thus, implications go far beyond mere Box Office considerations. China has now surpassed the US in screens adding 25 a day, that is, 25 a day! Chinese admissions are half the US so the Fast and Furious receipts could be doubled to 338 million. China soon will have a bigger annual gross than North America with plenty of room to grow.

Anent political considerations the WSJ story makes two very revealing admissions:

Tensions between China and the White House have accelerated since the presidential election. Mr. Xi is seeking to strike a contrast with President Donald Trump as a champion of globalism, and he appears eager to advance China’s narrative- both by pressuring Hollywood studios to portray the nation favorably and in the long term, by adopting Western filmmaking techniques for China’s own industry.

So, what kind of favorable portrayal do the Chinese insist upon, which is actually a form of censorship, because they won’t show US movies that might be critical. For instance in a movie portraying the Trump, Xi, Kim Jong Un situation it would be necessary to show China as the moral and ‘correct’ champion with the US and Korea as squabbling brats. Hollywood will have to accept an inferior position for the US.

Here Mr. Xi should horrify US Liberals and have them condemn him and China as Neo-Nazis. Indeed, as Mr. Xi states:

We must make patriotism into the main melody of literature and art creation, guide the people to establish and hold correct views of history, views of the nation, views of the country, and views of culture, and strengthen their fortitude and resolve to be Chinese,” said Mr. Xi at the Beijing Forum on Literature and Art in October 2014.

So, there you have it, conditions no Liberal will tolerate in the US but are acceptable to them when imposed by China. In pleasing the Chinese to retain access to the Chinese market Hollywood does violence to everything the US professes to believe as guaranteed by our Constitution. In point of fact, as far as movies go Hollywood is now the tail and China is the dog. The Hollywood tail is not going to be able to wag the Chinese dog.

In fact Hollywood’s relationship to the market now becomes like that of France, Germany or Japan to the US market. i.e. foreign films. China within perhaps as little as a year or two may produce more movies than the entire West let alone Hollywood.

The mass market in the US has then disappeared. With the mass market gone the way is open for other cities than Hollywood to produce movies designed specifically for the US domestic market or US-European markets. In any event Chinese control of ‘correct history, culture and mores’ must not be allowed to control US filmmaking.

As Mr. Xi’s comment indicates his notion of globalism is simply Chinese domination of the globe. Foolish Americans if they allow that to happen.


The Birth Of Two Nations



The Birth Of Two Nations


R.E. Prindle


In 1915 D.W. Griffith and Thomas Dixon Jr. released what is perhaps the most famous movie, silent or talkie, ever made. The movie that depicts the aftermath of the Civil War, that is Reconstruction, was the biggest spectacle ever produced to that time, and also the highest grosser.

The movie was addressed to the North. For the North the Civil War was a war of extermination intended to kill all the White Southerners. That they didn’t succeed is a mere accident of history. For instance, read War Crimes Against Southern Civilians by Walter Brian Cisco. After a hundred and fifty years later Southerners finally feel free to tell the truth. The book will help you understand Griffith’s Birth of a Nation.

Thus the nation Griffith and Dixon referred to was the unity of the Aryan Nation. The Birth was its hoped for reunification after the horrors of the Civil War. The plea was never to kill each other again; especially avoiding the genocidal horrors of Generals William Tecumseh Sherman and Phil Sheridan among many other Northern commanders.

Naturally the movie was seen as racial and racist and a great hue and cry was raised by Negroes and Jews but not by the men who fought the war either North or South. While the movie in many cases was viewed by participants and survivors of that great conflict, and thought to accurately represent the situation a barrage of defamation was directed at D.W. Griffith, the director, and Thomas Dixon, the writer.

Dixon who was a best selling author of talent and a good story teller was gradually turned into a racist monster having no place in American literature or culture. Both he and Griffith’s careers began a precipitous decline following the movie and both died penniless and in obscurity.

Now, a hundred years later in an effort to co-opt history a new film also titled Birth of a Nation has been written, directed and acted by Nate Parker. Nate is a Negro. His film deals with a slave uprising led by Nat Turner in Southhampton County, Virginia in 1831. The rebellion was a murderous, bloody, rapefest that ended as it must have once the surprise was over and the Whites organized. But, what is meant by Nate Parker’s filming the movie? Is it merely to mock Griffith and Dixon or is he calling for a unification of the present Negroes to exterminate present Whites?   In other words, a serious call for the birth of a Negro United States or Nation? The film certainly excites the Negro people to do battle with the White Demons. And that at a time when the Negroes are already working themselves into a lather finding excuses to kill, burn and loot.

The very people who denounce Griffith and Dixon now applaud Parker as the auteur of a fantastic picture. They little know that they are the projected victims of the film.

However Nate Parker has complicated the matter by having been tried for raping a White girl in college, sort of following Griffith and Dixon’s script that was denounced as defamatory.   The White girl is described as being unconscious, thus one imagines drugged, hence unable to give consent as Parker claims while having gratified his hatred of Whites on the girl’s body. Having gratified his hatred Parker invited his Black roommate into the room to have some too. So we have a gang rape.

So the Griffith film in which a Negro gratifies his lust on a White girl seems to have been reenacted by Parker even though the scene in Griffith’s film was called inaccurate and racist.

Parker, of course, represenst his rape of the girl as a mere youthful indiscretion and he’s put all that behind him; convenient for him although his victim subsequently committed suicide at the age of thirty. Collateral damage.   So let’s forget about the mistake and concentrate on Parker’s movie that calls for lots more murder and rape.

Let’s try to place Parker and his movie into a historical continuum. The Nat Turner uprising occurred in South Hampton County, Virginia in 1831 as noted. The uprising was not too far distant in time from the 1804 revolt of Toussaint L’Ouverture in Haiti which established the independence of Haiti from the French. Haiti was a major event in the consciousness of nineteenth century history. While Toussaint did not in any sense defeat Napoleon as some historians claim he did defeat troops of the Empire. The reaction among Whites was stupendous. Some feared an uprising in the US like that of Nat Turner other lauded Toussaint as the greatest military figure of all time surpassing Washington, Napoleon, Caesar and whoever. Just the greatest and that because he was a Negro. Matthew Clavin in his fine book Toussaint L’Ouverture and the American Civil War details the reaction to Toussaint’s victory. All the White men were massacred while the White women were given the choice of a horrible death or marriage to Negroes, but a real marriage not a mockery of one. Most women chose to submit to the Negroes.

The Whites not murdered during the Haitian Revolution fled to the nascent United States. While France had sold Louisiana to the US in 1803 New Orleans was still considered a French colony to which many of the slave owners repaired bringing their slaves with them. Many of the slave owners were mulattoes and Negroes thus New Orleans had a large corps of Negro slave owners at the time of the Civil War.

Others landed along the Gulf Coast so news of Haiti was general in the South among both slave owners and slaves. This Haitian rebellion then both incited Nat Turner and terrified the Whites. So, the result was murder, theft and rapine what it would seem Nate Parker is inciting with his movie. As far as rape goes he knows what he’s talking about.

Efforts are being made to prevent the theater release in October, not only by Whites but by Negroes also. This would seem wise. In the event of a Negro uprising that could occur before election time or at least inauguration that might seem to justify martial law and the continuation of Obama rule. Some worry about this and their worries may be justified. We’ll see. I fear that the US is now two nations and not one.

Vote Trump anyway.

Sony, Kim Jong-Un And The Hollywood Sewer

Sony, Kim Jong-Un And The Hollywood Sewer


R.E. Prindle


Pat Buchanan recently complained about the sewer culture of the US.  The culture has now gotten absolutely disgusting.  Within the week I have been so sickened by the sewage coming out of Hollywood that I have lost all interest in movies and television.  I don’t like pornography disguised as entertainment.

Thus when I read of the dictator of North Korea’s hijacking and exposure of the corruption of Sony-Hollywood I was of two minds.  Ambivalence deluxe.  Of course I deplore the Communist politics of North Korea but they have less of an immediate effect on my life than the Liberal corruption of Hollywood.  Let us ask:  Which is the greater evil?

I do not hold Sony Corp. responsible as their control over Sony-Hollywood executives and employees is tenuous at best.  Sony-Japan executives may not have had a clear idea of the movie in question- The Interview.  The movie will not now be shown so ignore it.

The movie as described is an invitation to assassinate Kim.  The US response cannot be directed at North Korea alone or Kim Jung-Un as he is justly angry, perhaps considering the film as an offensive act of the Obama administration; what other response could he have made that would have been listened to?  The nitwit Liberals in Hollywood have to learn what going too far means.  Can the tail really wag the dog?  They are the ones who should be punished, not North Korea or Sony.  After all, some hapless Negro who posted a comment that a cop should be shot on his front porch in front of his family for every Negro criminal killed while resisting arrest was fired from his job, so why shouldn’t the Hollywood Liberals be disciplined for the same offense against Kim Jong-Un?  What does globalism mean anyway?

Nor is this a matter of freedom of speech that Liberals don’t respect anyway.  Nor was the hapless Negro’s comment.  While movies may be entertaining they are also psychological tools that be using suggestion can and will influence future events.

Perhaps even the release of all those Sony-Hollywood executives’ emails may be beneficial.  Let no disaster go unused.  Perhaps this crisis can be used to loosen the logjam of so-called offensive or ‘hate’ speech.  Let’s get those offensive speech laws off the books.  If you don’t like what you see in the mirror it is not the mirror’s fault.  Smashing the mirror won’t change anything.

The hijacking is a regrettable crime possibly partly justified by the offence, but it requires no direct action by the Obama administration.  Learn a lesson and make Hollywood improve their manners.  Clean out that garbage producing sewer.  Do it Now.

Khruschev In Hollywood: Sept. 1959

Khruschev In Hollywood: Sept. 1959


R.E. Prindle

Various:  Face To Face With America: The Story Of N.S. Khruschov’s Visit To The U.S.A., Sept. 15-27, 1959

I came across this interesting volume at the local used book store.  Nikita Khruschev came to the US in 1959 in what was a sensational visit.  I was in the process of being discharged from the Treasure Island Navy base and taking up residence in Oakland at the time thus being otherwise occupied at the time so I  have no actual remembrance of the visit.

The Soviet press accompanying Khruschev obviously went back home and got this nearly seven hundred page volume together in a couple months.  The book reads very well, almost like a Russian novel of the nineteenth century.  Actually very enjoyable. especially as a first hand account.  In the course of the book the writers offer this very interesting Russian account of the nature of Hollywood’s effect on America.  I quote in full: pp. 217-220


While we are on the way to America’s film capital, it is well worth giving a brief account of it, telling why it plays such an essential part in America and why to many ordinary, unsophisticated boys and girls it is the city of dreams.

Hollywood is, in fact, a gigantic film factory of a New York office for propagating and consolidating the American way of life.  Gigantic is no exaggeration.  Hollywood annually produces hundreds of films which are shown not only all over America but in many other countries as well.  Decades of film propaganda and the allocation of a special role in the American way of life and American thinking to films are responsible for the fact that films have, indeed, become part of the average American’s life.

In the American family motion pictures take the place of books, museums, concert halls, the theatre and discussion between friends.  Films tell the Americans how to behave, to dress, to eat, treat the family, sweethearts and children, and even how to view world events.  Films give them the answers to all their questions- from what brand of cigarettes to smoke to the best buy in TV sets and automobiles.  If you want to know why all American boys suddenly adopt the crew-cut fad, go to a movie and see the hair-lay of the latest male star.  If, as though in a fairy-tale, the girls of some city unexpectedly, literally within a day or two, change their skirts for slacks, you can rest assured that it is the “dictate” of the new film star- Kim Novak, Shirley MacLaine, or some such.

The omnipotent penetration of Hollywood and its products into the life of the Americans has been going on for years.  Billions of dollars, the newspapers and the radio, stories spreading intimate details from the life of the popular film  stars, and even the church have been mobilized to create the cult of Hollywood.  Far be it from us to say that Hollywood with its dozens of studios has contributed nothing of significance to the world’s cinematographic art.  Many good films have been made there, and eminent producers and actors began their careers there too.

But with a cynical indifference to the destiny of individual honest craftsmen, Hollywood has always asserted its principal rule- to drum into the minds of the Americans the idea that they invariably, day and night, at work, at home, in school, at college and in the army, act according to the advice and decisions of the Hollywood gods and its New York bosses.

The American motion picture producers readily underline that Hollywood films are apolitical and have no ulterior motive.  Nothing is farther from the truth.  To be sure, the whole history of Hollywood is one of trends in American art.  Of course, these trends varied with time, always assuming some concrete expression.  There was a time when Hollywood did all n its power to assert the cult of the brave cowboy and sheriff, the maker of America’s “democratic” history.  Then came a wave of detective films followed by films about the police and “supermen”; a meticulous, almost pathological rummaging in human psychology is a characteristic of popular films today.  Hollywood tries to come closer to the church, to sacred themes- but, of course, by recasting them in the American manner.  Biblical commandments and other miracles appear with increasing frequency on the screen, the American cinema openly boosting religion.

But whatever the waves in which the Hollywood film production submerges the average American- police, cowboy, detective or religious- the main principals of mass ideological pressure imposed on Hollywood in the twenties, when Big Business and the Catholic hierarchy placed the odious figure of Will H. Hays at the helm of Hollywood, remain in force.

What are these principles?  Hays briefly formulated them as follows:  “Every American film must assert that the United States way of life is one and only for any person.  At any rate, every film must be optimistic and must show the small man that some time and somewhere he will catch his fortune by the tail.  A  film must not turn the dark aspects of our life inside out and must not kindle any powerful or dynamic passions.”

The last sentence clearly forbade the artist to engage in revolutionary thinking, or in efforts to change the existing state of affairs.

It is in the light of this last “Hays rule” that the end of Charles Chaplin’s work in Hollywood is so noteworthy and tragic.  In front of a fashionable cinema in Hollywood there is a concrete platform on which the film celebrities have left imprints of their hands and feet “for posterity”.  In our opinion and to our taste this is, naturally, not the best way for an artist to make his mark in history, but the sponsors of this unusual “monument” apparently  take a different view.

Be it so.  We are referring to something else.  When Charles Chaplin, addressing a big meeting during the war, said that it was the Soviet Army that would save the world from fascism, it infuriated the Hollywood bosses and they decided to erase the name of the great artist from history.  To them this seemed very simple.  They removed the plate containing the imprint of Chaplin’s feet.  They hoped that would suffice; they thought Chaplin would cease to exist in the memories of film goers.  Then, in order to “finish off” the artist who in all his films debunked the myth about the “American paradise” and was a friend of the little man, they framed Chaplin on a charge of seducing a young actress who had started acting in one of his films.  She disappeared from Chaplin’s studio, and soon the newspapers published an alleged letter from her in which she demanded 100,000 dollars to bring up the child which she alleged was Chaplin’s.

This was only the first blow, a small link in the chain of events which soon after the war burst over the heads of scores of eminent  Hollywood cinematographers, let alone Chaplin.  McCarthyism plunged hundreds of thousands of honest Americans into despondency and fear.  McCarthy attacked Hollywood with particular fury. this is understandable, because it was there that McCarthy and his lieutenants wanted to establish a set-up that would ensure the submissive compliance of the men of art for many years to come.  Chaplin was summoned before one commission after another.  He left the United States, the land where he had lived for 40 years, and went to Europe.

Perhaps when Chaplin bought his ticket to bid America farewell some members of the Un-American Activities Commission heaved a sigh of relief and thought all was over with Chaplin.  But Chaplin’s name has remained in the history of American and world cinematography.  Even today, when visitors to Hollywood are shown the places bearing the imprints of the hands and feet of Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, Deanna Durbin, and many other well-known American film actors and actresses, it is interesting to note that each without fail asks the guide where is Charles Chaplin’s imprint.

The time of the McCarthy witch-hunt was the hardest in the life and history of Hollywood.  Ten prominent American film workers were accused of communist sympathies and jailed.  The interrogators of the McCarthy commission filled hundreds of pages questioning film actors, producers and script writers one after another.  Fear descended upon Hollywood and engendered what fear always engenders- time-serving decay, and servility.

Hollywood needed time to recover, to settle into shape after the terror, distrust, and denunciations.  The complex process is not yet finished, although it would, of course, be wrong to assert that nothing has changed in Hollywood and that there are no forces wishing to take a sober view of the world, the relations between the peoples and the problems of the development of art, albeit slowly and timidly, in Hollywood today.


I’m sure the Soviet writers would be surprised that the situation has deteriorated even further.  One has to be even more careful of what one says but has to erase any remarks one may have made under duress as much as twenty-five years earlier.  Today the punishment is swift and sure for shaking violently after having had a gun put to your head by a Negro with all the fears that has for a woman. Paula  Deen   uttered the horrific word nigger in reference to the Gentleman of Color who robbed her and might have raped her or blown her brains out.  I doubt if he even went to jail.  In Nashville you can do worse than what happened to Paula and be defended as innocent.  No shit!

Imagine having a lucrative career destroyed, a penalty of possibly tens of millions of dollars for the crime of uttering ‘nigger’  twenty-five years ago.  Imagine that.  What were the Soviets complaining about?  Of course they had no crystal ball for the future or they might have been even more astonished at the course American “civilization”  has taken.  What new “American” way of life have the asses of Hollywood created?  Stay tuned, you may be even more astonished.

Manipulating The Words And Symbols

Manipulating The Words And Symbols


R.E. Prindle

     If you think the various nationalities, races and religions of the US are not in competition for supremacy, think again.  There are several quiet fronts in action.

     The main thrust of the various ‘armies’ is to disarm and suppress the majority people, specifically the White male.  How can this be done witout a shot being fired, at least up to this time?  Patience has been a virtue.  The other is to manipulate words and symbols; empty them of their former content and replace that content with another but similar meaning.   Religously this is the way it has always been done.

     There are several movies that illustrate these methods.  The movies were made as instructional films for the initiated.  Three that I would recommend to get you started are:  A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence and Wag The Dog.  Also any of the Marx Bros. movies will do just fine.  These movies all illustrate methods to subvert the status quo.  They work just as well in reverse.

     In dispossessing the majority, as I say, one converts words and symbols to one’s own use while depriving the majority of them.  A key word of the majority was Democracy.  The old meaning was that the country was not a monarchy or aristocracy where birth was an entitlement to success but success was open to all (theoretically and nearly so in practice) on the basis of merit.  Thus the country was considered a meritocracy.  Of course a meritocracy automatically favors the more able which, in fact, discriminates against the less able but this is unavoidable.

     Beginning some time after The Great War the Jews led by the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League and perhaps the NAACP guided by astute propagandists such as Edward L. Bernays the meaning of Democracy began to be collectivized from the individual to the group- Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, Moslems etc.  It was then argued that merit was no longer a key determinant but that Democracy meant that each group, each race, each nationality, each religion had to have a proportionate share of whatever was to be had.  Thus meritorious Democracy which had always been open to all irregardless of other considerations became a sort of aristocracy that depends on  birth- Jewish, Black etc. regardless of capability or merit.

     This type of group, then, including White Liberals, was organized into a coalition, an alliance,  to dispossess the White male by any means necessary legal, moral or otherwise.

     Of couse, this was a stealth attack executed in increments so that at first only ‘the lunatic fringe’, that is the alert or wide awake, was sharp enough to notice and they could be easily infiltrated and disabled so that no effective offense developed.

     Now that the plot against America is clear it remains to blow the whistle on these criminals  which includes controlling the terms of discourse and organize an offensive.  The Tea Party may be a start.  Think about it. Then act.

Navy SEALS, Sam Peckinpaugh And Shotguns


Sam Peckinpaugh

And Shotguns


R.E. Prindle

     Liberals have watched one too many movies.  Apparently they have taken Andy Warhol’s advice  and are pretending that life is a movie.  Liberals have taken George Clooney and Syriana a little too seriously.  These Liberal yo-yos seem to think assassination is a media game.

     Thus Tony Dokoupil on the Daily Beast lauds the Navy SEALS as ‘the nation’s quietest killers.’  We aren’t told who the ‘nation’s’ noisiest killers are or the messiest or neatest or how they compare to the wonders of assassination performed by the Mossad.  Dokoupil further tells us that although quiet the SEALS can crash through doors and “double tap” the enemy’s face…killing…with two point blank shots.’  Shucks they should use exploding bullets and save the expense of the second round.   Point blank and they need two shots?  Tony’s got the lingo down and enough movie viewing experience to know what an action film is all about.  “I’ll be back!”  Tony mutters as he signs off.

     Not only that but Tony uses antiquated ‘conservative’ terms like ‘nation.’  Hell, we all know that nations no longer have a place on this earth.  One world, one people, one religion.  Global, global, global.    How does stuff like this get past the Daily Beast censors.  Are they so sloppy they don’t have oversight?  They’re owned by Newsweek aren’t they?  No wonder the magazine is going bankrupt.  Good thing too.  Save us the trouble of bursting noisily through the doors and shotgunning them to death a la Sam Peckinpaugh.


An Open Letter To Mel Gibson


An Open Letter To Mel Gibson


R.E. Prindle

     Hi Mel, R.E. here.  So why do you appear to be sitting around morose when there’s work to be done?  You seemed like a new dawn; you had the right tack from the religious angle when you made The Passion Of The Christ.  Then your enemies, and indeed the enemies of Christ,  started calling you names like anti-Semite and you seemed to take them seriously.  Why?  We don’t care what they think.  We’re with you.  Jews are behind most of the agitation if not the wars.  Nick Sarkozy, over in France, says that he wants a law compelling White women to pair up with Black men.  How clearly do they have to speak before they’re understood?  What more evidence do you need?  You’re right.

     So, Mel, I’ve got a movie idea for you.  With recent TV/internet developments you don’t need Hollywood anymore.  Hollywood has been made obsolete by the internet.  Consider the Netflix business plan using other people’s movies and then convert it to a company making their own movies for their own ideological entertainment ends.  In one fell swoop one creates a company along the lines of the old studio system.  Varieties of movies can be made from blockbusters to topical shorts.  Independent movies made at no cost to the company can be shown on a separate Indie list for those who like that sort of thing paid on a royalty basis per view. 

     Capital can be raised in the conventional way of selling shares with the prospect of dividends so no charitable contributions are involved.  Of course the movies have to be treated in such a way that people want to see them.  However, like Netflix you sell subscriptions.   This of course means appealing to several millions of like minded viewers world wide.  Thus one has an annual budget of perhaps five or six hundred million or more to cover annual expenses, production and profit.  The product could also be rented or leased out to other channels, DVDs, etc. to boost income.

     Most importantly the company would be freed from the ideological trammels of Hollywood while being the wedge of the beginning of the destruction of Hollywood.

      Think about it Mel.  Now is the time to get cracking.  Up and at ’em.  No one has power in this but you.  If you like the idea but want further explanation call me.  This can be done.  You can change the world.  You are in the unique position.  Do it.  Get it done.

Nixing The Ugly American

Nixing The Ugly American


R.E. Prindle


      Beginning in 1958 with the publication of Eugene Burdick and William Lederer’s outrageous novel an image of the American as the Ugly American was created.  Just like that.  One fell swoop.  The suggestion went home, Americans began to think of themselves as louder, more obnoxious, more arrogant and less respectful than all other peoples.

     This self image was reinforced by the movie version of the Ugly American released in 1963.

     Why this hypnotic suggestion was so avidly embraced is difficult to understand.  Perhaps American guilt at being so prosperous.  Americans up to that time had been the most generous people the world had ever seen.  Hoover’s Belgian relief mission of WWI had been the wonder story of the age.  FDR lavished money and materiel on combatant nations with unparalleled largess.  He helped the Soviet Atom Bomb project to an extent that the Rosenberg’s could only have dreamed of.  The Marshall Plan in the wake of WWII set Europe back on its feet while a tradition of dispensing billions of dollars a year on all the nations of the world, even the USSR, began.

     It was incomprehensible, not only to the nations of the world, but to the wondering eyes of so many of us on the homefront.  For an example of the incredulousness of the world see the Peter Sellers movie, The Mouse That Roared.

     We gave so much it was said that we didn’t know how to give.  Probably an accurate assessment.  In 1957 just before the Burdick and Lederer book Time Magazine published a picture of tons of rice being unloaded in Thailand stamped Gift Of USA.  The stamp was deemed offensive by Time-Life.  It was said that though the USSR gave nothing they were more esteemed because they groveled before Asians.  Americans learned to grovel.

     Thus public opinion was primed for The Ugly American.  Americans overnight believed they were Ugly.  It was night and day.  I was there.  Not only that they were ugly but that other peoples were uniformly more beautiful in comparison.  They believed that every other people had better manners than themselves.  Now, I’ve done some hard travelin’ in my time and I have been to some places.  The evidence of my eyes is that at the worst Americans do not exceed any other peoples in rudeness and at best they are far superior.

     But, the hypnotic suggestion of Burdick and Lederer had been implanted in the American psyche.  Facts could not, cannot, disillusion them.

     Well, mah fellow Americans, disllusion yourselves, clear your minds.  You aren’t that good that you can excell others in rudeness.  It is impossible for you to be the most arrogant people in the world.  You don’t have the guts.  You quail before all other peoples submitting your sexuality to them.  No one so emasculated can be ruder than other peoples.

     Snap out of it.  NOW.  Clear your minds.  Stand up and be men and women.  Reclaim your sexuality.  Eject the suggestion.  You can’t possibly be ruder and more arrogant than the people who despise you for your simple minded generosity.


The future is yours for the taking.




Barry ‘Bama And His Knoxville Horror Redux


Barry ‘Bama And His Knoxville Horror Redux


R.E. Prindle


     Barry ‘Bama should be ashamed of himself.  Everytime his people embarrass themselves by atrocities or threats of atrocities they have to stage some show where Conservative Whites or ‘Skinhead White Supremacists’ out horrify themselves.

     First these Black guys in Knoxville, Tennessee commit a horrific crime gainst a White Boy and Girl so the Liberals stage this all but forgotten show where a White guy enters a Homosexual church and clumsily opens fire with a shotgun from the back of the church.

     Didn’t work so well, so let’s forget that one, apparently.

     Now, after years of horrific beheadings by Moslems that make this Liberal favorite group look like savages we have to have White guys uncharacteristically not behead, but ‘threaten’ to behead fourteen Black kids in one swoop.  O, right on.  (That’s sarcastic, son.)

     Then for the last couple weeks Liberals, both Black and White, have petulantly  threatened mayhem if their boy doesn’t win.  They call this electioneering.

     So, how to reverse the bad press?  Oh, OK we’ll get these two ‘Skinhead White Supremacists’ to take a fall.  Our story will be that the ATF will break up their plan before they even get it planned.  That will take away our guilt over 9/11 too.  We’ll just bust ’em before there is even any evidence to bust ’em on.  They will only have ‘threatened’ to rob a gunstore, ‘threaten’ an unidentified Black school, ‘threaten’ to shoot an exact 88 Blacks, who’s keeping score, because H is the eighth letter of the alphabet and two 8s or Hs stand for Heil Hitler.  Oh Hitler again, back from the grave on Halloween, how goulish.  Oh hey, hubba hubba… And then they ‘threaten’ to behead 14 Blacks because 14 is another sacred ‘White Supremacist number.  Like Biden said:  Who you got writing this stuff?

     The logistics there for two guys is mind numbing.  They were going to rob a gun store but I didn’t see anything about procuring an axe or possibly a chain saw.  The chain saw is the better touch, a pen knife would be too slow.

     Not satisfied with this these two ‘Skinhead White Supremacists’ next planned to assasinate our beloved Barry ‘Bama because you know how deep the racial hatred of Conservatives for a potential Black President is.

     Did I say plan?  What plan?  They were apparently going to drive in White Tuxedoes and top hats until they found Barry then, get this, driving straight at him firing all the way they were thinking what was going to happen?  Good god, what lousy writers those Liberals have.  Where’s Hollywood when you need it?  Wag The Dog, remember?

     First we had the assinine comments of token Whitey, Joe Biden, saying Barry is going to foment a major criminal disaster within six months of election- did I say criminal?  It’s only going to look that way at first but will turn our alright in the end- for which comments the Bi-guy justly took a raft- and then to take the heat off the ‘good guys’ these two ‘White Supremacists’ who at the point of their arrest had done exactly nothing criminal, were noisily arrested.

     Good god, don’t Barry and his Liberal cadres know the meaning of the word shame, or are they all chutzpah.  If they’re this bad now who would want them in office?

The Economic Revolution: Group Psychology


Economic Revolution:

Group Psychology


R.E. Prindle


     Sigmund Freud went from one of the three greatest Jewish intellects of the twentieth century into disfavor sometime after 1960.  The Jews have allowed the ‘great intellect’ to be discredited.  One must ask why?  Because he is the key to the nature of the post-1920 assault on Western culture.

    The key book for an understanding is his ‘Group Psychology And The Analysis Of The Ego.’  Multi-culturalism is group psychology in action.  Each culture has its own group psychology and group ego.  Thus it is important to separate group psychology from the study of cultures else differences are accentuated.  Especially so in the Jewish culture which then has a separate identity from that of the West.

     Freud obviously having never heard the admonition ‘never a lender or borrower be’ borrowed heavily from other thinkers.  The basis for his ‘Group Psychology’  is the 1895  work of the Frenchman Gustave Le Bon entitled ‘The crowd: A Study Of The Popular Mind.’  One should be familiar with both works.

     Combined with hypnotism one has the basis of the nature of the Jewish assault.  Hypnotism as crowd control is achieved through the message enclosed in the media of movies, TV, radio and records or CDs.  Backed up by the enraged charge of ‘anti-Semitism’ the Western mind as been completely hypnotized and paralyzed.

     It is absolutely essential that the above be understood if the West is to free itself from the Semitic incubus by which I mean both Jews and Moslems.

     The psychological method then formed the direction of the four thousand year old assault using these new and very formidable tools, themselves all the creation of the victims themselves.  The victims should have tried understanding media.