Edutainment, part 2: Nothing Is Accidental

by Arthur Thief

Nothing Is Accidental

THE FIRST STEP in providing effective counter-propaganda is to detect where the enemy’s propaganda has been most effective. It is the assertion of this work that entertainment has been the enemy’s most effective tool of propaganda, and that its messages have been implanted deliberately.

In this section, it is demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that not only is overt propaganda present in our entertainment, but that massive psychological assaults are deployed through seemingly innocuous background details. Most importantly, we answer the “edutainment” question of whether or not said details are the result of happenstance or intent.

For this, we merely need understand that all mass entertainment is crafted. Effort is expended to write a lesson plan, publish an article, develop a video game, produce a movie or broadcast a news segment. Resources are required for production, and more still for mass dissemination. Every aspect of cultural transmission is a result of human action and, therefore, of human intent.

A necessary outcome of action is that, if one is patient and observant enough, the intent which drove it is demonstrated by the action and subsequent actions, even when the actor seeks to mask his intent. So the intentions of those who produce our mass media of news and edutainment are made apparent in the products they have created, and in the further actions which they perform after gauging public reception of their productions.

Every aspect of value-transmission is intentional; a teacher writes each question to his test, and chooses his words with care; a television news team carefully chooses their camera angles, and the tone of the anchor’s words; a fictional character’s opinions do not magically appear from the aether, but are in fact – whether uttered by hero or villain – expression of the values the author wishes to prescribe or proscribe.

Nothing illustrates with more glaring light the intent of the artist than that which he attempts to express with subtlety. Let us examine a few pieces of “mindless entertainment.”

The once-popular television show Gilmore Girls (Warner Bros., 2000-2007, produced by half-Jew Amy Sherman-Palladino) provides many examples in its seven-season run. The show was very popular in its time among middle-aged White women for its compelling “modern” characters, and still has a following today in syndication. Generally, women seemed to respond to its portrayals of relationship growth and dynamics, a subject that seems to resonate with White women (and a factor which should be explored in planning racialist edutainment for women). A conservative-minded critic, dismissing it as “mindless entertainment,” might also denounce its “coincidental” promotion of single motherhood and “don’t need no man” feminism. This would be tragically shallow, as will now be demonstrated. The full depth of the show’s anti-White attack cuts to the marrow.

The main character, Rory – a lovely young White woman portrayed by the Scots-Irish actress with Cherokee Princess Syndrome, Alexis Bledel – goes on later to study journalism at Harvard, graduate, eschew marriage and motherhood for a career, and eventually cover Barack Obama’s presidential campaign for a major newspaper. She is held up in the show as the pinnacle of smart, capable, and competent womanhood. Her friend, Lane Kim, is the daughter of piously Christian Korean immigrants who is in a relationship with a White boy – portrayed as a loser – who is a small-time musician. All of them grew up in the same picturesque American small town in New England. Lane goes on eventually to marry her White paramour and, eventually, bear him twins. Her life choices are portrayed as those of someone of, at best, average intellect, and this message is not lost on White female viewers – if those of them with blogs on the subject are to be considered representative: The view that she more or less “doomed” herself to a strenuous and cloistered life as a small-town mother and wife is common.

It gets worse.

In a scene lasting scarcely more than a minute, with a lead-up of but a few episodes, the precise opposite of the values held by members of the National Alliance is conveyed.

The scene with which we are concerned is from late in the show’s run; the once-teenage characters are now marrying, having children, and starting careers. The Gilmore daughter is meeting with a childhood friend in a bookstore aisle to discuss – of course – relationships and dating. The Gilmore daughter is researching sex advice while her friend seeks information on motherhood.

The books on motherhood which the Korean friend has chosen are strewn about her in disarray, while the Gilmore daughter’s selections are neatly stacked at her side; again, these details track with the overall message: The Korean girl is a perennial mid-wit, while the Gilmore daughter is a genius “bookworm.” The background is even more telling. Behind the Korean friend, the titles on the shelves cannot be made out; however, the characteristic black-and-yellow cover art of a “…For Dummies” title can be seen (the other books’ cover art is done in the sort of pastel hues one might expect in a collection on motherhood). This is the “aura” given to the character whose life path is marrying a White man, motherhood, and small-town life — hazy, unfocused, and “for dummies.” Behind the Gilmore daughter we see various leftist political tomes; though most are in and out of focus and hard to identify, what can be seen most clearly in one key shot is roughly a dozen volumes of the Simon Wiesenthal Center Quarterly Review. The “smart girl” in the picture thus has the “aura” of neat, crisp, intellectuality — defined as leftist political conformity with pride-of-place given to Jewish guidance on “Nazi-hunting.”

The reader can be forgiven for growing exasperated with such a long description of a few instants of visual framing. But the point is important: Every inch of what appeared on that screen – including the background – is intentional, and most of the “message” of the piece is being conveyed outside of the dialogue and actions in the script. More propaganda is inserted into a single visual moment than what is contained in all the words of all the characters for hours of screen time. The expression “a picture is worth a thousand words” is quite true — and a film contains 24 pictures every second.

So, is Gilmore Girls merely empty fluff, “mindless entertainment” with at worst a “girl boss” bent to it, or is it a masterstroke in a one-sided duel of genocidal psychological warfare? For the former to be true, the elements of such a scene must have come together by pure happenstance, perhaps the result of being filmed in an actual small-town bookstore. For the latter to be true, it merely needs be demonstrated that every aspect of the visual moment was carefully constructed; intent is inherent in that process — and even if the ultimate purpose (genocidal psychological warfare) is still masked, it can be unmasked through further observation.

If the scene is not coincidental, then the presence of intent must be our default assumption: Human actions were undertaken and the results are either part of the intention, or accidental; there is no middle ground.

So, consider the following:

• The entire point of the scene is the two different subjects the characters are researching (sex and dating, versus matrimony and motherhood) and thus the books selected to appear in the background are, each and every one, chosen specifically to illustrate the director’s intent regarding those subjects.
• Each book the characters have “selected” were in turn selected by set designers and directors involved in the episode, and were not only put there intentionally and specifically, but even their relative placement is the result of deliberate behind-the-scenes decisions.
• In what world would matrimonial/parenting advice and “For Dummies” books be in the same aisle in a bookstore as The Simon Wiesenthal Center Quarterly Review, let alone directly across from each other? And what bookstore in Hell wastes scarce shelf space on the latter at all?
• Even if it were a likely arrangement of these books, how by pure coincidence do we have books about traditional female subjects out of focus behind the failing character, and leftist dogma so neatly arranged and in focus behind the “smart” character?

The idea that these subtle messages were embedded by pure happenstance defies all reason. Far from being “mindless entertainment,” the scene described above is actually a carefully constructed barrage of anti-White propaganda in which every moment, and every pixel of screen space, is scrupulously curated and chosen for its educational effect.

When analyzing the propagandistic “education” embedded in all of the entertainment vended today, it is important to keep one concept at the forefront of your mind: Not one detail of what appears on your screen or which is heard through your audio system is presented by accident. Even if a film, series episode, or news segment is “filmed on location” or transmitted live, the camera angles, timing, removal of unwanted visual elements, and emphasis on desired ones, are carefully crafted and refined until the director is satisfied; and the director’s mandate is always to advance The Narrative.

To be continued.

* * *

Source: Author