Beware of the J-Ray or the Jew-Ray of the Mass Electronic Media — J-Ray enables the Gay-Ray — The Need for White Light and Right Light — The Jewish Hustle in the Takeover of Goy Mass Media and Monopolization of High-Tech

God and Light

Prometheus and Fire

Since the beginning of time, mankind has been fascinated with the Light. Egyptians worshiped the Sun god. The Sun is central to Japanese mythology. Indeed, it’s difficult to think of a people or culture, ancient-medieval-modern, that hasn’t been profoundly inspired by the Sun in art, mythology, and science. Before there was a division of astronomy and astrology, two were one and the same. Astronomy moved from geocentrism to heliocentrism. And astrology has strange relationship with the Sun. Without the Sun, there would be no life on earth, no humans to gaze at the sky and read the stars. But then, the stars are visible only to the side of the Earth turned away from the Sun. The effect of the Sun from dawn to dusk is not unlike the effect of monotheism. The Sun is so bright and dominant that every last vestige of the starry sky vanishes soon after sunrise. The impact of the rise of universal-monotheism(derived from Judaism), especially of Christianity and Islam, has had a similar effect on the spiritual imagination of humanity around the world. Across Europe and Middle East(as well as what became ‘Latin America’), so much of pagan cultures and gods has been wiped out. But just as stars always return in the night to the side of the Earth that is asleep, perhaps there was something to what Carl Jung said about how the pagan gods and spirits are still within our buried psyches. Though vanquished from the conscious mind by the coming of the One God, they lingered in the hidden corners of the mind, re-emerging at times to inspire creativity and vision, as during the Renaissance and the Romantic Era. It’s like what Merlin says in EXCALIBUR: "The days of our kind are numberèd. The one God comes to drive out the many gods. The spirits of wood and stream grow silent. It's the way of things. Yes... it's a time for men, and their ways." And then later... "You(Arthur) brought me back... Back to where you are now. In the land of dreams."


Just like there will always be nights brimming with stars, there will always be an unconscious realm independent of conscious will & knowledge; and in this world of dreams, the dead, exiled, or forsaken gods whisper in our ears once again. Some people partake of prayer, meditation, or, exorcism to purge this deeper realm of the mind as a kind of ‘hell’ inhabited with demon spirits, i.e. apparently, it wasn’t enough to slay the pagan gods and hurl them into the dark pits of one's soul; the dark areas of one's soul must be scoured of the every last trace of paganism or ‘demonism’, not unlike what a doctor does with radiation and chemotherapy to destroy as many cancer cells as possible. But what may be deemed as cancerous or wicked by some is the very stuff of creativity, vision, poetry, and imagination to others. Indeed, is it an accident that the three great creative eras of the West since the Fall of Rome had to do with either the re-emergence of paganism and/or the fading of monotheism’s grip on the culture? Renaissance, Romanticism, and Modernism. Monotheism has done wonders for prophets, but polytheism or paganism has been more friendly to poets. And yet, oddly enough, the rise of Modernism, though seemingly most at odds with Monotheism, eventually led to a kind of neo-monotheism or secular-monotheism. One reason is Judeo-Christo-Islam and Science/Math have one thing in common in seeking the one-and-only truth. Monotheism requires one to believe that God is the only True God. If other gods are also valid, then Monotheism has no legitimacy. Likewise, science seeks the one truth. Unless there is a single set of universal laws of nature that governs the cosmos, science becomes pointless. While there have been many competing scientific hypotheses, they have all sought to discover which one is true, thereby proving all others false. For example, the Lamarckian hypothesis lost out to the Darwinian one, and certain elements of Darwinism have been discarded over the years by theories backed with more advanced experimentation. Because science has gained such prestige, even non-scientific fields have sought to imitate scientific methodology and terminology, resulting in an intellectual phenomenon called ‘scientism’, which isn’t really science but has its outward appearance. (The most dangerous quacks speak the language of medicine.) Then, it is not surprising that everyone from Karl Marx to Josef Stalin to Sigmund Freud to Carl Jung to Herbert Spencer to Adolf Hitler all claimed to speak in 'scientific' terms. Since science is about rejecting all false assumptions and hypotheses in search of the one true theory, such mental habit also came to define the rationalist scientism of ‘social sciences’ and modern ideologies. Then, it is no wonder that Modernism was both liberating and limiting. Initially, it led to the explosion of freedoms unthinkable earlier. But in its imitation of science, so much in the arts, architecture, music, literature, and social commentary came to insist that a certain form, method, or narrative was THE true one. Even though such attitudes emerged in opposition to the old dominant Idea or Narrative, the New Way was less about freedom than about the replacement of the old dogma with the new doctrine, even at the expense of eradicating future freedom to think differently and independently. Then, it’s hardly surprising that so much of the humanities is now more about technical jargon and 'correct' consensus than about personal and individualistic thinking on various matters. Even in discussion of popular entertainment, consider that so many critics now have a box-mentality that obliges them to praise certain works because of their subject matter and ideology. They might as well all be programmed NPC's. Possibly, the counter-appeal of Nietzsche and Heidegger owes to their rejection of quasi-objectivism that took hold of so much since the advent of science and technology. Objectivity, so essential to science, contracts, legal justice, and journalism, is easily corrupted in areas that are inherently subjective. When English Department that largely deals with fiction & poetry adopts an all-knowing ideology of PC, it creates the illusion that literature must be neatly divided into ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’, i.e. those in line with the official PC ideology is ‘good’ while those outside it are ‘bad’. Over time, this ideological ‘objectivization’ leads academics to favor bad literature that is ‘good’ over good literature that is ‘bad’.
Even as the humanities came to reject traditional standards and ‘conventional’ criteria of what is good or bad, it came to adopt ideological standards(as a form of new objectivism) of what is approved as opposed to what is ‘unacceptable’. This has affected general discussion as well, which is why anyone who speaks the truth about black crime or racial differences between blacks and non-blacks — just ask James D. Watson — is relegated to pariah-status, whereas total fantasies such as Wakanda(of BLACK PANTHER), BLM hysteria(that evil white cops are gunning down random blacks), and Hate Hoaxes(usually as acts of anti-white defamation carried out mostly by Jews and blacks) are approved, promoted, and even ‘sacralized’. But then, we live in a world where we are to believe that homo fecal-penetration is just as biologically legit as real sex between man and woman involving proper interaction of relevant organs; we are also to believe that if a man puts on a wig and says he’s a ‘woman’, then he is indeed a ‘woman’, but if few months later, he changes his mind and says he’s a man again, he’s a man.
It was bad enough when objectivism affected fields that are, by and large, subjective. While art cannot thrive without standards and some degree of consensus, there is no objective scientific law that can prove that Beatles REVOLVER is better than Rolling Stones’ AFTERMATH. Now, most people with good sense would know the Beatles were better than Herman’s Hermits, but their reasoning must still be made from a subjectivist viewpoint because so much of art appreciation has to do with one’s personal and emotional responses. Also, even though we know that a well-trained classical violinist is a better musician than some high-school violinist, art is more than about technical skills. Indeed, a less conventionally good singer may do more for a song. Maybe Celine Dion could have sung "Landslide" in a ‘better’ way, but Stevie Nicks, with a voice so uniquely bewitching, owns that song as composer and performer.

So, the realm of humanities should never have been infected with ideological objectivism, especially one as confused as PC that, on the one hand, claims to be committed to multiple perspectives against the Mono-Narrative, but then, on the other hand, insists that all perspectives must be converge on globo-homo-ism and be ‘intersectonal’, which really means that all groups must express themselves in ways that lionize Jews, homos, and/or Negroes while blaming all the bad stuff on ‘cis-gender white males’.
But something even stranger happened following the ‘objectivization’ of the humanities and English Department. Because Movies and TV do so much to convey an impression of shared reality and because so many journalists start out as English Majors, subjectivism(the stuff of art and fiction) has also seeped into what should be the objectivity of journalism and the law. Just consider: Today, Arts & Entertainment must conform to the mono-objectivism of PC. This goes from the haute Art World down to comic books for kids. So, we have Art Galleries selling million-dollar piles of junk about ‘patriarchy’ or ‘my liberated vagina’, and we have Archies comic book where the hero sacrifices his life to save a saintly homo from a deranged ‘homophobe’. Once the subjective humanities were turned ‘objective’ via PC ideology, they became a socio-political tool. Since journalism is about objective coverage of world events and trends, it began to take cues from the humanities that now claimed to have an objective grasp on society, justice, politics, and truth. Subjective was made ‘objective’, and in turn, objective was made ‘subjective’. It’s on wonder that so much of what passes for journalism today is about ‘muh feels’ that are now baked into the hearts and minds of anyone who attends college. Just consider: Obama as ‘the one’, Homomania as new faith, ‘gay marriage’ as legitimate, a man with wig is a ‘woman’, Russian Collusion Hoax, Trump is ‘literally Hitler’, Wakanda is truth, New STAR WARS is better than ever because ‘diversity’, ‘hate speech’ is not free speech, and etc. It’s gotten so ludicrous that even some on the Political Left are beginning to dump on the Lunacy:


(Jimmy Dore’s denunciation of the Russia Hysteria or Russysteria is most welcome and necessary, but he runs the same tired narrative on Joe McCarthy. While McCarthy was reckless and reached too far, a vast Soviet Network had sprung up in the US in government and cultural spheres during the FDR years. That was no joke, no fantasy. Even big shots like Harry Dexter White and Alger Hiss were communist spies. Rosenbergs and Morton Sobell funneled atom bomb blueprints — the most carefully guarded secrets in the US — to Stalin’s empire, the destroyer of millions of lives and occupier of Eastern Europe. And there were real communists and Soviet spies in media, entertainment, and academia. So, why have so many influential Jews, especially in academia and media, attacked McCarthy and the ‘Red Scare’ over the yrs ? Because many of the radicals and Soviet spies were Jews. That is why even non-communist Jews circled the wagon for the sake of Tribal Solidarity and spread the counter-hysteria that the ‘Red Scare’ had all been paranoid ‘hysteria’ when, in fact, there had been an extensive communist cabal in the US that funneled tons of secrets to Stalin’s government. Today, Jews are doing the opposite. If Jews of yesteryear denounced anti-communism as mostly paranoia, they now concoct and spread utterly bogus hysteria about Russia. Why? Even though the tactics have changed, they both serve the same core objective: Tribal Jewish Power. In the past, Wasps controlled the US, and Jews even sided with communists to discredit the Establishment. Jews worked with subversives to decry the Establishment’s anti-radical measures as ‘rabid and virulent’. Today, Jews are the Establishment and fear any dissent against or subversion of their power. Jews work with the Deep State to silence, shut down, and blacklist any courageous dissenting voice as ‘hateful’, ‘divisive’, or ‘Russian’. Funny that these Jewish elites who show zero solidarity with the Nationalist Folks of America insist that the latter must stand in solidarity with the former. "You suck our dick while we cut off your balls." Why do Jews now hate Russia so much? In the 1990s, Jewish globalists economically looted Russia and nearly owned that country. But Vladimir Putin restored some national sovereignty and locked up a handful of super oligarchs who happened to be Jewish. THAT is why Jews hate Putin and Russia. It’s not about ‘liberal democracy’ but Tribal Supremacism. Jews think they should own and rule Russia like they’ve come to own and rule US, UK, and Canada. Also, Russia, along with Iran and China, is one of the few nations on Earth that remains somewhat independent of US that is controlled by EOJ or Empire of Judea. And so, Jews fear Russia as a model of goy Nationalist Resistance against Jewish globo-homo Hegemonism. That is why the Jew-run Media have cooked up this nonsense about Russia Hysteria. Indeed, isn’t it funny that the very Jew-run Media that berate Donald Trump as a puppet of Russia, a foreign nation, have no problem with his truly servile attitude toward Israel, another foreign nation? What does that tell you? It means Jews demand that white Americans prioritize Jewish interests above all else. And yet, there is a paradox. Even as Jews increasingly dump on white conservatives as the unifying object of hatred for Jews and People of Color, they also increasingly rely on white conservatives to support Jews and Israel because Grievance Politics among POC often turn against Jewish privilege and Zionist tyranny. With there being less support for Israel and growing criticism of white-Jewish privilege among the growing non-white base among Democrats, Jews will have to depend more on support for Israel among white conservatives. Jews will have to increasingly rely on the very people they denigrate most in the media. But can Jews expect continued support among white conservatives when the latter is beginning to wake up to the fact that most virulent forms of anti-white-ism originates from Jews?)

Anyway, here we are in the 21st Century following the tumultuous 20th Century, the most notable developments of which was (1) Rise of USA as the premier world power and (2) Jewish takeover as the premier elites of the US. So, the 21st Century began with the legacy of the 20th that Jews on top of the world. It began with Jews controlling the US that controls the world. And one key feature of that control is the Mono-media-ism or Mono-mediantics of the Jews. Jews control the media like the Sun itself. Especially in the age of electronic media, most people get the news, info, ideas, data, entertainment, and messaging through rays from movie screens, TV screens, smart-phone screens, computer screens, and etc. We are constantly exposed to these rays. There are over 330 million people in America — many more if we include illegals — , and everyone has one or more TV’s, PC computers, laptops, smart-phones, and other such devices. And Hollywood still rakes in billions every year because so many young people flock to theaters with its giant electronic screens. And cities are increasingly covered with electronic advertisement.

Now, because we purchase and possess our own devices, there is a sense of autonomy and independence. After all, you watch your program on your TV, and I watch my program on my TV. You look for your news on your computer, and I look for my news on my computer. And yet, all these devices are useless on their own. They are merely hardware designed to relay or play something made by someone else. And for most of us for most of the time in most places, everything we are watching is made by a handful of people in NY, LA, and few other key centers. A handful of corporations controlled by oligarchs of a Certain Tribe get to decide who gets hired, what gets written, what gets made and who makes them, and how they are marketed. So, paradoxically, the fact that we own our devices has turned all of us into mental-sensual-and-emotional slaves of a handful of corporations controlled by World Jewry and their Homo agents. (Tootkins have gained much because they are experts of subtle finger-work in an economy that is increasingly less dependent on brawny arm-and-leg work of the working class. Appreciation of finger-work is in inverse proportion to depreciation in arm-and-leg work. There is still, however, some use of handiwork.) We own the devices, but Jews control the light that comes through them. Thus, we are all exposed to the Jew-Ray or J-Ray. Jewish Power owes much to their control of the Light of Modernity. Prior to electricity and rise of modern mass media, most goyim relied on local community for values, ideas, and information. Also, as there was far less centralization of society and nation, there were many media outlets, and often, local news and affairs took precedence over the Grand Narrative. Furthermore, news and ideas didn’t travel instantly and uniformly. But with the rise of electronic media, everything began to change. Those who controlled the signals could reach millions upon millions, then tens of millions upon tens of millions, then hundreds of millions upon hundreds of million, then billions upon billions... and uniformly and instantly. It began with sound with the advent of radio. Cinema emerged before radio, but one had to actually go to the movies. It didn’t follow one home. Also, even though cinema depended on electricity, film reels had to be physically transported from theater to theater. In contrast, the radio was in the house, possibly in every room. And then came the TV that combined sound & image and soon found its way into every home, then just about every room. Everyone owned his or her own TV but had NO control over what he or she saw. He or she became spellbound with the rays emanating from the screen. Through those rays, he or she found much entertainment and joy. He or she received much essential information and news. Through documentaries, he or she learned about other parts of the world. So much was for the good. But he or she came under the spell of those who monopolized the Light and turned them into rays that would alter minds and transform(or deform) souls all across the world. In DIE NIBELUNGEN, the Jewish-like dwarfs gain control of the Rhine Gold and then fashion a Ring of Power out of it to control the world.

Jews have gained supremacy with money, gold, and diamonds. But their power over us has to do with their control of Light. Prior to the rise of electricity, Light belonged to the Sun, the stars, and man's control of fire. Nighttime was lit by torches, firewood, or candles. For a time, city streets were lit with gas lamps. And then, with the coming of electricity and the light-bulb, nighttime became universally lit for everyone, at least in the First World. Humanity no longer depended on the Sun or on unreliable & often dangerous fire for radiance. With a flick of the switch, nighttime could be as bright or even brighter than the day. But, electricity didn’t merely light up the night or run machinery. It could be processed into signals to transmit enticing semblances of sound and image. And with the radio(and later with TV), these signals could travel through the air without wire. There was no longer the need for cumbersome infrastructure, as with telephones prior to the advent of the Cell Phone. A media center with powerful antennae could transmit its signals to millions upon millions of people. And with satellite technology, a single media center could reach the entire world. Beatles’ performance of "All You Need is Love" was the first globally transmitted TV broadcast via satellite, but its real lesson was All You Need Is Light. Beatles sang the song, but Jews came to control the light, the rays emanating from the screens of countless TV screens all around the world.


It didn’t matter if your TV was made in US, Germany, or Japan. On its own, a TV set is nothing. It exists only to relay the Light transmitted via signals, and the power to create that Light for all the world came to be controlled by Jews. Jews understood that control of Light was more powerful than control of Gold.
In Greek mythology, Prometheus steals fire from the gods and gifts it to mankind. In Judeo-centric Historiography, St. Paul ‘stole’ the spirituality light of the Jews and passed it onto goyim. Zeus was angry with Prometheus and punished him forever(though the story of Heracles says he freed Prometheus from the torment). And we know that Jews never forgave Jesus and St. Paul for passing the Jewish God to the Gentiles. Likewise, as with Zeus and religious Jews, modern secular Jews are determined to maintain monopoly ownership of the Light. Jews want all of us to remain spellbound by the J-Ray. Jews also use Gay-Ray, or Propaganda of Homomania, to serve the J-Ray. Not only are homos the most loyal and zealous servant-partners of Jewish Power but Homomania complements Jewish Supremacism as both are predicated on Minority Elite Supremacism. If Jewish Light is the Sun of the Mass Media, Homo Light is its ‘rainbow’. Like the Sun vanquishes all the stars in the sky, Jewish Media Power works tirelessly to blot out and silence all alternative and counter-narratives. And the Jewish Sun seeds the clouds to produce cultural conditions conducive for the 'gay rainbow’, which has been associated with men who do homo fecal-penetration or tranny penis-cutting.
In a way, each of us is living in a TRUMAN SHOW. Our Jewish Master uses the power of Light to control our beliefs, values, and perimeters of what-is-permissible. We are trapped in two ways, like people in Peter Weir’s movie. Truman is trapped because he’s been duped into believing that his bubble-world is real. But then, people who are addicted to watching Truman are also trapped because, even though on the outside, their lives revolve around the life shaped and manipulated by Media Central. They are as addicted to Truman as Truman is anchored to his fake world. And even as they root for Truman’s escape, it all takes place within the bubble, and even after Truman's liberation, the viewers demand yet another show. It’s like they’ve been robbed of the inner light and inner life because they’ve become so accustomed to artificial worlds beamed to them on their TVs. Again, they own the TV’s but not what comes through them. Of course, as the movie was made by Hollywood, the villainous media mogul who would be god is a goy, but in the real world, we know that such figures are Jews.


We are bombarded with J-Ray, not the White Light. In all the religions and mythologies, God or gods own and control the light. Mankind could only hope to harness some of that light. Or it had to contend with unstable and dangerous fire that produced smoke or burned out of control... or was difficult to reignite in wind and rain. Just as mankind enviously eyed the magical flight of birds, it was filled with fear and awe of the power of God or gods over the Light. Indeed, consider the cultures that sacrificed so many innocents to appease the Sun god. Just like God or gods held tremendous sway over mankind that believed in Light as a divine source, Jews now have godlike power over us as they control the electronic light that transfixes virtually all of humanity. Even in nations where Jews don’t directly own and control the media, so many people demand more J-Ray from Hollywood and US mass media. After all, however vile and wicked Jewish Power may be, the fact remains that Jews are talented in creativity and, with their vast financial resources, scoop up talents from around the world. Jewish Hollywood makes a lot of crap, but it’s expensive good-looking crap, and that sure beats cheap-looking crap made by the rest of the world. The New STAR WARS is crap, but with a budget over $100 million, it looks better than space fantasy movies made for few millions, which is what the rest of the world can barely afford. With control of the Electronic Media, it’s as if Jews control the Sun of Modernity. Media might as well be called Sunstein.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

Close Encounters - Mothership

Compared to the J-Ray of Sunstein media, dissident voices are like stars in the night. There are so many of them but disconnected from one another. Though there have always been dissident voices in a controlled democracy like the US, most remained invisible and unheard. Those that garnered some degree of attention did something outlandish, like anarchists who threw bombs at the police, individuals who assassinated politicians, extremist groups that either rioted or practiced strange rituals, and radicals-of-convenience selectively & momentarily exploited by the power. (Jew-run Mass media promoted the Westboro Church to defame anti-homo-agenda people as a bunch of deranged lunatics.) Obviously, if ‘fringe groups’ or extremist individuals do something really far-out or outlandish, they will get attention. But the Power will sometimes use certain radical individuals or groups as subversive or corrosive agents against rival Powers. A famous case of this was the Right-Wing German government use of Lenin and Bolsheviks to undermine the nationalist government in Russia. Germans, in their short-term interests, figured communist takeover of Russia was worth it if it assured German victory on the Eastern Front. Generally, the Power seeks to maintain respectability and avoids appearing extreme, unseemly, or dirty. So, it will use the shadow government — CIA, FBI, NSA, etc — to do the dirty work under the cover of ‘official business’. Or, esp in Third World nations(but also in first ones), the Power will use its ties with the underworld to carry out certain deeds. CIA had ties with the Mafia, and Zionists worked with gangsters like Meyer Lansky to pull strings. Or, the Power will selectively favor certain radicals to do its bidding while claiming plausible deniability. We see this in how Jewish Power uses Antifa to shut down dissident voices on the Right. Even as the Power denies direct links between itself and Antifa thugs, it pulls strings to ensure that the police and courts will go lightly on Antifa gangs. Thus, Antifa has essentially become the para-military force of the globo-homo power.

Jewish Power also works like the mafia in this regard: It runs an Extortion Racket as a Protection Program. But of course, you must pay off the Jews and/or serve them in order to have protection from none other than them. Jews make you an offer you can’t refuse. Jews use para-gangster organizations like SPLC, ADL, and AIPAC as moral covers to do their bidding. These groups veil their activities in the guise of Moral Crusade to pressure politicians, social critics, artists, entertainers, and businessmen into sucking up to Jews and supporting Israel. If anyone refuses to go along, the groups work in tandem with the Jew-run media to smear the American Refusenik as a ‘hater’, ‘extremist’, ‘white supremacist’, ‘anti-Semite’, and etc. Jewish Power has been so effective in this that cucking to Jews has become almost second-nature among prominent whites. Just look at Mitt Romney, the worthless dog of the Jews. Donald Trump pumped himself as a proud and tough white man, but look at him recently. He has Zionist cum drooling down the side of his lips. He looks like he’s been rammed in the ass by Chuck the Buttfuc* Schumer.

Anyway, whereas Jewish Media Power is like the powerful Sun whose rays cover all the world and own all the sky(as stars and the Moon are rendered invisible), dissident voices are like the dispersed stars in the sky. There are so many stars in the night, but the sky remains dark because there is no unity among the stars. Due to the internet, there are now more stars than ever. Unlike in the past when few corporations controlled all the media, anyone has the chance to become an known entity via the internet. As such, he or she can disseminate ideas disapproved by the Power. Indeed, this is the crucial difference between Established Electronica and New Electronica. With TV, the flow of images and sounds was only in one direction. It was from Media Central to all of us. We received but never returned information(except through ‘letters to the editor’). Also, there were limited means by which people could communicate with one another and form their own networks. Mostly, people talked to friends and family on the phone or sent letters. It was just person-to-person. But with the rise of the internet, a single voice on the internet can win over numerous fans. And there are eccentrics like PewDiePie who has tens of millions of followers on Youtube. Thus, in some ways, the stars in the sky are getting brighter and brighter. Meanwhile, the Sunstein seems to be dimming as more and more people, especially young ones, tend to rely more on peers and personalities on the internet for information than on official sources or establishment figures that, especially for people on the Right, have lost so much credibility, mainly because being so subservient to Jewish Power and addled with PC dogma has rendered most journalists into mere tools of the Power. One would have to be dumb, dishonest, demented, or deranged with worship of power-for-power’s-sake to take anything by the so-called mainstream media seriously. It’s just more Jewish globo-homo propaganda. In contrast, despite their limited resources and access to sources, many dissident, eccentric, or unique people on the internet can speak their minds and offer frank assessments of what may be REALLY going on.

Thus, Sunstein is dimming while the stars are burning ever more brightly. Still, the balance of power is with Sunstein. Also, the internet, like big media, has fallen into the hands of Jewish globo-homo supremacists. How did Jews manage to take over the internet? They used the Old Hustle Trick. You know how the hustle works. Some guy pretends to be not so good at billiards and loses a few games. The other guy gains confidence and plays for higher stakes. And then, the hustler shows his true colors and cleans up.
Jews used the same trick with takeover of the internet. But then, Jews pulled the same stunt in their takeover of mass media. If Jews, prior to media takeover, had revealed their true intentions — that, with media power, they intend to promote anti-white hatred and infect whites with ‘white guilt’ and ‘white self-loathing’ — , would they have been allowed to take over? Of course not. So, what did Jews do? They pretended to be Good Americans who love to compose Christmas songs and make patriotic war movies & all those Western movies that pay tribute to white menfolk and womenfolk who conquered and settled the West. So, most whites came to see Jews as Good Patriotic Decent Americans and didn’t oppose Jewish takeover of the media. But when Jews finally had monopoly control of the media, they showed their true face and pushed one anti-white agenda after another.
Jews did much the same to take over the internet. Platforms, Search Engines, and Social Networks controlled by Jews gained dominance by claiming to be neutral. Remember Google’s motto used to be "Don’t Be Evil". It created the impression that Google would be fair to all and not rig things to favor certain groups or agendas over others. Indeed, if Google and Facebook had stated at the very outset what their ultimate agenda would be — favor globo-homo progs over conservatives, effectively censor search results(or ‘censearch’), use monopoly power to smear certain individuals and groups while protecting others with far more power and record of evil, etc. — , at least half of America would NEVER have signed up to use their services. But Google, Facebook, and other such platforms hustled us and sucked us all in with promise of neutrality and fairness. But once they gained monopoly control, they went about favoring certain figures, ideas, and agendas over others. Also, while Jew-run Google and Facebook shut down or shadow-ban any courageous white voice who speaks truth to power, certain groups are ‘protected’ from the same standards.

Jews would have us believe that these groups need special protection because they are so vulnerable, but it’s all bogus. It’s really about Protected Supremacisms. What honest person can deny that the main supremacisms in the US are Jewish, black, and homo? Jews control just about all elite institutions and industries that matter. Blacks use their superior muscle power to dominate sports and beat up whites all over in streets and schools. And homos have been elevated to neo-angel status in America. Queertianity has become a defacto compulsory neo-religion for all those who want to succeed in life. Also, it’s hilarious when Jews claim to oppose anti-Muslim speech because it’s ‘hate speech’. It was Hollywood Jews who made all those movies with Muslims-as-Terrorists that convinced so many Americans that 'Muzzies' are subhuman psychos. It was Jewish groups that pressured Americans into supporting Israel that has terrorized and tyrannized so many Palestinian Muslim lives. It was Jewish Neocons and Liberal Zionists who used Deep State and Big Media to make the US wage Wars for Israel that has destroyed millions of Muslim lives in Middle East and North Africa. Jews pull all this shit, but they got the gall to pretend that they are protecting vulnerable Muslims from ‘haters’. These are the same Jews who used mega-money and media power to make Congress pass the unconstitutional anti-BDS laws. Jews are truly vile and hideous in their hyper-hypocrisy. Sometimes, I wonder if Jews are simply disgustingly dishonest... or are they so full of themselves as the smartest, wisest, richest, most successful, most tragic(‘muh holocuast’), and most ‘progressive’(always pushing some nuttery as the new moral panic of the year) that they’ve become blind to their own perfidy and venality. Consider a vile lowlife scum like Bari Weiss:

Via the Hustle, Jews gained monopoly control of the internet. Granted, not all platforms are owned by Jews, but as even Big Goyim in Big Tech rely on Jewish finance, Jewish lawyers & judges, Jewish academia, Jewish-controlled Deep State, and etc., they have no choice but to play along. Just look at Jack Dorsey’s dorky cuck-face. He always looks weak and wussy like Brad Pitt after he was castrated by Hollywood and Angelica Jolie. He’s always looking over his shoulders to see if anything he says has the approval of ADL, a Jewish ‘protection racket’ that is always "making an offer you can’t refuse".

Jack Dorsey the Dorky Horsey

Or consider the pussy-wussy goy-boy at Cloudflare who denied service to Daily Stormer in hope of obtaining more shekels from Jewish Finance. Now, Andrew Anglin and Daily Stormer are shit, BUT when we look at the state the world is in, WHO did all the damage? Anglin the clown who posts ridiculous headlines on his site or Zionist globo-homo scum and their goy cuck-puppets who used financial trickery to rob trillions and waged Wars for Israel to wreck entire nations? And who has promoted all the ugly gangsta rap music that encouraged urban violence? Andrew Anglin never killed anyone. Timothy McVeigh killed 150. Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright starved and killed 100,000s of Iraqi children in the 90s in service of Zionist Supremacism. And yet, the Jew-run media and their cuck-puppets would have us believe that the good citizens of Silicon Valley are working so tirelessly to shut down ‘hate’ that may destroy lives. This is funny coming from Google, a company that has major centers in Israel, a nation created via Nakba pogroms, a imperialist power that still occupies West Bank. Cuck-Duck Donald Trump says US troops will remain in Syria to protect Israel, but who is endangering whom? When was the last time Syria attacked Israel? In contrast, Israel has shot so many missiles and dropped so many bombs on Syria. Israel aided so many terrorists in Syria. Like the saying goes, "Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you."

If Trump wants to remain in Syria to protect it from Israel, that would make some sense. In fact, he keeps US soldiers in Syria to pin it down so that Israel can attack it more, but Trump and the Jew-run Sunstein media spin it as "US is protecting Israel from Syria and its allies." With Jews, you lose. I’m not the one to deny or disbelieve the core facts of Shoah or the Holocaust, but I’m beginning to see the need for Holocaust Realization. A Holocaust Realizer would be someone who finally realizes why something as horrific as Shoah befell Jews. Based on observations of Jewish supremacist behavior in the past 50 yrs, it isn’t difficult to understand why so many people were ‘antisemitic’ and hated Jews. While it’s possible that Jews of yesteryear were totally different from Jews of here-and-now, that is unlikely. Recent Jewish behavior strongly suggests why ‘antisemitism’ was so prevalent throughout European history. These Jews just don’t know when to quit. Pushy, deranged, contemptuous, and hateful, they are vicious and sadistic. Given them an inch, and they will go about totally destroying you and your people. Jews are essentially like Gypsies with higher intelligence. Also, the neuroticism arising from conflict between Jewish tribal supremacism and secular-universal moralism seems to have literally driven a third of them insane, a third of them cynical, and a third of them nihilistic.

Jews control the internet like they control the media, but there is, of course, one key difference. Given the nature of the internet, Jews cannot maintain total monopoly as with the Old Media. While Youtube can ban and censor many voices, it can’t suppress all voices. Also, the more that Big Tech companies censor or rig algorithms, word gets around that Jewish Geeks are up to no good, and this increases anti-Jewish animus and distrust among goyim. Also, the Jewish Monopoly’s censorship of elements of the Left that supports BDS is making more people(across the political spectrum) wake up to the hypocrisy of Jewish Power that claims to be ‘progressive’ and for the ‘little guy’ but is actually indistinguishable from the ugly Zionist supremacism of Sheldon Adelson and Thomas Friedman.
Also, because it’s less expensive to start an internet company than a traditional media company, even small players can enter the market and pose some degree of challenge to the big players. If Youtube censors too much, it will be a huge boost to a site like Bitchute that mostly eschews censorship. And despite all the Power’s effort to shut down Gab.ai as Free Speech alternative to Twitter, it’s still going and growing. And the reaction to Patreon’s banning of Sargon of Akkad goes to show that people have some power to push back against Big Tech in ways that readers and viewers didn’t have with Print and TV media.


Hopefully, the dissident stars in the night will burn ever more brightly as the Sunstein media dims and becomes overcome with sunspots. Sure, it has solar flares now and then to get people like Alex Jones de-platformed from every major site. Jewish Monopolies have the ultimate kill-switch on much of the internet. Furthermore, Jews use their control of Payment Processing to effectively silence voices and destroy lives by cutting off funds. Just like Zionist conquerors in the West Bank cut off water-supplies to Palestinians, Jewish monopolists cut off money supply to goyim they hate.


Jews also use Narrative Tyranny to have people they hate fired. In the current US, if someone is labeled as ‘alt right’ or ‘white nationalist’, he can be fired from any job. But if someone is an open Zionist supremacist who supports Wars for Israel, hatred against Russia & Iran, defamation of white people, and oppression of Palestinians, he faces no job risk. If anything, his Jewish supremacism will do wonders for his resume in climbing the corporate ladder or working for the Deep State.
Indeed, the US government passed a law that not only supports Zionist tyranny but penalizes anyone who supports BDS and justice for Palestinians against Zionist-supremacist-imperialist tyranny. In the current US, a sicko like Sheldon Adelson who called for the nuking of Iran gets to rake in billions of dollars and buy off whore politicians. But if you’re a white person who says, "It’s Okay to be White", Jews, their Antifa goons, and Anti-Fact shills in Cuck-Media will harass, bully, and threaten your place of employment to get your fired. THAT is how Jews behave. Just ask the Palestinians. If Jews treat a people as powerless and blameless as the Palestinians as subhuman, why would they treat YOU any differently? Jews wanted Palestinian land, and so, they pulled off all sorts of dirty tricks to dispossess Palestinians and humiliate them. Dirty Jews use the smokescreen of 'progressivism' and 'compassion for the disenfranchised' to hide their supremacism. It's just another manifestation of "Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you." By making so much noise about protecting the powerless, Jews hope that we won't notice that they are the Powerful who oppress the powerless. Just ask the Palestinians. Jews want total supremacy over the US and want whites to be their cuck-dogs forever. So, why would Jews with their monopoly power treat whites with ANY fairness or decency? Since when does a master treat a slave as an equal? Again, just ask the Palestinians, and they will tell you what Jews do to you once they gain supremacist power over you and your kind.

Is there a way by which the dissident stars can pull their lights together to form a Counter-Sun to the Sunstein Media? The White Light against the J-Ray? It won’t be easy, and truth be told, too many people on the Alt Right and Dissident Right lack the kind of prophetic vision, inspiration, and theory of justice to create a movement that pools all the lights together. What Lawrence said of the Arabs may apply to the Alt Right and Dissident Right as well: "...so long as the Arabs fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people, greedy, barbarous, and cruel, as you are." To lead a great movement, there has to be men of drive and ambition, but it can’t just be about ME, ME, ME. For awhile, people thought Richard Spencer might be the one to lead, but his spiled-brat selfishness as a player made it impossible for him to recruit and keep men of quality around him. He just ended up with second-raters or far-right lunatics.
But then, no great movement can be led by gentlemen. Jared Taylor is a respectable persona to those who know him, but a man who dares not to get his feathers ruffled won’t have what is necessary to form an army of true-believing warriors. When the right man finally arrives on the scene, maybe all the disparate and dispersed white lights in the sky will come together to form a light so bright and powerful that it will illuminate a new path for the white race. One wonders what might have been possible if Adolf Hitler and National Socialists had served as a bridge between the West(mainly UK and France) and the East(mainly Russia and Slavic nations). He could have been one of the greatest man that ever lived. Instead, by picking on Poland, he drove a wedge between Germany and UK/France. But he had a second chance as Germany prevailed over France in an easy victory. Hitler could still have worked to serve as bridge between the West and Russia, then an ally. But he turned on Russia, and that was the end of the dream. No man had so much of world history in the palm of his hand and then lost everything. But then, Hitler was born with a pathological personality, and maybe there was nothing to stop the madness in the long run. Men of inspiration tend to be eccentric and extreme in some way... but they must be fundamentally sane and sound of mind and spirit if they're to make a positive mark on humanity.

A Response to an Analysis of John Boorman's EXCALIBUR, Further Right than Far Right by David Yorkshire - May 13, 2017

For David Yorkshire’s Analysis, Click Here: FILM REVIEW: EXCALIBUR, Further Right than Far Right

This split between man and Nature is at the heart of liberalism in which Western Man is considered as apart from and not a part of Nature.

There are many facets to liberalism. In some ways, liberalism was about the return of nature and sexuality. Liberals saw Conservatives, especially Christians, as the suppressors of natural energies, especially of sexuality. Liberal Boomers feel nostalgia about the 60s because it was about Return to Nature, or Back to the Garden. Rock Music, Sex, and Drugs were supposed to reconnect modern man with his natural energies.

But then, there is another side of Liberalism that fears nature as the aggressive warrior-side of man that tends toward tribalism based on racial differences. Liberals had a tough time with the neo-barbarism of Hell's Angels.

This foreshadows the land's decay and the birth of Arthur's unnatural son, Mordred, to his half-sister, Morgana (in a departure from the existing Arthurian canon and a move towards incestuous themes in Der Ring des Nibelungen).

I don't think the rise of Morgana & Mordred has anything to do with Nature vs Christianity. Morgana and Mordred represent the Malevolence of Power(any kind of power) misused for vanity and megalomania. Morgana represents the dark side of the Dragon, the demonic force. She also represents the Will to become god. She has powers like Merlin, who recognized something special in her. But if Merlin uses his special knowledge to guide man, Morgana is all about vanity(and vengeance). Merlin is like half-man/half-god who cares about mankind. Morgana is half-woman/half-god who wants to be full-god and give birth to a god-man. She seeks immortality. She is about the vanity of power, or the vanity of vanity.

This of course asks questions of the Grail, what it is and what it represents, for it is noticeable that it is never referred to as 'the Holy Grail' in the entire film.

As Boorman envisioned it, the Grail is the lost truth. The Grail is also a mirage and illusion. It doesn't exist yet exists only when people realize it doesn't exist. That's the paradox of the Grail. Arthur sent his knights to seek the Grail OUT THERE in a physical quest on horseback. They thought it's a physical object that can be found like lost treasure. Later, we discover the Grail is not a thing. It is a state-of-mind, a realization. It cannot be found OUT THERE. It can only be found WITHIN. Perceval finally grasps it when he realizes that it's really about hope and reconnecting with the roots of truth and honor. So, in a way, the Grail was always right there in the hearts of Arthur, Perceval, and all the knights. They just forgot it. It's like what Joel McCrea's character tells Randolph Scott's character at the end of RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY. McCrea says goodness and honor were always there in Scott's heart, but he just forgot it, that's all.

Final Scene from RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY

This and Merlin's answer that "Good and evil, there never is one without the other" prompts Sir Gawain's outburst about Guinevere's lust for Sir Lancelot, an outburst that is made possible by Arthur's democratic leanings in creating the Round Table that gives a voice to all. Arthur's woes are compounded when he refuses to defend his wife's honour, as he must judge as king before fight as husband, much to the dismay of Guinevere. He therefore chooses civilization over barbarity, societal law over the Natural law of defending one's loved ones. Ultimately, Arthur has created these laws himself and they reveal a man who is increasingly willing to embrace the passivity of Christianity of his own volition. After all, why does there need to be a judge in a trial of combat?

It's not that simple. The Round Table is not democratic. It is aristocratic, solely the domain of the knights who'd been there with Arthur in the founding of Camelot. And there is hierarchy, with Arthur as King and with Lancelot as the greatest knight.

And Arthur's refusal to fight and defend Guinevere's honor makes sense because Gawain impugned not only Guinevere but Lancelot as well. His terse words dishonored both of them. So, even if Arthur were to condemn Gawain to death or fight him, Lancelot's honor would still be besmirched.
Therefore, the proper thing is for Lancelot to defend Guinevere's honor. And if not him, one of the other knights who have faith him Lancelot and Guinevere. Also, another reason why it must be Lancelot or one of the knights is that the Arthurian World is a world of magic. As Arthur says, in a duel of honor, the wrong cannot win over the right. And this is why none of the knights will come forward to defend Guinevere. They too suspect, along with Gawain, that there are certain dark feelings between Lancelot and Guinevere. And Lancelot too is uncertain about what action to take because, as he says, they(he and the queen) are innocent of body but not of heart. So, Lancelot is anxious about championing the queen because he may lose. He may be the greatest knight, but the Magic of the Arthurian World will favor the righteous over the false in a duel of honor. So, he has to purge himself of his wrongful feelings before finally arriving to defend the queen. But in his self-purging, he has seriously wounded himself. He wins the duel but with a cloud of uncertainty. Gawain begs for mercy and says the queen is innocent. Lancelot still tries to kill him, but the Magic prevents him from doing so, and Lancelot himself collapses.

Also, Arthur's action cannot be called 'passivity'. If anything, he sticks to the law because he is sincerely committed to being a just and noble king. Also, the pagan 'karma' of the Arthurian universe disfavors the rash and barbaric. Uther was rough-and-tumble, but he didn't last very long. He was not The One, and the Dragon let him die.

Equally, Guinevere is correct when she states that "In the idleness of peace, I see that gossip has spread its own evil." This is an eternal truth. As the True Right has always known, without real struggle, the human mind will artificially create struggle, hence the rise of the Social Justice Warrior from the creamy all-too-comfortable bourgeoisie and their crusades against all manner of invented abstractions that boil down to a struggle against Nature herself.

Actually, Guinevere is being disingenuous. The 'struggle' wasn't artificially created. It was always there. Indeed, when Guinevere and Lancelot first saw each other, they instantly fell in love. But they couldn't be lovers since Guinevere promised herself to Arthur, who is also Lancelot's best friend. So, Guinevere married Arthur, and they all pretended everything was hunky dory. But in fact, Guinevere and Lancelot were lovesick for one another. So, the tension that flows forth from this repressed love is not due to some idle chatter but the eventual emergence of the hidden passionate truth.

Arthur never suspected it because he loved Guinevere too much and trusted Lancelot. But others did notice it(if in silence), and Morgana exploited it to drive a wedge among the knights. The sexual dynamics are profoundly important in the Arthurian Universe since it is a world of warriors, and top alpha women go with the best knights. Arthur, as king, is the leader of knights. So, it is natural that he should have Guinevere. But there is a certain unease because Lancelot is actually the better warrior. And unbeknownst to Lancelot, he wasn't really beaten by Arthur. Arthur cheated and drew power from Excalibur to defeat Lancelot. But Lancelot thinks Arthur beat him fair and square, and that is why he pledged allegiance to Arthur. So, their friendship, beautiful as it is, was founded on a falsehood. The superior warrior Lancelot submitted to Arthur on the belief that Arthur beat him in combat.

By rule of nature, the top woman wants to go with the toughest man. But in civilization, power is gained not only through fighting but through statecraft, wit, and talent. And Arthur has those qualities, of course with the help of Merlin. So, he is king, and Guinevere went with him. But her natural womanly side still lusts after Lancelot, the greater warrior.

This is relevant to the Modern West because black men are tougher, more muscular, and more athletic than white males. This is why John Boorman appreciates THE BIRTH OF A NATION, which is about sexual anxiety, very much like Arthurian Legend. White men long ago feared the Negro man who is stronger, more muscular, and bigger-donged.

In nature, the strongest and toughest warrior-hunter gets the most desirable women.
In civilization, men can gain power with smarts and skills. So, best women often go with successful men who may not be the strongest or most attractive. That is the tension of the Modern West. White men, having higher intelligence, do better than black men economically. So, successful white men get top white women. But then, white people watch sports and watch pop culture and see the Negro Man kicking the white boy's ass. This leads to Cuck Mentality.

In a way, there is a certain logic as to why the Negro is often featured in the role of Lancelot in these new Hollywood tellings. In the Modern West, black males dominate sports and sex culture. So, they possess the Top Warrior archetype. And that is why increasing numbers of white women are into jungle fever, betraying white men, and offering their wombs to be Afro-colonized. They see black men as the superior warrior and stud. Look at Sports Illustrated. The top male athletes are black, and the bikini models are white. Look at athletes and cheerleaders in NFL and NBA. Mostly black male players and white cheerleaders.
THAT is the greatest threat facing the white race: ACOWW, or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. White guys want to believe that it's all about blacks raping white women, but in fact, tons of white women Go Negro because they got jungle fever for the superior stud.

Anyway, what happens among Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot was anticipated by Merlin who told Arthur that, yes he will marry Guinevere but will be betrayed by his best friend.
So, it goes to show that even a temperate man like Arthur can become blind to the bigger picture because of the hypnotic power of love. Even so, I think what Arthur and Guinevere feel for one another is love whereas the feelings between Guinevere and Lancelot are much stronger: it is lust.

And deep inside every woman is a desire to be saved by a hero, no matter how much she rails against 'the patriarchy'.

Yeah, but the problem is that Guinevere wants to be 'saved' from Arthur by Lancelot. In a way, the problem is that Guinevere feels 'oppressed' by the security offered by Arthur. It provides her with privilege, wealth, safety, and nice things. But what she wants most sexually is to be taken by Lancelot. In a way, she wants to be 'unsaved' from civilization and be taken by barbarism of lust. So, it's not so much that a woman wants to be 'saved' by 'patriarchy'. She wants to be swept away by the top lover-boy. This is why many Romance novels are about women being abducted and conquered by the superior man, the 'bad boys'. This is why Helen of Troy doesn't want to be saved. She finds Paris to be more dashing and desirable than her humdrum husband. She collaborated in the 'abduction'. A woman wants to be saved ONLY IF the savior is the superior man. But if the would-be-savior is the inferior man, she prefers to be taken by the superior pirate, thief, or lover-boy.

Indeed, women prove to be rather problematic in the film, which no doubt will please the Manosphere types who love to point to women as 'the enemy'. Morgana is indeed a representation of evil, but Guinevere is all too human, and her betrayal of Arthur is seen equally as stemming from Arthur's betrayal of her in the scene we have explored.

Everyone is problematic in EXCALIBUR, but things get complicated with women because their power is subtler and more mysterious. Men are problematic, but their conflicts are settled with brain or brawn. In contrast, some women have beauty-and-allure, the mysterious power of which is difficult to measure or figure out. Also, it's not just about looks. Guinevere is attractive but not the most beautiful woman. But she enchants men because of her personality. She has a special touch, a sparkle.

Also, Guinevere's betrayal of Arthur has nothing to do with his supposed 'betrayal' of her. She had subconsciously betrayed Arthur in her heart from the moment when her eyes met Lancelot's. On that wedding day, even though she was betrothed to Arthur, she was besotted with Lancelot. And when she saw the wounded Lancelot on the bed nude after the duel, the combination her lust and her compassion was just too much, and she couldn't hold it back anymore. She was caught in a conundrum. If she went off to make love to Lancelot, she would be betraying her husband and duty as queen. But if she didn't run off to Lancelot, she would be betraying her heart that wants to run off to him.

As for Morgana, she is not a simple character at all. She is the most complicated character after Merlin. In a way, we can understand her rage and bitterness. After all, Merlin conspired with Uther to have her father, the Duke of Cornwall, killed. This was especially unjust because it was Uther who'd broken the peace. Merlin was angry with Uther, but he decided to salvage the situation by having Uther 'rape' and impregnate Igraine. Merlin foresaw the death of Uther but also a new order arising from Arthur, son of Uther. But there was collateral damage in this plot. Though Merlin did this for the greater good, he had to commit an evil. He had to help Uther 'rape' Igraine and kill Duke of Cornwall. Thus, Morgana lost her father and witnessed her mother being raped by Uther. In a way, she is loyal to her father. She is avenging what was done to her family. It's like Lady Kaeda the avenger in Kurosawa's RAN. She is justified in her rage and hatred.

But Morgana is about more than vengeance. She is special, like Merlin. She has the vision, and she is consumed with vanity of power. She justifies her action on revenge for what was done to her family, but she goes way beyond vengeance because lust for power has its own logic. She can't say no power & vanity just like Guinevere cannot say no to lust.

But then, this was true of communism and Nazism. Communism justified itself as revenge of the oppressed working class, but its power-lust led to greater evils. And Nazism was initially justified on Germany's humiliation in WWI and Versailles Treaty. Hitler rose to power speaking of national justice and restoration. But he was consumed with power-lust and didn't know when to stop. Power has its own logic, like fire that always threatens to burn out of control.
Jews and Negroes also gained power in the name of righting historical wrongs, but they too became engulfed with power for power's sake. Today, black rappers are into thug power, and Jews are mad about globalist domination. Jews went from Holocaust-remembrance to acting like Judeo-Nazis.

Arthur's passivity leads to his problems with both his men and with women. His cuckolding and sexual assault leads to his impotence. In turn, this leads to the land decaying.

It's not his passivity that leads to the fall. Rather, it's his reneging on his duty as king due to personal angst. When he discovers that Guinevere and Lancelot betrayed him, the proper thing is, by the codes of that particular order, to kill them both. And indeed, he goes off to kill them.
But he just couldn't do it. He still felt too much love for them. And because he is a wise man, he can read their hearts. He understands why it happened. Merlin once said that Uther could't look into the hearts of men. Arthur can look into the hearts of others, and he realizes that Lancelot and Guinevere are not evil and didn't meant to hurt him, Arthur. It's just this crazy thing called lust/love.

Arthur could have done two things: The proper thing as king to kill them both as they slept. Or, he could have walked away with Excalibur and returned to being King.
Instead, he abandons Excalibur, Merlin's special gift to him. Merlin led Arthur to the Sword of Power to be savior and leader. A king must rise above his personal angst and think of the good of society. But Arthur, distraught over Guinevere and Lancelot, just abandons the sword and returns to his castle to wallow in misery. He forgets what Merlin told him: 'You and the Land are one.' Arthur's abandonment of Excalibur was like a betrayal of Merlin. When Arthur drives the sword into the ground and walks away, we see the sword striking into the back of Merlin, and he too becomes disoriented.

I think the idea of 'you and the land are one' has multiple meanings. It means the relation between leader and the land, but it also means the connection between mind/soul and body.

Yet for all this, the film received mixed reviews from the critics. This is largely because critics of the time all hailed from the same middle-brow liberal clique.

Actually, Ebert's criticism made some good points. Even at 2 hrs and 20 min, there is a lot of material that isn't sufficiently developed. It's a film that should have been epic in scope: one more hour would have fleshed out more details. Still, many critics were blind to the film's undeniable virtues.
Ebert, Siskel, and many critics also devalued BLADE RUNNER for the same reason. They focused so much on plot and characters that they overlooked the real stylistic and visionary aspects of the film.

I don't think Ebert's lack of appreciation had to do with politics. After all, Ebert later recommended CONAN THE BARBARIAN, RED DAWN, and RAMBO, more blatantly 'right-wing' movies. I think he focused on the wrong things: story and characters. He felt there was too many things happening without proper development, and he was right in a way.

Maverick Liberal Jewess Pauline Kael, an admirer of Boorman and who wrote a mostly glowing review, also noted that the movie has problems of continuity and characterization. Incidentally, Kael's review of the film is one of the best in film criticism. It's in the volume TAKING IT ALL IN. A snippet: http://www.geocities.ws/paulinekaelreviews/e3.html

I think EXCALIBUR is one of the greatest films ever. THE 13TH WARRIOR is one of the few films of similar theme & setting that is comparable in beauty and power, but it tragically bombed at the box office... whereas a totally worthless pile of crap like LOTR raked in big bucks. It goes to show what a dumb-dumb world we are living in.

* * * * *

With one movie, Boorman conveyed more ideas and poetry than all the STAR WARS movies combined. Boorman also made a fascinating sci-fi film with ZARDOZ, one of the most relevant films given what is happening in the world.

Boorman presented Big Ideas with poetics, romance, grandeur. And he took inspiration not only from Arthurian legends but from Germanic mythology, especially as revitalized by Wagner. And the relationship between Merlin and Arthur is among the richest on screen.

Merlin is an ambiguous character. Always anxious because he sees MORE. So, if humans are rejoicing over some victory and celebrating like it’s the End of History and their side won, Merlin foresees dangers ahead and knows that all glories are fleeting. Even at the worst of times, he sees glimmers of hope. Even at best of times, he sees disasters looming up ahead. He is like a less amoral Indrid Cold in MOTHMAN PROPHECIES. His vision is from a higher plane. He can look further over the horizon. Thus, he’s never content with apparent stability in the here-and-now. He’s always worried because to know more is to be aware that everything is fleeting, no matter how 'permanent' it may appear for the time being.

But there’s also a detached & aloof quality about him. Despite his involvement with humans, he is not of any particular world. And he’s seen it all — the cycles of rise and fall — before in other worlds. And there are other worlds after THIS ONE. This detachment is an advantage but also a sadness. Because he isn’t attached to a single time and place, he can continue in other worlds even if the current world falls into ruin. But because he isn’t loyal to a single realm, he doesn’t really belong to any one or any people. He's like a professor, not unlike Kingsfield in THE PAPER CHASE, who can't feel lasting attachment to any one class or student.

In the end, he is a wanderer, a stranger to all. Ben Kenobi and Yoda are supposed to be like Merlin figures in STAR WARS, but Kenobi is too goody-goody, and Yoda is a muppet.

Merlin tried to help Uther, but it proved hopeless because Uther was too impulsive and primal. He couldn’t control his anger, his lust. As Merlin says, Uther couldn’t look into the hearts of other men. Everything was about himself and his immediate desires. He risked everything for a romp with Igraine because he couldn't control his lust. Because he fails to look into the hearts of other men, he alienates them and makes too many enemies and falls in the end.
But the great irony is Arthur is created by Uther’s most foolhardly deed, the sexual conquest of Igraine. Merlin realizes that his failure with Uther was part of the ‘plan’ because the failure fertilized the success(if limited) with Arthur.

Arthur is smarter and more sensible than Uther. Arthur is cautious, like Michael Corleone in contrast to hotheaded Sonny Corleone. And with the aid of Merlin, he learns to look into the hearts of others. He has empathy, he has understanding. He not only battles the knights who oppose his kingship but reaches out to them in understanding. Ultimately, he wins over Euryens not by force of arms but display of virtue.

He is also capable of self-criticism. When the sword breaks in his duel with Lancelot, he confesses that his pride broke it. He was supposed to use Excalibur to unite all men, but he used it for personal vanity and vendetta. This wisdom is an advantage, and the Lady of the Lake forgives him and restores Excalibur.


But the world of EXCALIBUR Is fraught with contradictions and paradoxes. It’s like Merlin says everything has its opposites. Also, the opposite of something may actually be nearest to it or hiding within it.
It’s like Michael remembering his father’s advice in THE GODFATHER PART 2: Keep your friends close but your enemies closer. In EXCALIBUR, Arthur asks where evil is, and Merlin says it is always where you least expect it. Evil isn’t necessarily OUT THERE SOMEWHERE but just around the corner, in your own domain, right behind you, or even right in front of you. It’s like the biggest enemy of the white race is not Russia, China, or Iran, some foreign nations far away. It is the PC virus within the very core of the West. An external enemy can be fought with sword or gun. But the evil virus can be within you.


Just as evil could be right in front of you or within you without you noticing, so can the truth & redemption. The biggest truth could be invisible because it’s hidden within one’s soul or standing right in front, thus out of focus. After all, the knights who went on the quest for the Holy Grail were misguided in thinking it was out there somewhere. Perceval discovers that the truth is actually within his own soul, indeed it’s always been there. He just forgot it, as did Arthur.
Again, it's like the scene in RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY where the dying hero tells his partner that there was good within him all along: he just forgot it, that’s all. (Given the out-of-control sexual politics among youth today, RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY offers some sobering lessons about impulsive behavior among the youth, but also how excessive puritanism — like with Elsa’s father — can make things worse.) The ‘holy grail’ was within Arthur himself. He just forgot what Merlin had taught him.

And yet, there is a paradox to Arthur’s decline. It was precisely because he was wise and could read the hearts of other men. Everything has its opposites. The source of wisdom and duty could also lead to weakness and doubt. When he discovers that Lancelot, his best friend, had betrayed him(by taking Guinevere), he wants to kill Lancelot and his wife. But he can’t make himself do it because he has too much empathy. He can look into the hearts of Lancelot & Guinevere. Despite his rage, he is also understanding. So, he hesitates and finds it impossible to kill his friend and wife. His wisdom makes him understand more but also renders him ‘weak’ and lacking in resolve to carry out the execution.

But there is the tragedy. He surrenders Excalibur, the greatest gift bestowed to him by Merlin and Lady of the Lake. In doing so, he abandons his role as king. A king is supposed to serve something bigger than his ego and self. Whatever his personal foibles, he is supposed to rise higher and rule for the good of the people. But Arthur, so depressed over the Lancelot/Guinevere affair, withdraws into self-pity and becomes despondent like Scottie in VERTIGO. He just tunes out and drops out. If he were a private individual, it wouldn’t have mattered to others. But as leader, he has a kingdom to rule and must never renege on his duty and responsibility. Whatever his personal setback, he must rise higher and rule for the good of all. But he just surrenders Excalibur and walks away to hide from the world. And the moment when he drives Excalibur into the ground proves most vulnerable for Merlin who feels the blade strike into his back. His gift to Arthur has been abandoned, Arthur has violated his covenant with the sword, and there is disturbance in the Dragon. It is in that moment of confusion and distress that Morgana gains control of Merlin’s dazed wits and uses his magic against him.


* * * * *

The mythic themes of EXCALIBUR, much like those found in Greek mythology, give us a clue as to why the West broke through the 'sound barrier' of progress in ways that never occurred to non-Western cultures. It wasn't just about rise of reason and science but the heroic individual will to strive further and reach higher. It was the visionary audacity to steal fire from the gods.

PC accuses white people of having stolen from other peoples. But man-stealing-from-man has been the rule of history just like animal-stealing-from-animal is the rule of nature. Clans stole from clans, tribes stole from tribes, kingdoms stole from kingdoms, and empires stole from empires. Whether it was the Zulus, Mongols, Huns, or the Vikings, the story of mankind has been stealing from other peoples, just like wolves and hyenas steal from other animals. So, if whites had done only like the other races and only stolen from others, they couldn't have broken through the 'sound barrier' of history.

So, what set the white race apart from others? What did white individuals do that other races failed to do?

They stole the secrets of the gods in Promethean manner & unlocked the mysteries of the universe.
Whites unlocked the secrets of micro-organisms and how diseases happen.
Whites gazed into distant space and discovered galaxies and black holes.
Whites discovered the mechanism of atoms and harnessed nuclear energy.
Whites solved the secret of flight and gained mastery of the sky.
Whites cracked the secret codes of higher morality and envisioned a world of order & liberty.

So, white people stole the secrets, ideas, and values that had once belonged only to the gods. Whites stole the keys to unlock countless mysteries that had baffled, mystified, or frightened the rest of humanity.
And by unlocking the secrets known only to the gods, white people attained and then spread the higher & deeper truth to all of mankind. If not for whites, would any race be flying through the skies or probing the secrets of viruses?

That is Power. It began when Prometheus stole fire from the gods.
The real secret of white power is not that whites stole from non-whites. Whites ‘stole’ only crude rudiments like land and labor from non-whites. Every people stole such from other peoples since the beginning of time.

What set whites apart from other races is that they, in the spirit of individuality and heroism, mastered the art of picking the locks of the gods & the cosmos and walked away with priceless treasures of knowledge.
You can steal land from red savages and labor from black savages. It takes no genius to conquer territory or enslave others. All peoples could do that and did that.

But the art of navigation, art of medicine, art of flight, and the art of nuclear power can be stolen only from the gods. And only individuals of vision, dream, or genius could pull it off. After all, like William F. Buckley said, "You cannot paint the Mona Lisa by assigning one dab each to a thousand painters."

Other peoples merely feared or served the gods. Only whites dared to access the vault of the gods holding the secrets of everything from the smallest atoms to the biggest stars.

That is the true source of white power. White stole everything… from the gods.

A Response to David Yorkshire’s Review of ZARDOZ by John Boorman

ZARDOZ: Natural Order against the Left by David Yorkshire: https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/04/zardoz-natural-order-against-the-left/

"John Boorman's films are implicitly white, as they address themes that pertain to people of White European descent, whether historical, philosophical or mythical."

Not necessarily. Boorman made HELL IN THE PACIFIC that is about cooperation between Japanese soldier and American soldier. He also made EMERALD FOREST that romanticizes the jungle natives of the Amazon as living in unity with nature. If anything, that movie is most damning of incursions of white civilization into the natural order. Boorman made a movie about Burma in BEYOND RANGOON. He also made a movie where a white woman romances a black man. So, he's not this explicitly pro-white director you make him out to be... even though his themes and treatment would be politically incorrect for many today.

"for the film is a biting satire directed at creamy bourgeois Leftists."

The Order in ZARDOZ is highly conservative, exclusive, and hierarchical. It has a clear division between civilization and barbarism. It was established on a shining ideal of eternity and wisdom, but all that power and privilege has created a society of dogmatism, consensus, asexuality, and/or jaded apathy. The people of the Order have had it so good that they can't value what they have.
Also, they fail to understand the true danger posed by the barbarians because their Order has been impenetrable and impermeable as far as they can remember. They have no reason to regard barbarians as any kind of threat.
And yet, precisely because the Order is so crystalline and immaculate in its conception and design, there is a fear of the slightest alteration or revision. It can only exist as a utopia, a perfectionist order that cannot tolerate deviance from the rule. Perfection is unnatural, therefore fragile, and must be guarded with iron resolve, like the inner mechanics of a Swiss watch. Everything must adhere to the programming.
Originally, the Order was created to expand freedom and potentiality by prolonging life into virtual eternity. But thus elevated into near-god-hood, the main priority of the Eternals came to be self-preservation, and that meant the suppression or termination of anything that threatened the basis of their exalted existence.

So, to say that the Order is just 'leftist' or 'bourgeois' misses the point. Now, it may have elements of what we might call 'leftist' by today's standards. But the Order is really about hierarchy and total exclusion. In its cult of reason and science, it be construed as 'leftist'. In the equality of men and women in the Order, it could be seen as 'leftist' too.
But then,there is no need for manliness because the Order is so secure. Also, as people are immortal, there is no need for sex and love. People are supposed to devote their energies to contemplation and leisure. But all such things have become boring without the cycles of life and without challenges to the Order.
So, it's glib to say ZARDOZ is an anti-leftist tract. It is essentially a call for reconnection with nature, the stuff of life. The World of ZARDOZ fails for the same reason the world of CAMELOT does in EXCALIBUR does. Too much success and power have led to complacency and lazy gossip and battle of egos and vanity. It is only when Arthur drinks from the Grail that he realizes he must be one with the land, with nature and the people.

Boorman isn't anti-civilization or anti-Christian(with its linear view of history), but he fears that civilization and abstract ideas can fatally sever man from nature and its cycles of birth and rebirth. Only with death and rebirth is life revitalized. Prolonging life may overcome death but could lead to boredom, enervation, and dissipation. Even decadence and degeneration. To counter decline and resignation, one may insist on the strict regimen of devotion and discipline, but this could lead to the rigid dogmatism of the Middle Ages or traditional Jewish culture that revolved around almost incestuous obsession with Ancient texts.

But more often than not, too much prosperity and security leads to a deadly combination of complacency and compassion. A carefree naivete that has forgotten the warning of 'Do not feed the animals'. Having been secure and prosperous for so long, they've come to take their well-being for granted and assume it will be painless and joyous to welcome the world with open arms. They see themselves as white jesuses taking care of lambs from around the world. They are innocent spoiled brats getting high on their own delusional virtue. They are blind to the delusion because they've had it so good for so long. They lack the experience of survival & hardship and have forgotten the lessons of their ancestors who had to struggle against great odds to secure the land and build a civilization.
And this is what has happened to Sweden. Too much ease and good life led to ZARDOZ-like conditions where overly well-fed and bored white folks welcome invasion simply because it is 'virtuous' and vibrant, the stuff of life lacking in well-ordered Sweden.

"Ostensibly, the Eternals are all at peace, free from violence and death, and forever young. Their society is democratic and imposes equality on all. (Men's) impotence has led to women becoming leaders along feminist lines in spite of the ostensible commitment to equality."

The world of Vortex is NOT democratic. It is elitist. It is equal only in the sense that Spartan Warriors were equal with one another or aristocrats are equal among themselves. But, in fact, Spartan elites lorded over the helots. And aristocrats lorded over the serfs. So, the Eternals are NOT democratic. They are equal only among themselves, an elite breed of sci-fi aristocrats.
Also, women do not rule the Vortex. Since the realm is asexual, men and women are almost the same. The women in ZARDOZ are not interested in the sisterhood or women's issues. They only identify as Vortexians.

Feminism is about women forming a sisterhood against the men. There is no such politics in ZARDOZ. Rather, female aristos in ZARDOZ work with male aristos to maintain the exclusive hierarchical order. They are more like princesses working with princes against the serfs. They are not about the Sisterhood.

"'Penic erection is one of the many unsolved evolutionary mysteries surrounding sexuality.'... The speech is a look at sexuality straight out of 1970s feminist pamphlets, with the only difference being a smugness in victory, dressed up as concern for the wellbeing of both women and men."

Actually, Boorman's point goes deeper than a critique of feminism. Boorman senses in higher spirituality, Christianity especially, the denial and repression of natural sexual drives. This goes back to the Old Testament. In Eden, Adam and Eve were nearly equal. But there was the Original Sin, and man and woman had to struggle in the world of Nature that was seen as FALLEN. And the divide between man and woman grew wide after the Fall.
In Eden, it had been peace and harmony for Adam and Eve. God provided everything. Adam didn't have to be a hunter-warrior. Eve didn't have to do women's chores. But after the Fall, Adam had to be tough and manly to hunt and procure food. And with all creatures at war with each other, Adam had to defend himself and Eve from other animals. And Eve had to be womanly and do women's things.

Christianity offered a Way out of such Fallen State. Men and women would deny the pleasures and fears of the flesh and redeem their souls to enter Heaven to be with God for all eternity. Thus, Christianity is anti-nature. It sees nature as fallen and sinful. It views human nature as a baggage of vices: lust, gluttony, greed, vanity, etc.
In EXCALIBUR, Merlin mourns that One God comes to drive out the many. Paganism is fading and nature grows silent.

Another danger is an Order becomes obsessed with more order. And this was true of Victorian England where sex was taboo as a subject. Also, the rise of effeminate style among men long predated feminism. It began within the aristocracy itself. Initially, aristocrats were warriors, tough and hardy. But as they accrued so much wealth and privilege, they got fanciful and had homos devise feathers, dress, jewelry, and etc. for them. Look at Tim Roth's character in ROB ROY. French aristocrats wore fancy wigs, used perfume, and powdered their faces.

As for feminism, it's a confused self-defeating ideology. There has been a strain of feminism that was anti-sex. But there was also another strain that emphasized little more than sex. Today's feminists are confused. They go on and on about "Don't grab my pussy" but they publicize their pussies for all too see. PUSSY-ism is new feminism. They are into slut pride and damsel-in-distress both. Also, feminists demand total happiness for women. But happiness for women comes from sexually surrendering to big tough alpha males. So, even as feminists castrate men, they also demand men with mega-dongs to hump them. As a result, we have the funny spectacle of white women castrating white men but burning with jungle fever for black mandingos who act like shameless savages. This is why feminism is self-defeating. The women in ZARDOZ are not like this. They are neo-victorian in their total denial of sexuality.

"Yet this has created anything but an idyll, with particularly the men wishing for death, as Arthur Freyn, acting as the chorus to a theatrical play, states he longs for at the beginning of the film. This introduction, however, is one of the unsatisfactory elements of the film, as it rather gives the game away, Freyn himself exposing that the film is a morality play, who he is and what the film is about. It is unnecessary and an insult to the viewer's intelligence."

No, most men don't wish for death in the Vortex. They are perfectly happy. Frayn and Friend are rare exceptions who secretly conspire against the system. But then, May the female also ends up helping Zed because a part of her also feels that the system is fatally flawed in some ways. She kept Zed alive because a part of her sympathized with him, longed for him. (Later, it becomes apparent that all the Eternals have a hidden death wish as they come to welcome the deliverance of death. But not having experienced violence for eons, they panic and run when the horror ensues. They thought it would be fun, liberating,and innocuous. It is actually brutal and ugly.)

Frayn's intro doesn't make ZARDOZ a morality play but a philosophical theorem. Frayn is not preachy or judgmental. He's a magician, a trickster, an artist. He wants to have fun toying with people. He wants to play god as puppeteer. He is the Merlin-like figure... though with only the semblance of wisdom. He'd been given the job of using the Stone godhead to fool the barbarian dummies. He had a great run messing with the yokels, and he later decides to pull a stunt on Eternals themselves.

He is not primarily motivated by morality but by creativity and artistry. The whole experiment is like a philosophical parlor game for him, and he cooks up a scheme with Friend(who is more serious). He has no idea how things will really turn out. Indeed, he dies brutally like the rest. His experiment finally engulfs him in the horror as well. The master puppeteer, the man-who-would-be-god, is reduced to a pig-for-the-slaughter for the butchers. Frayn is rendered as helpless as Ned Beatty in DELIVERANCE.
If the Eternals, in their eons of seclusion, lost all sense of horror, the Exterminators have practiced nothing but horror. It's like hungry wolves set free in a pasture of sheep.
It's like today's helpless Swedes and Germans as deer-in-the-headlights prey to the brutalized arrivals from Africa and the Muslim world.

Even though Frayn takes after Merlin, the difference is Merlin understood the nature of tragedy. He knew what it is like for an Order to fall. So, against all odds, he tried to help Uther and Arthur maintain the order from chaos. When Uther proves to be hopeless, Merlin bio-engineers a super-baby in the figure of Arthur. Frayn similarly engineers a superior figure in Zed, who has the warrior vitality of Exterminators and the intellect of the Eternals.

Even so, Frayn is like a child compared to the wise Merlin. Frayn has no idea of what it would be like for the Vortex to fall to barbarism. It's all just a game that he accelerates... until it finally happens, and then, panic-stricken & speechless, he is slashed with a sword while shitting bricks.

In a sick and dark way, one can argue that the Current Left is like the Friend-Frayn Nexus in their Afro-mania.
Even though the 'Left' pretends to believe that 'race is a social construct', they really feel that white race is deficient, inferior, and missing something. Consider the rise of Rock n Roll(and the fascination with blues), especially in once rigidly ordered and finely mannered England. It was as if whites with frozen souls were thawed, warmed, and heated by the burning souls of blacks. And overly rigid and hierarchical British Society was made looser and freer by black influence in music, style, and attitude. And this is why whites became so Afromaniacal. White boys turned cuckish in their worship of Negro athletes and badass warrior-thugs. And white women got jungle fever from watching all those big-donged black athletes beating up weaker and slower whites. But we know from Africa and Detroit that blackness = savagery and disorder.

In contrast, a people like the Japanese can create and maintain order. But white people are not excited by Japanese who come across as physically shrunken, weak-voiced, servile, lackluster, conformist, and timid. White people are excited by blacks with booming voices, bulging muscles, and dongs-and-butts. GET OUT is about whites wanting to be in black skin.

Japanese can build and maintain a modern society whereas blacks can't.
But blacks can make music and do athletics that excite whites... something that Japanese can't do. Japanese have higher IQ but blacks have more Iconic value or ICQ or iconic quotient.

So, the resolution at the end of ZARDOZ is now the template for leftist engineering via race-mixing. The bloodbath at the end of the movie makes us reject both the Vortex and the barbarism. Vortex was an elitist order divorced from nature, but the barbarism of raw nature is stupefyingly ugly.

So, what is the new hope? Zed and Consuela mate and create new humanity. Zed is a blend of natural barbarism and knowledge. And Consuela is a woman of knowledge who has regained her natural self.
In today's UK, this unity is seen as mixing of the black male as the ideal icon of manhood and the white female as the ideal icon of female beauty. The blending of tough black manhood and beautiful white womanhood is supposed to create a new superior race that finds the balance of nature and civilization.
And that was the appeal of Obama, the blend of black intuition and white intellect. He represented the ideal interracist template favored by the so-called Left. This 'Left' is race-ist in its own way but loathe to admit it. It doesn't see all races as equal or valuable. Rather, its ideal vision is the blending of blackness and whiteness. Blackness represents virility, rhythm, musicality, athleticism, and prowess. Whiteness represents reason, intellect, control, and organization. In ZARDOZ, Frayn created Zed as a kind of 'interracist' hybrid of Exterminators and Eternals. Zed has the body and toughness of the Exterminators but the mind and knowledge of the Eternals. In a similar vein, the current Left prizes the mulatto higher than both blacks and whites as he or she is supposed to represent the unity of black prowess and white proficiency.

It's pretty crazy, but today's LEFT is actually closer to Frayn-Friend's plot to bring down the Order and to create a new order formed by fusion of Afro-vitality and Euro-ability. They feel that this will result from the Negro penis and white vagina. In a way, Frayn is like a George-Soros-like figure who pushes Open Borders to bring down the ossified elite order. He is like the Loki character in German mythology who plays both sides -- gods and giants -- and finally helps breach the barrier that stands between the god realm and the world of giants.

Now, this isn't to say John Boorman had such in mind, or that he wanted Europe to be invaded by masses of Africans. But the satire of ZARDOZ goes far deeper than easy jabs at Leftism. It is about the problem of civilization itself. It is a timeless dilemma. We all want to create and be part of a Shining Order. But every Order, in order to perpetuate itself indefinitely, prolongs itself to the point of violating the cyclical way of nature and man. Thus, the order survives but loses in vitality.
And yet, the condition of man is always between Scylla and Charybdis. An order that lasts too long grows either apathetic or dogmatic. But then, the cyclical way is no circus. The stage of fall, even if necessary, is horrible and traumatic. We can't escape the tragedy of existence even if we wanted to.