Who is the message intended for?
0 comment Sunday, August 24, 2014 |
I know some of you are staunch proponents of the 'kill your TV' doctrine, but over the Christmas season, it's hard not to tune into at least some of the classic Christmas programming. And unsurprisingly, the propagandistic advertising assails your senses when you watch TV for more than a few moments. It seems that every commercial has to have some racial/ethnic propaganda, often coupled with feminist messages, all of which are delivered with the subtlety of a sledgehammer.
Either the multicult is so overconfident that they no longer try to hide the agenda, or they are getting desperate and hoping to bludgeon us into submission as speedily as possible. I am not sure which it is; maybe both.
Just one example: a Big Lots commercial advertising Christmas sales, in which two couples are seen riding in a sleigh in a snowy landscape, dressed in rather cartoonish Victorian clothing. One of the males is black. To me this whole scenario is bizarre and unlikely in the extreme. Are we to believe that there were such improbable social arrangements back in Victorian times? Apparently so. But it's absurd, and it's hard not to feel one's intelligence insulted by these surreal scenes.
I suppose we have to suspend disbelief, because the advertisers are showing us not reality, or even a simulated reality, but their alternate view of the world -- as they think it should be. The world depicted in commercials is an alternate, politically-corrected, multicultural babel in which people are randomly mixed together in unlikely combinations. That's the prescribed order of things, the world as the multicult wishes it to be, plans for it to be, and strives to force it to become.
I used to think, as most people think automatically, that these ads with their mix 'n match groupings of people, were meant to make the nonwhite races feel accepted and to gain their goodwill and their business. Advertisers, we are led to believe, just care about the bottom line, and everybody's money is green. So 'green' is the only color advertisers see; they just want everybody's dollars.
There may be that aspect to it, but it seems the primary purpose now is to ensure that White people get accustomed to the idea that this is not a White-majority country anymore -- even though it is, numerically speaking. But it will soon be a country with a majority nonwhite population if the busy elites have their way. They are working night and day to change the makeup and the character and the face of this country, and the commercials are one way of subliminally telling us that this ain't your daddy's America anymore, and that we must accept that inevitability. Not only must we accept it, we must celebrate it, welcome it, weep with joy over it (as when Obama was elected). We must submit. Resistance is futile.
I've noticed, as I know others have too, that the cable news channels have increased their percentages of nonwhite 'anchors' and presenters and reporters and pundits. CNN is the most obviously nonwhite channel, which has actually been going on for some years, as the channel considers itself a world news channel, not an American one. Fox News is also following suit with more black personalities.
The Weather Channel must comb the country for 'diverse' meteorologists -- or are all those diverse faces real weather scientists?
Even the Food Network, which is one of the last refuges from politically correct programming, has become more ''diverse'' (read: more black) with at least two new shows featuring blacks and ostensibly 'black' cuisine.
The channels which supposedly specialize in documentary-style programming (like the History channels and the National Geographic channels, etc.) are also riddled with political correctness.
The shopping channels have their share of black presenters and models, but so far the PC message has not been successfully worked into the sales pitches -- unless you count things like their pushing the 'Obama coins' and commemorative plates. Who is behind this phenomenon, I wonder? Who writes the copy for these ads -- things like:
"His confident smile and kind eyes are an inspiration to us all." Or this line: " this will be a family heirloom."
I've been wondering if he himself is making a profit on these things though many of the irate pro-Obama commenters on Politico.com fiercely deny that he is making money from the merchandise.
But does he not have the right to control the use of his image, and to license products using it? There have been many celebrities who have sued those who used their image without permission on items like this.
But in any case the coins aren't legal tender, per Politico.com :
''Now, the real U.S. Mint has issued an advisory about the coins, warning consumers that the coins aren't official government tender, but merely plastic coating on real dollar coins.
Says the Mint:
These advertisements feature genuine United States coins that the private commercial businesses have altered by affixing a colorized image to the coin. Additionally, some businesses have treated the coins by gold-plating them.
These items are not official United States Mint products. Furthermore, these products, businesses, and advertisements are not approved, endorsed, sponsored, or authorized by the United States Mint, the Department of the Treasury, or the United States Government.
The United States Mint does not encourage, endorse, or sponsor products that alter the fundamental images depicted on its coins.'
How fitting: the coins are bogus, just as most of the multicultural ideology which propelled the Obama to the presidency.
I'm convinced that the "historic" election of Obama is the end result, direct or indirect, of the decades-long multicultural, anti-White advertising and indoctrination which the mainstream media specializes in. Decades of images of blacks as wise, superior people as contrasted to inept, feckless White males have had their desired effect.
The fact that so many people's views today are 180 degrees away from those of their parents and grandparents is proof of how effective this re-education effort has been.
And it isn't just here in the United States; I've heard similar complaints from people in all Western countries; it's going on everywhere. There seems to be a stepping-up of the effort to eliminate all dissenting viewpoints, and any remaining vestiges of traditional ideas and practices. And the underlying message being displayed is: 'surrender, Dorothy.' The change to the 'new order' is inevitable and it's for the best. Give up and give in.
The blatantly propagandistic commercials and the forced 'diversity' in the news media as well as the 'entertainment' media, is aimed only secondarily at the 13% or so of blacks or the 15% Hispanic viewers. It's aimed first and foremost at you and me, to inure us to the fact that we are being displaced, dispossessed, demoted, and basically written out of the script. And it's working, for most people, who seem resigned and even quite content to be second-class or third-class citizens in the land their ancestors created and fought for.
Getting people to disengage from the media and from the whole consumer culture would seem essential, but it seems that few are willing to do so until or unless they become aware of the obvious agenda, and begin to realize that the media are hostile to us, and toxic for us and for our national immune system. I know when I became more awake and aware, my radar for the media hazards became much more acute, and my tolerance level for the propaganda dropped. I sincerely hope the media and the whorish advertising industry will overplay their hand even more, and alienate people on a widespread scale. I believe that the educational system (falsely so-called) and the 'mass media' are the biggest pollutants of our minds right now.
We live in an age in which people worry more about minor environmental pollutants than about the real dangers, the mental and spiritual pollution to which we are being subjected.

Labels: , , , , , ,