BadEagle.com Header Image

 

Bad Eagle Journal

The Blue People: AVATAR Race Fantasy

by David Yeagley · January 19, 2010 · 44 Comments ·

James Cameron’s movie sensation, AVATAR, is about race, obviously. In a classic venue of white man versus nature, the white man is made the traditional enemy of the environment and its more natural, morally superior habitants–persons of color. This is such a basic, anti-white fantasy, one has to wonder at the implications of the movie’s success. Are there that many non-whites in America, or, Are there that many guilt-mongering whites in America? Perhaps it is a combination of both audiences. Combine that ‘liberal’ moral appeal with the compulsive lure of computerized, extravagant “photo-shop” creativity, and the stepped-up 1960 “Thirteen Ghosts” movie glasses, and you have an irresistible movie, the third most successful in history, in fact, and still climbing.

But now, what about the “persons of color” bit? If the white man is the enemy, which non-white race gets to be the hero? Ah, here we have the real crux of the matter. Who will the white man–the movie makers–select as the star of the show? Whom does the great evil white man regard as the supreme race of color?

What color is the person of color? Obviously, the movie selects the American Indian as the “character,” but, the white man cannot bring himself to declare the colored winner. The white man must somehow hide specifics in a mesh, a haze–a blue haze, a heavenly blue haze. This way, the competition is avoided. And the pitiable Negro is blended in to share the honor of the Indian, as are the other colored people. This is really more about hiding the Negro. There is no single hero now. All persons of color are the same. All are included in the general image of the American Indian. This is the trick, and one being played nicely by the George Soros’ funded documentary division of Robert Redford’s Sundance Institute. The thrust of mixing all non-whites into one color has been a fantasy of white liberals for a long time. It’s just now becoming obvious and undeniable to the public. All races of the world that are not white are graciously included under the general auspices of the “Native American.”

Not a position ever conceived of or desired by American Indians, such a fantasy racial mix, in the beautiful, heavenly color of blue, does give the liberal white racist the ingenious and luxurious opportunity to not only hide the unwanted black man, and all other races, but honor them all with the status of the American Indian–symbol of the American White Anglo-Saxon Protestant’s “chief” racial encounter, so to speak, the one he had to fight–the Red Man.

Interestingly, even those who have objected to the film have not noted this deeper issue of white racism toward other races. Veterans have protested the role in which they are cast in AVATAR; Chicago Alderman James Balcer thinks the movie is anti-military and anti-American. (Shannon Bell has a great blog on this.) This is all perfectly legitimate, but, the critics fail to see the true objection to the movie–its racism of white liberals who want all persons of color to be equal to the same “blue” race.

But, even in their juxtaposition of the “lunatic” white race, the liberals are still unwilling to consider the white race a race at all. This is the profound blind spot in white thinking, certainly liberal white thinking. White people are not willing to consider themselves a race. “Race” pertains to all other people, all people of color. (The minute a white man considers “white” a “racist,” he is suddenly a white racist! And that’s the evilist of all evils! So say the liberals and their attorneys.)

Indeed, “minority” refers to people of color. Even though dooms day liberal whites are happily predicting that somehere in the near future the white people will be in the “minority,” they still do not consider themselves a “race,” or a minority–in the racial sense. They are simply above race. They are not race. Whites are the un-race. Race and minority pertain only to us darkies of the world. This is most interesting.

American Indians, perhaps by proxy, in the WASP history of America, are the chosen “race,” to represent all other races. AVATAR of course is delighted to blend the Negro into the “blue” Indian race, using Wes Studi (Cherokee) as a chief and Zoe Saldana (Negress) and Laz Alonzo (Negro) as blue “natives.” But no one is ever willing to object to this kind of association.

No one but BadEagle.com.

We have questioned from the beginning this compulsion of the liberal whites, and even conservative whites, to beggingly, insistantly associate the Negro with the Indian. What is solved, in the white psyche, by blending the two, politically, legally, and now, technologically? What does the white man gain by this manoeuver? It is about psychological convenience? Is it some natural management in the mind? Some grand mal of Gestalt psychology?

If I may say, American Indians with any pride left hotly object to being considered the same as other races. Liberal “equality” is a ploy to demean, diminish, and destroy race. No self-conscious Indian will ever accept such nonsense. Our fathers died that we might be who we are. Only truly liberalized, “dumb” Indians would ever give it away. Protesting the Washington Redskins is giving it away. How so? It’s behaving like the American black has been taught to behave (by white liberals). It is imitating social tactics designed for black people.

Finally, the Vatican didn’t like AVATAR, either, but for a different reason. The fathers fear that man is too apt to worship nature. Of course, the European catholic tradition has always been about bringing nature under the service of man. So, does that mean the Pope doesn’t like American Indians? The Indian is America’s closest link to the land, supplying the one thing the white man here will never, ever have–the sense of natural home. The white man therefore ever aggrandizes the American Indian in the collective white American conscious. I doubt the Pope could ever undo that structure. However, there may need to be some clarification on just what “nature” we’re talking about here.

As a Comanche, I haven’t inherited a “mother earth” psyche. There are tribes to present this as their mantra, but, I don’t think the “mother” bit is in their linguistic regard for the earth. This needs to be carefully researched. I am not convinced that “mother earth” is an authentic, universal aspect of American Indian religion. At all. In this sense, AVATAR is not only racially denigrating to American Indians, but also a serious misrepresentation of Indian religion. It is a misinterpretation of a generalization, and as such, is prejudicial.

Nevertheless, AVATAR is a great example of the enduring psychology of race, religion, and politics. The stereotypes are a reliable constant, and the lessons, still unlearned, are compounded by the daring, explicit destruction of “race.” That is, if you are a non-white “minority.” You’re a blue, now. Doesn’t that make everyone happy? It means the Negroes aren’t black, and the white conscience is altogether soothed, while whites are still white, if “bad.”

Posted by David Yeagley · January 19, 2010 · 3:32 pm CT · ·

Tags: American Indians · Arts · Bad Eagle Journal · Liberalism · Negro Race · Paganism · Politics · Race · Religion · White Race




Read More Journal Posts »

44 responses so far ↓

  • 1 geronl // Jan 19, 2010 at 4:28 pm   

    Interesting. I’m pretty conservative and I do not meld blacks and Indians into one group, actually I just consider people to be people. It always seems to be other people who project their skin color as if it were them. Identifying yourself as a color is not something I have ever done.

    Great article, a couple of misspellings, But it is a blog after all.

  • 2 geronl // Jan 19, 2010 at 4:29 pm   

    Oh and as for originality I give it an F minus. Dances with Pocahontas with a bit of “Skyland” thrown in.

    Read this, its hilarious.

    Cameron’s AVATAR: the original text

  • 3 David Yeagley // Jan 19, 2010 at 4:32 pm   

    WordPress spell check on this edition became dysfunctional Sunday. I had to disconnect it. I’ll try to get a new one hooked up soon. Thanks.

    If you were Indian, you’d identify yourself as Indian, believe me. American blacks are the only group who seem anxious to identify with races other than their own.

    As I said, I don’t think whites consider themselves a race at all. Something’s not quite right in that.

  • 4 David Yeagley // Jan 19, 2010 at 4:34 pm   

    That Disney take-off is classic! Where on earth did you find it?

  • 5 Thrasymachus // Jan 19, 2010 at 6:41 pm   

    “As I said, I don’t think whites consider themselves a race at all. Something’s not quite right in that.”

    No, it’s entirely unnatural. It is a product of education. It is not spontaneous or traditional thinking. The 1950 Errol Flynn movie “Kim” was a very racially aware adaptation of the Rudyard Kipling classic novel, and the Whites were proud to be white — yet non-Whites were not treated with contempt. The perfect movie to compare on the changed attitudes of Whites on race.

    I saw a young white child on YouTube introduce himself with the word, “Well, I’m a white boy.” We are all born with a sense of community and race.

    “The Indian is America’s closest link to the land, supplying the one thing the white man here will never, ever have–the sense of natural home.”

    This is true. My ancestry is Celtic and my soul is still in Scotland and France, whence came my ancestors.

  • 6 Thrasymachus // Jan 19, 2010 at 6:46 pm   

    This article may help shed a little light on what happened to the White Man’s psyche. It is called “The Logic of Liberalism.” The author is Ian Jobling.

    The Logic of Liberalism

  • 7 johnnymac // Jan 19, 2010 at 6:58 pm   

    James Cameron, just another in a long line of self-loathing guilt-ridden, rich white liberals. *yawn*

  • 8 Thrasymachus // Jan 19, 2010 at 6:59 pm   

    Perhaps Whites these days, in a twisted kind of logic and religiosity, imagine themselves as a kind of supra-racial collective “messiah.”

    I think that Whites feel guilty for the successful civilizations they have created when compared with black Africa. This is why the Dutch immediately send out an airplane to bring black children into the Netherlands to be adopted.

    Here on youtube is a song just about that “Bring Him Here.”
    Bring Him Here

    The propaganda message: bring black African children into Europe and place them in “white” families that are really ‘raceless.’

    For Whites, it is time to get over the guilt of the Second World War and realize that God is on the Throne and the White Race need not be a “master race” that sacrifices its own existence to save the world.

  • 9 Thrasymachus // Jan 19, 2010 at 7:01 pm   

    The above “airplane” was in reference to the Haiti earthquake.

  • 10 Thrasymachus // Jan 19, 2010 at 7:18 pm   

    The current kind of self-sacrifice played out on the television stage by white elites is really very much a perverted “racism.” These people imagine themselves as ultimately heroic in their intense love for the “coloreds,” that they can proudly put on display for the world. “Look! We are laying down our racial life for the world. We are the “saviours” of the world. We are still the “master race,” for we alone have the means to save “humanity,” etc.

    The sin of Pride — the wrong kind of pride — in its most devious form to date.

  • 11 Thrasymachus // Jan 19, 2010 at 7:45 pm   

    The gist of what I’m saying is that the White Race is trying to play God — trying to be, symbolically, like Christ. The White Man is suicidal, and his suicide is a mixture of guilt and a desire to cruicfy himself to redeem the world.

    Thus, from a Christian point of view, the new ‘white racism’ is of the most ‘Satanic’ form possible. Cf. “Madonna” ‘s video “Like A Virgin.” This mockery of Christ is translating itself into racial terms, because the White Race has denied the truth of race (on the conscious level) — the truth that the White Race exists as a race. So David Yeagley is right: all other races exist, but the white race has no existence, for that would be the sin of “racism,” i.e., the recognition of the very existence of the white race itself.

  • 12 David Yeagley // Jan 19, 2010 at 10:29 pm   

    Deep thoughts there, Thras. I tend to agree. I’ve always said this was the problem. Using race as the savior. The white race is a very noble race, but, how shall the savior instinct be better directed? What should it be trying to do in the world? Should it be trying to do anything?

  • 13 ajibik // Jan 20, 2010 at 12:40 am   

    Don’t be fooled. It’s only a movie. Drop that gun and run!

  • 14 David Yeagley // Jan 20, 2010 at 9:21 am   

    Ah, but movies represent thoughts in peoples’ heads. An individual story writer operates on a socially marketable collective conscious.

    What gun? I have only a knife. But I ain’t runnin’!

  • 15 eggfarm // Jan 20, 2010 at 10:03 am   

    Very thought provoking perspective. Who is trying to play God? It is all human being’s nature to want to be in charge and those with power and money are. This existence is a battle against the principalities of evil and giving into the desires of the flesh. The race issue is a smoke screen. Whoever is controlled by the Spirit of God shall overcome.

  • 16 David Yeagley // Jan 20, 2010 at 10:45 am   

    Well, I don’t think the hierarchy bit is inherently evil. The way we plan in and out of it is indeed generally wrong, expressing the carnal nature. But, hierarchy is ordained.

    Now, the spiritual hierarchy delineated in Ephesians, for the church, is ideal. But, of value only to those who ‘buy’ into it. We still otherwise live in this world, with the incessant abuse of hierarchy.

    Did I just agree with what you said?

  • 17 eggfarm // Jan 20, 2010 at 11:43 am   

    We’re on the same page. Because mankind must control rather than be controlled we must live with the barriers he constructs. God’s love is perfect and unites those who tap into it.

  • 18 eggfarm // Jan 20, 2010 at 11:53 am   

    Submission is a good thing when done in Godly obedience regardless of one’s circumstances as in a husband/wife, employer/employee, governor/citizen, slave/master relationships as outlined in the scriptures.

  • 19 Gary DeLoriea // Jan 20, 2010 at 12:08 pm   

    As far as the article that Thrasymachus linked to. I found it informative and enjoyable. It also proves that we can disagree without being disagreeable. i also tend to agree that things like affermative action , while they may have had it’s place 20 years ago, is a bad idea that needs to be scrapped. My opinion is that the term liberal has been both hijacked by the radical left and maligned by the right I fall on the Liberal-libertarian side of the political spectrum. I hate to break it to you but i actually do consider myself a member of the white race. However to give one of my liberal view points i also believe that labor unions are ultimatly benificial to this country because i know enough history to know what life without unions was like and it wasn’t pretty.
    Gary Deloriea
    Normannii reik

  • 20 David Yeagley // Jan 20, 2010 at 12:20 pm   

    Labor unions came into being because of incredible abuse! True. Anyone that knows history knows this.

    But, sometimes, a thing can out-live its usefulness, and morph into something inimical.

  • 21 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 4:46 pm   

    “Deep thoughts there, Thras. I tend to agree. I’ve always said this was the problem. Using race as the savior. The white race is a very noble race, but, how shall the savior instinct be better directed? What should it be trying to do in the world? Should it be trying to do anything?”

    Those are profound questions: easy to give an “answer,” but tough to give a good one!

    I think that when government leaders — for ordinary people are simply trying to live their everyday lives and make ends meet — understand that God established the principle of nationhood and is opposed to one-worldism, an answer will emerge and make itself clear.

    Starting with Genesis 11:1 “And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech,” and reading the entire passage, including this: “And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. 8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. ”

    What do we find the Bible teaching?

    God is not pleased with a one-world system! God ordained nationhood. God separated people into nations.

    Yet modern liberalism essentially denies nationalism in any form and seeks to erase all borders and racial boundaries.

    In my opinion, the White nations should be peaceably building and strengthening their own societies within their own traditional homelands and should never dare to exploit non-Whites in any way or for any reason.

    As White nations prosper, it is acceptable to be of service (in the spirit of true humility and in awareness of the principle of righteous nationalism) to others who desire guidance or assistance, but basically the policy should be one of non-interference in the affairs of others.

    The principle of righteous natialism means that we do not go abroad to import the people into our homelands and settle them among us, nor do we force our culture and values on them. The belief that we must share our homelands and our genes with aliens is an attitude of superiority, as it implies that the others are just not good enough to make it on their own.

    White Liberal Elites really don’t like Blacks — they’re trying to remake them into something “useful” to the liberal agenda. I still suspect that “the love of money” — the insatiable desire for material wealth and power — is the root of this evil we call the “race problem.”

    When we understand that the Creator has made different nations and peoples because He wants us to be such, then we naturally can respect our differences in a healthy and helpful way, without oppression or exploitation or cruelty.

    When you truly love and another people, you certainly do not desire to remake them in your own image! And when you desire to remake your own people into the image of another, then you do not love your own people — you most likely even despise them, though perhaps unconsciously.

  • 22 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 4:50 pm   

    The sentence was to be “When you truly love and respect or admire another people, . . .”

  • 23 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 5:01 pm   

    The idea of “Mother Earth” is perhaps not exclusively Western.

    Sinologist Richard Wilhelm writes:

    “Ancient Chinese theism taught that there was a god in Heaven on whom the world depended absolutely, and who rewarded good men and punished the evil. This god has human consciousness. He allowed the elect saints, like King Wen, to be his entourage. He was capable of getting angry and meting out punishment if men were evil; but ultimately he would always forgive them and have mercy on them, if their priest and representative, the son of Heaven, purified himself in the right way and approached him with sacrificial offerings. The Earth as mother was partner to this father in Heaven. There were also — though they did not impinge on the monotheistic foundation — an abundance of natural and ancestral spirits who were dependent on Heaven, but nevertheless had their own specific tasks, rather like public officials under a king.”

  • 24 David Yeagley // Jan 20, 2010 at 5:57 pm   

    Thras, your idea would have been possible, except for the aggressions of Communism. That’s what drew us into the world arena. They would have made every nation against the United States.

  • 25 David Yeagley // Jan 20, 2010 at 5:59 pm   

    No one said Mother Earth was Western. I said I wasn’t convinced that it was so clearly an American Indian thing–which liberals have certainly determined it is.

  • 26 Ranbaxy // Jan 20, 2010 at 6:54 pm   

    Avatar is itself a form of imperialism, forced on the world to create a “Pax Cinematica” by the American film empire at the expense of “indigenous” filmmakers.” I particularly found it “wondy” and such a special teaching moment for the young of the world when two precious, special natives engaged in tasteful sex under a special tree that bears a close resemblance to a bachelor-pad fiber-optic lamp.”

    Before I saw the move Avatar, Oh! how I regret not having read the Indian’s Leonardo Da Vinci’s archetypal, Gestalt shtick. Had I done so, the made for the sci-fi channel movie staring blue natives that all look like Woody Harrelson, would have made so much more sense.

    Avatar” isn’t about actors or characters or even about story; it’s about special effects, which is fine for children and those that think like children. But for a movie that stresses how important it is for us to stay connected with nature, to keep our ponytails plugged into the life force, “Avatar” is peculiarly disjointed, silly and without much originality. But I’m sure little girls and boys will send it over the top, since they will pay to see it three or four times, just as they did “Titanic.”

  • 27 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:27 pm   

    I was not aware that liberals were attributing the Mother Earth concept to American Indians. That’s certainly interesting. I suppose that liberals are trying to suggest and imply that Whites are a race that is uniquely disrespectful of and harmful to the very planet and the natural environment.

    I once tended to think that the concept was more or less a universal archetype, as Gaea, or Mother Earth, certainly was part of Western thought in early Greece.

    Mythology: Gaea

    What came as a revelation to me was that the Far East had so analogous a concept!

  • 28 keyboard jockey // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:56 pm   

    Dr Yeagley stated: As I said, I don’t think whites consider themselves a race at all. Something’s not quite right in that.

    Senator James Webb mentions just how many different white races there are in his book “Born Fighting How the Scot Irish Shaped America” I think he counted 16 or 17 different white races that came into America. He sites Albion’s Seed Four British Folkways in America an excellent book.

    As I have mentioned before, growing up, I was aware of WASP culture. I instinctively knew I wasn’t a WASP.

    What is Cameron’s ethnicity? His political ideology is obviously deep liberal blue ;)

    Albions Seed: Four British Folkways

  • 29 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:57 pm   

    Dr. Yeagley,

    Do you know of a web-page where liberals make could “enlighten” readers on the subject of the relation between the American Indian and Mother Earth?

    In any event, I humbly confess that I know next to nothing about what the American Indian’s beliefs and religion were like at the time the Pilgrims arrived with their religion. I have heard of the “Great Spirit,” but I really don’t know much about it.

    When I think of the Pilgrims, I find it surprising that they even made the journey, in a way. I mean, their quest was for religious freedom, but how could they possibly know what conditions of life would obtain in the “New World”? I really call that a “leap of faith.”

    My understanding is that the Puritans first thought of (actually made the effort for) relocating in the Netherlands, where their Calvinism would certainly be tolerated. But they soon left that country because their children were being too assimilated into Dutch society and were losing their English identity! (So I have been told.)

  • 30 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:59 pm   

    It should be known that the Dutch are probably just as much related to the English as they are to the Germans. In fact, in very ancient times, Dutch and English were the same language.

  • 31 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 8:03 pm   

    The very fact that Europeans have been at each other’s throats over religious doctrines has always amazed me. It really is part of the “racial picture,” in that European missionaries probably felt more successful at converting other peoples to their particular brand of Christianity than in simply understanding and tolerating the particular beliefs of other European Christians!

  • 32 keyboard jockey // Jan 20, 2010 at 8:18 pm   

    Dr Yeagley Stated:

    No one said Mother Earth was Western. I said I wasn’t convinced that it was so clearly an American Indian thing–which liberals have certainly determined it is.

    Note, Cameron is a child of the 60s and 70s just like the rest of the Progressives. Leftover hippie radicals aka The New Left. I seem to remember that Hippies liked to wear headbands ect – imitating American Indians dress, well they thought they were imitating American Indian dress, this was back in the 60s and 70s.

    This is an excerpt from an interview of Cameron about Avatar.

    Well it’s been a big influence in my life in general, you know, being a child in the 60s, and sort of coming to that point in the development of your cognitive processes, as a teenager in the late 60′s, early 70s – which was the birth of the environmental movement, and its always been a big deal to me – even though I haven’t been an activist until more recently. And then with my relationship with the ocean and seeing the devastation of the coral reefs and by all kinds of human activity.

    Cameron Sees AVATAR as Environmental Warning

    Ayn Rand wrote a book about the New Left “Return of the Primitive The Anti Industrialist”

    Cameron fits the Progressive aka New Left radical mold, that came out of the 60s and 70s. I have little doubt he supports cap and trade, and GREEN jobs, oh and he probably believes in Man Made Global Warming.

    Why the Blue color? Well he is a Democrat their political party uses the color blue “Blue State” of course they would be the good people LOL!

    If you are a Republican you are from a Red State so there is no way the people could have been Red, and been the Good Guys.

    I didn’t realize Cameron was so simple. Shows how great America is, and how anyone can prosper, look how much money he has made.

  • 33 David Yeagley // Jan 20, 2010 at 9:01 pm   

    I think Thras had the point on that: self-righteousness. Self-salvation. When one race considers itself a savior, or the savior, we evolve into what we can safely call a “liberal” race identity.

    Blue. Red used to mean Communist, so the Dems doffed their original Red ID. Blue? The color of the sky. Superior. The dome of heaven. Actually, the symbolism goes even deeper.

    Too, blue and red make purple, the color of Barry’s lipstick. Har, har.

    But, now, green and yellow make blue. The sun is yellow. The earth is green. Is that what makes the sky blue?

    Colors have ancient significance, psychologically. Always symbolizing something.

  • 34 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 10:26 pm   

    I can see that in comment # 27 I put my thoughts in the wrong order! LOL. Now I’ll straighten it out a bit.

    I probably first heard of ‘Mother Earth’ when I read Greek Mythology.

    Then more recently I discovered that the ancient Chinese civilization had a similar concept.

    From this, I got the idea or impression that the Earth as a mother symbol might well be a very old idea held in common by the greater part of the ancient traditions of the race.

    Even in Christianity God is the Father and He creates Man out of the Earth, rather than out of “the blue.” Nevertheless, in Biblical thinking, the Earth is not quite a mother-figure, as I see it.

    Yet all major religions and philosophies speak more or less of the “ground” of our existence. Such etymology, or, more adequately put, semantics, is certainly suggestive.

  • 35 Thrasymachus // Jan 20, 2010 at 10:35 pm   

    One scholar on comparitive religion has pointed out that in Judeo-Christian belief, Man is given the Earth, to have dominion over it.

    The Eastern religions are quite opposite in this regard. They hold that Man cannot ultimately dominate Nature and must always work with her, never against her. Hinduism, for example, scorns any idea that Man can make this a better world. Indeed, in Hindu thinking, Man (as a collective) is himself fatally flawed and will ultimately end in tragedy.

  • 36 eggfarm // Jan 21, 2010 at 10:16 am   

    Liberalism is evident in civilizations throughout history. It is only white liberalism in our era. Consider the Babylonians, Egyptians, Mayans, Greeks, Persians, Romans, etc.etc. The inclination of these societies regardless of race was always towards immorality.

  • 37 David Yeagley // Jan 21, 2010 at 10:23 am   

    Thras, couple of points:

    In Hebrew, man is “red.” You see, Adam was an Indian! (Ha!) adam means red, rosy, ruddy. Blood, life, in the face.

    I don’t see “mother earth” in the Bible at all. It is a pagan concept. But, that doesn’t necessarily mean every “pagan” people regarded the earth as the mother figure. I really don’t know that Indians did. Some tribes may have. But, I want to see some serious research on this.

  • 38 Thrasymachus // Jan 21, 2010 at 8:08 pm   

    “Thras, your idea would have been possible, except for the aggressions of Communism.”

    So true. Communism — and the various reactions against it (Nazism, Liberalism, etc) — has made huge waves in this world. It was an effort to upset any possible natural world order. Communis was based on nonsensical ideas of history and human nature. Somewhere in this scuffle, intellectuals and rulers have lost the threads of right thinking that might have led to a more stable political order. The world has never recovered from this upheaval and madness. Sometimes, to quote a song, I find myself thinking “it’s a little too late to do the right thing now.”

    Even if someone were brilliant enough to find the perfect solution to the world’s problems, how could it be enforced? In fact, few things are more frightening than to watch the masses follow after any man who presents himself as a messianic figure.

    Since people everywhere disagree about what is the best way to live and what is the best kind of society, it is obvious that “education” can easily become indoctrination and create confusion, rather than a solution.

    This may be the reason why the ancient Chinese philosopher, Lao Tzu, recommended keeping the people uneducated and the powers of government concealed (government would be operating quietly in the background)! However, that was several centuries B.C. It would not be possible to put his political quietism and obscurantism and isolationism into practice in the modern world.

    The only hope for the survival of the White Race, and other races in peril, is to somehow show people that nations do have a racial foundation, and that making the individual into his own god — aka “existentialism” — leads to the opposite: the individual, left entirely to fend for himself, without a natural community of like individuals, will become helpless and a world dictatorship of some kind will step up to the plate and attempt to take over.

  • 39 David Yeagley // Jan 21, 2010 at 9:24 pm   

    You know, I consider Naziism simply Communism. It is mistakenly distinguished for the Holocaust. Russia killed more than its share of Jewish people, too. Hitler is made to be nastier, but, he really wasn’t. Naziism is the same. The German version of the German Jews (Marx), who was implemented in a massive way in Russia. Same tyranny.

    If you call someone a Nazi, that is a terrible insult. But, if you call him a Communist, that’s not supposed to be as bad. This is mistaken.

  • 40 Thrasymachus // Jan 21, 2010 at 10:22 pm   

    I guess that basically what I am is, for lack of a better term, “a pro-white civil rights activist.”

    I certainly am totally against dictatorships and tyranny. I have absolutely no desire to persecute or be cruel to anyone, including Jews.

    Any Jew who openly stands in defense of the White Race and Western Civilization can be on my team.

    I hope that in the future more and more Jews will come to see this position as being to their greatest long-term advantage.

    The message that I am trying to send to people is that the systematic destruction of any race or nation is pure cruelty, whether the people are murdered and exterminated, or simply dissolved away, as happened to ancient Philistia and Egypt. Every national and racial group has a right to its own existence and survival interests.

    The desecration of nationhood and the genocide of forced miscegenation are both cruel and unusual punishments.

    If the Siamese cat were in danger of extinction, I would be all for its preservation. When people finally come to understand that any nation has a legitimate racial or ethnic basis for its existence, then it will be understood that persecution or harm done to any nation is immoral and cannot be justified on any grounds.

  • 41 geronl // Jan 21, 2010 at 10:46 pm   

    By the way, I found it somewhere on FreeRepublic.com and saved a link to it. I thought it was pretty funny.

  • 42 keyboard jockey // Jan 22, 2010 at 11:38 am   

    At this point, I don’t think of Cameron as especially creative. He is trying to tap into archetypes certainly, but he isn’t being especially clever or subtle about it. I think Cameron is relying on the ignorance of his audience. Druids were into nature – earth worshiping. That is what the New Left are all about a Return of the Primitive. Pagan vs Divine.

    In the Scottish Highlands there were a tribe of people called Picts, they were ancient people who had a matriarchal society and they painted themselves blue and drew symbols upon themselves.

    http://heritage-key.com/britain/druids-and-stonehenge

    http://www.dot-domesday.me.uk/picts.htm

    The white races came from tribes too. The movie Braveheart by Mel Gibson, portrayed the Scots painting themselves blue before battle against the English.

  • 43 keyboard jockey // Jan 22, 2010 at 11:49 am   

    The article on the Picts doesn’t mention the belief that the settlement of Ireland, came from folks migrating out of Egypt. That the Scots took their name from an Egyptian Princess named Scotia.

    http://www.scotland.com/forums/history/23562-scotia-descendants-princess-scotia.html

    Ireland was said to be named for “Ir” “”Eire’s Land”

    Egypt & Druidry

    http://druidnetwork.org/interfaith/articles/akkadiaford.html

    Maybe the blue people in Avatar are really conglomerate of the Druids, Picts, Scots, ect….if so it’s like Cameron is finger painting with special effects.

  • 44 keyboard jockey // Jan 22, 2010 at 12:03 pm   

    This is a good article on the subject, ties it all together. Even mentions where the name “Tara” for Earth might have come from…as in Terra Firma ;)

    Red Ice News Feed
    Atlantis, Egypt, and Ireland?

    Was the name of Tara Herself, derived somehow from these Egyptian origins?

    …that would mean Tara = Mother Earth.

    http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=854

    I have enjoyed this discussion, my three favorite subjects, Anthropology, History, and Genealogy…but I still have no interest in seeing this movie maybe when it comes out on DVD I will rent it.

You must log in to post a comment.