[continued from previous message]
are good or bad, there’s a possibility that the existence of more
humans like Taylor–via offsprings or from other parts of the planet– may lead to apes being ruled under a human order(like non-whites came
to be ruled by white imperialists). (Suppose alien beings from another planet came here, and they had IQ of 1,000. Suppose they keep coming
and coming and having lots of offsprings. Would we be ready to accept
the dominance of the new species? Whether these alien newcomers are
good or bad, we wouldn’t want a different species to rule over us.) Anyway, the ending leaves us with skepticism, and we are not so sure
about the liberal pieties dominant throughout the film. The
implications are as conservative as liberal, or neither–just plain nihilist and despairing. The ruins of Statue of Liberty can be read in many ways. It can be a cautionary warning about science and technology
or about man’s tribal or ideological tendency toward aggression, war, and (self)destruction–especially alarming in a world with nuclear weapons. If the ‘rational’ or ‘scientific’ hubris for Truth leads to
such, isn’t it better to cling to the Noble Lie? POTA isn’t sure and neither are we.
Some may argue that Heston-as-Taylor stands for the Jewish-and-or-
Negro threat on the white order. Gentile folks have long feared the
Jews and the Negroes. The Egyptians killed the sons of Hebrews because
of the fear of smart cunning Jews taking over Egypt. In the Demille’s Ten Commandments, baby Moses is saved by a sympathetic and childless Egyptian niece of the Pharaoh. Moses grows up an Egyptian but
discovers his Jewish roots and brings mayhem and destruction to the Egyptians. Europeans have long feared the Jews. In the 19th century,
Jews were emancipated and used their superior intellect to take over
much of European society. The intellectual hubris of Karl Marx led to
the deaths of tens of millions of Europeans. Jews also came to
America, and though no more than 2% of the population, took over most institutions of power and wealth in record time, and today, USA is
JewSA.
As for the Negroes, Arabs looked upon them as a bunch of wild savages. Arab travelers and writers in Africa felt mostly contempt for the ‘ugabuga’ half-naked blacks with big muscles shaking their butts and chucking their spears. And, even though whites folks saw blacks as intellectual and spiritual inferiors, they could readily see that
blacks were tougher, stronger, and wilder. In a way, Taylor
represents both the Jewishy and Negro-ish threat to the civilized apes
in the POTA. Taylor is relatively strong(possibly stronger than even gorillas), and it takes a whole bunch of apes to capture and quell him when he runs loose. Also, Taylor is comparatively strong willed, impulsive, and such when compared to the apes who are restrained, disciplined, and cautious. Taylor is full of self-assurance and
cockiness, like Jack Johnson and Muhammad Ali in a society of ‘faggoty- ass’ white boys. Why were white boys, especially Jews, were more
likely take up radical or leftwing politics than negroes were?
Perhaps, Negroes didn’t need no high-faluting ideology to feel tough, proud, and confident. White intellectuals, on the other hand, were physically a bunch of dorks compared to the Negroes, so they could
only be tough with an aggressiveideology. Even in the arts, Negroes
tended toward music, a direct and expressive form, whereas white boys, lacking the same kind of intense energy, hid behind intellectual-ish
avant garde-ism and the like. This is why blacks would never sit
through something as lame as Jeanne Dielmann, Cook Thief Wife’s Lover, or Salo. Since dweeby white intellectuals cannot stake their manhood
or toughness on charisma and natural masterfulness, they must seek
their special radical-rebel status through cutting edge or high
concepts. This was one of the themes of the movie “Dear Wendy” where a white guy wraps himself with ideas, symbols, and values to maintain
his authority in relation to the Naturally badass black guy. Of
course, another way white boys try to attain toughness and respect is
by slavishly worshiping everything black, hoping that some black
coolness will rub off on lame white boyness. This explains the pants wetting faggotyness of white boys who think blues singers are gods and that Barack Obama is their main god-homey. What a bunch of faggotyass dorks.
These white boys are even more despicable than Nazis. Nazis were evil
but had a sense of their own culture, pride, heritage, and power.
White liberal and leftist boys are a bunch of gimpass dweebs hiding
behind bogus intellectualist ideologies or sucking up to blacks.
Among whites, Jews actually get something big out of intellectualism because they are smarter, make more money, set the agenda, and control
our minds(by ownership of expensive media), even those of Negroes.
But, gentile white boys have been relegated to kissing the Jew’s ass
and sucking the Negro’s dick. Though white liberal and leftist boys
know that they are losing their land, their women, and their pride, it doesn’t bother them because they’ve been raised from cradle to worship Martin Luther King and worship Jewish power. White liberal and leftist boys take sick pleasure in the demise of their own people. Though
Jews killed millions through communism and though Negroes practiced slavery much worse than white men ever did, the Liberal/Leftist Jews
who control the academia and media have brainwashed white gentile boys
to carry the burden of all the evils of the world. What a bunch of faggotyass white boys. Of course, conservative white boys are no
better for they think their asses can be saved by reading the greed-is- good fantasy novels of Ayn Rand the odious Jewess.
Dr. Zaius pontificates Biblically about the man’s tendency toward destruction and/or subversion, and certainly the Jew and the Negro represent, respectively the most subversive and destructive
tendencies of man. The Jew, at least the modern Jew, embodies the
hubris of intellect, science, technology, and ideology. The Negro exemplifies wildness, anarchy, jiveassness, and craziness. Look at
what Jewish intellect wrought in the 20th century. Marx’s so-called science of history and economics led to the deaths of maybe 100
million people. Wherever Negroes have been allowed to run wild and
free, societies ended up like Detroit, Haiti, Jamaica, Watts, Chicago South Side, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Congo, and South Africa after
apartheid. Jews represent the arrogance of brains-out-of-control and Negroes represent the dangers of booties-out-of-control. Jews,
brimming with intellectual arrogance, think their genius and
brilliance can fix all problem. It was not just Karl Marx but Jewish finance capitalists who have wreaked so much havoc. Study the recent financial crisis, and guess who came up with all those fanciful
financial tools for the New Economy? The Jews. Look at the global New World Order, and guess who control its brains and heart? The Jews.
Look at the rise of turdboy Obama, and guess who engineered it? The
Jews. (Of course, I’m talking of key Jews in power, not all Jews, most of whom are decent folks.) Of course, it’s doubtful that the Jews who wrote the screenplay and directed POTA had these ideas in mind, but implications are there nevertheless.
Taylor has both positives and negatives. His counterpart in Bridge on
the River Kwai is the William Holden character. I haven’t read the
novel of the Bridge, so I don’t know how faithful David Lean’s movie is to the source. I don’t know if the novel had an American character. Maybe Lean’s movie took liberties with the book just as POTA the movie did with its source novel. But, both movies could be seen as praise
and condemnation of the American spirit. Holden in Bridge on River
Kwai is the most likable character. He looks out for #1, isn’t an ideologue, isn’t dogmatic, and has a free spirit. That’s all good. But, he’s also cynical, self-interested, and hustling. Same could be said for Taylor in POTA. His independent spirit is admirable but often prickly–even asshole-ish–at times.
During the Cold War, there was liberal/leftist and European fear of
the American cowboy spirit, most hilariously illustrated by Sergeant
Kong missile rodeo at the end of Dr. Strangelove. There was a liberal
and progressive Keynesian/Galbraithian conviction that the modern
world was too complex to be left up to the wiles of unruly
individuals. (The film Right Stuff is interesting for exploring how
rugged American individualism was both utilized and tamed by modern corporatism.)
The age of collectivism or the welfare state had arrived. Whether in business or government, whether liberal or conservative, a new
corporate spirit had taken hold, and the ‘organizational man’ was the new ideal. Goldwater, the champion of cowboy values, lost by a
landslide in 1964, and movies like Dr. Strangelove, Seven Days in May,
and Fail Safe warned us the dangers posed by individuals unwilling to
be cogs in the machine; mavericks in high places were seen as the
greatest threat to mankind. The system was favored over individuals,
and it was imperative that people within the system be team-players
than individualists with personal agendas. (This perhaps explains the central tension in liberalism/leftism there & then, and even here &
now. On the one hand, liberalism stood for the collective system where
the Best and Brightest ‘organizational men’ devised the ideas, imposed them from the top, and expected the lower members of the welfare or bureaucratic state to implement them accordingly. There was a sense
that liberal intellectual ideas were the best, the most scientific,
the most just, the most effective, the most rational, and most
effective. These ideas would be shaped into policies which would then
be carried out by a vast state apparatus and through a corporate capitalist system allied with the government. Individuals and
mavericks were not supposed to ‘do their own thing’ or disobey orders–
like the crazy military mavericks in the paranoid doomsday movies of
the 60s. But, there was another brand of liberalism/leftism founded on youth culture, rebellion, counter-culture, rock music, drugs, and radicalism that rejected the notion of the mega-corporate state as envisioned by men like John Kenneth Galbraith. The social tensions– especially related to race–and the Vietnam War made many people lose faith in Liberal Utopia. The very liberals who had warned people of
crazy rightwing Cold War mavericks got mired in the Vietnam War.
Liberal Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey got tagged with the
maverick warmonger label. Worse, some people assumed that the mega- modern-liberal state was just another form of corporate state fascism.
The organizational liberal men found themselves at odds with disorganizational leftist kids who were ideologically more totalitarian–far left– yet behaviorally downright anarchist and looney tunes. Today, Obama is trying to synthesize elements of both liberal corporate statism founded on Ivy League Organizational Man-ism and maverick leftism founded on radical neo-Marxist ideology or brash anarchism. He’s trying to be everything to everybody–fellow egghead intellectual to Best & Brightest Ivy Leaguers and fellow revolutionary
to clueless, naive, or downright stupid idiots who get their ideas
from Chomsky or Emma Goldman. Since the two sides cannot be
intellectually harmonized, Obama relies on pomp, imagery, ritualism, ceremony, and hype to pave over the differences. Needless to say, the leftist maverick was different from the rightist maverick. The
rightist maverick believed in law and order and embraced tradition and honor; what he did want was know-it-all eggheads pushing big
government and social engineering down his throat and up his ass.
Leftist mavericks, in contrast, challenged the order of Organizational
Man and Bureautopia to destroy the entire fabric of traditional
society; they were utopian in their politics and grubby in everything
they did. Patton was a different kind of maverick than Charles
Manson.)
In Dr. Strangelove, General Ripper is a cowboy maverick with his own agenda. In Seven Days in May, Burt Lancaster acts like a triggerhappy rancher in a Western. Europeans greatly feared Maverick Americans–and this fear has been echoed with the presidency of George W. Bush,
perceived to be a crazy out-of-control cowboy(though, in fact, he’s
been nothing than a robot of the Neocons and Big Business).
Anyway, the 60s was a strange time because the counter-culture, though ostensibly of the Left, was at war with not only the Right but with
much of the Left and Liberalism(of Old School kind). The leftism that
grew out of the 30s was of the collectivist communist kind; Peter
Seeger couldn’t stand mavericks like Dylan-gone-electric and Negroes acting all uppity. Seeger wanted Negroes to be like Paul Robeson
singing the Internationale in dignified way. And, the liberalism that
grew out of FDR’s New Deal was corporatist, bureaucratic, and to a certain extent, even hierarchical. Counter-culture of the 60s waged a
war not only on Goldwater conservatism but on the ideal of the
Affluent Society as posited by Kenneth Galbraith. The rise of Nixon
would not have been possible without this great schism within the liberal/leftist ranks. Just as Dylan’s fan base split into pro-
acoustic folkies and pro-electric rockers, liberalism/leftism split
into the New Deal/Great Society supporters and the radical/anarchic/ maverick/nutty forces. Some of the young radicals were Third World totalitarians worshiping Castro, Mao, Che, and Ho, others were
Identity Politics folks–Black Panthers, Red Power, etc–, others were perverts and degenerates, others were hippies and junkies, and etc.
The rabble that made the counter-culture was so varied, contradictory,
and nutty that the coalition couldn’t be held together. The crazy
quilt of liberalism and leftism was in tatters, and the conservative coalition–also diverse and varied but less outlandish and more polite with one another–grew to prominence. Anyway, that’s the not the issue that concern us. The issue is how Americanism was perceived by
Europeans and many on the Left. It was both admired and despised, both looked up to as the postwar ideal(since Europeans had proven their own destructiveness, cowardice, and craziness in both WWI and WWII) and
feared as the arrival of uncouth/uncultured barbarism. The American
was both attractive and ‘ugly’. (Things have gotten much worse since the first decades after WWII. The American cowboy or Ugly American of yesteryear could be unruly and aggressive but also imbued with certain values and code of honor. Since then, the new American cultural icon
has become the Negro Thug Gangsta Rapper, especially since blacks
whupped the white boy so convincingly in sports, music, and in the bedroom. This is why the American Right should not be offended by Europeans, Asians, and Arabs despising much of American culture. We
should share their loathing of ‘American’ culture now dominated by disgustingly wild & savage blacks and cunning & devious Jews who
market that garbage all over the world.)
Of course, released in 1968, POTA couldn’t help but attract the young crowd. Many young people probably identified with Charlton Heston for
his cynicism and anti-authoritarianism. Young people may have seen
Taylor in the same way as Benjamin Braddock in The Graduate. We often
see Taylor half-naked(back to nature child), with the girl(free love),
and with a gun(radical revolution). If more traditional liberals may
have identified most with Zera and Cornelius, the two conscientious chimps, young people probably identified with the resourceful and independent Taylor. (Of course, conservatives and right wingers
probably saw Taylor as the All-American rugged cowboy.) Not that
Taylor was some kind of peacenik hippie but within story’s context, he was a rebel and outsider. This kind of fascination was common within
the liberal-left coalition of the 60s. Rich white liberals were into radical chic, rubbing shoulders with violent and dangerous mavericks
of The Revolution. Liberal lawyers formed alliances and relationships
with black criminals or radicals in jail. Consider the story of Fay Stender and other white liberals who championed the causes of ‘revolutionaries’–often black–in prison. White liberals were naive because they grew up in safe privilege, had only seen the world
through the prism of books, and had been conditioned to feel white
guilt. Do-gooders may mean well, but their naivete can be deadly to
the community as a whole; do-gooders are the types to allow the Trojan Horse through the gates. They are easily manipulated and used by
radicals and ideologues. This coalition of radicals and naive liberal do-gooders uses its power in the media and academia to brainwash and browbeat those who disagree into acquiescence.
Anyway, there was nothing blatant about race relations or race
dynamics in POTA the movie. But, this cannot be said for most of the sequels. The exception is Escape from the Planet of the Apes, which is kinda like POTA reversed. Instead of man in a world of apes, it’s
about apes in a world of men. Actually, much of what happens in EFPOTA
is taken from the original novel, where, at one point, the human
character becomes a famous celebrity in the ape world. In the POTA
novel, it dawns on the apes that the human they’ve come to embrace may breed with other humans and create an intelligent race of man who
shall inherit the world. In EFPOTA, humans at first greet the amazing, intelligent, and talking apes. But, it dawns on the humans that if
they allow the apes to live and breed freely, the future will be like
the one where the apes came from–a world where apes rule over man.
One could argue that there is a theme of racial fear in this plot, and
we hear such warnings from people like Le Pen and Pat Buchanan today. Demography Is Destiny, and those who outbreed other groups shall
inherit the Earth. This is true enough, but it’s the sort of truth we are not comfortable with because we’ve been raised with Christian morality and have been castrated by the liberal and left-wing Jews
from cradle. It’s okay for Jews or non-whites to worry about their
own survival, but white folks are supposed to face their doom by
beating their own heads with pangs of guilt. Supposedly, the only way whites can redeem themselves is by white men turning into faggotyass liberal white boys kissing Obama’s ass and traitorous/treacherous
white bitches turning into slutty ho’s of black men. So, there is an element of race fear in EFPOTA. But, it’s not blatantly about whites
and blacks. Indeed, in some ways, Zera and Cornelius are like escaped
Nazi doctors. They are medical professionals and decent enough apes,
but they plied their expertise on humans deemed less-than-ape. Zera
and Cornelius didn’t think they were doing anything evil since apekind considered humans as animals or animal-like. Similarly, many Nazi scientists and doctors were not evil in the conventional sense. In
their belief that certain races were less-than-human, they didn’t
feel moral pangs in carrying out experiments. One can say that the ideologies governing the worlds of Zera/Cornelius and Nazi doctors
were evil, but it doesn’t follow that they were evil as individuals.
One can be part of an evil ideology and system but still believe in morality and goodness. We only need to look at Gorbachev, a man born
and raised in an evil system; even so, there was something
fundamentally decent within him that tried to humanize the system as
much as possible(even if Gorbachev never quite realized that the
system itself was evil). Until Taylor arrived, Zera and Cornelius weren’t too bothered by experimenting on humans because, as far as
they were taught and could see with their own eyes, humans were mere animals or animal-like. Similarly, horrible experiments are carried
out on animals today, but most of us look the other way because we
figure, ‘well, they are merely animals’ This why the hogocaust–mass murder of pigs–continues to this day all over the world and why the dogocaust goes on in China, Korea, and Vietnam.
In POTA, we sympathize with Taylor and the chimps against the conservative/reactionary orangutans, and in EFPOTA, we sympathize with Zera, Cornelius, and her liberal human friends against alarmist humans
who fear an ape-dominated future. But, both films are thoughtful
enough to make us wonder if the ‘bad guys’ have been right all along. They may be cold and ruthless, but they have no illusions. Dr. Zaius
in POTA is cold-blooded toward humans, but he’s trying to save civilization for the apes; and the man who shoots Zera and her baby is
a killer but also a defender of human civilization. And, precisely
because we saw POTA, we too fear what will become of man if Zera’s
baby is not killed. For its irony and complexity, POTA and EFPOTA are
the two best films in the ape series. Their main focus is on ideas surrounding civilization and barbarism, time as an element in history,
the conflict between tradition and progress, the sacred and the scientific.
Beneath the Planet of the Apes, Conquest of the Planet of Apes, and
Battle of the Planet of the Apes, in contrast, are blatantly about
racial tensions. Beneath the Planet of the Apes continues the story
of POTA, but the main conflict is between mole-like human survivors
who worship the nuclear bomb–a parody of Dr. Strangelove?–the ape order which has become overrun by angry and aggressive gorillas. The
war between underground humans and the apes in the film isn’t necessarily racial in nature; indeed, it could be seen as a childish, simple-minded, and perverse allegory of Cold War mentality. The real racial element in BTPOTA is found in the rise of the gorillas vis-a-
vis chimpanzees and orangutans. In POTA, the gorillas were not particularly black-ish in the way they talked, walked, or acted. They
were more like Roman centurions or the Prussian Guard. In BTPOTA, the gorillas are somewhat more jiveass-like. We see one gorilla giving a demagogic speech which stirs up a whole bunch of other gorillas. It’s like Idi Amin or the Black Panthers coming to power. The gorillas
seizure of power can be seen as the rise of fascism, but there is a
black element here because the gorillas seem to be so unruly and wild– unlike in POTA where they dutifully submitted to the superior
intellect and knowledge of chimpanzees and orangutans. In BTPOTA, both chimps and orangutans are increasingly threatened by gorilla power.
There is a sense that reason and spirituality are losing out to wild passion, mob mentality, and jiveassness. In a way, BTPOTA reflects
the disillusionment of liberals in the late 60s and early 70s. White liberals thought that whites and blacks would have a future together
like in Lilies of the Field or Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner. But,
blacks got wilder and crazier in the 60s and 70s. White liberals
thought blacks could easily be accommodated and socially engineered in
the new progressive order. Blacks saw things differently and made it
clear that they were not interested in listening to or following the advice of do-goody ‘progressive’ liberal whites. Some white radicals joined with crazy blacks to start revolution, but both whites and
blacks expended most of their energy on drugs, orgies, internecine battles, ego trips, moronic ideological fantasies, and self- destructiveness. The coalition of white liberal do-gooders, the progressive religious community, and blacks was broken. Just as the
chimps and orangutans are shunted aside in the new gorilla dominated
order in BTPOTA, white liberals were left confused and puzzled by the
late 60s and early 70s. How did things go so wrong with blacks and
unruly young people? The rise of the gorilla order in BTPOTA is
prescient in the rise of black order in Zimbabwe and South Africa.
Even South African Jews who did so much to help blacks end apartheid
are now wondering what went wrong. The blacks who took over South
Africa have been acting more and more like gorillas in BTPOTA. Of
course, no amount of sobering data will convince pussified liberal
white boys and dumb white girls trained to kiss Jewish ass and suck
black dick even when their own future is doomed; indeed, white
liberals think it is evil to even insist on the idea of a white race, white tradition and identity, white power, or the right of whites to survive as a people. Pussified white liberal/leftist boys think their
main role in life is to wank off to black males taking white girls,
and idiot white liberal/leftist girls think no virtue is greater than having sex with Negroes and giving birth to their own Obama-babies.
The liberal and leftist Jews, through control of media and academia,
have played an essential role in creating and implanting this kind of suicidal mind set among white folks.
BTPOTA presents two camps as equally dangerous. On the one hand, there
is the ‘racist’ human survivors who worship the bomb, no doubt representing right-wing Cold Warriors of the white right in America.
On the other side, you have the gorillas who represent rise of fascism/ militarism or far leftist communism, black panthers, or street mobs.
In between are the few good chimps–liberals–and a couple of humans(who arrived from the past via spaceships). BTPOTA is a vision of the
future where extremists on both sides take over and bring apocalypse
upon all of humanity.
Conquest of the Planet of the Apes can only be read as the rise of
blacks or the Third World against the white, western, colonialist, or imperialist order. It is prescient because what we are now seeing in Europe and America is along the lines presented in the film. Humans naively think they can peacefully coexist with chimpanzees trained to
play secondary roles and serve humanity–like how European expected non- white immigrants to come and do all the dirty work and not complain OR like how Americans expected Mexican Illegals to cut the grass, work in restaurants, and not make too much fuss–or like South African whites thought blacks would forever accept apartheid or like Israelis think
Arabs in Israel and West Bank/Gaza could forever be pacified.
Violence is breaking out all over Europe, and we’ve seen massive
Illegal rallies in America. But, this already happened on a larger
scale with grave consequences with the importation of black slaves in North and South America. Whites thought they could use black slaves indefinitely as a servile caste. But, blacks were eventually freed.
Then, whites thought blacks would be happy with second class status.
But, that too was challenged. Then, whites thought blacks would be
happy and grateful to be given equal chance in society. But, many
blacks went crazy and violent(especially as they came to regard whites
as pussy and faggoty and began to smell the blood), and we are facing
huge problems related to the black race. Many blacks have become like
the apes in COTPOTA. They say demography and iron will are destiny,
and the apes in COTPOTA have the numbers and the will. They take over society just like North Vietnamese eventually took over the South,
like the communist guerillas prevailed in Cuba, like blacks took over
many major cities–only to drive them into the ground of course.
Battle of the Planet of the Apes presents a world where the apes now
rule. It is like freaking South Africa after the end of apartheid.
Humans have been allowed to survive but must serve the apes. But,
there is division among the apes. There are the relatively broad-
minded and conciliatory light-skinned chimpanzees and the blacker,
uglier, and more violent gorillas. The fate of both apes and humanity rests on which side shall gain dominance–the light-skinned chimps or
the black-faced gorillas.
Finally, there is a big battle between the apes and remnants of
humans, and the apes triumph. Apes gain total power to do as they
please. Will the future turn out like in the original POTA, with apes running everything and humans relegated to animal status and banished
into the wilderness? BOTPOTA defies the iron law of determinism.
Future is what we make of it through free will. So, Caesar the noble chimp–like Tom Cruise at the crucial point in Minority Report–chooses to establish a society where apes and humans co-exist equally.
(Actually, I wouldn’t mind a society where humans and intelligent apes co-exist as equals. At least, there won’t be any ‘interracial’ mating
between the two groups. The problem with white-black integration is
black males take white females while white males are reduced to
becoming pussyboy beta-males sucking up to black males and fooling themselves that their pitiful submission to black dominance is a kind
of ‘progressive’ attitude when, in fact, it is just the natural result of the weaker pussy boy bowing down before the tougher male.)
Anyway, BOTPOTA is also prescient due to the rise of Obama. Many
whites are afraid of blacks and worried about the racial future of
this country. Most whites don’t hate blacks but fear them. Most whites are well-intentioned when it comes to blacks but feel helpless to do anything about it because white good will is distrusted,
unreciprocated, exploited, and mocked by many blacks. Most black
leaders have been like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan,
Marion Barry, David Dinkins, and worse. White liberals–many of them
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)