Wrap Up

Well throughout the semester, I talked a lot to my roommates about this course (CES 444). They thought I was taking this course as a joke, but my comeback to them was they took Queer Identities Studies last semester. I remember last semester, three of my roommates took that class and they always told me about their class, regardless if I was willing to listen or not. This semester, my five roommates were very engaged into things I told them about class. Over the weekend I bribed them by making dinner for them to tell them what I learned about white nationalism and to get their feedback. But like I said, we've had various discussions over the semester, here is one highlights from the semester.

The one topic that sticks out the most was that unit we did on the Tea Party. The Daily Show, the Colbert Report, and GOP debates are always must watch comedy/informative shows or events in our house. The Ann Coulter segment on the Daily Show was especially enjoyable in class because we as a house saw that segment when it was aired live on the Daily Show. We had a huge debate about the Tea Party. Most of my house leans to the left and the other just loves Ron Paul.

We had a discussion about the Tea Party and I tied in my thoughts that were actually formed from class. The idea that the Tea Party and its members are brutal towards Obama and how their hate lends from the fact that some of the members, even higher up ones, are white nationalists. I informed them about how some white nationalists welcomed the election of President Obama because it awaken the sleepers and push more people to their cause. They hadn't thought of Obama's presidency as any sort of victory for white nationalism, but acknowledged the fact that groups, such as the Tea Party, have received more press and support since the arrival of Obama.

Shortly after this discussion, I showed them the Bill O'Reilly clip where he argues with that black professor, I can't recall the name, so we found this video and found it entertaining.

John Stewart talks about the Tea Party being formed because of the anger people have felt toward the government. The government in the eyes of many white nationalists is this Zionist Occupied Government.

After recently talking to them, I talked about the paranoia of white nationalists and how that cripples them the most. There rebellion against pop culture and media just puts them more out of touch and contributes to there paranoid views of America being ran by Jewish people.

We also talked about white nationalists feeling victim to how current cinema is portraying them. Collectively it was agreed upon that anything can be made about race when you look at it. Sometimes movies just need to be taken as entertainment values; however, there are movies that are statements, but not every movie is meant to please every crowd.

Speaking of pleasing crowds, my roommates were shocked to hear about Ethnic Cleansing, the video game. As a house, we play a ton of video games. I explained to them the premise behind Ethnic Cleansing. I described it as a first person shooter where you run through the ghettos killing blacks, Latinos, and Jews until you reach the Jewish Control Center where you kill the main Jews, stopping their world domination. One of my roommates commented about the similarities it could draw to a game like Grand Theft Auto. It's an interesting thought because those games are controversial themselves. I think the main difference though is the paranoia that white nationalists feel about this Jewish control, and race mixing. It dominates every aspect of their life.

I think the main thing I took from the semester was that a group that I thought of to be tough, or even intimidating, I find that they are actually just paranoid, and to an extent scared. Their anger, paranoia, and fear kind of clouds their judgment and makes it hard for them to see something for what it truly is. There is always some secret meaning behind it to keep them down. The perception of them being tough and intimidating really gets diminished by the insecurity of the group as a whole.

Jewish Government Control

*Note to David, I went out of order a little. For blog topic six, we were supposed to find a visual representation and relate it to course topics. The main focus of my blog post six, is about Frank Meeink and American History X. I would like to use that previously written post to be my 10th post because it focuses exclusively on those two topics, so for my tenth post I will redo post six focusing on a different image/video and tying it to another course reading. I just don't want to be too redundant and repetitive because I feel like that a little already.

One of the main issues that white nationalists have is that there is a Jewish control on everything in America. Abby Ferber talks about the falling white man, and the Jewish control is to blame. As you can see in the photo, there is a Jewish stereotype holding a mirror in front of Uncle Sam, its reflection being the Jewish stereotype.

Paranoia lingers everywhere from the government to media. It seems that every movie that comes out seems to offend white nationalists because of its overall message and portrayal of white nationalists. Through Ferber, other readings in class, and general common knowledge it is obvious there is a lack of trust between white nationalists and Jewish people.

In my opinion, any movie, story, and topic can be made into a race issue if that's what they are looking for. Take something like the Blind Side. It is a great, true story and is enjoyable to some degree of entertainment. Depending on how critically you analyze it, you will take a different message. It being a Disney movie, I don't know if little kids were gathering that the movie could be viewed as racist, as far as a white family saving a black kid, making him acceptable by society's standards.

For white nationalism almost every current movie is a conspiracy against the white people. Whether it be by uncool representation of whites, race mixing, and whites mixing in with different cultures, there is always the element of being made the victim in the current "Jewish run" society and media.

I wanted to find a movie that was anti-Semitic in a way and wanted to gauge how white nationalists felt about movies that were being dubbed as controversial. I settled on the Passion of Christ and looked around the Internet to find white nationalist's feeling on it.

From Stormfront:

The religious theme aside, that movie showed how the Jews deal with their enemies. The Roman governor viewed Jesus as just another religious agitator, of which Judea had plenty, and was of no particular threat to Roman rule. The Jewish leaders wanted him dead because he had attempted to cleanse the temple of its money changers. In fact he had driven them out with a whip. In order to manipulate Pilate the governor, they said they would report to Caesar that Jesus had claimed to be King of the Jews, a treasonable offense. If Pilate then went easy on Jesus he would lose favor with Caesar. It was a classic case of the Jews manipulating the secular authorities to do their dirty work.  

Very little has changed. The Jews learn nothing and forget nothing! That will be their undoing and will lead to their long overdue fate, being cast out of all civilized nations

Another from Stormfront:

Notice how a movie about JEWS killing the most noble being to ever exist is subject to intense scrutiny.....and the Jews say "its far too graphic and violent for people to watch", I never heard a Jew complain about holohoax movies like Shindlers list, even though the gore and violence in this movies far exceeds that of the Passion Of The Christ.

Justification of the movie occurs because Jews are portrayed in a negative light. In this case, they are the victims, making the movie acceptable to some white nationalists. However, if a movie does the same for white nationalists, it's a movie about keeping the white man down. Paranoia itself may be far more oppressive to white nationalists than the "Jewish controlled" America.

Machete and the Double Standard

For my free blog, I decided to look at a movie that stems from filmmaker Robert Rodriguez. I have always been a huge fan of Rodriquez, especially since him and Quentin Tarantino seem to be cut from the same cloth. Tarantino has been on of my favorites ever since the first time I watched Reservoir Dogs. Back in 2007, Rodriguez and Tarantino teamed up to make a film called Grindhouse, giving an ode to the old grindhouse movies, that centered around exploitation of a certain subject and filled with violence, sex, romance, etc. These films usually were low budget films and were shown at grindhouse theaters or drive-ins. Rodriguez made the movie Planet Terror while Tarantino made Death Proof. Those films combined created Grindhouse. Prior to the films, Tarantino and Rodriguez introduced fake trailers as a source of entertainment. One of the trailers happened to be for a fake movie called Machete.

Trailer for Machete - Grindhouse Version

Fast forward three years later and a new Machete trailer is out. However, this time it is not a joke trailer, but an actual movie slated to be released in theaters. Basically, the movie is centered around Machete, an ex Mexican Federale, who ends up in Texas as an illegal immigrant. Along the border in Texas, a group of immigrants work to control the border by murdering illegals at the border. It is very similar to the border patrol flash game that we were showed in class. A Texas Senator candidate is for the border control, and exclaims something along the lines of  "We are at war, every time an illegal dances across our border, it is an act of aggression against this sovereign state — an overt act of terrorism."

Openly calls out Arizona Immigration Law at the beginning 

The senator's campaign manager, without the knowledge of the candidate, hires Machete to kill the candidate, and sets up Machete for attempting to assassinate the candidate. This essentially leads to a huge debacle and turns into a race war between the conservatives at the border, and the illegal aliens.

If you are shocked by the plot, imagine how white nationalists felt. Though I enjoyed the movie on a totally pure entertainment value, there are a ton of underlying issues and messages layered underneath the movie. Clearly, the movie is exploiting the issue of illegal aliens and the stance conservative states, such as Arizona, took with regards to the issue. It is meant to be controversial, so I was interested to see how white nationalists would take a movie like this.

Many on Stormfront proclaim this movie to be one of the worst movies ever made in the current era. Many have a problem with how the double standard of Mexicans starting a race war, as opposed to whites starting a race war. There is almost a 30 page forum that deals with the movie, and the fear, anger, and confusion it left some white nationalist in when they initially saw the trailer.

Believe it or not, some white nationalists were in fear in what could result from this movie. Many pointed out that exploitation  movies of the past were used as tools to make the white man look vulnerable, and allow for the lower IQ races to violently retaliate back. With the topic of immigration being such a hot stove topic, many thought that this movie could push Mexican immigrants (illegal or not) to start a race war. Many comments suggested people gear up for retaliation and laughed off the notion of guns being more powerful than machetes.

A majority of the white nationalists were fuming about the movie because it again pushes the belief that the media is ran by Jewish control, and the movie being permitted to be released worldwide was the biggest hate crime a person can commit. The allowance of this movie to be seen by the public, portrays whites so unfavorably, that it can stir up animosity into minorities, where they will rise up and attack whites.

Many people welcomed the idea of a race war, while others protested. A group in San Francisco called Bay Area National Anarchists (BANA) protested the movie and its messagewhile being armed with machetes. The use of machetes during protest was a sign of symbolic speech and protected against the First Amendment, as long as there were no violence, threats, or other sources intimidation.

White nationalists believe that they are the victims in the movie and are negatively portrayed. The movie flips the script and makes the oppressed the oppressor. White nationalists hated Inglorious Bastards too and talked about how when Nazis kill Jews it's vilified, and when Jews killed Nazis it's entertainment and even comical. I'll give it to white nationalist, they are the victims in these movies, but that is the point of these exploitation movies. It is fantasy. A group that is normally oppressed rises up. The movie does flip flop the script to a certain point.

Poster for Inglorious Basterds

White nationalists claim to be the victim in cinema or media in general, and complain about this double standard. It's not for every movie, just the majority of them. But in the cases of Machete and Inglorious Bastards they are fictional depictions and are used as entertainment. Jews killing Hitler is more comical than Hitler killing the Jews because the latter is TRUE. Would you rather be oppressed in movies or in real life? Even looking at this story, white nationalists call for the double standards of equality in cinema, but look who gets away with protesting those movies with weapons like machetes. I am positive that minorities protesting a film that was anti-minority would be taken so lightly…

Yggdrasil's Movie List

Of course Stormfront.org provides a wide buffet of hate on many different topics. Any topic that can have an opinion on it, most likely already has a year long + thread on it. I remembered back in the 2nd post, when we had to use the forums on Stormfront.org to describe and reflect on what was being said about our specific topic. I found tons of movie reviews and lists. However, almost every thread that had to do with cinema of any sort referenced this website as kind of a handbook of what movies were acceptable by white nationalists. The website is called Yggdrasil's Movie List.

This site's intro talks about the white nationalist movement as Euro-American survival. From there, the website really takes off. The site rants about the media's attack on white nationalists and white people in general. The introduction to the site just lends more to the notion that white nationalists are paranoid of about the conspiracy theory of Jewish control on the media. Actually, the website itself calls for the cancellation of cable/satellite subscriptions and suggests their list a substitution to their normal entertainment. The suggested media library would be a quality substitute to cancelled cable services.

In the site's eyes there is a three pronged attack against "us,"

A. Getting us to accept and feel comfortable with the Hollywood image of ourselves as stupid, incompetent, insensitive, boorish, promiscuous and cowardly - all as a means of getting us to submit to our subordinate role in the multi-cultural scheme.

B. Getting us to accept and feel comfortable with the notion that we are not valid human beings unless we are in the company of negroes and being supervised and managed by the Hollywood image of the all-knowing, wise, and sexually disinterested negro.

C. Getting us to accept non-whites as attractive sexual partners by constantly portraying interracial laisons, and especially, by promoting the Hollywood image of the inner party male as the only sensitive and understanding partner for White females, and by promoting the Hollywood image of the black male as the only verile, agressive and masculine partner for White females.

The site talks about ideals and disqualifying features… I hate to copy and paste but this is seriously the best way to portray it…

The list that follows is the beginning of my effort to provide this information. The ideal that we seek - the positive criteria for inclusion(in addition to significant entertainment value) are any of the following, either alone or in combination:

1. Positive portrayal of whites in defense against the depredations of liberalism, crime, and attack by alien races.

2. Positive portrayal of heterosexual relationships and sex, marriage, procreation and child rearing.

3. Positive portrayal of impulse control and behavioral restraint - consideration of the feelings of others and of community mores. Positive portrayal of initiative, hard work, achievement, sacrifice for the common good, - discrimination, self discipline, and sexual patience in mate selection.

4. Portrayals of white males as intelligent, sensitive and strong - in positive leadership roles and or romantic leads.

5. Particularly intense portrayals of white female beauty, in non-degrading roles.

However, given the realities of Hollywood, the primary criteria for appearance on the list are the absence of the following disqualifying features.

1. Disgusting scatological imagery or excessive vulgarity (Belle de Jour, Mall Rats, Van Wilder, American Pie, Road Trip, etc, ad infinitem).

Mallrats scene

2. Sympathetic or attempted erotic portrayal of homosexual and lesbian conduct and themes, and non-critical portrayals of violent sex (The Election, Mulholland Drive - Leaving Las Vegas).

3. Period pieces with so much un-historical overt sexuality or depravity that they amount to revisionist denials of 20th Century cultural decline. (Numerous examples, but Elizabeth with Cate Blanchett is typical of the genre as is Cold Mountain.)

4. Portrayal of White males as stupid losers or sadistic criminals. (Too numerous to mention)

5. Romantic comedies which portray visibly IP males as sensitive loving types who are worthy of the shiksa's heart, as contrasted with their brutal and insensitive White male competitors. (Where the Heart Is - with Natalie Portman ironically playing the Shiksa, all Adam Sandler and most Seth Green and Ben Stiller movies).

*all Jewish actors I must add

6. Interracial sex, romance, and marriage propaganda (The King and I, South Pacific, Love is a Many Splendored Thing, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, View to a Kill, Save the Last Dance, Road Trip, The Fast and The Furious.)

7. The theme that Whites are not valid humans unless they have the all-knowing and wise Negro managing, leading or helping them. (To Sir with Love, Save the Last Dance, almost all Denzel Washington movies)

Denzel in Remember the Titans, example of "Negro managing"

8. Negative portrayals of Christianity or the Catholic Church (The Blues Brothers).

Blues Brothers negative portrayal of Catholic Church

*videos, captions and asterisks were all added by me

The site also goes onto make sense of the list of movies the site offers and how they are rated. It calls for whites to further themselves away from the mainstream media that portrays them in a negative light. These movies are meant to guide whites into movies that are suitable, and more favorable to them. It just makes more sense to the idea that whites are the victim and fighting an oppressive war on the image and portrayal of the white man.

This list intends to list at least a 1000 movies up to its criteria. That's a ton of movies… The whole idea of Jewish people having control over the media and cinema is absurd. Society as a whole has changed throughout the years with integration. The victim card that white nationalists play is a weak argument for a change in society that is still a work in progress. They feel censored in present day media, yet want to censor any movies that don't fit their criteria.

This website is a good tool for white nationalists to find movies that fit their criteria, but the blocking of other movies can really narrow perspective and the realities of modern day culture.

Extreme/Mainstream Views

The mainstream and extreme views may like opposites but they are much more complimentary as opposed to polar opposites. Mainstream can be loosely defined as society's or a group's prevalent ideas, attitudes, morals, practices, etc. Mainstream ideas as a whole, are generally more safe ideas, to appeal to that group or society's main population. Extreme views can offer a little more excitement. Their ideas usually differ so much from the general consensus, it draws in the mainstream.

I think back to class when we were reading about the Tea Party. The Tea Party stemmed from the more mainstream right wing views that the Republican Party stands for. The mainstream media focuses on this party due to their extreme views and their overtly racist protests of Obama. The acknowledgment and time spent talking about this party has given the party steam. Constant exposure can bring an extreme group to be a mainstream one.

offensive Tea Party signs

When it comes to movies and music, the mainstream always seems to be "dissed" on. People love movies or bands when the general public hasn't adopted them into the mainstream. Liking and discovering music and movies that aren't played on the radio or recognized by peers always seem to give an individual a certain satisfaction. Uniqueness is something that many strive for almost making that mainstream. It's a strange circle.

What I find interesting is that music groups and movies embrace being extreme or different from the mainstream, like their fans, but when the mainstream receives their message, and society embraces them or their work (and see cash), it's easy to go from independent to mainstream.

Looking at something such as white nationalism, it's hard not to notice what's going on with the Tea Party. I know that not every person in the party have the same extreme views about Obama, but they are the ones that carry the most attention. Though the group gets represented in a negative light by some media outlets, their existence and influence is still recognized by the mainstream media.

I've hit this note a couple of times already, but white nationalists feel that the Jewish run media portray white nationalists in a negative light purposely in order to discredit and set aside their views.

Movies like Higher Learning and American History X, aren't highly thought upon in white nationalist circles because they are said to be Jewish propaganda. Though they claim these movies to be based on extreme stereotypes, making the trouble white youth a neo-Nazi and a black athlete as a victim, I found a couple comments interesting in the Stormfront forums. One person said this about Higher Learning,

Seeing this movie so long ago made me do research into race relations, the result was one of the many parts that led to my racial awakening. So I think that movie has done a lot to turn Whites into WN's. Maybe more movies like that should be made. Thank you John Singleton!

though Higher Learning doesn't portray WNs in positive light, their message, no matter how extremely its portrayed, can still cause racial awakening in some.

Though they feel that movies misrepresent them, it could be doing them favors by having these stereotypes wake up the "sleepers." If this person, hadn't seen this movie, would his/her views still be the same today? When extreme views make their way into the mainstream, a group can be upset that their message can be skewed to make them look like the bad person, but isn't their message reaching a mainstream audience a win for themselves as well?

Frank Meeink in American History X

I feel like I am beating a horse to death by constantly bringing up American History X, but how can you deny the parallels between Derek in American History X and Frank Meeink? Actually after doing research, some of American History X's scenes are loosely based off of Frank Meeink.

The parallels between Frank and Derek are staggering. Both were confused kids and easy targets for recruitment. In Derek's case, his ability to hate was always there, instilled by his father. When, his father is killed at the hands of blacks Derek's whole attitude is changed. After a meltdown on a local news interview, Derek is recruited by Cam to become part of the movement. Frank's troubled path to the movement, was due to different things. Rejection by family and constantly being beat up by local gangs , had Frank looking for another calling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs0ZvwIai7w&feature=related

Like Derek, Frank became a leader for the Neo-Nazi's at a young age. I googled more about Frank and found from various sites that he indeed became a Skinhead leader. I was interested to see how Frank was perceived in the Stormfront community. Many discredit him and said he was never fully embraced by the movement and was nothing.

Derek and Frank both go through transformations in jail, befriending the enemy. The perspective of others dramatically shifts because of exposure to the other culture. Hollywood and Meeink's personal story brings ideas of change being possible if one is isolated from others in the movement and learn about and get to know other races that they had spent their lives hating.

In Derek's case, he kills three Crip members. This scene is the favorites of many white nationalists members. The violence in the way he murders the black gang members are applauded by many white nationalists. That part, along with Derek's ideas at the dinner table that meet no comebacks are the reasons why many white nationalists watch that movie and even own it.

Frank mentions that, "The whole skinhead movement revolves around violence, and I was so tired of that." That line is interesting because it strikes many white nationalists the wrong way. Many white nationalists feel that their movement doesn't revolve around violence; however, everyone's favorite scene in American History X is the violent way Derek murders the gang members.

It's that double standard that comes up again. The victim card is busted out. No one is for violence, but they all love it. Also, Frank is a beloved member while in the community and a traitor and a non-credible source after he leaves it.

What's interesting is why are Derek's and Frank's stories so touching. The fact is they were both violent, hateful people who served jail time. Their redemption, comes when they realize they are wrong. These stories are highlighted because it restores faith that people do change. It was interesting in class, when David brought up the idea, why these stories are accepted and advertised as redemption stories. Would the affect be the same if a Black Pather who murdered a white person was seeking redemption? Even when there is a good message, it still has a weird under tone.

Paranoia Hinders

Researching websites and blogs advocating white nationalists ideas I couldn't come up with a solid actor, director, and writer that were consensus favorites in the white nationalist community. There were certain genres and eras that many were fans to. D. W. Griffith is a key person to the movement after his 1915 film, "The Birth of a Nation," but realistically it's not very current to the ideas of today. It did wonders as far as getting the KKK back into the spotlight, but almost being a century old, it is simply outdated.

John Wayne and westerns also were a common theme along with older horror movies. Stanley Kubrick and Hitchcock are generally respected in the forums. The pattern I did seem to catch was that a lot of these favorites were older, nothing really in current mainstream filmmaking really resonates with white nationalists today.

As I searched for answers, I found that in the eyes of many white nationalists, today's media focuses on the idea that media, cinema, and the government is run by Jews. The idea that Jewish people have their hands in everything is a representation of the paranoia that current white nationalists feel today. In their minds, something such as cinema, portrays certain messages that mold the ideas of today's youth.

I found this interesting article that portrays common stereotypes used in movies or TV shows from natvan.com:

For example, a racially mixed couple will be respected, liked, and socially sought after by other characters, as will a "take charge" Black scholar or businessman, or a sensitive and talented homosexual, or a poor but honest and hardworking illegal alien from Mexico. On the other hand, a White racist—that is, any racially conscious White person who looks askance at miscegenation or at the rapidly darkening racial situation in America—is portrayed, at best, as a despicable bigot who is reviled by the other characters, or, at worst, as a dangerous psychopath who is fascinated by firearms and is a menace to all law-abiding citizens. The White racist "gun nut," in fact, has become a familiar stereotype on TV shows.

White nationalists have portrayed themselves as the victims, feel being misrepresented in movies. However, movies such as American History X, are hated by followers because of the "Jewish ending and ideas." The fact that a person portrayed as a white supremacist can be "rehabilitated" by a black person. However, they love the rest of the movie as far as showing Derek's past.

Paranoia is the key reason that white nationalists think that everything is run by Jewish influence. The victim card can only be played so far. From the same article they say,

Once we have absorbed and understood the fact of Jewish media control, it is our inescapable responsibility to do whatever is necessary to break that control. We must shrink from nothing in combating this evil power that has fastened its deadly grip on our people and is injecting its lethal poison into our people's minds and souls. If our race fails to destroy it, it certainly will destroy our race.

I personally don't understand the angles white nationalists are taking. They claim to be the targets of reverse racism in movies, when they get exploited by a minority or someone who opposes their cause, such as in Inglorious Bastards. However, a movie that has a white person being racist and disliked by an audience was created by the Jewish run Hollywood to make him unlikable and to keep the white man oppressed by today's society? They have it both ways, and they play the blame game no matter what. Movies change with the times, you simply cannot get away with the same things in the 1940s in present day. There are many factors to that, such as harsher guidelines by the MPAA, political correctness, and relevancy to today's "mixed" society.

The portrayal of white nationalists or even whites in general in cinema, won't ever be held to the standard that white nationalist groups want. They want to play the victim and receive national sympathy, but they hate being stereotyped in the movies. However, if they are given a "more accurate" portrayal, they seem to be the bad guys and receive national backlash. Either way, the agenda of the Jewish media will always try to keep them down.

Pocahontas and Racial Purity

Racial purity is a topic that has been alive in America since the first ancestors settled. The idea that white represented a notion of civilization and a "rightness," while blacks and other races are primitive in comparison. Miscegenation has always been an issue for whites. The idea of tainting the goodness that is "whiteness" seems unfathomable. You can look back to the first settlers of America, despite being invaders, felt that they had brought civilization to the long time native people of the land. Though their ways differed from that of European whites, it still proved to be a sufficient way of living for them. However, the more civilized whites pinned the natives as savages and pushed them further and further from their lands to gain what was unrightfully theirs. The idea that their whiteness takes precedent over others.

Take a movie like Pocahontas, it deals with idea of miscegenation and racial purity. John Smith is a settler in the New World and falls in love with Pocahontas, the daughter of the chief. However, Smith and his men are there to push out Pocahontas' tribe to get its gold. This movie idea is very popular and was even rehashed in the movie Avatar. The time period may have changed, but the story remains the same. The Englishmen in Pocahontas do not have any interests in befriending the tribe, but look to gain the gold that was believed to be under the tribe, at any costs necessary. That attitude is the similar thinking of many of the early settlers and that their whiteness gave them privilege because their purity and civilized ways.

John Smith acts as a different agent. He represents the idea of accepting others and takes in the new group. Race mixing has always been a sort of taboo, but John Smith breaks those barriers by pursuing a relationship with Pocahontas. What I find interesting is that how Disney portrays the idea of race mixing being opposed on both sides. It seems that both the Native Americans and the Englishmen were against the relationship of John Smith and Pocahontas because these two worlds weren't thought to be able to mix. Were the natives against mixing with whites in fear of something new or because they though their race was superior to the whites?

Either way you see in an innocent Disney movie, that the theme of racial purity is strong. Conversely, the idea of John Smith being the good guy absorbs the native people into the culture and is willing to "mix" with someone like Pocahontas points to the fact that not every white person believes that racial mixing is wrong.

For a story that was supposed to take place in the 1600s, not much changed when the Constitution was drafted in the 1780s. The 3/5 compromise was enacted that allowed for other non whites to be counted as 3/5 of a person. That notion of equality between whites and other races still hasn't reached that ideal point and maybe never will. But a big step was during the Civil Rights Movement, when places no longer were segregated. Mixed schools, restaurants, etc. came to light.

The movie Missippi Burning, captures the ideology of a small southern town when dealing with the desegregation that came to light. in the film, civil rights workers are murdered and two FBI agents are sent to go investigate. The community proclaims itself as an Anglo-Saxon democracy, and has avoided integration, along with having total non-acceptance of other races. The KKK members of the town are aided by the police, in targeting African Americans, brutally torturing them and setting houses on fire. The two agents work to find different ways to investigate the murders because they receive no information from people in the town (black or white). Whites didn't come forward with information because they were against what the civil rights workers stood for and favored a place that separated the whites from the other mongrels. And the blacks didn't come forward in fear of what the KKK would do.

The KKK are represented as having full authority to terrorize. The town sought to keep racial purity and not allow for mixing and backed the methods the KKK used to terrorize the African American community.

Racial purity will always be a sensitive issue. In cinema, its portrayal is similar to real life. Some people are okay with it, while others will go to extremes to protect it. Race mixing of course is more common today than it was in 1960 or the 1600s; however, the taboo of race mixing is still alive and strong. However, what people who believe in whiteness as being right fail to realize is the fact that without the absorption of other cultures and ideas, we wouldn't be where we are today. Whether they admit it or not, their lives have all been affected by "mixing."

Paul Mooney is the Man

More blogs in the works, but thought I'd share this article from comedian Paul Mooney, a comedian I have loved ever since I first saw the "Ask A Black Dude" segment on Chappelle Show in 7th grade.

Chappelles Show
Ask a Black Dude - Walking
www.comedycentral.com
Buy Chappelle's Show DVDs Black Comedy True Hollywood Story

Chappelles Show
Mooney on Movies
www.comedycentral.com
Buy Chappelle's Show DVDs Black Comedy True Hollywood Story

Lit Review

I stumbled upon a journal entry in the Journal of American Studies from the Cambridge University Press. The author, Tom Rice, explores the revival of the Ku Klux Klan through the avenue of cinema. Birth of a Nation opened the flood gates for the KKK to become more main stream. Shortly, after the release of the movie, various movies produced by the KKK were shot, distributed, and shown to the masses. Many of the films did it its best to "counteract the poisonous propaganda circulated by alien enemies who have declared their determination to wipe out the Klan." The 1920's were a huge time for the Klan because the movies reached new audiences and could engage widespread interest to the cause. Knowing what was on the line, movies were made to legitimize their movement.

In the movie The Face at Your Window (1920), the Klan identified themselves as true patriots. That movie alone served as a catalyst for growth. To further increase their numbers, members of Klan vowed to show pro-Klan movies to at least one other man to have their message widespread.

Movies such as The Toll of Justice and The Traitor Within sought to redefine the clan by confronting misrepresentations of the group. For example in The Toll of Justice, the common conception that the Klan are real life villains are challenged. The movie's villain uses the Klan as the scapegoat for murder. The Klan tries to come across as the victims of misrepresentations or stereotypes. Believe it or not these films helped people question their stance on the Klan, and recruitment numbers went up.

People with secret ties to the Klan, when questioned about films and their message, denied any sort of connection to the Klan and downplayed the fill to be on Americanism and not to be mistaken with the Ku Klux Klan. Subliminal themes along with the determination to change their image from being violent racists to "true Americans" really did wonders for Klan's numbers.

The article only touches on movies from 1915-1930s. I find it interesting that the Klan has always found themselves feeling like the victim for misrepresentation, even back when society was more tolerant of those feelings (pre-Civil Rights movement). The Klan has always felt that they have not received a fair shake. I know the Klan doesn't represent every white nationalist, but there is more history with the Klan being depicted in cinema.

In the book Racism and anti-racism in American popular culture, author Catherine Silk talks of a shift from films showing blacks favorably. After World War II, films depicted blacks in a positive light and slowly moved away from the days of controversial, racist depictions of blacks (such as black face). Of course films today can depict some stereotypes, but no way is it as volatile and excessive as it has been in the past.


This shift has left white nationalists hating today's cinema. Just looking at top 10 lists of white nationalists, no recent movies really hit home for them. They feel that they are being censored by the Jewish-run media, again making them misunderstood, making them the victim. No matter the era, the message always seems to be misunderstood, the only difference is that today, it would be difficult to use cinema as a way to win back some support. Movies that are pro-white nationalism can not be mainstream. Cinema is no longer an outlet to rehabilitate image or recruit, but there are plenty of more avenues of doing so then there was in the 1920s.

Storm Front

Movies often offer an escape for people, but a lot of current movies just remind White Nationalists of the hold that the Jews have on pop culture. Looking through Strom Front, there are many threads analyzing many of the current movie releases and discussions about whether the movie is proper for White Nationalists to enjoy or if it is just "anti-White propaganda" that the Jews are shoving down society's throat. Often in the threads, you can find movies that White Nationalists will boycott. A pretty recent example was the movie "Thor." There was a huge outcry because Idris Elbra, a black actor, was casted to portray Heimdall, Sentry of Asgard, who many believed was white. A black god outraged so many White Nationalists, many members on Storm Front decided to boycott this movie.


Movies that portray White Nationalists are even more heavily scrutinized. I found through the forums there are many movies that portray White Nationalists, but few are deemed acceptable by them. The most popular movie portraying White Nationalists is "American History X." It was discussed in class, that White Nationalists actually loved a lot of the parts in this movie. The brutal violence towards blacks were cheered upon in the forums. In their eyes the movie takes a turn for the worst when the characters are made to realize that hate is wrong and decide to leave the movement. As described on Storm Front, a lot of these movies have some "agenda" by them. Like World War II movies do with Nazis, movies about White Nationalists depicts them as the villains, or has a story where someone on the villain side takes a turn for good.

Many people in the forums point out the scarcity of good movies about White Nationalists. Many of the current movies out, are either cheesy and depicts White Nationalists as the villains, or are just terrible films in general. However, a movie I kept seeing be brought up repeatedly was "Romper Stomper." This movie seems to be the golden standard of movies dealing with White Nationalists. No surprise that this movie was released in Australia. Usually, foreign movies are better received by White Nationalists because they are free of Jewish influence (in their minds).

Here is an interesting post by SSleinpnir in the forums of Storm Front regarding "Romper Stomper:"

It has much more of an impact on the viewer because of it's extreme realism. American History X takes some of most brutal scenes of all time and just makes them look like silly lifetime specials by slowing it all down and making everything melodramatic.

Romper Stomper does the opposite, it films everything as it happens, making it one of the most disturbingly realistic works I've ever seen. Also, unlike other films about skinheads, Romper Stomper takes a completely unbiased look at their culture. Instead of showing everyone has rude, inconsiderate miscreants and then centering the film on the one person who is above at all, this film displays their culture for what it really is.

A realistic look at the skinheads, instead of an over-dramatic look at the struggle one person makes to get out. Russell Crowe is disturbingly natural, fully absorbed and overwhelmingly commanding in his greatest performance of all time.

"Romper Stomper" seems to be a favorite because it depicts White Nationalists in an unbiased manner, many believe that movies made in America in present day cannot be unbiased because many directors are afraid to "step on the toes of the Jewish power behind their industry."

After reading many reviews about "Romper Stomper," I found that it is very similar to " A Clockwork Orange." It is of no surprise that White Nationalists would respond to a movie that pays homage to Stanley Kubrick's classic. Many White Nationalists have Stanley Kubrick's movies in their top 10. The classics are more acceptable movies because it was prior to all the "influence" of Hollywood today. If you look at their favorite movies, they usually don’t date sooner than the 80s. The older movies still portray whites as the hero, something that they believe Hollywood won't do today.

A Brief History of Cinema...

A Look Over the Years of White Nationalists in Hollywood:

Movies have always been a great way to escape reality. You can throw your mind into a fantasy world, where you can witness characters and events that mirror reality. You can enjoy antic or cringe at certain situations, but at the end of the day, it is just a movie. Even if the movie is extremely far-fetched, people watch movies to entertain themselves. And, no matter how bizarre a scenario or character, the audience will still embark on that journey.

Movies styles, content, production value, etc. have all changed drastically from the first film. Cinema has come a long way from days of black and white silent movies. Improvements in technology, has aided those changes no doubt. What interests me is the content of movies and how they have changed. Like technology changed the way movies were made, society plays a huge role in what's deemed acceptable and controversial in a movie. How do we go from D.W. Griffith's KKK tribute, "The Birth of a Nation," to White Nationalists complaining about being the victim in almost every modern Hollywood movie? Society dictates what's fair game and what's taboo and it's evident when analyzing cinema's history.
You can't start a history of White Nationalists in cinema without 1915's "The Birth of a Nation."



D. W. Griffith's film was a big success commercially and for movies in general, but it was a bigger win for White Nationalists everywhere. I remember watching this film in my high school's Film Study class a junior. The film takes place during the era of Civil War and Reconstruction (post Civil War). The blacks in the movie, who are actually white actors in black face, are depicted as unintelligent and sexually aggressive towards white women. In one part of the movie, a black person is killed after he aggressively pursued a white woman into the forest, where she essentially jumped to her death, rather than being with a black man. The Ku Klux Klan hunts down the black man and tries him, to only fine the man guilty. In the film, the Ku Klux Klan is formed to retaliate against the Reconstruction laws allowing mixed race marriages and orders to salute black officers. The KKK is depicted as heroic and as crusaders to maintain the white race, while protecting the purity that is white women. The film sparked a second wave of the KKK and was also used as a huge recruiting tool.
A lot of early films depict whites as the superior while every other race is inferior, plays a sidekick or a villain. Dehumanization and holding whites supreme to other races was commonplace until more modern cinema. Many movies depict white nationalists as ignorant, country folk, uneducated, and devoid of civilization. Almost everyone taking this class have been influenced by media to think of white supremacists in that light. When doing the "defining white nationalism" assignment, many people had the same "person" in mind when thinking of White Nationalists.



"American History X" came out in 1998 and was interesting because the main character Derek, played by Edward Norton, is an intelligent student, but gets recruited by the leader of the Neo-Nazi movement after Derek's father is killed by a black drug dealer. The anger at a certain group is used to as a recruiting tool. Derek is a smart person, but certain events stir feelings of anger, and that anger is harnessed as hate. His hate disappears after spending jail time, when he becomes friends with a black inmate. Not every person in the movie is as smart as Derek. A lot of the gang come off as empty-headed, following every order from the leader. The leader uses his minions as his tools for destruction, while keeping his own hands clean.

It's comforting to think of White Nationalists in a way of being unintelligent and ignorant. Almost in a way, it is comforting for whites to think of every other race as below them (but on a way lesser scale). The depiction of White Nationalists or of just white people in general in cinema has angered White Nationalists so much they steer clear from a lot of Hollywood films.

New Focus

My new focus is the depiction of White Nationalists in Hollywood. First post coming soon.

My Focus

This semester, I am enrolled in CES 444, where we are learning about the White Power Movement and all the different sort of ideologies and various events through history. As part of the class, it is required to maintain a blog about any topic we want, while keeping it pertinent to our class. I decided to focus my posts on pop culture, specifically movies and music, and how white nationalists have been utilized or portrayed in these two things to help or hurt their cause throughout history. I will also examine music or movies that have messages taking stands against white nationalism. I am passionate about movies and music, so I picked these topics hoping it would be easy to write about. "Reel" and "Virtuoso" are movie and music terms, put those two together, you get the blog name. Not only will I focus on the historical perspective of white nationalists, but I will also examine how current White Power groups receive current movies and music. Hopefully, readers will be able to enjoy my posts as well as get something from it, seeing as music and movies are global to every one.