• Re: Planet of the Apes and its implications (2/2)

    From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to good grief on Thu Jun 2 23:37:40 2022
    [continued from previous message]

    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 Jewish–are allied with such men but feel frustrated and privately
    bitter. It’s like dealing with ugly, stupid, brutish, black-faced
    gorillas in BOTPOTA. So, white liberals and even some conservatives
    look upon Barack Obama as a Caesar-like figure(in BOTPOTA). Caesar is
    an angry ape–for what the humans had done to his fellow apes–, but
    he’s also a forgiving ape, an intellectual and smart ape, a reasonably humane ape, etc. Whites look upon Obama like South African whites
    looked upon Nelson Mandela. Whites are too guilt-ridden or afraid to
    honestly expound on what they hate about the black community, so they
    can only make indirect criticism by profusely overpraising what they
    deem as the virtues of black society. Whites are too afraid or guilt-
    ridden to say, ‘many of you black women are obnoxious, trashy,
    hideous, and monstrous’ so, instead, they take someone like Oprah and praise her to heaven. That’s supposed to serve as an indirect or muted criticism of the kind of stuff that whites don’t like in the black community.
    By profusely rewarding ‘good blacks’, whites hope to subtly punish bad blacks. The white message is, ‘look at all the goodies and riches that
    will come your way if you act nice like Oprah; if you act trashy,
    you’ll end up with nothing’. Problem is too many white people do
    reward crazy blacks as well. Just consider the amount of money made by rappers and other jiveass artists. Mixed signals are sent all the
    time. Anyway, there is this hope that by overpraising Bill Cosby,
    Oprah, and Obama, the gorillian blacks will take the cue from the
    smarter, saner, and more reasonable chimpish blacks. So, Barack Obama
    is useful and valuable to whites in the way that Caesar–the son of
    Zera and Cornelius–is beneficial to humans in BOTPOTA. In a world
    where whites are going to lose power regardless vis-a-vis the ‘people
    of color’, it’s better to elevate the saner than the insaner among the colored kind. But, look at where South Africa is going, and it’s not working, is it? Chimpish black Mandela was purely symoblic and Mbeki
    failed to connect with the masses of gorillian blacks. So, the end
    result is the rise of the gorillian and disgusting Jacob Zuma. Only
    hard truths are useful in history in the long run, not soft-headed
    liberal fantasies. Only fascists dare know and speak the truth.

    Anyway, that’s my summation of the Planet of the Apes and thoughts on whatever it may mean to the world of politics and social reality.

    Message about life:

    https://www.polygon.com/2020/9/18/21444131/planet-of-the-apes-movie-franchise-2020-politics-pandemic

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)