Notes on Trevor Lynch's Review of HIGH AND LOW directed by Akira Kurosawa

For the review, click the following link:
https://www.counter-currents.com/2020/07/high-and-low/

High and Low is a portrait of a virtuous industrialist who is targeted for destruction by a nihilistic criminal who hails from the professional rather than the working class and is motivated not by need but by envy and pure malice.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say he’s virtuous. To a large degree, Kingo Gondo(Toshiro Mifune) was compelled to do the ‘right thing’. If he has something in common with the kidnapper(named Takeuchi and played by Tsutomu Yamazaki), it is neither character truly understands himself — ultimately, both are driven by emotions than moral reasoning though, to be sure, whereas Takeuchi had all the time in the world to plan the crime(like Gondo with his secret plot to take over the company), time is running out for Gondo to either pay the ransom or finalize his takeover, a classic 'gain the world, lose the soul' situation. Gondo does the moral thing, but he’s not really sure what drove him to it. And even though the criminal later tries to justify or explain himself, he doesn’t really know his own heart(or lack of one). After all, the economic argument isn’t very compelling on his part. Though he’s known poverty, he was studying to be a doctor and had something of a future. So, he was driven by more than need. Was it an idea, a kind of twisted philosophy that possesses the character of CRIME AND PUNISHMENT? Or was it just the nature he was born with? In RED BEARD, there’s a psycho-woman who goes around seducing and killing men. We learn she was victimized as a child, but Mifune’s character of the wise doctor says that some people are simply born evil, and there's nothing that can be done about it. If so, are they to blame for their pathology? Can society be blamed for failing to reform such individuals? If being born-evil is a natural condition in some people, what is to be done? Most likely, even had Takeuchi been born into affluence/privilege, he likely would have had evil lurking in his heart and would have committed other crimes of sociopathic nature. There are surely plenty of white collar criminals and scumbags in the Deep State. Alas, they have the Law on their side and can get away with acting like miscreants. Rule of Law is for little people. Jewish Power and Deep State are above that.

Now, Gondo's frustration(bordering on anger) in regards to Aoki's desperate pleading to save his son was, in a way, s desperate repression of his shame that he's decided to choose money over life. It's especially stinging on his conscience because he was willing to pay any sum to save his own kid but doesn't feel the same way for another man's son... which, of course, is natural as most of us don't care about strangers. Still, with Aoki the relationship is somewhat complicated because, even though he's just a hireling who's only owed waged, he's also been a loyal servant and grown close to the family, indeed to the extent that his son plays with Gondo's son as if they're siblings. Whereas the parents are distinguished by rank and status, kids are still kids. They even switch roles and toy guns at the drop of a hat in playing cops and robbers. Ironically, Gondo cheers on his son in the role of robber. He tells him to do ANYTHING to 'kill' the cop and come out on top. Winning is what matters. Because his son feels so close to Aoki's kid, Gondo is especially in a quandary. Also, the ONLY reason the kid was kidnapped was because of mistaken identity. The real target was Gondo's son, and so, Aoki's son would NOT have been kidnapped if he hadn't been playing in the premises of Gondo's house and mistaken for his kid. So, in a way, even though Gondo's son is safe at home, it is as if he was kidnapped in a 'spiritual' sense. Aoki's kid could very well be Gondo's kid. It was only by chance that the kidnapper took the wrong kid. There is also the fact that Aoki is a widower and only has his son as family(like with the widower of IKIRU; one of the sad things about the angry peasant in SEVEN SAMURAI is that his wife has been kidnapped by the bandits, and so, he has no family, which for Kurosawa, is the saddest thing, as with the Dersu Uzala character). (In a way, there are two wrongful kidnappings in HIGH AND LOW. Not only is the wrong kid abducted but the wrong Gondo is targeted by Takeuchi the kidnapper, i.e. Takeuchi's imagination of Gondo as heartless villain is at odds with the real man who, though no saint, isn't a monster either. But Takeuchi's craziness can't hold a candle to current PC craziness in the West where Jewish Power willfully paints the wrong image of Evil Whiteness, so evil that it must be attacked and destroyed and shown no quarters. People like Tim Wise, Sabrina Rubin Erderly, and Mark Zuckerberg's disgusting sister are kidnappers and murderers of White Reputation.)

Now, if Aoki's son had been kidnapped at Aoki's house for reasons unrelated to Gondo, Gondo would have felt no special obligation to sacrifice his wealth for the kid. But, as Aoki's kid was playing with Gondo's kid only because Aoki was working for Gondo, it's not merely an academic matter but a very personal one. It's not just a question of abstract altruism but personal attachment. Unlike his partners who are willing to stab him in the back(and vice versa), Aoki has been a loyal worker. Also, children easily become friends and attached to one another, and Gondo would feel shamefaced in front of his own son IF he let the other kid get murdered.

Also, the 'national' and 'social' elements cannot be overstated. Jewish Power pushed two ideologies on Western Man: Anti-National collectivism(especially via communism and anarchism)
and Anti-National individualism(especially via libertarianism and me-centered hedonism). Though collectivism and individualism are polar opposites, they have one key commonality: Denial of National Identity, Unity, and Purpose. Ideally, communism was supposed to be a borderless ideology of workers-of-the-world(even though its tyranny, failures, and paranoia about the richer and more powerful West led to strict border controls that actually boosted national preservation, if only by accident). And libertarian capitalism denigrates national identities as 'atavistic tribalism' and emphasizes the free individual as rootless globalist wanderer. But even as Jews pushed these two modes on goyim, their main mode was a form of 'national socialism' via Zionism and Jewish Consciousness. Indeed, it was a key reason as to why many Jews were alarmed by the rise of German National Socialism and fascism in general. Sure, they were disturbed by its anti-Jewish vitriol, but the other reason was the Germans had figured out the real source of Jewish Power: Jews used capitalism and employed elements of socialism BUT centered around Jewish Interests; in other words, make collectivism and individualism revolve around nationalism than abandon nationalism to wholly commit oneself to collectivism or individualism. (To be sure, the main passion of white people today is more idolatry than ideology: Worship of the holy three of Jews, homos, and Negroes, what with both white socialists and white capitalists sucking to Fentanyl Floyd as the holy angel.) Without Tribalesse Oblige, the elites of a people split from the masses of the people... as we are now seeing in the West and even the East.

Now, 'national socialism' only works within the nation, which is why both German imperialism and Japanese imperialism became so problematic and ultimately monstrous. Their strong sense of identity made them cohesive at home but alienated & hostile abroad, especially among those they regarded as inferior. And we see the same problem with Jewish Power. Zionism works well for Jews in Israel but unfolds as supremacist Nazi-like imperialism outside the Jewish nation because Jews feel disdain and contempt for goyim, be they Arabs or Iranians.

Kurosawa on the set of RED BEARD with Toshiro Mifune

But it turns out there is a heroic and manly way to make women’s shoes. Gondo… is hosting some of his fellow executives, who wish to enlist him in a corporate coup against the “old man” who… is stuck in a rut of making unfashionable “army boots.” Gondo’s colleagues wish to manufacture flashy shoes that are cheaply made. Gondo wants to make more fashionable products, but he feels that selling shoddy merchandise is dishonorable…

Here Akira Kurosawa was probably making a commentary on culture as a whole, not least film culture. HIGH AND LOW came out when Japanese cinema was coming under serious competition from TV. Also, with rising prosperity, the culture was changing from post-war humanism & moralism to consumerism, hedonism, & even nihilism. Given the wreckage of war and widespread poverty, the humanist themes/message in fiction and movies had resonated with audiences around the world as nations began to rebuild from the rubble. But in Japan as in Europe, the rise of La Dolce Vita sensibility led to consumers hankering for style and fashion than morality and sobriety. And some even regarded YOJIMBO as a nod in this direction; it was a huge hit in Japan and inspired the nihilistic A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS that changed film history, not necessarily for the better(though Sergio Leone was a true giant). But beneath the veneer of nihilistic ‘cool’, YOJIMBO was meant as morality tale and satire. It was meant to be more despairing of than inspired by the new outlook, especially among the young. On the one hand, Kurosawa understood that Japanese cinema could not rehash the same humanist messages that had special meaning for post-war movie audiences. Times change, and arts/entertainment must stay afloat of new conditions and expectations if they're to be relevant. He understood that people in a more prosperous Japan wanted a popular culture with more color, splash, and excitement. And in a way, HIGH AND LOW is the kind of shoes that Gondo wants to make: sturdy and stylish. It is substantive with serious themes but also stylish and suspenseful. And even though it is on the side of law and morality, it daringly ventures into the nether zones of modern Japan, disapprovingly but with a certain cool fascination.

Kurosawa was feeling the pressure. Not only from the rapidly rising popularity of TV but from a younger generation of film-makers with more of a ‘new wave’ approach. His brand of cinema faced the problem of not being low/popular enough and high/arty enough. Two years prior to HIGH AND LOW, Shohei Imamura made PIGS AND BATTLESHIPS set in a similar social milieu, though mostly of ‘hell’ or the ‘low’. There’s a devil-may-care sensibility in Imamura’s film that lends it nuance and fluidity missing in Kurosawa’s work that, despite ‘modernist’ touches, is essentially a rather rigid moral drama(which at times comes close to melodrama). Kurosawa wore the hefty theme on his sleeve, as with Otto Preminger, and it could have been off-putting to subtler sensibilities(which is why many cineastes never tire of telling everyone they prefer Yasujiro Ozu, Kenji Mizoguchi, Mikio Naruse, or etc. over Kurosawa). Imamura’s films have a licentious spirit and free-wheeling curiosity, absent of anything like a 'message' and leaving the meaning to the audience to piece together on their own. The mercurial Imamura runs with the idea and follows it wherever it may lead, whereas Kurosawa projects a moral map in an Apollonian manner.

PIGS AND BATTLESHIPS by Shohei Imamura

Like Ingmar Bergman and Federico Fellini, Kurosawa came into his own in the humanist 1950s and was somewhat at odds with the newly emerging film sensibility of the 60s though YOJIMBO did play a role in setting the tone. While the mass audience was turning to TV, leading critics were shifting their attention to younger talents like Nagisa Oshima, Hiroshi Teshigahara, and Imamura. Another problem was Kurosawa, like David Lean, got accustomed to scale(as a matter of prestige) and thereby less adept at navigating the troubled waters of changing economy and taste. He faced the danger of becoming a dinosaur in a rapidly changing industry that could no longer afford his kind of 'perfectionism'. Overly confident of his vaunted position as a world-famous master film-maker, Kurosawa stuck with established conventions of film-making, albeit with nods to innovation and fashion. He wanted to make fancier boots than high heels, and sadly, HIGH AND LOW was the last of its kind for Kurosawa. The next film RED BEARD was an excellent boot but very much an old boot. Critics and the public saluted it as a grand monument(and last hurrah) to humanism but didn't salivate over it. It was acknowledged as serious and important but failed to garner enthusiasm as the future direction of Japanese cinema.

Incidentally, the scenario of plotting to overthrow the ‘old man’ in HIGH AND LOW later resurfaces in RAN where the two older sons plot against the father while the youngest son, though seemingly ungrateful and petulant, is not without principles and a deeper sense of loyalty. Likewise, even though Gondo seems to stand against the 'old man', it is out of loyalty to the latter's resolute sense of standards. HIGH AND LOW and RAN also have in common the journey from top to bottom, and few places are as visually apt as Japan, a mountainous island-nation, for themes related to hierarchy.

RAN - 1985

I prefer Kurosawa’s morality plays to Imamura’s anthropological forays, but the didacticism could favor instruction over inspiration. Though Kurosawa’s imagination wandered widely from the high world to the low, his lens was usually focused on the good and the bad, honorable and dishonorable, teacher and student, noble and ignoble. As such, his realism was in service of moralism, even an idealism(a blend of traditional culture of respect and modern commitment to individuality), than acceptance of reality as reality. It's no wonder that, despite the realist settings of many of his films, most characters belong to certain social types. (Only SEVEN SAMURAI comes close to breaking out of this mold.) He was unwilling to see people and accept them just as they are. His vision always had a moral vertebrae with overarching shape and structure from head to tail. The stuff of good vs evil, noble & ignoble, and heroes & villains that audiences could readily recognize. Kurosawa, like Masaki Kobayashi, thought in terms of the Human Condition. But perhaps a closer probing of humanity requires malleability in the degrees of observation and inspection. Imamura was like an octopus. Lacking the rigidity of a moralist backbone, he could slither in and out of all kinds of human situations without moral judgement though his works aren't without moral sense. For Imamura, truth itself intimately observed and accurately delineated has moral value in and of itself. It's no wonder his characters, major or minor, are first and foremost individuals than archetypes or stereotypes. VENGEANCE IS MINE, for example, is the kind of film that Kurosawa could not have made. Kurosawa tried to confront the evil of the kidnapper/murderer in HIGH AND LOW but hit a brick wall. The character comes close to being the face of Evil Incarnate and remains beyond comprehension. He is only to be judged and condemned. It's as if Kurosawa felt there's a limit to human understanding, as with the woodcutter and the priest in the opening of RASHOMON who simply cannot penetrate the mysteries of human darkness. In contrast, Imamura slithered into the decrepit souls of the characters in PIGS AND BATTLESHIPS and VENGEANCE IS MINE and observed like a naturalist. A special kind of skill but sure to be discomfiting to most audiences.

Gondo then explains to his assistant that he has been planning his own takeover of National Shoes, mortgaging himself to the hilt buying up chunks of stock. All he needs is to complete one last purchase.

This suggest Gondo isn’t exactly virtuous. Though clearly more admirable than his partners, he’s not above backroom deals and intrigue to gain the upper hand. Perhaps, he’s justified in his maneuvers, but he’s also driven by egotism and pride.

If he does pay, the child may still die, the money may never be recovered, and Gondo will almost surely be ruined. Eventually, though, Gondo is persuaded by his wife, his driver, and the police to pay the ransom. It is the compassionate thing to do.

It is a bit more complicated. There is the matter of public opinion. If Gondo doesn’t pay the ransom and uses the money to take over the company, he could get such bad press that he will be ruined anyway. It’s really a case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t, or being stuck between a rock and a hard place. So, even though he was partly motivated by conscience, did he really have a choice? Either way, he might have faced ruin. A man is not an island but lives in a community. (If Gondo doesn't pay the ransom and if the kid dies, he has to deal with both public pressure and personal issues. Without the love/respect of his wife and son, could he really live with a peace of mind? He isn't a loner but a family man, and there is something like a family-mind in any household. What he might accept on his own is far more difficult to accept as the head of a family. The old villain in BAD SLEEP WELL is willing to even lose his son & daughter to keep his position, but Gondo isn't that kind of man.) If the community rejects the man as immoral or soulless, the man becomes an outcast. There is some of this in the dynamics of ‘woke capital’, the difference being that whereas Gondo was faced with a real moral dilemma and did what was right, most of ‘woke capital’ is either just delusional or craven in sucking up to PC narrative pushed by insane Jewish Supremacists. (I mean, when will ‘woke capital’ push ‘Palestinian Lives Matter’ or ‘Justice for Libyans and Syrians destroyed by Obama and Hillary’ or ‘Sanction Israel that has nukes and stop sanctioning Iran that has NO nukes’?) As in IKIRU, we don’t really know the motivation behind Gondo. He doesn’t really know either. Was he truly motivated by conscience or did he do the right thing because he couldn’t win either way? Or did it have to do with self-justification under the gaze of his family and the police. The policemen remain as calm and professional as the wife is distressed and pleading, but Gondo can sense judgement in their silence. So, there is jumble of motivations. Likewise, was the old man in IKIRU really motivated by compassion or did his ego seek validation before he died? Was it really selfless or was it about the self, the need to be remembered?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/hm6NAwdsTzM/


Thus far, High and Low has been, in effect, a filmed stage play. But Kurosawa is so virtuosic at creating dramatic tension and coaxing out compelling performances that the result is not static at all.

An odd thing about HIGH AND LOW is that the ‘stage play’ opening of the film is more exciting and suspenseful than the latter part, much of which takes place outdoors and is full of movement. The interior scenes are less static than the exterior ones.

The film then switches gears again into a quasi-documentary about the police’s attempts to find the kidnapper and recover Gondo’s money. At this point, some people might feel the movie drags, but I found the meticulous rationality of the detective work fascinating.

For first-time viewers, it won’t drag because of the element of mystery and suspense. But for repeat-viewing, some of the later scenes with detective work do drag because they are presented more like docu-drama procedural than psychological drama. (In contrast, Fritz Lang’s M is compelling from start to finish no matter how many times you watch it.) It would have been more interesting had Kurosawa developed the detectives as fully-realized characters than presented them rather too heroically as social ideals. They strike me as too-good-to-be-true, too upright. Kurosawa mocked such earnestness in the young samurai in SANJURO, but the lawmen of HIGH AND LOW are to be taken as the best of the best. For this reason, the darker implications of the police work don't register as powerfully. After all, the inspector could have had the kidnapper arrested but prolong the pursuit to charge him with a more serious crime, thereby receiving a sentence befitting his wicked nature and the grave harm he's caused. As a result, the kidnapper ends up killing another person, a female junkie who is used as a guinea pig. This raises a ethical question as to whether the police acted professionally or out of vendetta against the criminal, especially as the head detective became personally invested in bringing justice to Gondo, who did the right thing at great cost. His personal feelings about Gondo may have affected his professional decision, leading to the death of a woman. (Also, in a question session with reporters, the police urge the newsmen to give bad press to the shoe company for firing Gondo. It is to punish the executives, but won't the depressed sales hurt the workers as well? Also, is it professional or ethical for the police to make such a request? This darker side of police work — the questionable ethics even when the lawmen act in the name of justice — isn't addressed in the film.)

It is a wonderful portrait of what is possible in a homogeneous, high-IQ, high-solidarity society—everything whites have lost by embracing diversity.

This is questionable. Japan has been called a high-trust society, but it’s more a high-conformist and high-obedience society, though these days perhaps not even that. Japanese justice system has been notorious for being unresponsive to problems until things really go south. Also, the legacy of caste-mentality and social hierarchy can just as easily foster distrust as trust among the populace. After all, the film is called HEAVEN AND HELL or High and Low. Japanese with privilege don’t care about the rest. Their attitude is “I got mine” or at best, "My family got ours", and that is the extent of Gondo's concern when he realizes his chauffeur's son has been kidnapped.
Why is the nation of Japan in a death spiral? Because Japanese look down on 'dirty', 'dangerous', and 'degrading' labor. Japanese would rather die than do ‘dirty’ work. In the past, many Japanese just accepted their lot and did whatever job was available but prolonged affluence led to higher expectations among many Japanese, and they’d rather commit national suicide and import cheap labor(that will lead to the great replacement) than do ‘dirty’ jobs. In BAD SLEEP WELL, Kurosawa exposed the hollowness of the cult of trust in Japan. While underlings sacrifice their lives for their bosses, the latter just hoard everything for themselves. The rich care about family members but lack any sense of larger good or national interest. Kurosawa himself, despite the humanist themes of his works, attempted suicide in the early 1970s when he felt he could no longer make the kinds of films he wanted to. Accustomed to his role as the emperor of Japanese cinema, he was unwilling to shift gears and work on more modest projects as some of his peers did. Perhaps, he found them 'degrading'.

High and Low is clearly an anti-Marxist film.

While it’s not a Marxist film, it isn’t anti-Marxist either. It might be called ‘national socialist’ with little ‘n’ and ‘s’. It is about a rich man who comes to look beyond class & privilege and embraces the child of his servant as if his own. He goes from capitalist mindset and family-centrism to national and humanist consciousness. This was the positive side of National Socialism and New Deal. This theme, of the high and mighty being compelled to recognize the humanity of those below them in status, recurs throughout Kurosawa’s works. In SEVEN SAMURAI, the ronin are masterless knights but still higher in social rank than the lowly peasants. Initially the samurai feel it’s beneath them to risk their lives for dirty peasants, but the two groups join forces against the bandits. In MEN WHO TREAD ON TIGER’S TAIL and HIDDEN FORTRESS, noblemen-in-exile disguise themselves as commoners and come to see the other side of society. Kurosawa as a young man had communist sympathies and even as late as the 1970s, he had glowing things to say about Lenin(to Andrei Konchalovsky’s horror).



In films like BAD SLEEP WELL, RED BEARD, and YOJIMBO, merchants don’t come across as noble characters. And yet, Kurosawa could see things from both sides. As such, HIGH AND LOW makes an interesting contrast with BAD SLEEP WELL. The latter film is about the evil of corruption fueled by greed, whereas the hero of the former is a businessman tormented by an impoverished medical student. Thus, good and evil isn’t a matter of class(though it seems those who gain great wealth or power tend to be sociopathic: take the loathsome Jeff Bezos and the scum in the Deep State; on the other hand, consider all the lumpen scum who loot and burn; 2020 is the year of synergy between elite deep state and lowly street scum, with horrendous consequences; for sure, the convergence of sociopaths on top and psychopaths on the bottom is recipe for disaster). Kurosawa had socialist-humanist leanings but also an elitist streak, not least because of his samurai background. It’s like Oliver Stone is a man of the Left but with a Great Man Complex: Tony Montana, Gordon Gekko, Alexander the Great. Kurosawa found humanism in the lower depths but also nobility in the higher reaches. KAGEMUSHA is kind of a reverse of HIDDEN FORTRESS. A vulgar thief comes to appreciate and ultimately die for the lofty honor of the Takeda clan. It's about the low entering the realm of the high than the vice versa in HIDDEN FORTRESS.

HIDDEN FORTRESS

In fact, the leftist rhetoric he spouts is simply a tool by which these monsters gain the power to murder millions.

There’s an element of leftism but also nihilism. He tries to convince Gondo and himself that he doesn’t care if he dies. He claims to be unafraid of anything and beyond human emotions, but he breaks down with a fury and desperation that is all too human, even animal. The final moment is harrowing because the would-be-nihilist finally realizes his own humanity, its fragility and weakness. It’s been said of Kamikaze pilots that they died beautifully and poetically without fear, for country and emperor. But it’s been recorded that many charged to their deaths scared out of their minds screaming for mother. In the end, they were human after all.

In their meeting, Takeuchi(the kidnapper) realizes that Gondo is not the monster that he made him out to be, imagined him to be, indeed willed him to be. Seeing the big mansion from below, Takeuchi created his own impression of Gondo. Since greed is a common feature among the rich, Takeuchi created an essentialist view of Gondo as a rich parasite; by what is shown in HIGH AND LOW, he isn't exactly wrong as Gondo's business associates do come across as greedy and unscrupulous. In a way, it might have pleased Takeuchi IF Gondo hadn’t paid the ransom and let the child die. Then, Takeuchi would have been vindicated in his view of Gondo. But Gondo paid, even if it meant personal ruin for the sake of a child who isn't his own. Gondo did the ‘leftist’ thing in favoring the life of a servant than personal profits. In contrast, Takeuchi ended up taking money in exchange for the life of a poor man’s son, hardly a leftist thing to do.
Perhaps, Takeuchi would have at least felt vindicated if Gondo had been bitter toward him in their meeting — greedy Gondo angry about the money or the anger as evidence of Takeuchi's significance in the lives of others. Instead, he sees a decent man and has to face the fact that he ruined the life of a man, not a monster. Thus, Takeuchi loses something more dear to him than his life: His radical self-justification based on a delusion. Sadly, such deluded conviction is now the official ideology of the US. Any black person is morally justified in seeing every white person as ‘racist’, ‘fragile’, ‘privileged’, or whatever. The fantasy of righteous hate takes precedence over reality and complexity. Thus, the whole nation has been taken hostage by black and Antifa lunatics egged on by insane Jewish supremacists.

High and Low’s portrayal of a heroic businessman plagued by an envious villain, as well as its celebration of the rationality of the police detectives could almost spring from the pen of Ayn Rand. Gondo and the detectives represent the highest virtues of bourgeois modernity, whereas the kidnapper represents its deepest vice.

Not sure about this. Ayn Rand was not about bourgeois values but radical individualism. She might have sneered at Gondo’s decision to pay the ransom as sappy ‘altruism’. Granted, Randism at its core isn’t really about ‘muh profits’. In THE FOUNTAINHEAD, Peter Keating reaps the profits by whoring out to public taste whereas Howard Roark faces many hardships and bouts of poverty. Still, he has Rand’s respect because of his vision and refusal to compromise, ever. But HIGH AND LOW isn’t a celebration of the superior individual. Its morality is closer to IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE where an individual with visibly superior qualities sacrifices personal dreams for what is good for his hometown community. Would such outlook have sat well with Ayn Rand? Rand surely would have told George Bailey to leave dinky Bedford Falls and follow his dream like Howard Roark.

HIGH AND LOW might make for an interesting comparison with the Oscar-winner Korean film PARASITE by Bong Joon-Ho. Both are about class tensions. The difference is, whereas HIGH AND LOW offered some hope of mutual understanding between the classes on the basis of nationalism and humanism, there is nothing to salvage in PARASITE where society and culture are utterly soulless, bloodless, and gutless.

HIGH AND LOW diagnosed the problems of its day as festering future wounds if left untreated. (How ironic that the villain is a medical student. Medicine as mere profession isn't enough to guarantee the nobleness of its calling, the theme of Kurosawa's next film RED BEARD.) Post-war prosperity was welcome but had a divisive effect on the Japanese who, due to war and deprivation, had shared in the hardships together as a nation. Class divisions are inevitable in any society but threaten the sense of national identity and unity. Today, we see this problem all over the world. Western elites no longer feel any sense of unity or solidarity with their racial brethren among the lower classes. They are too busy snubbing white masses as ‘racist’ or virtue-signaling about homos, Negroes, and Diversity. And much the same is happening in Japan. Its merchant elites have turned Japan into a soulless consumer society. With its adoption of globo-homo, afro-globo, mass immigration, and irreversible decline in birthrates, Japan is doomed like the West.

There’s a harrowing scene of druggies in HIGH AND LOW, and fast-forward to today, and consider the global spread of drug culture(aided and abetted by pop culture that has increasingly grown to resemble drugs, more like chemicals than experiences). In every continent, there's massive addiction to legal and illegal drugs. Mass white deaths from opioids(but white lives don’t matter in Jewish Supremacist America where countless brain-dead whites worship George Floyd the Fentanyl Negro.) Entire cultures centered on drugs and fantasy of escapism. Junkies seek insta-heaven with easy highs but fall deeper into the pits of hell.
HIGH AND LOW also exposes the problems of US imperialism and the vices it spreads. Surely, the most outrageous scene is in the nightclub where some monster-sized Negro with a big ass fattened with countless buckets of fried chicken keep trying to land a five with his big fat hand on everyone. It's a vision of Japan as whore nation to the US. A memorable Ugly American scene. Against drugs, nihilism, and mindless hedonism, Kurosawa offered a vision of life and economy centered on honest work, family, and morality. At one time, such values were easily recognized by most people, but today, they are shocking and scandalous in a world of the New Normal where the highest morality is LGBT marching with BLM to push utterly delusional visions of reality. In the end, Kurosawa’s warnings came to naught, and modern civilization is one big suicide cult.

One problem with the film is that the rival executives are reduced to paper-thin scoundrels to make Gondo seem so much better. They are too obvious as foils. It would have been more interesting if the execs were presented as men with reasonable(if not exactly noble) motives of their own. After all, they are selling women’s shoes, the kind women intend to dispose of sooner than later. Shoddy boots are a bad idea, but shoddy women’s shoes make sense given women’s shoes change with fashion. Also, there is the high-end market and low-end market. A lot of people buy stuff that they don’t intend to keep for long. Indeed, Gondo and others could have compromised. Make high-end quality shoes at higher price and make cheap shoes for low-end market. Why not both? It’s like Hollywood made both A movies and B movies. But Kurosawa and his co-writers opted for a simpler setup verging on melodrama. In contrast, consider the characterizations of Barzini and Hyman Roth in THE GODFATHER movies. Though we are left rooting for the Corleones, we can see where Barzini is coming from. The man is all business, and he knows drugs are the future. And we know Roth holds a personal grudge(about Moe Green) to rival Michael's own regarding Sollozzo the Turk. MICHAEL CLAYTON may not be a great movie but is all the more interesting for having a villainess who isn't evil by design but by circumstances. If Gondo is compelled to do the 'right thing', she is compelled under pressure to do the wrong thing. Not because she's evil at the core but because her vanity and loyalty to the company require she do so. Still, she takes no pleasure in doing it. Perhaps, only few people are evil at the core(and relish acting evil), but many people do end up committing evil acts out of 'necessity'; worse, it can become habitual and mundane, thus no longer appearing on the moral radar — it's like those working in the sewage don't notice the smell so badly. Granted, the rival execs in HIGH AND LOW are not exactly evil — they are too petty and predictable for that — , but they are utterly two-dimensional creatures.

In RAN, while the two older sons are vile characters, we can at least understand where they're coming from. Their motives aren't purely scoundrel-like. The oldest son isn’t very bright and has only the position to stake his authority. The second son is smart and feels HE should inherit the throne. They are bad but understandable. In contrast, the execs in HIGH AND LOW are shallow jerks, and that’s about it. Now, there are real people who are little more than jerks, but in HIGH AND LOW, such characterizations seem too easy a way to burnish Gondo's credentials as an ethical businessman. There’s an element of cheap shot.

The great thing about SEVEN SAMURAI is that even the most craven and despicable peasant, the father of the pretty girl, is utterly understandable on human terms. And he’s not entirely wrong in his arguments and in his feelings. HIGH AND LOW doesn’t reach so high.

The Japanese title of High and Low… literally means “Heaven and Hell.” But High and Low is a good title, because the movie is constructed around the contrasts between a modernist mansion… and the crowded, chaotic city below.

While HIGH AND LOW as title is certainly workable, it misses at the bigger meaning of the film. ‘High’ and ‘Low’ indicate differences in wealth and status, but Kurosawa ponders something darker than mere economic hardship and poverty. One can be in the low world but not in hell. ‘Hell’ is a moral and spiritual condition. Kurosawa’s earlier films showed much poverty, but in ONE WONDERFUL SUNDAY, a real gem, a couple barely has enough money for a cup of coffee but are still in a kind of heaven than hell because they have each other.

The hell in HIGH AND LOW is not the world of the poor. It’s a state of mind, the destruction of souls. The film goes from the rich world to the world of the poor, but we still don’t see hell. We see hell when we finally encounter kidnapper and the world of addiction. We also see hell in the raucous night club scene. Now, hedonism isn’t necessarily hellish, and every city has(and even needs) something like the Red-Light District, but there’s something especially sleazy about the night-club scene and not because of some gorilla-like big-ass Negro fattened on fried chicken. It is a vision of Japan as un-Japan, a zone not only of military occupation but cultural degeneration. The racial mix in the club are united only by noise, rancor, and amnesia. (It’s different from the folk music in HIDDEN FORTRESS that confirms the community.) Now, if such stuff can be restricted to the Red-Light District, it wouldn’t be so bad, but such Americanism came to serve as the blueprint for ALL OF CULTURE and ALL OF SOCIETY and ALL AROUND THE WORLD, a hellish vision of the Kalergi Plan of no borders, no limits, no thoughts of past or future but just the thrill of the jungle moment. What is the main expression of Western Civilization today? ‘Twerking’. At least the Twist(seen in the movie) was a half-decent kind of dance.

So, using ‘low’ than ‘hell’ misses what the film is ultimately about. It’s about something worse than poverty of means. It’s about the poverty of the soul. In this respect, HIGH AND LOW is a lavish variation of STRAY DOG where the gun-thief and his girlfriend have adopted a kind of nihilism. Indeed, the scenes of arrests of the criminals in the two films are similar. They are handcuffed amidst flowers and reminders of innocence lost.

Also, ‘heaven’ lends a special meaning that ‘high’ simply misses. It adds an element of irony for the ‘heavenly’ world of the high is filled with its own demons. And in a way, the problems of ‘heaven’ is connected to ‘hell’. While Takeuchi the kidnapper was likely born evil or had a childhood so bitter & painful that he was scarred for life, he is also the product of New Japan as created by the US empire with the collaboration of the merchant and war-criminal class. Initially, US Occupation worked with the Japanese Left against the defeated and disgraced Militarist Right. But things soon changed as China turned communist and Soviet Union became the main rival of US power. Also, the Japanese Left got too radical and demanding. So, the US rehabilitated many militarist elites who’d earlier been accused of war crimes. So, many of the militarist elites who’d once sworn to fight the US to the last man were working as toadies, which ended up creating, more or less, the one-party system in Japan that is totally servile to the US. As such, there was no national theme in Japan but economic growth and materialism. It was all about the Money, and Takeuchi is someone who grew up under the new system. Of course, his crime is his own. After all, most Japanese, regardless of circumstances, didn’t go around committing crimes or kidnapping kids. Still, his soullessness is part of the larger disease flowing from those on top. Just like the corrupt businessmen in BAD SLEEP WELL are capable of ANYTHING to get what they want, the kidnapper follows the same logic. The differences is that those with privilege and connections can pull strings and get away with it. In contrast, low-level criminals when caught must face justice.

…as the detectives observe Gondo’s character—his decision to pay the ransom, his courage, his intelligence, and his unpretentiousness (mowing his own lawn, breaking out his shoemaker’s tools to help modify the briefcases for the ransom)—they are won over

To be sure, he mows his own lawn because he was fired from the company and has too much time on his hands. Ideally, he should be at work and his servant would do the lawn work.

Gondo is a self-made man, who rose to his position due to hard work. He was not born to wealth and privilege. His wife does come from a privileged background, and her dowry certainly helped matters, but he had to win her through hard work and character as well.

Right. The thing about Gondo is we mustn’t see him only as a businessman. He rose up the ranks and became an executive, but he began as an apprentice and worker on the shop floor. So, he’s the full package. He knows the business from low to high. He paid his dues. He didn’t inherit some high position from a rich father. So, Gondo has the consciousness of prole, craftsman, professional, and businessman.
In a way, it could be Kurosawa’s commentary on how he became a director. Before Film Studies in universities, film-makers rose up the ranks by doing just about anything. They mopped floors, served as extras, learned various skills and tricks on the job. This was true of men like Raoul Walsh and John Ford. While young film-makers today must also work up the ladder, they develop more of a privileged mindset because they enter the profession through college courses. They begin with a cerebral outlook and seek to specialize as writers, producers, or directors. But in Kurosawa’s time, you had to work yourself up from the shop floor. You began like the privates in FULL METAL JACKET, as grunts and maggots. Same with newspapers. Before elite college kids filled the ranks of journalism, many had entered the profession through experience. Now, the Film School system has much to recommend it. It did produce great directors like Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese, among others. But, psychologically at least, it’s about going from high to high than working from low to high.

So, characterizing Gondo primarily as a ‘businessman’ would be misleading. The workers in the factory seem to respect him despite his hot temper because he knows the industry from shop floor to high office. He was one of them. Still, as a businessman, he’s far from virtuous and is capable of gambling everything and acting like a shark. Though his partners aren’t saints, his underhanded plot to take over the company was ethically dubious. (Also, Gondo didn’t only plot against the partners but against the ‘old man’ who, though behind the times, seems a man of principle in product quality. The bigger question is why would the ‘old man’, who stodgily resists change, cooperate with unscrupulous short-term profiteers? I suppose the latter could be more shameless in flattering the ‘old man’ in his presence, much like the older sons in RAN who gain the approval of their father while planning his demise.) Worse, without consulting his wife, Gondo put up the family house up as collateral to acquire the loans, thereby risking everything in a daring move to take over the company. Because he bet so much, his fall is especially hard when he must pay the ransom. In a way, he’s a victim of his own hubris, despite the fact that his vision of the company was more admirable than that of his partners.

The ending is happy but haunting. In this case, justice has triumphed, but at great cost. Evil and chaos will always threaten order and goodness.

Can the ending be said to be ‘happy’? Sure, the criminal is caught and brought to justice, but the final scene is grim. Also, by ‘evil and chaos’ threatening the order, what if the very order breeds such evil and chaos(especially of the soul)? In a way, the kidnapper is an agent of evil and chaos. In another way, he is the product of the New Order, a Japan of materialism without a soul. A nation whose survival and livelihood depend on playing whore to US imperialism. Japan gained tremendous economic benefits as a vassal of the US, but what did it lose?
Before defeat, Japan was plagued with a different kind of evil. This Japan did have a soul. It did have a meaningful connection to the past. The Emperor represented the Japanese people’s connection to their history and to their island nation as sacred homeland than mere geography. Through the Emperor, Japanese blood was one with Japanese soil. But with Japan as an imperialist power in its own right, the Yamato spirit had grown cancerous and risked everything. In doing so, it committed great crimes all over Asia and got embroiled with war with US(and then USSR) and then lost everything and had to start from scratch as the Tokyo Shoeshine Boy and Mamasan of the US. In a way, Gondo’s attempted putsch and the son’s overly ambitious battle plan at the end of KAGEMUSHA have something in common with Japanese imperial ambitions. They put all the eggs in one basket, took a huge gamble, and lost everything. Still, militarist Japan stood for something. Japanese people were bound together, high and low, not only by material need but a sense of national culture and spiritual connection to the past. It's as if Japanese had something like the covenant through reverence for the Emperor.

KAGEMUSHA - 1980

With defeat and US occupation, there were surely great gains in freedoms and economic development. Lots of good positive stuff in many walks of life. But a people cannot live with bread and liberty alone. They need meaning, connection, & pride as a people, and those essentials were lost. The new elites promoted this soulless Japan, and in a way, the kidnapper’s attack on the rich could be, on some subconscious level, a strike against their perfidy. After all, in a nation with meaning, even the poor might feel some ‘spiritual’ connection to the rulers. In his autobiography, Kurosawa said he despised the military dictatorship during the war(and didn’t believe in the literal divinity of Hirohito), but if the Emperor had told the people to commit mass ritual suicide, he would have. What this suggests was that pre-defeat Japan, though defined by some very dark atavistic ideas, was a nation of meaning. There was some real connection between the rulers and the ruled.

In contrast, the kidnapper, like most post-war Japanese, has no soulful connection with the rulers(who are really servants of the US as shogun) or to the nation. Japan is just a marketplace, or worse, a big brothel. Japanese are no longer part of a tree but mere mushrooms growing on rotting wood, which seems to be the theme of ATTACK OF THE MUSHROOM PEOPLE(which came out the same year as HIGH AND LOW). Just like underwater atomic blast unleashed Godzilla, something about the New Order made way for the monstrous soul of the kidnapper, especially as he was conceived to be more than a mere individual. He stands as an archetype of soul-malaise, as the inspector, in contrast, stands for duty, dedication, and professionalism amidst the national shame. In other words, while Kurosawa could empathize with those who felt a blinding rage about the New Order, it didn't absolve one of the obligation of being a decent person with a sense of responsibility to the community.

In BAD SLEEP WELL, Kurosawa felt nothing but contempt for undying loyalty based on profits. Why should underlings sacrifice their lives for men who care for nothing but their own privilege and money? But in KAGEMUSHA, despite the oppressive and unjust ways(by modern standards) of the feudal order, Kurosawa is fully of empathy. It is an order of culture, tradition, and meaning, indeed one that so moves the thief that, in the end, he chooses to die in its honor even though he could have lived out his life as a free man without attachment. (The pathology of the killer in VENGEANCE IS MINE is also associated with the theme of weakness. Not only is the killer living in post-defeat Japan but he was raised by a Christian father who seemed so weak and pathetic. It’s as if the son over-compensates as the absolute opposite of his father. His characterization is both more mundane and terrifying than Takeuchi in HIGH AND LOW. Whereas Takeuchi is a damaged soul, a man-turned-monster by whatever circumstances, the killer of Imamura’s film defies all labels and brands and yet is nothing more or less than a man. And if Takeuchi, on some level, can sense his own sickness and feel normal human emotions — no matter how much he represses them — , the psycho in VENGEANCE truly unnerves us as evidence that man can be so far removed from human values but still be utterly human.)




But in a nation without meaning, the rich are simply rich and the poor are simply poor. Consider the new West. In the past, despite class tensions, white folks of a national community might have felt some cultural and spiritual link with their rulers. Today, there is only status for the rich and resentment among the poor. Indeed, if the mob rounded up rich globalist urbanites and threw them into a bonfire, would most of us care? As much as I loathe BLM and Antifa, I watched with pleasure as they ransacked parts of Manhattan and boutique stores around L.A. In a way, Antifa’s embrace of BLM is a reaction to white elite’s embrace of Magic Negro and Diversity. White elites have been telling the white masses, “You are a bunch of ‘racists’, and we GOOD white elites care about blacks and diversity.” Antifa, filled with ranks of lesser whites with cruddier education, romp around with a twist of the white elite logic. Antifa whites in the streets say, “We embrace black rage and attack privileged blue cities filled with white elite privilege.” Elites used pro-blackness as fancy perfume. Antifa uses pro-blackness as Molotov Cocktail. Elites want to pretend it’s mostly about ‘peaceful protesters’, but reality says otherwise. (Amusingly enough, the elites are trying to unite BLM with globo-homo in the hope that all that ‘gay’ stuff may pacify black rage somewhat. Don’t be so black with rage, wave the colorful rainbow with smiley face. And let’s sing about black trannies for a change.)

White America once seemed the model for all the world, but it has proven to be a delusion, something that can be discerned in HIGH AND LOW. What has this White America done in the post-WWII period? It ceded power to Jewish globalists and defined its essence as youth culture based on black rhythms. It favored short-term thrills over long-term virtue. Fast-forward to 2020, and White America is a trashy, soulless entity that either marches with globo-homo and BLM thuggery or cravenly cowers in the corner while its heritage, statues, monuments, and symbols are torn down everywhere. If this is the fate of White Americanism, why should any majority population follow down the same path? In a way, the white-cuck elites of the GOP are like post-war Japanese elites that played doggy to the US as long as they received regular doggy biscuits. GOP is now a useless cuck-party whose only purpose is to cower before Jews and play roll over as long as the cuck-collaborator insiders get their doggy treats. The White American Model to all the world is “Surrender your identity, body, and soul to the worship of Jewish globalists, decadent homos, and wild Negroes.”

This is why neither capitalism nor leftism can serve as the Core Principle of a People and Culture. Capitalism is useful as economic system, and leftism can do good by emphasizing some measure of equal justice and people’s interests. But capitalism ultimately comes down to ‘muh profits’, and leftism, in its puritanical obsession with justice-and-more-justice, ends up waging endless war on all culture and tradition that doesn’t satisfy the latest demands. (What capitalism and leftism have in common is a kind of radical amnesia that emphasizes the hype-or-passion-of-the-moment at the expense of all else.) Thus, ideally capitalism and leftism must revolve around something else. It’s no wonder that Jews have chosen a kind of national-socialism for themselves while pushing either soulless capitalism(or libertarianism) or ‘leftism’ on everyone else. Libertarian whites will never unite as white people as they’re all about ‘muh individualism’, and ‘leftist’ whites will be too obsessed with stamping out ‘white privilege’ and ‘racism’ to ever develop a sense of white identity or white culture. As for conservatism, it can only say ‘oh, please stop’, as Bill Buckley did. Only neo-fascism can save a people, and that is why Jews, despite all their diatribes against ‘fascism’, practice a form of fascism for themselves. But it’s a bad kind like German National Socialism because it’s imperialist and supremacist than national-humanist. Still, Jews understand the need to fuse respect for Jewish tradition/identity with some measure of individualism and acceptance of modernity. It's not an accident that Jewish Power is founded on both traditional tribalism and modern individualism.

One thing that might disturb some viewers about HIGH AND LOW is the mention of capital punishment as just desserts for the kidnapper. The inspector played by Tatsuya Nakadai is presented as an admirable character, and it is his idea to convict Takeuchi on murder as well, thereby sending him to the gallows than merely have him serve fifteen years for holding a child hostage. Was Kurosawa okay with capital punishment? If so, maybe it had something to do with his samurai background. After all, Japanese culture is one where it’s worth dying for honor. Then, death is surely an option for a unrepentant psychotic punk.

It is also an avant garde cinematic experiment—in fact a whole series of them—a fact that most viewers are too enthralled to even notice. It really sneaks up on you.

Kurosawa’s modernist touches were only that: touches. HIGH AND LOW has traditional narrative conventions with heightened style, but it is far from avant-garde, which reached its artistic peaks with Hiroshi Teshigahara’s FACE OF ANOTHER and perhaps Yoshishige Yoshida’s EROS + MASSACRE, which isn’t easy watching. Seijun Suzuku got canned for his avant-garde experiment BRANDED TO KILL and later returned to modernism with the TAISHO TRILOGY. There is a fresh and exciting quality to HIGH AND LOW, and one can find seeds of movies like THE FRENCH CONNECTION, which too is essentially conventional storytelling. HIGH AND LOW is even less avant-garde than THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE and DR. STRANGELOVE, both of which stick mostly with conventional narrative form.



Now, some people think modernism is part of a linear progression, something more ‘advanced’. But while modernism created whole new possibilities and pushed boundaries, the arts can’t be judged like science. We can value Pablo Picasso and Igor Stravinsky, but the notion that their works are ‘more advanced’ than those of Sandro Botticelli and Richard Wagner is one of those unfortunate conceits that did much to undermine art and creativity. Consider the damage done to serious music by university departments controlled by modernists who insisted on certain ‘radical’ schools of music as the ‘most advanced’. Modernism is most painful when those who don’t really get it apply it inappropriately to works that don’t have a genuine modernist bone in its body… like Kurosawa’s ridiculous color schemes in DODES’KA-DEN.

Perhaps, Kurosawa got confused with modernism because of RASHOMON with its unusual(at the time) chronology. But in fact, Kurosawa gave a rather conventional treatment to a genuine piece of modernist writing by Akutagawa. To be sure, Kurosawa did revolutionize film-making. No one had done action like Kurosawa in SEVEN SAMURAI, a hugely influential film. And YOJIMBO’s sardonic sensibility was new in cinema. And in films like IKIRU, HIGH AND LOW, DERSU UZALA, and later RAN, Kurosawa chose the somewhat unconventional approach of reaching the dramatic peak before the first half and then spending the rest of the film to return, re-examine, and/or resolve the issues. In the more conventional dramatics of SEVEN SAMURAI, the tension builds and builds until reaching crescendo in the final scene. In IKIRU, HIGH AND LOW, DERSU UZALA, and RAN, the emotional peak is reached in the first third or half of the film, and for that reason, some viewers might find the rest rather anticlimactic. Stanley Kauffmann much admired IKIRU but thought the long funeral scene where the guests piece the puzzle together overlong and redundant. The emotional peak of DERSU UZALA is when the Goldi hunter bids farewell to the Russian explorers, and as the result, the story following the reunion unfolds more like a long aftermath than second act. RAN reaches its emotional peak in the first hour, and the rest, like APOCALYPSE NOW following the helicopter raid, tends to meander in search of shape and meaning. HIGH AND LOW is feverish drama in the first hour, and the rest of the film is about picking up the pieces and is markedly different in tone from the first act and half. Alfred Hitchcock did something similar with PSYCHO where the seemingly lead character is killed off in the first third, followed by the rest that’s about piecing together the puzzle.

IKIRU - 1952

The first hour of HIGH AND LOW is clearly the best. The final twenty minutes are pretty suspenseful. But the second hour is problematic. It is good cinema but only good. Perhaps, Kurosawa should have balanced the second hour more between the police and the kidnapper. Also, instead of presenting the police as so cool and professional, it would have been more interesting to dramatize them with warts and all(as every police department has its own problems and failings). And it would have been better if Takeuchi was examined a bit more than kept as a cipher with a troubled soul. He’s presented more as a cold-blooded reptile than a sick-souled man. Kurosawa said the artist he admires most is Dostoevsky but he missed a Dostoevskyian opportunity. At best, the kidnapper is Dostoevskyian only on the surface.

The police work may remind us of the head samurai’s preparations in SEVEN SAMURAI. He surveys the nearby region, scours for weak spots, draws up a map, and pools resources to devise a plan of battle. Still, it’s more compelling in SEVEN SAMURAI than in HIGH AND LOW. But that may owe largely to the fact that defense of a village is simpler and clearer than navigating a huge city for tidbits of clues that may lead to the criminal. Protecting a haystack is simpler than finding a needle in one. In SEVEN SAMURAI, the planners know what they are defending. In HIGH AND LOW, the planners have too many ideas and too few leads. A far more challenging and elusive task.

Negrolatry or Negro-Idolatry as It pertains to the Electronic Mind and the Common Thread — Reflections on Blackness as Unifying Jungle Faith, the Spiritual Corollary to Jungle Fever, in the Aftermath of Mass White Spiritual Cuckery to Blackness as Holiness

Negrolatry has something to do with the Electronic Mind and the Common Thread. It seems, if whites got Jungle Fever for black bodies, they now have Jungle Faith in black souls. Caucasians might as well be called 'Cuckasians'. But, why is Modern Consciousness so partial to this kind of thinking? Let's consider the transformations of consciousness resulting from Modernism and Electronica.

The rise of the Electronic Mind has fundamentally altered modern consciousness. In a way, it has erased or at least eclipsed consciousness as it had been understood. Prior to electronic communication, entertainment, and media, people generally processed one idea, idol, or icon at a time and for a duration. It might be awhile before they got another dose of information or indoctrination. It's like a meal that you consume and slowly digests throughout the day. It's no wonder the Novel caught on as a form of popular art because, when not working, people had lots of 'dead time'. Without the TV, radio, internet, and iphone as constant means of stimulation/distractions, people could immerse themselves in stories with many characters and extended plots. And if they wanted to read another book, they had to go to the book store or library on foot. And it took some time for books on order to arrive. So, there were always lots of 'dead time' BETWEEN social activities. Even many privileged people didn't have many books, and you had to live in a good-sized town to have access to any kind of real library. Most people had Bibles, Almanacs, and few works of ideas and fiction. Because non-stop bombardments on the senses and the mind were inconceivable in the pre-electronic age(which was most of human history), people developed more consistent and continuous views of their lives, values, and meaning. People became immersed in the Bible. Or, for meaning, they became involved in the family, the community. Or because the economy was labor-intensive and society had yet to provide much in the way of safety-nets, people spend a lot of time with work and derived meaning from production. When you eat a meal and wait awhile before the next one, you have ample time to digest all of it. In contrast, if you're snacking all the time and going from flavor to flavor to flavor, the body doesn't really know what to make of it, especially as you keep eating for the flavors than hunger and need. Your digestive process becomes inconsistent and incomplete, even contradictory, than consistent and complete.

Take the Electronic Mind in the experience of cinema, or the Movic Mind. A cinephile might, on the same day, take in a trashy Hollywood comedy, a crazy Hong Kong action flick, a b/w 'classic' of yesteryear that is relatively wholesome & sentimental, and a dour or solemn European art film. What happens when the mind experiences such drastic and total shifts and contrasts in tone, mood, and meaning in expression in rapid succession? Now, one may note that the human mind was always multi-faceted and shifted gears from one perspective to another. After all, people appreciated both comedy and tragedy in Shakespearean and Ancient Greek times. As human emotions have a wide range, everyone through the ages had something to laugh about, something to cry about, something to tickle his fancy, something to rouse him to fury, and etc. Even a stern priest might tell a bawdy joke or two. Still, he might say it underneath his breath. He would know it's just a morsel, not the main course, of life. For most of human history, there was more consistency and insistence on what was essential, crucial, and important as opposed to what was peripheral, trivial, or disposable. So, if a priest were to tell a dirty joke, he would say it in hushed tone with someone he's close to. His input with vulgarity wouldn't be the same as his investment in spirituality. Some things got more light and attention while other things remained in the shadows or hidden around the corner. Also, even if someone experienced two highly contrasting or contentious views around the same time, the chances were he would have had time to address the contradictions to some degree as the chances of yet another problematic idea or idolatry to cross his path would have been unlikely.

But things are different in the Electronic Age. In a city with lots of movie theaters, one could go from one reality to another, one after the other. In the past, if one attended an opera, he would have the whole day or week to ponder and process what he'd seen and heard. But in the electronic age, one might encounter an artistic/intellectual experience of great depth but, even before processing it halfway, might take in other stuff — ones that utterly violate and demean the spirit of the work of depth —that jolts his senses on the same day. When the mind/senses are constantly taking in new stimuli without ever fully processing earlier ones, what happens? It's akin to people who keep shopping without ever using their purchases to proper use. It got even crazier with the rise of TV, then Cable TV and Video technology. And then, things got super-crazy with the coming of the internet followed by devices people carry around at all times. Even before one could properly ponder and process one consumption of entertainment/propaganda, he could be fed, even bombarded, with another and then another then another, all in quick succession.
Besides, the Electronic Mind has gotten so accustomed to endless sensory-stimulation that, like someone sitting before a slot machine, it feels compelled to absorb more and more sensory data in the manner of an addict than an autodidact. (US empire has become cancerous in this manner. It feels this constant need for more growth, more expansion, more power, more control, more hegemony, more wars, and etc. without ever fully formulating what it's all about and why. Shopaholic US empire must have more just to have more.) Just like many people need more and more sex without thought of relationship, emotional life, & commitment and just like too many people need to eat and eat without any meaningful relation to food, nutrition, & health, so many modern minds, Movic or Networkic, have become insatiable for endless streams of sensory data. Indeed, they can't handle 'dead time' because it would call upon them to sit still and finally process and think about what they've read, seen, or experienced. Their minds demand constant 'motion' as distraction from the meaning of existence.

One reason why the most popular works of literature happen to be in Teen Fiction or Stupid Sex(like in FIFTY SHADES OF GREY) is because people are reading fast for thrills than meaning, depth, or originality. It is the age when even adults talk seriously about HARRY POTTER and HUNGER GAMES. In Peter Weir's movie TRUMAN SHOW, the TV junkies are rooting for Truman to escape and break free from the TV world, but they are hooked to the TV even as they cheer on Truman. And when Truman finally breaks free, the movie ends with a TV junkie wondering what is next on TV. He was so into Truman's adventure but almost instantly forgets it as he channels-surfs for the next big thrill on the Tube. So, there isn't even much time BETWEEN the Truman Show and the Next Show. It's total insta-immersion in one thing followed by total insta-immersion in the next thing, even if the two things may be diametrically opposed in tone, style, tempo, message. Electronic Media isn't only instant but totalizing. A reverend may give a powerful sermon in a church, but he will tell a dirty joke behind closed doors or in the hallway with a friend or intimate. One thing is infinitely more important than the other. But, everything conveyed via electronic media has a totality of expression, an authority equal to any other. Nothing is a whisper, and everything is a shout. Indeed, the most outrageous, shameless, and 'dirty' things have an advantage as electronic media are the product of amplification, and loud stuff is more suited for electricity than quiet stuff is. A rock show or vulgar comedy comes through with greater force than a solemn sermon or reflective drama. No wonder superhero movies, rap videos, lewd comedies, general pornification of mainstream culture, and partisan-propagandizing of the news tend to dominate the airwaves and social networks.

Still, as people cannot indulge in mindless trash all the time, they also seek out meaning. They go from 'porning' to mourning, shrieking to seeking, sensuality to spirituality, nihilism to moralism, and etc. Sometimes, one masquerades as the other. So, Quentin Tarantino's INGLORIOUS BASTERDS has been sold as both nihilistic celebration of sadism and a moral statement about World War II, a kind of Morality-Porn, which can also be said of RAMBO, a dumb trashy gung-ho fantasy masquerading as serious statement about 'Vietnam'. Rappers wallow in thuggery but pretend to be 'speaking truth to power'. The decadent hedonism of globo-homo vanity has become conflated with 'spiritual' redemption, especially as so many churches now fly the 'gay flag'. (In some ways, such spiritual-vandalization is worse than the physical destruction of churches under communism. After all, while physical attacks on churches ennobled Christianity as victim of barbaric violence, the church collaboration with globo-homo degeneracy is an utter betrayal at the spiritual level. A Christian may face physical defeat but still possess a victorious soul, which is the story of Jesus. But when the Christian spirit succumbs to the sickly and hollow vanity of neo-aristo homos who work in league with neo-imperialist deep state and super-capitalist oligarchy, it means the Faith is dead from within. Furthermore, communism's attack on the Church was, at the very least, not without moral and material justification. Communists wanted people to break free of the opiate of religion, especially as it had been controlled and manipulated by the ruling elites, and see reality for what it is and work to create a better society on Earth than dream of some fantastic Kingdom of Heaven. Though history judged communism to be more bad than good, there was genuine moral and philosophical reasons for its opposition to religion. In contrast, globo-homo-mania is utterly cynical and opportunistic in its infiltration and corruption of the Church. Even though it is ultimately the tool of Jewish globalist-supremacists whose objective is to destroy Christianity and the Goy Moral Order, the agenda pretends to represent the TRUE meaning of Christianity and all forms of spirituality... because what? The highest form of divination is to instruct humanity that nothing is more sacred than homo fecal-penetration and tranny penis-cutting?)

Because of endless barrages of contrasting and contradictory images, idols, and images in the electronic media — with each image, idol, icon, or idea vying for totality of the moment for the duration of its hold over the consumer — , the Electronic Mind is bound to be fractured and fragmentary. One minute, you could be watching an exciting TV cop drama about law-and-order heroes, next you could be watching a gangsta rap music video extolling the thug lifestyle. You could be sucked into a Zionist talking point on Youtube followed by a pro-BDS video. Even if you were to be politically partisan and choose only one ideological point of view, there is hardly any consistency on either the 'left'(or the 'right' for that matter) as the 'left' went from Mayday & the Workers to Gayday and the 'Wokers'. The so-called 'Intersectionality' is a constant clash of 'totalized' priorities and interests. And the 'right', though accused of 'white supremacism', goes out of its way to snuff white politics while promoting Zionism and Lady Maga. (Today's 'conservatives' are supposed to support Israel because it has maybe the biggest 'gay pride' parade in the world. Right, 'True Conservatism' is about praising the Jew for turning the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah, so says Dennis Prager.)

Even in the political and cultural landscape where most of the Electronic Express — media, academia, entertainment, and state propaganda — is controlled by so-called 'Liberals' or 'Progressives', it is difficult to push a single, consistent, or unified line, message, or narrative because, whereas ideologies tend to be radical and purist, entertainment tends to be irreverent, hedonistic, and nihilistic. Even if every last vestige of conservative ideology/politics were to be banned from media and social network, the contrasts and contradictions between Liberal entertainment and Liberal ideology would be bewildering. A culture that promotes both MLK and David Chapelle, both TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD and DJANGO UNCHAINED, and both Mandela as saint and rappers as cool thugs will be all over the map. Such problems exist in China as well. Ruled by the CCP, China is far more ideologically monolithic than the West. But its often nihilistic-consumer-hedonist entertainment serves a very different vision of the world than the Official Morality & Consciousness promoted by the State. Even with total suppression of conservatism, Liberal States will end up with deep fissures inherent in what Sam Francis called 'Anarcho-Tyranny'. While the Power developed Anarcho-Tyranny as a means of control, it can run out of control, as has happened with BLM riots in both the US and EU.

And there is so much confusion. Are white women 'fellow victims' along with POC of evil white men? Or are they modern witches, or 'Beckys', who call the police on innocent black men? Are Muslims to be welcomed as immigrants or blown to smithereens as terrorists? Should homos push globo-homo even further in big cities, OR should they apologize to blacks for taking the limelight away from black issues and BLM? Should Liberals insist on the equality of the races on grounds that 'race is just a social construct' or lionize blacks as special and superior on account of their tougher muscles, louder voices, bouncier buns, and bigger dongs? Who are More Woman, the 'Terfs' or the Trannies? Should good white 'liberals' prioritize Gentrification or the Gentle Giant? Or maybe the two can be combined by moving the Gentle Giants to the 'racist' Suburbs while the cities further gentrify? Or maybe white 'liberals' are afraid that blacks are beginning to catch onto the Blue Privilege Agenda.

All such contradictory positions or attitudes are pushed by Electronica, and each message vies for its totality. So, if one were to watch these views in succession in a single sitting, he will experience a kind of whiplash between one insta-totality to another and then another and then another. At the end of the day, he will have a cubist mind that feels disjointed, disoriented, perplexed, and neurotic. Such is the modernist mindset, but most people, even modernists, find it unsatisfying, confused, and difficult. It's like people may be provoked, fascinated, and challenged by the works of Pablo Picasso, but they don't really find enjoyment, any more than from Serial Music or other forms of Modern(ist) Music. Modernism may engage the mind/intellect but usually offers no assurance emotionally or spiritually. There is no common unifying theme, but the eternal mind/soul craves it. Then, the dominant 'idology'(something between idolatry and ideology) will be whatever or whichever that attains the semblance of the Common Thread in the realm of the Electronic Mind. And this is why, currently at least, there is Negrolatry, Jew Worship, and Holy Homo Reverence. The biggest power in Electronica, the Jews, have used all their means to create a web across electronic spaces to ensure that Jews, blacks, and homos are part of the Common Thread DESPITE all the contradictions inherent in the electronic system. Howard Stern once declared himself the 'King of All Media', and Jews would have us believe that Jewish Themes(along those of blacks and homos) are the unifying threads across all nations, cultures, and times.

Take, for example, the 'gay rainbow' as symbol, emblem, insignia, even battle regalia. It is no longer associated only with homos but with just about everything. You want to have some Oreos, grab a burger, or drink some soda? Well, look at the advertising, and there are 'pride cookies', 'pride burgers', and 'pride sodas'. You love Israel as the Holy Land? Well, the Holy Land is now inseparable from the mantra of 'Israel has the biggest gay pride parades'. You want to be a Good Conservative? Well, the new line according to Neocons who control Conservatism Inc. is that 'gay marriage is conservative values' and 'Lady Maga is special'. When BLM was all the rage during the final yrs of the Obama presidency, many of its rallies were peppered with 'gay pride' flags, indeed as if BLM and the 'gay rainbow' were part of the same Happy Meal package. The globo-homo logo has become so 'sacrosanct' in globalism that even Palestinians, though oppressed by Jews and globalist homos in the US deep state, try so hard to link their struggle with 'gay pride'. We live in a world of Logo over Logos. Even though globo-homo-mania is the neo-missionary project of Jewish-controlled US imperialism, those claiming to be anti-US-imperialist also wave the globo-homo banner. It's like 'With Gays on Our Side' is the new 'With God on Our Side'.
Of course, some nations have held out against globo-homo, but they tend to submit to another globo-enforced Common Thread, which is Jew Worship. So, even as Russia is constantly attacked by Jewish Power, it is always making noises about how the Russian state is good for Jews, how Russian values are justified ESPECIALLY because Russia defeated Nazi Germany that killed Jews. In the US, 'liberals' and 'conservatives' may growl at each other on certain issues, but both major parties are totally united on Jew Worship, support for Israel/Zionism, and shoveling more Fed money to Wall Street. And both parties are committed to shutting down BDS. The academia is supposed to be 'liberal' and critical of the Power, but most of it is amazingly silent about Jewish Power and the Zionist Question. While there are pockets of academia that do criticize Israeli policy, they are mostly ineffective and ignored by the MSM that is totally Jewish-controlled and by politicians who are totally owned by Jewish donor class. Donald Trump, like Russia, has been attacked by Jews from day one, but he's all about 'I Luv Jews and Israel'. Even as blacks bitch about 'white privilege' and 'police brutality', few prominent blacks dare mention that Jews played a big role in Gentrification and Israelization of the US police. (ADL played a role in turning US police in big cities into the Zionic-Bionic Men.) Thus, Jew-Worship is part of the Common Thread. Despite all the cacophony of Electronic Media with so many disparate and opposing views, most are united in sucking up to Jewish Power and 'Muh Holocaust'. The only truly vocal opposition to Jewish Power comes from the Dissident Right, but as Jews control the Platforms and Media(and as the US government and justice system haven't done much to control Jewish Monopoly), speaking-truth-to-Jewish-Power still has a long way to go before the Holy Jewish Spell is broken.

When we take white women, there is no Common Thread of their goodness, wonderfulness, or holiness. While white women are promoted as victims of white fratboy rapists in colleges or the 'pussy-grabbing' Orange Man, they are evil Beckys if they dare to call the police on illegal or dubious black behavior. White women as pro-globo-homo feminists are good, but white women as TERFS are bad. So, white women could be virtuous in one thread but villainous in another. Same goes for Muslims. As immigrants, they are holy victims of evil Donald Trump and 'white supremacist Islamophobes'. But as Iranians or Syrians who resist Jewish Supremacist Power, they might as well be subhuman who should be blown to smithereens.

But there is a Common Thread about blacks, possibly even more than for Jews and Homos. Upon closer scrutiny, the common thread of Globo-Homo across so many sectors and spheres is artificial and even antithetical. After all, what does homosexuality have to do with Oreo cookies or a hamburger? What exactly is a 'pride burger'? Why must Burger King bill itself as Bugger King? Food has NOTHING to do with homosexuality. (Even Jack Tripper of THREE'S COMPANY only pretended to be homo.) And what does BLM have to do with globo-homo? What do black protests about imagined White Police Brutality have to do with homo pride or tranny celebration, especially when the police has used extra force against blacks precisely to keep cities safe for Jews and HOMOS? And why did Christianity cave to Queertianity? What do God, Jesus, and Salvation have to do with men buggering another or a man with a wig pretending to be a 'woman'? And why do sports franchises celebrate globo-homo? What does Football or Basketball have to do with fruits and fairies, especially as sports are about machismo disdaining sissy boys? So, the common thread of globo-homo isn't natural. It's been enforced by Jewish Power.

In contrast, the Common Thread of Negrolatry is more understandable and more natural as blacks dominate the fields that get most people excited, thrilled, or hyper. Rap and Hip-Hop are the most popular musical forms around the world, and so naturally, many peoples of all races are madly into Negrolatry in pop music. Also, sports make people lose their minds. Globalization and mass migration have led to black athletic colonization even in non-black nations. Britons, French, Dutch, and other Europeans look to blacks as their New National Heroes. Black Idol Imperialism has reached even Japan. In China, yellow boys hug their basketballs like women hug pregnant bellies as they watch the NBA, the bastion of Negro athletes who are the most revered 'heroes' for many young Chinese. So, blacks got pop music and sports. Also, the internet has pretty much made pornography accessible to all the world, and something like 1/3 of all internet traffic is pornographic. And this led to the spread of Negro Dong Fetish around the world. The other black fetish among non-blacks is 'twerking'. Even college-educated women in US, Canada, Australia, Russia, Japan, and Europe are 'twerking' their buns like black women. What were black women thinking when they came up with 'twerking'? It's really 'sex with negro dongs' dance. There was a time when pornography was a Red Light district affair or kept to adults. Nowadays, even young boys and girls grow up to porny images that are easily accessible through smartphones. Also, as the culture-at-large has been pornified, there is hardly any shame or opprobrium associated with overt sexuality. White female singers and white actresses now regularly appear in music videos, TV shows, and movies as the sexual interests of Negro men who are now promoted over white men. So, Negroes not only got sports and pop music but the pornographic imagination, the three big thrills of globalism. That's a lot of Common Thread in pop culture/entertainment.

But Negroes are not only objects of worship as Victors but as Victims. Unlike the Narrative about Homo Victimization, which is mostly bogus as homos were never a specific group — besides, even when homosexuality was held in contempt or criminalized, plenty of homos were born into privilege and abused power in all sorts of ways — , the Narrative of Black Victimization in the West is true enough. As a backward savage people, they were preyed upon by fellow blacks, Arabs, and whites as slave labor. The Atlantic Slave Trade was truly a horror, and blacks did struggle as slaves in the New World. (Though black slavery in the US gets the worst rap, it was far worse in Latin America.) Also, there was the Civil Rights Movement, which had a certain greatness to it but for the fact that the 'racists' were, to a large extent, justified in their Fear of the Tougher, More Aggressive, and More Thuggish Negroes. It wasn't just about the color of the skin but tone of the muscle as Negro men, with equal freedom with white men, were bound to eventually kick the white boys' ass — blacks call white men 'white boys' — and colonize white wombs as women naturally drop loser men and go with winner men. Especially as blacks have louder and more booming voices, the black holler for truth and justice felt more powerful and compelling in the white imagination. So, blacks came to dominate the Common Thread as both high-fiving Victors in sports/entertainment and holy Victims in a spiritualized vision of History that said whites must atone for 'racism'. (Even as modernism billed itself as avant-garde and more evolved, its contradictions led to obsessions with the primitive. In its confusion and obfuscation, it sought out the elementary and vital in, say, African Art and nude Tahitian women. Initially, the fascination was intellectual, but as the years passed and as modernism lost its luster and was eclipsed by an uninhibited pop culture, the primitive went from a cultural artifact to the main fuel of post-Western Imagination.) Because whites worship blacks as natural victors, their guilt about blacks as victims was bound to be greater. With Negro-hood dominating the Common Thread as both dominant victor bodies in sports/entertainment and main victim souls of oppression/injustice, the resulting Mandela/Mandingo Complex among whites is surely a sight to behold. Ridiculous but spectacularly so.

In a way, whites and modern folks have always craved a Common Thread because Modernity and Modernism created such a fractured world of ideas and senses. Modernism insisted that such alienating and anxious consciousness of modernism was good as the necessary price for real freedom. It laid the ground for existentialism whereby individuals must seek their own meaning. Traditional societies put forth essential truths that were meant to be embraced and valued by all. But modernism meant freedom, and that meant the clashing of so many ideas, information, idols, and icons, and therefore, it was up to the alienated and anxious individual to seek his own meaning from the constant melee. So, even as modernity was bewildering and even though modernism wasn't emotionally satisfying, they were challenging and compelling us to think for ourselves. We must all become more 'cubist' in thinking and worldview, so claimed the modernists. But, the human mind craves some kind of essence, some kind of truth that runs as a common thread through all spheres and domains of thought, feeling, and experience. Then, it's no wonder that so many people in the modern world gravitated toward Marxism that did offer a Common Thread of dialectical materialist class analysis that supposedly explained all the past and all the future through an ideology that united philosophy, science, spirituality, and meaning. But in the end, Marxism was the god that failed.

So, what is left as the Common Thread? Jews tried globo-homo, and it has had great success as everything, even Chick-Fil-A(which is now Dic*-Fill-Ass) has been globo-homo-genized, but it's really artificial, more the product of massive promotion via advertising. So many things associated with globo-homo actually have NO relation to homosexuality. Who really thinks of sodomy while sipping Coke? What does the beautiful rainbow have to do with men with wigs who plan to have their penises cut off?
In contrast, blacks are naturally dominant in sports, pop music, and sexual fetishes of whites, what with Emmanuel Macron calling on Europeans to welcome 100s of millions of blacks so that European wombs will be Africanized as white men go cucky-wuck. One would think Viktor Orban would be seen as the sane leader in Europe, but he is denounced as an 'autocratic dictator' whereas a collaborationist cuck who kowtows to Jews and blacks(and homos) is praised as what 'liberal democracy' is all about.

How about Jews as a Common Thread? After all, Jewish Money controls so much, and Holocaust Movies are now a genre unto themselves. But even as so many goyim suck up to Jewish Money and Power, Jews are loathe to make a big deal about their influence and wealth, Alan Dershowitz's chutzpah notwithstanding. As for the Holocaust Narrative, it's too depressing. Jews used to have much cultural capital as comedians, but Jews now seem almost allergic to comedy as satire has always been threatening to the dominant ruling power. Also, Jews aren't great orators(though verbally gifted), great athletes, or great singers. (Bob Dylan lucked out as he came to prominence when people still approached music intellectually and seriously.) Jews may have bigger dongs on average if Ron Jeremy is a realistic representation of Portnoic lusts, but Jewish men lack muscle power. Even if a Jewish Portnoy and Negro with equal-sized dongs stood side by side, the Negro would seem more dominant. This explains why even Jewish men are beginning to fret about all those NY Jewish women going with Negroes. Indeed, it may be the Negro sexuality that finally destroys the unity of Jews as Jewish women tend to be pretty nutty. Just like Jewish men were wildly chasing after blonde 'shikses' in the 70s and 80s, we know have Jewish women chasing after black shakas(or shaka-zulus) in the 21st century.

So, from the most secular-spiritual iconography to salacious pop cultural idolatry, there is the Common Thread of the Negro. It's telling that George Pretty Boy Floyd(or Ugly Boy Floyd as the case may be) the Knee-Groid once acted in porn and is now called a saint. In other words, St. George could be Saint George or Stud George, but in our age, the Mandela/Mandingo Complex have conflated the two. Besides, if Christianity has cucked to Queertianity and now conflates god and jesus with ass-buggery and tranny-penis-cutting, who's to say a drug-addled porn actor can't be a saint as well? To push this logic further, who's to say counterfeit money(like the one held by saint-stud George) isn't real money? If the Fed can print gazillions for Jewish Wall Street, maybe Negroes in the street should be allowed to print their own money too. Trans-money. If tranny men are 'women', let trans-money be real money. In the modern world with so little in the way of Common Thread — made all the worse by baffling Diversity — , so many people are grateful for the Common Thread of Black Celebration because it's the one thing that naturally or 'organically' exists across the cultural landscape, from high to low, to moral narratives to sensual experiences.

In other words, Welcome to Clown World.

Ben Shapiro said, 'Facts don't care about your feelings', and he's right, but therein lies the problem. Facts don't care about ANY feelings, good or bad. Facts are just cold data. A computer drive could be filled with tons of facts, but computers feel nothing. So, having facts on your side doesn't matter as long as you don't FEEL for the facts. Against the current false Narrative of Negro Martyrdom, many on the Right have been spouting off facts about black crime in the genteel manner of Jared Taylor. But those facts, even if true, are uttered without feeling. Those facts will matter ONLY IF whites invest them with feeling, with passion, with rage, with anger. It's not enough to mention that blacks commit more crime and attack and murder more whites. The fact that whites can mention such facts WITHOUT righteous rage means whites are either cold automatons or cucked maggots. When blacks are attacking your race on a daily basis, you should be angry. You should be shouting out every day, 'blacks rob our kind, blacks rape our kind, blacks murder our kind'. Whites should be saying BLM stands for 'burn, loot, and murder' as some have noted. But whites, even in the Dissident Right, are often about the facts without the feelings. Blacks attack whites but only angrily shout 'black lives matter', but whites are likely to either cuck and say 'blacks lives matter' or speak defensively and say 'all lives matter' when, if they had any balls and rage, they would say 'white lives matter', and 'we are not gonna tolerate anymore savage black violence against whites'. In other words, it's time for Race War.