Anti-Elitist themes in "They Live"

Time to look at another film. This time around it’s the 1988 science fiction/conspiracy film They Live directed by John Carpenter who also wrote the script under the pseudonym Frank Armitage and co-composed the score. Carpenter shot to fame with the classic horror film Halloween in 1978 and even during his years with bigger budgets and studio backing he was always a more innovative-than-usual film director. Avoiding sensationalism in the form of excess gore and nudity, his films were driven by atmosphere, as well as by storytelling and filmmaking creativity. They Live is no exception to this and it comes from a time in Carpenter’s career when he went back to making lower-budget independent films after lackluster performances at the box-office with studio productions. It all worked for the better since there is no way a big budget movie studio would produce a film like this: it has one of the most effective anti-Zionist metaphors of all time. Of course, there is no way to prove that his intentions were anti-Zionist, but that just might be Carpenter making a clever chess move.

MAJOR CHARACTERS
Nada - a drifter who winds up in Los Angeles. Discovers a special set of sunglasses and soon links up with a revolutionary group on a mission to save the city, and maybe even, all mankind. His name is a witty take on the “man with no name” or nameless hero archetype who sweeps in and saves the day. Appropriately so, Nada’s name is not mentioned once in the film and we only learn it in the end credits.

Frank - works at a construction site and helps Nada find a place to stay. Thinks Nada is nuts when told about the truth about society and even takes a bit of convincing, but eventually teams up with Nada.

Holly - initially taken hostage by Nada when he needs to escape undercover. She lives in a posh house and has a well paying thus hasn’t even considered the possibility of society being endangered. Her character is ripe material for a standard love-subplot, but unlike Hollywood cheesefests, the film here takes a much different direction.

SUPPORTING CHARACTERS
Man watching TV - an interesting though very small role. He becomes the film’s ultimate example of a sellout.

Gilbert - volunteer working who helps out around the shantytown, but also works with the revolutionaries.

Revolutionary Group - all glance roles, but they show that a militarist movement is in operation.

A DEGENERATED WORLD
The world is in a state of decay. Nada mentions that many banks in Denver have closed. Lower-class people have trouble finding work in a packed jobs office. A street preacher in the middle of a sermon about how civilization worships greed is suspiciously taken away by cops. Note that what this preacher says, using a venomous snake tongue metaphor, is very similar to Christ's words to the Sanhedrin Jews. -[Thanks to Delendaestziobot for this elaboration]- Frank mentions that in Detroit many steel mills closed and despite workers taking many cuts to their pay and benefits, but the corporate owners just “gave themselves raises.” Around the city people can be seen to be entranced by television sets that play pointless programs and show dull ads all appealing to vanity and desire for longevity. The world seems to have lost purpose and direction with the rich milking all resources for their own benefit while keeping the lower classes entranced in a servile (goy) state of mind.

At one point a TV ad mentions “divine excess” which, reflects the street preacher's example of how much of a religion materialism has become. Peoples' lives consist of just spending and comsuming, which are the sustaining processes of their society and they cannot see past this. Their frustrations as to why things never get better have no rational answer, at least not one they can see. Nada says, "I believe in America" and that he is sure a chance will come for him if he waits, while Frank seems to see this hope as naive. Later, when Nada wants to look into something that may provide some answers, Frank tells him to "leave it alone" as he has a job and just walks the white line doing his job, while Nada responds, "white line's in the middle of the road, that's the worst place to drive." Their respective attitudes seem to have switched.

Note that Frank's mentioning a white line, effectively means he is going along a path that has been drawn out for him, which is analogous to Nada "believing in America." So sometimes they may feel that something is not right, however what is likely true is their attitudes sway back and forth from day to day or week to week, but the end result is they remain servants locked in am empirical prison with glimmers of false hope here and there.

SEEING IS BELIEVING
The central idea of the film can be seen as a slam on the myth that White Nationalists love to preach, which roughly sums up as: "Wake up!" Meaning, we’re asleep and the Jews (and also all non-christian non-whites, according to false-Aryan white nationalists) are robbing us of our freedom and rights. The movie does cater to this by using the "wake up" message in several forms, for example Nada sees a sign “They Live We Sleep” - an elaboration on the title and an indicator that Nada is learning more about the reality of his world. However, these references to waking up and sleeping are well outnumbered by film’s references to sight.

His afternoon just got a lot more interesting

The first hint of this is in the opening shot: we get an oddly framed title card with the film’s title off to the bottom left written in what looks like hand-writing. The first shot fades in and we see a graffiti covered wall and the movie title is actually written on that wall… it is part of a bigger picture and the film has just very specifically pointed it out. In approaching such a large mural, one bit of writing off to the side is not likely to be noticed first if at all. This is the key idea: “seeing” isn’t enough, “seeing the right thing” is what matters; the right patterns so that the right conclusion and right course of action can be taken.

In the shantytown where Nada settles down some people are watching TV, which is showing some dull programs. Then suddenly a signal comes on that warns people that they are slaves and talks about some mysterious conspirators: "They are safe as long as they are not discovered." The "Man watching TV" mentioned above is in this scene and he gets annoyed by this transmission: “it must have taken the hackers months to do this.” He is simply writing off anything different in the status quo as a violation or annoyance of some sort. The transmission reappears the next morning calling once again for revolution to the annoyance of the people watching. Nada, however, doesn't just disregard it, in fact, he looks very curious. This is the first indicator that he will break the status quo.

His curiousity takes off, because soon after Nada starts to suspect something is going on in the church next to the shantytown. When he brings it up to Frank is when he is told to "leave it alone," but he goes to investigate. There he finds that it is not just a church, but also a lab where sunglasses are made, ones with so called “Hoffman lenses.” An exact spelling of the lens name isn't given, but it may be a reference to, Albert Hofmann, the creator of LSD. A drug which doesn’t "wake" the user, but alters their perception, makes them "look along a different plane of reality" so to speak, which is akin to what the glasses let the wearer do. The glasses are the central element to the film and once Nada puts them on “seeing is believing” is taken to a whole new level.

The world is not at all what it seems. All billboards, ads, newspapers and signs that make up the corporate-run world contain subliminal commands to be obedient. The glasses allow the wearer to see this, but without them, everything looks normal, "normal" in the sense of how we've been conditioned to perceive it.

Some signs Nada sees:
“Marry and Reproduce” is behind an ad about travelling to the Caribbean, which features a woman in a bikini. All in all, with the hidden message it is suggesting hedonism and base-sexual behavior.

“No Independent Thought” is behind a sign for men’s apparel suggesting that all people buy the same clothes, which draws a connection to uniforms, but more precisely, and given the film's context, prison uniforms.

“Consume” is behind a sign for a “close out sale” which is just fancy capitalist jargon masking very blunt capitalist jargon.

Then when Nada looks down a city avenue...

Consumerist Civilization

Notice that all the signs are in all capital letters and one font, in other words, as blunt and direct as can be. It is not just ads and billboards, magazines that are usually filled with useless news stories, soft porn and other interruptions have like-minded commands behind them. Even money has “this is your God” on it. One magazine on the street stand Nada visits has “let TV teach you” written on it and this is seen without the glasses, which suggests that the propaganda is so rooted in, it is becoming less and less necessary to disguise. This little detail is visible when Nada sees the real shocker about his world, thus it was most definitely a detail the director wanted the audience to see. The real shocker, however, is that aliens live among us and they’re only seen for what they really are through the glasses, otheriwse they appear human. They hold the positions of power and influence and to be blunt, they are the “they” of the title and the “they” the man on the intruding TV signal was talking about.

They are elitist minded creatures claiming to be inherently better than us, using the most elaborate manipulations to herd us, stealing wealth from our planet’s resources, enjoying a life of materialist hedonism as the honest of us suffer, bribing some of our own to help them maintain control and showing perhaps the ultimate example of in-group altruism through their selfish actions.

Note how the film's many political, economic and imperialist references reflect this.

ARYAN MILITARIST REVOLUTION
Nada, shocked and in some disbelief, tries to figure out what to do. His struggle is reflective of the Aryanist struggle in that he has trouble convincing anyone; partly due to his inarticulate communication, partly due to people’s stubbornness in their comfort, partly due to being hunted by the aliens' enforcers. The comically over-the-top fight between Nada and Frank is an example of this: Frank is comfortable working (life ain’t easy, but it’s steady) and it takes a lot of convincing to get him to go on the militarist route to actually change the world for the better, hence the fight. What finally gets Frank convinced that Nada is right is when he sees the aliens, Nada puts the glasses on him. Again, the "wake up" notion is totally ignored in this key scene. Seeing the truth is also dangerous, since the minute the aliens know that someone can “see” they call in their enforcers. Nada learns this the hard way during his first walk with the glasses.

Nada and Frank figure that they can’t be the only ones with the glasses and they soon locate some revolutionaries. The group is meager, but well armed and planning a blend-in strategy while they acquire more numbers, however, the aliens enforcers crash their meeting and start to kill everyone. In that moment, Nada and Frank basically realize the situation: we fight now or never.

Holly, who has a subplot with Nada (which I didn't go into here), helps them determine that the alien signal must be coming from the TV station where she works. The relation between Nada and Holly is interesting in that it avoids almost all cliches. The three sequences that Holly is in all take a drastic unexpected turn. I don’t want to reveal all twists here so as not to spoil the entire movie.

Note that as the film progresses, Nada starts to make more and more calculated moves. This goes back to his first walk with the glasses. First he found the aliens just plain ugly and started to insult them, funny, but it gives him away. He next used a bit of cleverness to get out of being cornered by two cops, but shot up a bank killing several aliens right after. However, he escaped the bank scene using a bit of cunning once again and from that point on all the violence that Nada causes is to serve the goal of revealing the aliens. What starts as a simple-minded revolt takes on traits of an Aryan Militarist Revolution. By the end Nada and Frank willingly go against great odds since as Aryans the only death they’ll let their oppressors exact on them is one in which they were fighting out of oppression.

In trademark Carpenter form, the movie’s ending is a bit open ended, but that’s one of the things that makes it interesting to talk about.

BITS AND PIECES
The opening shot, after fading in, tracks left and we see a freight-train rolling by with sun-wheel designs on the cars and after it passes we see a Nada, which links him to the Aryanism. Also when first at the construction site he says he has his own tools, he is a reasonably self-sufficient worker.

Frank, in turn, is linked to Aryanism when he tells Nada, “you’ll meet some of the folk” when showing him the shantytown.

Right before the police raid, Nada is looking at the church, but then he looks up and sees a helicopter and only then does he hear the engine roaring. Why didn’t he hear it when it first arrived if it's that loud? Because the world is in a trance and under illusion, things have to be specifically concentrated on to break the spell.

A trash truck “appears” in a similar way to the chopper mentioned above. This is right before Nada fights with Frank, in watching the scene it is plain to see that there is no way Nada could have not seen it unless there was some sort of illusion going on.

The "Man watching TV" and complaining about program being interrupted shows up at the end. Note this key scene.

Holly’s house is located on Circle View Drive… and interesting name considering that the essence of maintaining an illusion is keeping people looking around in circles and away from the source.

Also, something very important in the film is, quite unexpectedly, very fragile. I do not want to give away all the details here and it should be rather obvious once it comes up on the film. Take note of how this relates to the arrogance of the aliens. On how they must have totally counted on it not being discovered. On how seeing the right patterns and taking the right course of action can easily ruin even the most elaborate illusion.

The music in the film is pretty interesting and not a very typical film score. John Carpenter almost always at least co-composes the scores for his films. Thus his ideas and metaphors from his direction of the film as well as his writing of the script are directly linked to the film's music. The music here is largely composed of bass sounds; low, subtle sounds. This reflects the film's message of important things being largely hidden and not out right obvious.

The film's poster also underlines the important of "seeing" not "waking up."

CONCLUSION
This film doesn't make very many direct references to Zionism and I do consider it more of a broader anti-elitist themed film, though it is interesting to see how well an anti-Zionist interpretation fits here. Henry Ford only started to distribute the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion after he saw how similar the course the world was taking to what was described in the book. Can you, reader, see any parallels with this film and our world?

----------------------------
They Live IMDb page
----------------------------

ZC Weapons: Vilification and Demonization

The Zionist machine’s most active set of gears would have to be the one that spouts information. It is active everyday all day all the time. The information that this massive contraption produces is its own special brand of information we call “Zioninst Correctness” (ZC) and it completely engulfs the more known type of information known as “Political Correctness” (PC), which is meant to be spread by servile Gentiles. The corporate-owned news networks, cable channels, popular newspapers, and major entertainment producers are all subject to ZC. Entertainment most often manages to break PC for the simple reason of it being the easiest to excuse (“it’s just a movie”), but despite this, even most hard edge and darkly humored satire (eg. Fight Club) is still bound by the shackles of ZC.

The “correctness” in ZC is only “correct” in that it is subservient to the Zionist agenda and in agreement with their view of history. Political Correctness is just about not offending anyone. However, the truth behind the curtain is: not offending anyone whom ZC doesn’t want to offend. That is the hidden string.

Upon examining war films from the late 40s to the late 60s we can see whom the ZC puppeteers were ok with offending. Aside from rare, semi-honest portrayals, the soldiers of the Wehrmacht were mindless killing machines that were deservedly gunned down by heroic Americans. This increased dramatically with the birth of the action film genre that was basically an offshoot from war films. In order to make things just a bit more exciting, the filmmakers took creative license and effectively departed from reality. This was the start of all the action film cliches we know so well: guns that don’t run empty, badguys who can’t aim, exaggerated explosions and physics, and so on.

After the Germans become too much of a retread, it was by the 1970s that some new groups started to also appear as “the bad guys.” These included Soviet and Vietnamese Communists as well as Arab Terrorists. The first two groups were just convenient propaganda for the American side of the Cold War. Notice that after the Cold War ended, so did the action films exploiting it for the most part. However, the portrayal of Arabs was part of a scheme already in place long before, but now there was fresh wood for the fire, so to speak.

The following documentary goes into detail about the portrayal of Arabs and Muslims in US cinema. It was first a book by the narrator, Dr. Jack Shaheen, before being made into this short documentary film that was only released online as far as I know. Note the section on the production company called Cannon starting at the 23 min mark and the part on the film Rules of Engagement.

DOCUMENTARY: REEL BAD ARABS

The documentary makes many good points, even some against Zionist crime, but seeing that it was so far from the mainstream and does its little mandatory share of comparing National Socialists to evil, it was most definitely under the reins of ZC. But still, only truly intuitive viewers managed to find it and see it when it first came out, while most just ate up the daily cable news bulletins.

This brings me to the main point here, the ZC weapons of Vilification and Demonization. These are essentially increments along the ZC-hate-meter. Vilification is the first stage; it is achieved by repeated negative and/or antagonistic portrayals of a group. Once the association of a group with villainy becomes automatic and second nature from an audience, the conditioning has worked. Demonization works the same way, but the demonized subject is only shown as an antagonist (villains may be shown as protagnist anti-heroes such as MacBeth or Scarface) and they are almost always responsible for premeditating some awful crime that their villainous henchmen go on and carry out.

Can the reader guess to whom I might be referring?

Of course… who else, but Adolf Hitler. The man has repeatedly been portrayed in a way best summed up as “the incarnation of absolute evil” - a phrase that appeared in this TIME magazine article by Elie Wiesel. A very similar phrase describing Hitler was used in the game Wolfenstein 3D where the player destroys a very cartoon looking version of Hitler at the end of Episode 3. More on this highly influential game coming up in a later post. The first time Hitler was shown in a German film played by an actual actor (as opposed to stock footage or implied prescence) was in the 2004 film Der Untergang. However, even this dramatic and very detailed reenactment of Hitler’s last days succumbs to common myth and ZC: the Soviet war crimes in Berlin were ignored and the “six million figure" is reiterated at the end despite not having anything to do with the film’s story. Interestingly, the only numbers given at the end are 50 million (as "total dead during WW2") and 6 million (as "exterminated Jews"), yet the other groups who suffered don’t seem to be worth mentioning. Seeing that the film is about Germany's defeat from the German point of view, why not mention how many Germans died? Because that would be a “heresy.” Demonization carries the “heresy virus.” Meaning, any positive notion that someone gives about a “demon” makes them a “heretic” and a more-than-likely victim of character assassination, or as they used to do in the medieval times, burning the stake, or as the story of Christ goes, public crucifixion. In fact, “public crucifixion” is a phrase sometimes used to mean “character assassination.”

Now, why do the Jews unleash the ZC Hounds whenever their worldview is perceived by them to be threatened? Simply because “the myth of persecution is the adhesive and cement of Judaism” as the narrator states in the documentary Who Brought the Slaves to America?

Here are slight elaborations from two famous minds:

“In the Aryan mind no religion can ever be imagined unless it embodies the conviction that life in some form or other will continue after death. As a matter of fact, the Talmud is not a book that lays down principles according to which the individual should prepare for the life to come. It only furnishes rules for a practical and convenient life in this world.” ~Adolf Hitler

“While all other religions endeavor to explain to the people by symbols the metaphysical significance of life, the religion of the Jews is entirely immanent and furnishes nothing but a mere war-cry in the struggle with other nations.” ~Arthur Schopenhauer

The Jewish mind is completely empirical and that is why they fabricate demons in this world from the likeness of their opponents and sanctify their fallen kin and make demi-gods of their martyrs before arrogantly projecting these delusions unto all. Like all inhabitants of this Earth, they also have this need for the metaphysical, but cannot (or choose not to) break out from their Talmudic prison; like a pitiful child too afraid or too stubborn to be independent in the world beyond home. Gentiles are their prisoners, their herd, either bought out or successfully connived into being goys.

We Aryans know that the human mind cannot live healthily as such and thus we explore the Greater and the Metaphysical with eagerness, but without forcing our subjective viewpoints onto others.

“Belief is a matter for each one to resolve in the light of his own conscience.” ~Rudolf Hess

A Revisionist Documentary

In light of my last post, here is an example of some solid historical revisionism. It is a documentary talking about a subject that we all learned about in school with the same (more or less) story being given each time the subject was touched upon and with some added complexities once we were in High School. College history majors got an even more detailed version, but at its core it was the same old thing again.

This documentary adds all the details that even the most advanced academic course wouldn’t dare mention. This is not one of those sensationally themed Alex Jones style documentaries that says “forget all that you know” and then claims to show the viewer the actual full picture. No, this is a sober and enlightening look into history. The subject is the African Slave Trade, one of the most heinous, thoroughly premeditated, and longest lasting crimes ever perpetrated on this Earth.

The reader is, by all means, encouraged not to forget everything they know, but to actually keep it in mind so they can see how this information closes many gaps and paints a much fuller picture.

Who Brought the Slaves to America?



This is Part 1 of 6, the rest can be found on YouTube. Also, the film is in its entirety on Google Video.

NOTE: I do not take credit in any way for creating this documentary, I am just promoting it. But that was probably obvious.

Some Thoughts on Revisionism

As Aryanists, in order to accurately and honestly portray our history and our Aryan folk, there are many key things that need to be done. Many of these objectives are all ready rolling forward with increasing success, but at the same time coming into more friction from opponents. The key issue here is Historical Revisionism. The popularly accepted version of history does its best to vilify all things Aryan, but especially all things National Socialist; it’s as if the Devil himself wrote a political theory.

This notion continues to be accepted as the actual course of history despite an incredible wealth of information suggesting otherwise. This information is of high scholarly quality, both in its presentation and documentation, and everyone who has read it can clearly see that, including the information’s many deniers. Naturally, those deniers simply do what they do best: promote their policy of ignorance since slandering is becoming increasingly difficult and refuting the aforementioned information with equal scholarly quality is simply too hard, if not outright impossible, so for them the most efficient thing is sweeping it under the rug. I would like to bring the reader’s attention to this particular article that so thoroughly addresses key issues about supposed policies of National Socialist Germany that it should be a required reading for history scholars. However, if it in fact was required reading in academic circles, then it wouldn’t be “revisionism” anymore, but “truth.” As long as it can be grouped elsewhere than truth the establishment is satisfied enough.

Revisionism is not limited to 20th century history or even to the entire field of history, it can be found in a wide variety of subjects. As Aryanists, we should promote a “Universalist Revisionism” that encompasses and addresses issues and topics across the real worldwide spectrum. This will only be possible under a solid and united movement with Aryans of various skills and from many fields of study working together.

The idea of revisionism is nothing new, only the here suggested new way of implementing it is. For example, one of the great minds of the Renaissance, Copernicus, proposed an entirely new way of looking at the universe with the Sun at its center and not the Earth as according to Vatican dogma. He came to this conclusion after years of observation and study, which are empiricist methods, however, we know that no one could have controlled the information that he was looking at, the night sky. We also know that he was ready to accept something new altogether since he recorded his work and published it (albeit on his death bed), thus there was a bold step that he took, one of intellectual innovation (thinking outside the box), that resulted in a vital piece of revisionism, which he then shared with the World. Copernicus’s own theory would go on to be honed and revised by scientists like Brahe, Galileo and Kepler (who actually published the first defense of Copernican Heliocentrism). None of these men had any vicious or selfish motivation (if anything their lives were endangered by their “heretical” ideas), they were men of logic in search of Greater Truth.

A much more recent example or revisionism can be found in some Westerns from the 1960s. Before Westerns were largely “black hat, white hat” with villains and heroes as obvious as can be. These were the films that made John Wayne famous. By the mid 60s Sergio Leone created some influential films with a young Clint Eastwood that challenged the conventional Western; they presented a much more ambiguous moral landscape, in such a wild, and often savage, place as the West, “good” and “bad” are not the only two archetypes are work, Leone introduced the “ugly” archetype, one driven by impulse that does both good and bad depending on what serves its needs. This idea was most famously put forth in the aptly titled film The Good, the Bad and the Ugly from 1966. Due to Leone’s being Italian, his films were labeled as “spaghetti westerns” due to their more complex, and often convoluted, drama as well as a humorous take on Leone’s heritage.

A film that presented a really radical (at the time) view on the Old West was Sam Peckinpah’s The Wild Bunch from 1969. Utilizing revolutionary filmmaking techniques in camera work, sound, and editing the film caused a great stir in the film world. It was a uncompromisingly grim depiction of the life of outlaws in 1911, when the Wild West was largely coming to an end. Notable is the fact that John Wayne detested the film saying that it “destroyed the myth of the Old West.” A statement that is so very true on so many levels. The film is about a time when the Old West was coming to an end as well as it changing the entire depiction of the genre, thus Wayne could have just as well have said that it “destroyed the myth of the Old Western.” The rough and ugly reality of not just outlaw life, but of life in general in the Wild West, would become a topic for many years to come with revisionism being the primary drive.

Not surprisingly, Clint Eastwood, who had risen to fame by the late 1960s, made his own revisionist Western in 1973 called High Plains Drifter in which a small town’s ugly past catches up to it with violent consequences. After the film was released, Eastwood wrote a letter to John Wayne saying that he’d be interested in making a Western with the legendary star, but Wayne responded by angrily criticizing the revisionist portrayal offered by High Plains Drifter.

Thus, it is plain to see that revisionism is met with opposition in every field that it enters. In an established system where people are comfortable (especially comfortable financially), they’re more than likely to protest a change even if said change seeks to bring the truth.

As Aryans, it is our duty to bring the truth to light.
-------------------------
My Honor is Loyalty
----------------------------

Anti-Zionist themes in "Equilibrium"

An interesting and often overlooked film is Equilibrium directed by Kurt Wimmer and released in 2002 for a very limited theatrical release. The film’s production budget is estimated to have been $20 million, which is pretty meager by big studio standards, though there are several names attached to the project that have reasonable clout in Hollywood and thus were able to garner the money to make it. Most notably is actor Christian Bale, a talented actor, though not yet the superstar that Batman Begins made him into, and even after the release of that film, Bale is among the few high paid actors not swimming in Hollywood vanity and keeps a relatively humble profile. Actors Sean Bean, Emily Watson, Taye Diggs, Angus MacFadyen and Sean Pertwee are all relatively established names in the film and theatre acting world, though far from Hollywood superstars. Klaus Badelt composed the film’s unique score. Jan DeBont, who was first a cinematographer then director who shot to fame with 1994s thriller Speed, produced the film. Hardly an A-list series of names, though respectable they are… perhaps this can be explained when we look closer at the actual film that these people using their talents have created.

The film is science fiction and takes place sometime in the 21st century, it is not said exactly when, but from the opening narration we know that “during the first years of the 21st century a third world war broke out.” Mankind was left in ruins and the main culprit of this disastrous conflict was deemed to be “man’s ability to feel.” It was determined that our own “volatile natures” simply “cannot be trusted” and that human emotion, with symptoms of anger, hate, and greed is a disease that was rightfully eradicated. And a new form of law enforcement was put into place, the Grammaton Cleric, to ensure that the new human civilization called Libria would be safe.

I do not wish to go through the entire film scene by scene and I encourage the reader to actually get a hold of it. It’s pretty rare, but the bargain bin in Best Buy might have it and ordering online (or torrenting) will probably also work. I will, however, go over the themes that I think are very much anti-Zionist. These are not that hard to see, but what is really clever about the film is that is actually presents a degenerated form of Aryans… how? We’ll get to that shortly.

MAJOR CHARACTERS
John Preston, the protagonist, is an elite law enforcement officer in Libria. In the beginning he executes his partner, Errol Patridge, who had started to see past the oppressive façade of Libria. Later he misses a required dose of the pacifying state mandated drug and himself begins to question his reality and eventually aids the start of a revolution.

Vice Consul DuPont, the highest government official that Preston interacts with and most likely a close aid of Father, who is rarely seen in public. DuPont acts as Father’s representative in most cases.

Father, the leader of Libria, who gives speeches from a protected booth in major city squares, but is most often seen on the many imposing monitors around the city.

Brandt, another elite law enforcement officer who becomes Preston’s partner after Partridge is executed.

Mary, a sense offender that Preston and Brandt arrest, and after missing his dose Preston slowly develops feelings for her. Through these brief interactions guised as interrogations Preston finds out what it is to be human.

MINOR CHARACTERS
Errol Partridge, an elite law enforcement officer and Preston’s partner at the start of the film. Preston executes him for reading a book of William Butler Yeats’s poetry.

Preston’s son and daughter. The boy is in training to become an enforcer like Preston and the girl looks like she is not dosing and thus confused and dissatisfied with life… we’ll get into why she is not given away soon.

Preston’s wife, appears in a flashback on the night of her arrest for sense offense. Desperately kisses her husband as she is dragged away, as far as is shown in the film, that is Preston’s earliest “feeling moment.”

Jurgen, a member of the underground resistance. He is on the dose so he can safely enter society and report to the underground members who are totally off the dose and thus unable to go to the surface. He tells Preston about the lie that has been perpetrated on humanity.

THE WORLD OF THE FILM
The world shown in the film is almost purely empirical and therefore un-Aryan. When the Gun-kata fighting style is described in a scene, it is said that the base of information that was used to create this combat technique was derived solely from video analysis of gunfights and the statistics that were drawn from them; meaning solely on experience, there was no real innovation involved, just persistent, though admittedly quite acute, observation.

This theme can also be seen when Preston drives into the city with Partridge at the very start, they are driving along wasteland and then come upon the city gates. Why would a civilization able enough to construct a massive city not clean up around itself? Because, this world has no will of creation or greatness or innovative drives, it is just configured to be convenient to live in. Only the immediate area matters.

The title that the elite law enforcers in this future world hold is "Grammaton Clerics" which means "Clerics of the Word." The organization they serve in is called the "Tetragrammaton" which means "Four letter word." In Judaism that term is used as a substitute for "YHWH" - the main Jewish idol. Thus, it is the Tetragrammaton YHWH that is behind the entire deception and oppression in the film. This is the key Aryan idea in understanding the film as from it most other things become clear. For instance, a "Third World War" was mentioned in the opening narration and that it was used as a pretext to create the society of Libria… now let’s look at a basic outline of how Zionists deceive the masses.

Summary of Zionist trick:
1) Promote a policy that they know most people are too degraded to successfully execute.
2) Blame the policy instead of the people for the failure, allow their agents to reverse the policy and thus gain public trust.

With this in mind it is not unreasonable to believe that it was the Tetragrammaton YHWH that engineered the war or the policies that led to it in order to be able to sweep in with the all remedies after the massive conflict had killed untold millions, and maybe even billions, of people.

Summary of Aryanist countermeasure:
1) Blame the people instead of the policy for the failure.
2) Make the policy work by gathering sufficiently capable people.

It is precisely this that the underground resistance movement is doing and Preston joins them, he uncovers his true inner-Aryan

The full article with the quotes above can be found HERE.

DEGENERATED ARYANISM
This is perhaps the most unsettling theme in the film. How can noble people be brought down while still retaining some of the characteristics that made them noble in the first place? The answer can be one of two things. Either the masses, after the war, were engineered to be strong and healthy, but passive by way of drug (like in Huxley’s Brave New World) in order to serve the elites; OR they were precisely degenerated from Aryanism and are kept in their limbo-like state with the drug. Note that Preston is very fit, clean, methodical and, at a glance, seems to be an Aryan, but the drug Prozium keeps a veil over his perception and he doesn’t see beyond the programming of his indoctrination. He is an Aryan kept at an empirical level; practically cattle.

This is a nightmare vision of a future in which Aryans failed to unite and were overpowered by the Tetragrammaton YHWH and made to serve it.

Notice that the main emblem seen flying throughout the film is similar to an Aryan Swastika as seen on the flag of National Socialist Germany. The whole city looks Art-Deco in style with Albert Speer motifs, but it is bland enough to obviously not have been made by Speer. This is a key part of the illusion that keeps the degenerated Aryans in servitude, they believe they are in an Aryan society.

When speaking with Mary, Preston is asked a key question about what he lives for… after thinking about it, or running through some key memory jogs, he blurts out a propaganda sounding message: “to safeguard the continuity of this great society.” Mary, the Aryanist, responds with the cold hard truth: “You exist to continue your existance.” She sees that society has been tuned to be purely preservationist.

Note that the Prozium dosage method resembles suicide by self-inflicted gunshot. The capsules containing the drug look like rounds in a magazine that are chambered into a barrel and injected with a trigger-like device. Symbolic suicide.

A question to ask: Is it possible in our real world, as depicted in the fiction of the film, to be able to break the Aryan will so precisely so that we the noble become slaves while thinking that we are still noble? Sadly, yes. The greatest indicator of this is the many White Nationalist groups and neo-Nazis that drive this possibility forward. They spout their hate speech, march around with swastika banners wearing cheap mock-ups of SS uniforms and all the while believing that they're doing good.

THE METAPHYSICAL ARYAN DRIVE
The scene where Preston misses his morning dose of Prozium is some sort of anomaly. He places the capsule on the counter next to the sink, then splashes cold water on his face and dries up with a towel which he places on the counter but… the capsule he placed falls and shatters. How can a man trained to basically be a robot, a man with a nearly flawless service record for his whole life, a man so bound to routine that by now it must be forged deep into his subconscious, suddenly flub a basic everyday action? Preston even says that he never takes the capsule out until after he brushes his teeth, so it was not just the placing of the towel that was a change of routine, but the order in which he did a standard procedure. This anomaly, this out of place occurrence, is his true inner Aryan breaking out. He is slowly, first subconsciously, breaking the indoctrination of the Tetragrammaton YHWH.

Due to the fundamental nature of Aryanism stretching beyond the empirical, it is therefore impossible to fully suppress the Aryan will with purely empirical methods. The film shows that this suppression can be engineered in ways that greatly prolong it, but it is inherently impossible. This is also why Preston and his son, indoctrinated servants, don't give away their kin, the girl mentioned before. Their family drive, despite conditioning, is strong enough to continue to maintain their family unit. This need was perhaps intensified after the mother was executed. Tetragrammaton YHWH, no matter how hard it tries, cannot break all the compassionate bonds of its servants.

As Preston stops taking his dose his world view slowly changes. One key scene is when he wakes up from a nightmare (dreams indicate thought and imagination), he frantically tears down the translucent film on his window and sees something he has never yet looked at directly before, the Sun. Why look at the Sun? Why didn’t his conditioning to get a replacement kick in after he broke his first dose? People dependant on drugs can get very impulsive and dangerous when they don’t take their fix. The answer is, once again, his inner Aryan. This being a film, a work of story and fiction, not all events that take place need to conform to our reality as symbols and metaphor are key to the art. The metaphor of Preston looking at the Sun is him for the first time seeing the enlightenment of the Swastika. Realistically, it would have probably just dawned on him as he woke up, but the film shows the event in a more poetic way, a scene with several metaphors at work that outline the themes being communicated throughout the film.

BITS AND PIECES
I do not wish to spoil all the detail of the story so that the reader can view the film and enjoy a real first viewing, but here are several things to keep an eye out for.

Sense offenders are said to be incinerated in a combustion chamber. The Tetragrammaton YHWH is exterminating its dissenters with industrial efficiency.

When arresting Mary near the film's start, the still loyal slave Preston states "We're the Tetragrammaton, there's nothing we can't do." The scene of warrantless arrest suitably sums up the attitude of the Protocols of Zion and their thirst for power and control.

There are many hints throughout the film as to the deception that has been placed into society. Keep an eye on how major characters behave and what color schemes and music the film uses in those scenes.

Preston’s Dual Pistols that he is seen firing throughout the film sometimes display a Tetragrammaton logo as their muzzle flashes. Note key scenes when this happens, especially at the end.

A key traitor is killed in a symbolic way… they’re “unmasked.” Watch to understand.

Also there is a scene that heavily resembles Sergei Eisenstein’s Odessa Steps sequence in the famous film Battleship Potemkin. That film was used by the Soviet regime to demonstrate the cruelty of the Russian Czar as the Czar’s troops march abreast down a large stairway shooting innocents. The film glorified the Communist Revolution… however, in this film, it is the revolutionaries who do the shooting and the rank of soldiers tumbles down the stairs riddled with bullets as rebels run up past them. In true Aryan form they don’t run from their oppressor, but meet him head on. This is an Aryan Revolution.

REACTION TO THE FILM
One last thing of note is the criticism that this film received. Its fan base was, and still is to this day, largely on the internet. Most mainstream critics that reviewed it during its limited theatrical release panned it. IMDB forums were packed with supporters and haters. My guess is that the anti-Zionist themes were picked up quite early in production, hence the smaller than usual budget, limited release, and outside funding for the film; it was decidedly not a mainstream film.


------------------------------
Equilibrium IMDb page
------------------------------

An update of "Die Fahne Hoch"

On my other blog I am doing a bit of translation work in order to expand the reach of Aryanism. However, there is a bit of translation that I found appropriate to put here since the result was in English. Simply put, it is my update of the NSDAP anthem, "Die Fahne Hoch" or, as it is sometimes referred to as, "Horst Wessel Lied." I got this idea after seeing that many of the English versions of this anthem are rather bland with just straight forward and very literal translation; the beat, the rhyme and whole poetic nature of Wessel's lyrics have been lost with only the basic idea being put forth.

I tried to compensate for much of that and created a version that fits much more to the beat of the music, retains some of the rhyme scheme, but also, most importantly I think, uses current Aryan terms. This is not the 1930s after all; Aryanism is in a new era.
-------------------------------------------------------------
With Flag up High

With Flag up high our ranks are firmly led,
S.A. Troops march with bold and solid steps.
Comrades whom the Red Front and reaction'ries shot dead
Now march in Spirit within our Aryan ranks.

The streets are clear for all the brown battalions,
The streets are clear for all the Storm Troopers,
Full of hope they look up to the Swastika in millions,
The day for freedom and Folkdom now dawns.

For one last time the rally will now be called,
For our Noble Kampf we all stand ever ready.
Soon Aryan banners will fly over all the city halls,
Slavery's binds are at their last dying grasp.

With Flag up high our ranks are firmly led,
S.A. Troops march with bold and solid steps.
Comrades whom the Red Front and reaction'ries shot dead
Now march in Spirit within our Aryan ranks.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Best recited or sung when listening to an instrumental version of the anthem which the reader can find HERE. There is a little intro to this rendition and the lyrics should enter at 0:17.


NOTE: This version of lyrics was edited on 9-17-2010. The new construction of the title/first line seems to make more sense in English this way.