The BS Gentiles at The Occidental Observer reviewed this film and that was really just a continuation of their fixation on white race preservation as can be read in this review of the blockbuster film. Replace "white" with "Jew" and you'll have a typically racist, rabbi written op-ed.
In the article, Kevin MacDonald writes:
"So, in a nutshell, Whites from Earth are colonizing another planet whose indigenous wonderful hominids with primitive technology but great butts and neural connections to plants and animals, are in the way of The Company which wants its precious mineral called Unobtainium. (This was the only in joke in the movie I think.) There are a couple of social workers trying to get the natives to move and save Precious Life. They are of course outmaneuvered by the capitalists who want their unobtainium and start to bulldoze the magic forest."If all MacDonald can observe about this film is that certain white characters are greedy and unpleasant, than he is missing much of point due to his skin-pigmentation fixation. He also misses the satire on Judeo-economics... "unobtanium" is quite the way to put it.
In the film, there are mixed characters on both sides. Good humans aren't all white and neither are the evil humans. Though, the commander of the mercenary unit deployed to protect The Company is white, as is the main representative of the evil corporation, and it is from these two bits that MacDonald's main concern springs: evil white people. Odd that a professor of psychology would evaluate character's based on their skin-color. How about delving into their... *ahem* ....psychology? Meaning, looking at the characters' intentions, goals, means to achieve these things, and the like. From this we can see that the commander and the corporate officer are slimy, arrogant bastards and deserve no sympathy from noble people.
Practically all of the main Zionists in Israel have light skin that could be called "white," so does this mean that MacDonald sympathizes with those war criminals? And does he find any news report that points out Israeli criminality as offensive, since it criticizes "white" people? It would seem so. MacDonald decidedly prefers the shallow end of the pool. His allegiance to his "white" skin is like the Jews' allegiance to the Law of the Rabbis - what's good for (my group's name here) is good in all senses of the word.
More from MacDonald's article:
"So, the Good pseudo-native , like in The Last Samurai, goes native and war is begun with the CapitalistImperialistWhitePigs. Spectacular battle scenes with the Good natives mounted on the backs of flying Teradactyl like birds beating the White Man’s machines. As in Tarzan movies, the animals also come to the aid of the natives, after having sensed that the White Man is a greater danger.MacDonald's race-themed defensive posture is virtually identical the ever-apologetic Jew, who will always find a way to mask or excuse his deeds - from cries of "anti-Semitism" and "blood libel" to the quintessential racist attitude of "We're the Chosen People." The BS Gentiles at TOO simply substitute "White" for "Jew." In their eyes, criticizing whites is "anti-White" or maybe "anti-Occidentalism."
In the battle, the chief Bad Guy is a jarhead (Marines) colonel who wants to kill all the Good Natives. Blue eyes and a very White Marine, he of course, is beaten by bows and arrows and big scary animals (a la Tarzan). As he is about to kill our pseudo-native hero, who has of course betrayed the mission of The Company, the colonel yells, “How does it feel to be a race traitor?” With that, two arrows from the love-interest native female sink into his chest."
"Like Bladerunner’s replicants, the natives are more human than homo sapiens — Whites that is. The few other folks who help the natives are Earthlings — Blacks and browns, who of course, side with the natives. They recognize a brother when they see one."Oh boy. Quite the absurdity, in addition to the racism.
At no point in the film is it so bluntly said that the Na'vi (the "natives" from Avatar) are "more human" than the humans. What is said, via the story, is that they are less overcome by greed and material desire. This makes them more noble and thus they are the story's good-guys.
"The material interest of mankind can prosper only in the
shade of the heroic virtues. The moment they become the primary considerations of life they wreck the basis of their own existence." ~Adolf Hitler
The human mission on planet Pandora is primarily concerned with material interests, while the Na'vi are heroically defending their homeland. That is why the humans and their corporation loses. However, by the end, a few humans, the noblest stock, joins the Na'vi. They do this to pursue ideals and probably didn't consider "race." In fact, in the film, it is only the bigoted Gentiles that bring up "race" and such terms. They cannot see past the end of their nose.
I do agree with MacDonald that Avatar paints a pessimistic portrait of humans, however, unlike him, I am not at all surprised. Just look at the day's news, mainstream source or not: there's violence, treachery, greed and hate that comes from people of all colors. Oddly, since MacDonald is so Euro-centric, he only sees the media point out evil white men and takes offense to this. That sort of arrogance and ignorance hand-in-hand is very Jewish.
The fact is, all peoples suffer and all peoples are to blame. The state of the World is decayed, decadent and filled with drudgery. The popular films that come out simply reflect this. Complaining about such a film is like complaining to a mirror for showing you a scar on your face - it's not the mirror's fault! You did something that gave you a scar and the complaints won't help heal it.
"Man has become great through perpetual struggle." ~Adolf Hitler
And he can become great again, but this means primarily proactive effort. This means seeing your own faults in addition to those of others, and this is something the Gentiles lack.
Taking a look at this essay is a good start for them to steadily veer away from simplistic bigotry and tunnel vision.
Alternate version of the rebuttal HERE
