Avatar and the Myth of the Noble Savage

Avatar and the Myth of the ‘Noble Savage’

Avatar and the Myth of the “Noble Savage”
By Hank Wolf

I will admit to being a fan of movies even though Hollywood films have a tendency to promote themes that are harmful, or even downright hostile to the interests of our people. Consider the fact that Eli Roth’s disgusting torture movie, “Hostel” and the equally twisted and ultra-violent revenge film “Inglorious Bastards” were lauded by critics, the ADL included, and media circles alike. On the other hand, Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ”, an elegant artistic achievement depicting the love and forgiveness of Christ, was derided by these same people and lambasted as “anti-Semitic”.

In recent weeks, James Cameron’s 3D hit “Avatar” has ended up being somewhat of a sensation. There were, to be sure, many aspects of the movie I found enjoyable. The visuals were, to be frank, quite amazing. But like many Hollywood movies, it was packed with highly questionable thematic elements that bordered on a bizarre propaganda overload. Without spoiling too much of the plot for potential moviegoers, the main character of Avatar is a crippled former marine who goes to work for an evil corporation on the utopian planet of Pandora. The Eurocentric corporation is trying to extract a mineral from the planet, and in doing so, decides it must “ethnically cleanse” the Na’vi, the race of gigantic blue hominids that inhabit the planet.

Meanwhile, the marine becomes involved in a scientific-ambassador program that neurologically links him with a lab grown Na’vi body (an Avatar), and he immerses himself in their utopian native culture. He gradually learns their ways, and realizes that their world is far better than the life led on Earth. In the final scenes of the movie, he fights alongside the Na’vi in a cataclysmic war against the humans, and in a climactic battle scene, the villainous head of the corporate army asks the hero “how does it feel to betray your race!”

Like previous films with a White hero fighting alongside the oppressed natives such as “Dances with Wolves”, “Avatar” had racist, anti-White undertones. Only this time, instead of horses there were flying creatures (plus free 3D glasses). Ironically, Avatar was criticized as being racist by the media—not because of its clandestine negative portrayal or European civilization, but because the hero was White! Apparently having a White hero is beginning to be a little too much to handle anymore, even if the character is portrayed as hero for betraying his own people.

Actually the film is a not-so-subtle hate film against Europeans. Third Worlders will invariably identify with the Na’ vi people being exploited and genocided by Europeans. It is true that the movie has a subtle racial strike against the non-Europeans by saying it takes a European to lead them, the worst aspect of the film is its impact on the vast number of European-American audiences that see the film. The real target of the film is not simply to inflame non-Whites around the world, which of course it does, its real target is to destroy our own people’s will to preserve our heritage and freedom.

Having the hero be a White man who betrays his own people sends a not-so-subtle message to millions of Whites both young and old. If you really want to be a good guy, a hero, you have to do the right thing and betray your race and fight on the side of the other races. Of course, with massive immigration and high birthrates of non-Europeans into every European homeland, it is we who are being ethnically cleansed, not some Third World tribe. In fact the highest birthrates in the world are in non-White nations, while Europeans are being reduced to a minority in their own homelands. Their demise is not some evolutionary cleansing by a more advanced people, but the elimination and replacement of a great people, not by some sort of excellence or demonstration of ability – other than the ability to make a lot of babies.

One of the most troublesome aspects of the movie in my mind, and the motivation behind this article, was how the film propagated the myth of the Noble Savage. In a nutshell, the ‘myth of the Noble Savage’ is the belief that the mind of man is a blank slate at birth—pure, noble, spiritually connected to nature, and naturally caring toward other creatures. It is modern society, the environment, and European civilization in particular that lead to violence and debasement of this once innocent blank slate. In the real world, heredity, not the environment plays the key role in human and animal behavior, but that is beside the point at the moment. Is lack of medicine, literacy, the beauty of the higher arts, the advances of sciences really such a wonderful thing? Are we to prefer illiteracy and superstition over intellect and enlightenment?

Nowadays, it is often not worth it to spend too much time dissecting a movie. We have become accustomed of what to expect. But with “Avatar”, the media has admitted to some of the negative effects of this film that are important enough to address. A CNN article titled “Audiences experience ‘Avatar‘ blues” (www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/Avatar.movie.blues/index.html) mentions several cases of people becoming depressed and in some cases suicidal after watching it. This is probably more widespread than reported. According to the report, the breathtaking, artistic depiction of the planet Pandora has made people long for an unattainable utopia and become depressed and pessimistic, especially when they are presented with such a negative portrayal of our civilization.

It may come as a surprise to many people, but I believe that this sort of pessimism is precisely the desired effect that the director and the Jewish dominated movie industry have in mind. They simply do not want people to think positive thoughts about European culture and our world as a whole. The purpose is to demoralize. The propaganda in the movie may have been subtle, and even indirect at times, which makes it more difficult to counter, and the conditioning all the more effective.

Obviously, movies are just that. Movies. They are often designed to implant ideas in people’s minds and we should always be aware of that, no matter how much a film may move us. Movies should be a hobby, a diversion, and a source of enjoyment. I for one try not to take them seriously and this especially goes for movies churned out by Hollywood. But, the danger of films like Avatar is not its overt propaganda; it is the effect of the film on a subconscious level. As reported, even though the “hero” wins in the end, Avatar is ultimately depressing because of the flickers of self-hate it instills in many. It is depressing for me because as I watched the film, I realize that this fictional film is one more blow against our own sense of self-preservation as a people.

Katie Couric: Be respectful “unless it’s someone like David Duke”

Katie Couric: Be respectful “unless it’s someone like David Duke”

Commentary by Dr. David Duke

It is incredible how some reporters throw out their most important journalist ethics when it comes to interviewing me. When I took journalism courses at LSU I was taught that the main job of an interviewer was to present accurately the views of the person interviewed. After all, that is what journalism is all about. The interviewer or reporter is not supposed to be the star of every interview. An interview or article is not supposed be about the journalist or his opinions, but about the fair and unbiased presenting of the views of the person, no matter how controversial. That way the public has the right to form their own opinions about the merits of the person’s opinions.

A reporter is supposed to find out and report what the views are of the person being interviewed, not to join in some ideological lynch mob.

Katie Couric is at the pinnacle of her profession as a journalist. In a recent interview she stated matter-of-factly that core journalist ethics shouldn’t be followed when interviewing someone like me.

In a recent interview with Poynter Online, Couric says that “ideally, in 100 percent of the situations it is really about the person you’re interviewing, or should be.” She goes on to say that her tone was “really important because I think it is respectful and politely persistent.”

Then she goes on to say,” that’s really what you want to do when you’re interviewing someone, unless its someone like David Duke whose views are so abhorrent to the vast majority of the American people.”

So if she finds someone’s views abhorrent or thinks the majority finds them so, at that point a journalist should not be respectful or polite, but simply a combatant rather than an open minded journalist.

The question is why would Couric throw journalistic ethics out of the window when she interviews me?

Could it be that when the public actually hears my views without bias that she is afraid they may agree with me.

And which of my views does Couric think the public finds so abhorrent. I have won three public elections, two in Louisiana and one in New Hampshire in a Vice-Presidential Primary. I have a public record of bills I proposed and a voting record from the House of Representatives in Louisiana. The American people will find nothing scary in the clear public record of my positions.

What has been my consistent platform?

1) Stopping the massive immigration that will make our Children walk as strangers in our own land.

(Polls show about 80 percent agree)

2) True equal rights for all, and thus stopping the massive racial discrimination against White people called affirmative action.

(Polls show about 75 percent agree)

3) Opposing forced busing and the forced integration of schools and preserving the neighborhood school.

(polls show about 75 percent agree)

4) Vastly reducing use of taxpayer’s money in Foreign Aid and not sacrificing American boys in wars all over the world.

(polls show a majority agree)

5) Protecting America from free trade policies that destroy American businesses and millions of American jobs.

(polls show most Americans agree)

and perhaps the most important position I hold, as far as the controlled media is concerned. A position they are compelled to repress:

6) Exposing the destructive policy of Jewish extremist Matrix of Power that dominates the media, international finance, and politics, and leads us to catastrophic wars that damage the American nation and people, that fuels hatred and terrorism against the people of the United States, and that is bankrupting our economy.

Most Americans would agree on this point too if they knew the facts, and that is precisely why they can’t afford to let me calmly present my evidence before so-called journalists like Katie Couric, who are simply servants of the Zionist, extremist Jews who own and run the media conglomerates.

No one in American politics has spoken so forthrightly and convincingly on all these subjects.

I suggest that the fact that I speak effectively on them is why hacks like Katie Couric must resort to schoolyard brawls instead of journalist ethics and human respect.

Best to All, David Duke, PhD

Here is the excerpt of the Katie Couric interview where she discusses me:

Interview with Katie Couric: ‘People want Coverage that Has a POV (Point Of View)
Posted by Mallary Jean Tenore at 6:07 AM on Jan. 26, 2010

Couric: If you’re too confrontational, and there are times when you need to be confrontational, sometimes the attention is then focused on you rather than the interview subject. Ideally, in 100 percent of the situations it really is about the person you’re interviewing, or should be.

Sometimes journalists make the mistake of having a certain tone or conducting the interview in a certain way that it draws attention away from the subject and on to the interviewer herself or himself.

My tone was really important because I think it was respectful but politely persistent. And that’s really what you want to do when you’re interviewing someone, unless it’s someone like David Duke whose views are so abhorrent to the vast majority of American people

David Duke: Arrest Is A Suppression of Human Rights!

David Duke: My Proof to the Czech People that My Arrest is a Suppression of
Human Rights
Why I am not guilty of any "Thought Crimes" in the Czech Republic. By Dr. David
Duke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDIiSOthK5g&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stormfront.org%\
2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D596528&feature=player_embedded

After jailing me in violation of my human rights, I have no personal interest
in visiting the Czech Republic again, but if it is decided that my human rights
of conscience and speech will be violated by continuation of charging me with
crimes related to free speech, I will certainly come back to Czech Republic to
defend myself and to defend that most precious freedom of free speech. Freedom
of thought and speech is the freedom upon which that all other human rights
rest. If it becomes necessary for me to return to defend myself I will do so. In
the unfortunate media frenzy that will ensue, I will expose to the people of
your fine country and to the world — how human rights are being trampled on - in
a fashion completely unworthy of the heroes of your great history.

Every true Czech should value freedom of speech, especially after decades of
brutal suppression of freedom of speech by the Bolsheviks. How many of you; how
many of your fathers and mothers endured imprisonment, torture or even death for
exercising their God-given human right of freedom of speech. They stood up
bravely no matter how the communists tried to criminalize their free speech.
Slowly, the same kinds of human rights violations are creeping into your land
and across Europe. Journalists are always

For More: >>>>>>
http://www.davidduke.com/general/david-duke-proof-of-my-arrest-as-suppression-of\
-human-rights_9737.html
Source: http://www.davidduke.com