← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Walter Yannis
Thread ID: 14958 | Posts: 48 | Started: 2004-09-11
2004-09-11 07:17 | User Profile
In additon to this new movie review, [URL=http://home.ddc.net/ygg/new/clips.htm]Ygg also revised [/URL] his classics movie list, incorporating a number of [URL=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12355&highlight=yggdrasil]our suggestions [/URL] (OD mentioned)
Walter
A White Nationalist Classic.
If I had unlimited resources, the first explicitly White Nationalist movie I would produce would be a dramatization of the corrupt and cynical way in which the inner party dominated racial extortion coalition operates.
It would vividly show how sexual vice is used to control media celebrities and politicians, how violence is used when necessary, and perhaps most important, how the constituent racial and ethnic groups in this coalition all use each other and basically hate each other.
But miraculously, an outer party liberal - Robert Redford - has produced it for me.
It is called ââ¬Å[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001XAPWY/qid=1094886970/sr=8-1/ref=pd_cps_1/103-3755000-2528635?v=glance&s=dvd&n=507846]People I Know[/URL].ââ¬Â
And it is the only truly explicit White Nationalist movie in existence. Braveheart may come close, but it is a Scottish nationalist movie - ardently separatist in its operation - which although uniting Scottish and Irish separatists in a uniquely modern and un-historical way - still involves fighting between groups of Christian Whites.
"People I Know" is an overt and explicit attack on the racial extortion coalition.
In some respects, it is similar to ââ¬ÅEyes Wide Shutââ¬Â, but is much more explicit. The average soccer mom would miss entirely the ethnic driver behind the system of social control revealed in ââ¬ÅEyes Wide Shut.ââ¬Â
The ââ¬ÅJ wordââ¬Â pops up in the middle of "People I Know" and is used with increasing frequency through the climactic conclusion. You even get to see an inner party cabal in action - complete with billionaires, media barons, a Rabbi and bands of armed izzy bodyguards.
It is available for rental at Hollywood video (and I assume, Blockbuster) and available for sale on EBAY for from $7 to $15.
The protagonist of the movie, played by Al Pacino, is a public relations crisis manager specializing in covering up scandals for movie stars and politicians. He is an ââ¬Åold schoolââ¬Â inner party ââ¬Åcivil-rightsââ¬Â liberal. His passion and his cause is setting up a fund raising dinner to raise money for the legal defense of some Haitian black illegals threatened with deportation.
He gets a call from his one remaining client, a movie star (played by Ryan Oââ¬â¢Neil) to bail out a young starlet/prostitute who managed to get herself arrested.
It turns out that the young starlet was on a mission for the actor (who wants to run for a U.S. Senate seat) to infiltrate and photograph the goings on at a super model pleasure palace run by an inner party billionaire named Scharansky for the purpose of corrupting and then controlling politicians (lowering their cost and increasing the predictability of their votes).
The actor wants the film because Scharansky is supporting some other candidate for the Senate seat he wants, and the actor needs the goods on Scharanskyââ¬â¢s pleasure palace in order to force Scharansky to shift his substantial support and money to his own campaign effort.
Unaware of all this, Pacinoââ¬â¢s IP character visits one Reverend Block, a black leader in Harlem to get him to attend the fundrasing dinner - at which point the hostility between black and inner party surfaces explicitly.
He next visits Scharansky for the purpose of persuading him to attend the fund raising dinner for Haitian immigrants, and here we are informed that Scharansky could care less about Haitian immigrants, hates Reverend Block - who he accuses of calling the IP ââ¬Åhooked nosed devilsââ¬Â - and desperately wants to know where the young actressââ¬â¢ ââ¬Åtoyââ¬Â containing the incriminating pictures might be.
Pacinoââ¬â¢s character tirelessly tries to convince people to come to his fundraiser, and despite the fact that none of these liberals cares about Haitian immigrants, and almost all say they will not attend, in the end every one of them attends because of the opportunity to work the rest of the crowd for money, influence and glamor.
The cynicism at the party - scratching one anotherââ¬â¢s eyes out in private conversations while striking happy, multi-culti poses for the camera is quite revealing, juxtaposed as it is with old photographs of 1960's civil rights marches and pictures of MLK delivering his famous IP ghosted speeches.
While it is always hazardous to speculate about the subjective intentions of the producer, I suspect that these photos of the 1960s civil rights era were intended to shame a liberal audience into rejecting the cynicism and elitism of modern multi-culturalism and embrace the ââ¬Åold idealismââ¬Â of the cause.
But when viewed objectively, the 1960's civil rights movement is made to appear equally cynical by its juxtaposition with the attitudes and behavior of its current standard bearers.
When the movie ends, I am left sitting on the sofa wondering exactly how and why such a movie could ever be made in the first place. It is a clear threat gesture. The film played only in a few ââ¬Åart housesââ¬Â in New York and Los Angeles before being released on DVD. While expensive acting talent was employed, there was essentially no ad budget, and the public at large is completely unaware of this filmââ¬â¢s existence.
It looks like Redford and his backers (the outer party faction in the racial extortion coalition) has been angered by the Sharanskys of the world and has produced this movie as a warning shot across the bow, so to speak.
It is a frank confession that the racial extortion coalition is a fragile one, and that while the blacks have been unhappy with their subordinate role for many years, the appearance of this film tells me that the outer party liberals have now joined them.
The fact that this movie was made is good news for us.
Buy a copy and enjoy.
Yggdrasil-
2004-09-11 07:34 | User Profile
Netflix just got this movie a couple of weeks ago. I will rent it next week and let you guys know if I concur with Ygg's analysis.
2004-09-11 10:51 | User Profile
Just ordered it from Amazon.
Reviewing Ygg's revised list was a lot of fun.
He included a lot of our suggestions.
I suggest he also include:
[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005Q79A/qid%3D1094899804/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-3755000-2528635]What's Eating Gilbert Grape[/URL]
[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000062XG0/qid=1094899830/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3755000-2528635?v=glance&s=dvd]The Man from Snowy River[/URL]
[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000AUHQU/qid=1094899865/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3755000-2528635?v=glance&s=dvd]Hud[/URL]
2004-09-11 11:07 | User Profile
Ygg also included "The Naked Prey" (and gave it his coveted 2-star, must-see rating), which is an obscure (although it did get an Oscar nomination for Best Screenplay) 1966 film starring and directed by Olympic medal winner Cornel Wilde. Its one of the best films you'll probably ever see (as well as one of the most disturbing - and I refuse to spoil any of the disturbing bits by detailing the various methods of execution employed by the wild Negroes). The main plot is about a man who, after the rest of his safari party has been massacred, has to evade ten Negro hunters, while naked as a jaybird in the wilds of then-British East Africa. Its available only on used VHS from Amazon, EBay and the like, unfortunately.
2004-09-11 12:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]Ygg also included "The Naked Prey" (and gave it his coveted 2-star, must-see rating), which is an obscure (although it did get an Oscar nomination for Best Screenplay) 1966 film starring and directed by Olympic medal winner Cornel Wilde. Its one of the best films you'll probably ever see (as well as one of the most disturbing - and I refuse to spoil any of the disturbing bits by detailing the various methods of execution employed by the wild Negroes). The main plot is about a man who, after the rest of his safari party has been massacred, has to evade ten Negro hunters, while naked as a jaybird in the wilds of then-British East Africa. Its available only on used VHS from Amazon, EBay and the like, unfortunately.[/QUOTE]
I have seen the movie. It shows the depths of brutality of the negro animal.
2004-09-11 12:30 | User Profile
Hud is one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen.
And it's all about traditional rural American morality running up against the sociopathic personalities that we've come to admire.
Great, great film. I can't recommend it more highly.
2004-09-11 12:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Just ordered it from Amazon.
Reviewing Ygg's revised list was a lot of fun.
He included a lot of our suggestions.
I suggest he also include:
[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005Q79A/qid%3D1094899804/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-3755000-2528635]What's Eating Gilbert Grape[/URL]
[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000062XG0/qid=1094899830/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3755000-2528635?v=glance&s=dvd]The Man from Snowy River[/URL]
[URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000AUHQU/qid=1094899865/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3755000-2528635?v=glance&s=dvd]Hud[/URL][/QUOTE]
I also recommend " The Man from Snowy River" also. It not only shows white society but also shows how a boy earns manhood by taking adult responsibility and earning the respect of the other men. It also has lessons on the proper courtship of a woman.
2004-09-11 14:39 | User Profile
Cornel Wilde was Jewish, incidentally. Czech extraction I believe.
2004-09-11 14:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]I also recommend " The Man from Snowy River" also. It not only shows white society but also shows how a boy earns manhood by taking adult responsibility and earning the respect of the other men. It also has lessons on the proper courtship of a woman.[/QUOTE]
It does contain some twaddle about feminism, but I don't find that too offensive given that it's well within the context of the times.
It's a beautiful film, without even a genuflection to the Multicult.
2004-09-11 23:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]Cornel Wilde was Jewish, incidentally. Czech extraction I believe.[/QUOTE]
I found this hard to believe and checked on Jewhoo and you are right. Until now I thought that he was an excellent specimen of white manhood. He was great in costume epics in the 50's when he had a sword in his hand. Too bad, he had a great body, though.
2004-09-17 13:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]Netflix just got this movie a couple of weeks ago. I will rent it next week and let you guys know if I concur with Ygg's analysis.[/QUOTE]
I just finished watching "People I Know" about an hour ago. I can't quite honestly heap the same level of praise upon it as Ygg saw fit to do, but if not a classic, its cerainly a film which can easily be interpreted as having a very powerful and authentic WN message. I imagine the vast majority of OD posters would find it quite worthwhile, and I would further say it has moderate outreach potential.
2005-02-03 12:17 | User Profile
I watched this film again (on DVD) with my teenage daughter. I caught some nuances the second viewing that I'd missed the first time around.
There are a number of amazing lines in this film, and we're actually told a good deal about the characters in bits and pieces. A few tidbits:
The Al Pacino character (Eli Wurmser) tries to pick up a pretty, shirtless boy at the cabal orgy right after he takes in a huge lungful of opium. We also learned that he banged one of his female proteges, along with several others. In short, the Eli Wurmser character is quite debauched, having lead a very dissolute life.
Wurmser's dissolution didn't stop there, however. He was addicted to some AWFUL drugs that his doctor, Sandy (Jewsih), prescribed in massive quantities. It turns out that Sandy is working for the cabal, and ruined Eli's health on purpose. Sharansky in the end condescendingly tells Wurmser that he likes him, because he's the "little Jew who could." Really a sneer. Man. The film really says that the Jewish elites use and abuse their own underlings quite as much as they do gentiles. The only smart one in the whole lot is the black preacher, surrounded by heavily armed Nation of Islam bodyguards, who doesn't put up with an bit of Sharansky's crap.
On a second viewing Wurmser strikes me as much less sympathetic character than when I first viewed the flick. The first time around I thought that his was certainly a failed life, and maybe he was wrong about everything, but he seemed sincere enough and his heart was somehow in the right place. But he really gave me the creeps on the second viewing. Drug addict. Liar. Weasel. There was really nothing to recommend him. Maybe that's not how Redford wanted him perceived, but that's the impression he left with me. Disgusting little creep.
For me the kicker was this. Right after the cabal has Wurmser injected on the street with slow poison, Wurmser drags his wasted body home and settles into a recliner chair. He turns on the televison and flips through the channels. He stops briefly on an episode of (I think) "This Old House" - the PBS home repair show (please correct me if I'm wrong). There's a blond white guy standing on the porch of a run down white house. He says something to the effect that "this is the result of the rot that started in the 1930s." In the context of the film, it seems inescapable to conclude that this was an oblique reference to the Jewish-Black political alliance struck in the 1930s - the Jews provide organizaitonal skills, publicity and financing, the blacks deliver the monolithic vote to the Democratic party, and then they divvy up the political spoils.
Unbelievable. I couldn't believe my ears when I finally heard that the second viewing. Whoa. Redford must really be ticked off to make a flick that seems to condemn the basis of the whole Civil Rights movement. I really think that was the dramatic climax of the film. Right before the totally bankrupt human concern known as Eli Wurmser finally terminates in death, we're told that his life was part of the "rot" that has been eating away at our white house since the 1930s.
I would like to hear comments on that.
My daughter really liked it. She's now starting to apply to college, and she's fixed her sights on some very kosher ones. Forwarned is forearmed, I guess.
Walter
2005-02-03 12:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Wurmser drags his wasted body home and settles into a recliner chair. He turns on the televison and flips through the channels. He stops briefly on an episode of (I think) "This Old House" - the PBS home repair show (please correct me if I'm wrong). There's a blond white guy standing on the porch of a run down white house. He says something to the effect that "this is the result of the rot that started in the 1930s." In the context of the film, it seems inescapable to conclude that this was an oblique reference to the Jewish-Black political alliance struck in the 1930s - the Jews provide organizaitonal skills, publicity and financing, the blacks deliver the monolithic vote to the Democratic party, and then they divvy up the political spoils.
Unbelievable. I couldn't believe my ears when I finally heard that the second viewing. [/QUOTE]
Firstly, I haven't seen this (it was on a bunch of times on IFC last month, though, so I'll certainly keep an eye out for it).
Secondly, we must assume two things. One is that what we read is almost certainly not what Redford et al wrote, so to speak; the other, that our likelihood of reading it the way we do anyway is why "the public at large is completely unaware of this film’s existence".
Thirdly, one could easily see the 1930s allusion as a comment upon, not blacks and Shmuels, but FDR selling out both populism and socialism (and America) to the Jews. There have always been Jews, Jewish leftists and Jewish leftists of influence among us; but the 1930s was the era in which Jews essentially were invited into, and thus [I]became[/I], our Federal government.
2005-02-03 16:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Firstly, I haven't seen this (it was on a bunch of times on IFC last month, though, so I'll certainly keep an eye out for it).
Secondly, we must assume two things. One is that what we read is almost certainly not what Redford et al wrote, so to speak; the other, that our likelihood of reading it the way we do anyway is why "the public at large is completely unaware of this filmââ¬â¢s existence".
Thirdly, one could easily see the 1930s allusion as a comment upon, not blacks and Shmuels, but FDR selling out both populism and socialism (and America) to the Jews. There have always been Jews, Jewish leftists and Jewish leftists of influence among us; but the 1930s was the era in which Jews essentially were invited into, and thus [I]became[/I], our Federal government.[/QUOTE]
But you see the whole filick is about the Jewish-black coalition at the heart of the Democratic Party. It's really right there on the surface, too. I see no other way to understand that comment in the broader context of the film.
I think Ygg is right. This is an explicitly white nationalist film. I resisted the notion when I first read his review, but my second viewing of thefilm clinched that for me.
A couple of other points occurred to me.
There are two white gentiles in the film. One is the Kim Bassinger character who is the widow of Wurmer's brother. We learn that his brother also graduated from Harvard (where they were friends with Sharansky) and that he committed suicide a few years earlier. Bassinger was only 12 years old when she stood bravely at Selma with the Wurmsers and Dr. King. The film doesn't answer what in the hell she was doing there. She was apparently a Southerner, from Virginia. There was talk about Wurmser moving to her farm, where he'd hide out. She was burned out, disillusioned, like Wurmser. And his dead brother.
The other white gentile is Wurmser's young protege, a grunge rocker from Seattle. He struggles to deal with Wurmer's insane life and crooked business. He sees the writing on the wall the night of Wurmser's big bash and quits, saying that he missed grunge and rain. Wurmser agreed that was the best thing for him to do.
I think that taken together, one shows what a life spent chasing Jewish illusions leads to. A wasted marriage (there was no talk of children, I assume the Bassinger character was a childless middleaged woman) and wasted life. The assistant seemed to grasp who vile the whole thing was, and so he chose to leave, indicating a little hope for us.
I'm going to watch it again. I know it's hard to imagine Redford making a WN film, but was Fire Sign Theater put it, "it's just like bees in your head, but, whelp, THERE THEY ARE!"
2005-02-03 16:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]There are two white gentiles in the film. One is the Kim Bassinger character who is the widow of Wurmer's brother...The other white gentile is Wurmser's young protege, a grunge rocker from Seattle. [/QUOTE]
What about Ryan O'Neal's character, Walter?
2005-02-03 17:39 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]I have seen the movie. It shows the depths of brutality of the negro animal.[/QUOTE]
Brutality of the "negro animal"?????????? How about the "brutality" of the Jews who kill the Palestinian children with head shots......the "brutality" of the Jews who kill the Palestinian children with "fifty caliber" snipers rifles breaking their little bodies in two.
Remember the name May Lai in Nam? Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki? blown all to hell by the "white" man?
[B]The first step to finding yourselves is to accept life as is and not as you want it to be and then doing something about it to make it as you want it to be.[/B]
You people are putting the horse before the cart.
By the way I seen "The Naked Prey" many many times, it is a true story of survival and I specially love the ending where they wave at each other, that was a salute of true warriors.
2005-02-03 18:16 | User Profile
The Naked Prey is the best "white man outwits savage band of niggers" ever made, bar none. Wilde both starred and directed the movie, btw. And for a powerful double-dose of nigger-killing action, I recommend viewing The Naked Prey right alongside Michael Caine's Zulu.
[img]http://images.amazon.com/images/P/6300215849.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.briansdriveintheater.com/beefcake/cornelwilde/cornelwilde17.jpg[/img]
2005-02-03 18:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ponce][B]Remember the name May Lai in Nam? Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki? blown all to hell by the "white" man?[/B]...
[B]The first step to finding yourselves is to accept life as is and not as you want it to be and then doing something about it to make it as you want it to be.[/B]...
You people are putting the horse before the cart.[/QUOTE]Almost [B]10[/B] times as many Vietnamese were butchered at Hue by the North Vietnamese than killed by Calley and friends at My Lai.
The Japanese butchered more than 30 million Chinese - almost 100 times the number killed in the bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The Russians attacked Japan at the end of the war and almost as many died due to their savagery as Japanese died due to the atomic bombs plus the fire bombing of Tokyo.
Does Ponce believe the United States has to apologize for killing those trying to kill us? Due to his age I expected him to have a more mature outlook than many who post here. We have no obligation to be the moral exemplar to mankind.
2005-02-03 19:03 | User Profile
Well, that's Ponce. One of these days he's gonna say "some call it a sleeng blade" and make it official.
2005-02-03 20:01 | User Profile
Ponce,
Bless ya, man, but you're the Ivory Soap on this message board: "99 & 44/100% non-sequitur."
2005-02-03 20:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ponce] You people are putting the horse before the cart. [/QUOTE]
Ponce, I've tried actually placing the cart before the horse, but as yet haven't had much luck in getting anything to happen. My horse just kind of sits there.
2005-02-03 20:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=General Rommel]The Naked Prey is the best "white man outwits savage band of niggers" ever made, bar none. Wilde both starred and directed the movie, btw. And for a powerful double-dose of nigger-killing action, I recommend viewing The Naked Prey right alongside Michael Caine's Zulu.
[img]http://images.amazon.com/images/P/6300215849.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.briansdriveintheater.com/beefcake/cornelwilde/cornelwilde17.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Cornel Wilde was Jewish, incidentally.
2005-02-04 02:45 | User Profile
For classic nigger-killin' action, Zulu is top-notch - sure to irk the multiculturalists in your family.
[img]http://www.musicman.com/00pic/4764.jpg[/img]
2005-02-04 03:38 | User Profile
Uffffffffff that's Ponce for you, I meant to say the cart before the horse : (
By the way Ed my point was that we should not complain about the other "animals" when we are also animals.
I seen it in Cuba, The Congo, Nam, Rhodesia, Nicaragua and a couple of other places...... I do know of a Staff Sgt. in Nam who was a real animal and he had an accident.
Martin? like I posted elsewhere, are you a Jew? yes or no?
The Frog? go back to your pond.
2005-02-04 14:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]What about Ryan O'Neal's character, Walter?[/QUOTE]
Right, of course.
He was the third one. A very corrupt, awful person, and future Senator.
He ratted out Wurmser to Sharansky as part of the price he had to pay for Sharansky to back his Senate bid.
2005-02-15 17:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The Al Pacino character (Eli Wurmser) ....[/QUOTE] There's more to it than that, Walter.
I watched this last night -- thanks for the recommendation, by the way -- and the protagonist's name is Jerome Eli Wurman, or J.E.W. What do you make of that?
2005-02-15 19:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=mwdallas]There's more to it than that, Walter.
I watched this last night -- thanks for the recommendation, by the way -- and the protagonist's name is Jerome Eli Wurman, or J.E.W. What do you make of that?[/QUOTE]
Whoa! Missed that one.
The short answer is that I really have no idea what to make of this flick.
And what do you make of the This Old House comment at the end as J.E.W. lay dying - "the rot set in in the 1930s" or something like that? I mean, after all that came before I see no way to escape the conclusion that the "rot" was the Jewish-Black alliance that was sealed in the 1930s. That would cast all those seemingly sentimental references to the Civil Rights Movement in a much less sympathetic light. Do you agree?
I'll watch it again. I suspect there are a number of those little digs at the Yahoodis.
Like I said, for me the second viewing was even more jarring than the first, maybe the third time will be the charm.
How in the world did this thing ever get made, and with an all star cast at that?
2005-02-15 21:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Thirdly, one could easily see the 1930s allusion as a comment upon, not blacks and Shmuels, but FDR selling out both populism and socialism (and America) to the Jews. There have always been Jews, Jewish leftists and Jewish leftists of influence among us; but the 1930s was the era in which Jews essentially were invited into, and thus [I]became[/I], our Federal government.[/QUOTE]
That's how I intepreted it.
2005-02-16 02:43 | User Profile
General Rommel.
I love that film! :cheers: :lol: :gunsmilie
[QUOTE=General Rommel]Zulu is top-notch - sure to irk the multiculturalists in your family.
[img]http://www.musicman.com/00pic/4764.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
2005-02-16 06:05 | User Profile
The Zulus actually came off as quite noble in that picture. Recall their parting tribute to the Brits...
2005-02-16 06:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]The Zulus actually came off as quite noble in that picture. Recall their parting tribute to the Brits...[/QUOTE]
Yes, that's right. In fact, in the beginning praise of their courage and physical endurance was heaped upon them.
Give credit where it's due.
2005-02-17 01:44 | User Profile
Walter Yannis,
[QUOTE]I watched this film again (on DVD) with my teenage daughter. I caught some nuances the second viewing that I'd missed the first time around. ... My daughter really liked it. She's now starting to apply to college, and she's fixed her sights on some very kosher ones. Forwarned is forearmed, I guess. Walter[/QUOTE]
My God, you should not do that. Send her to local two-year college and have her live at home for four semesters. Let her gain a bit of maturity and responsibility before she goes out totally on her own. And then have her get her own apartment off campus. The dorms on many campuses are real cesspools.
2005-02-17 10:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Faust]Walter Yannis, My God, you should not do that. Send her to local two-year college and have her live at home for four semesters. Let her gain a bit of maturity and responsibility before she goes out totally on her own. And then have her get her own apartment off campus. The dorms on many campuses are real cesspools.[/QUOTE]
Oh, I dunno.
She'll have to learn to deal with the world the way it is at some point.
Besides, there's a significant future economic benefit associated (statistically) with attending a top school. A diploma from Georgetown opens doors a degree from Podunk State can't.
2005-02-17 17:58 | User Profile
Walter Yannis,
"She'll have to learn to deal with the world the way it is at some point."
Yes this is very true, but doing well on a debauched college campus does not have much to do with the "real world." Often the most debauched students are the ones who do not work and thier parents are paying all thier bills.
"Besides, there's a significant future economic benefit associated (statistically) with attending a top school. A diploma from Georgetown opens doors a degree from Podunk State can't."
Outside of a few academic snobs, people do not care much about that sort of thing. When I was graduated from high school I did want to do well in college and go to graduate school, but I can not get too excited about. I do not think I could suck up enough to Professors in order to get into graduate school. I was not greatly impressed by many of them anyway.
And pleasing some wage-slave-master have never been one of my goals in life. And in good part they do not care that either.
2005-02-17 20:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Faust]Outside of a few academic snobs, people do not care much about that sort of thing. [/QUOTE]
That hasn't been my experience.
Basically, you won't get into the elite institutions if you don't go through their PeeCee bootcamp masquerading as colleges.
I've seen it with my own eyes. I graduated from the University of Wisconsin and that's just not good enough for many silk stocking law firms.
Not that I particularly care and not that it stopped me from making a good living, but still the fact remains that getting into one of those schools is a ticket into the inner sanctum. It doesn't guarantee success, but it does guarantee a second interview, so to speak.
2005-02-18 00:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Outside of a few academic snobs, people do not care much about that sort of thing. [/QUOTE] Even in Dallas, my degree from an Ivy League university is a real door opener. [QUOTE]I graduated from the University of Wisconsin and that's just not good enough for many silk stocking law firms.[/QUOTE] Well, it's good enough for Kevin MacDonald, but mentioning his name won't get you very far.... But try interviewing in Atlanta with a degree from Arkansas, as a colleague of mine did. At King & Spalding, a partner informed him that he had a "lot of moxie" interviewing here with an Arkansas degree.
2005-02-18 02:05 | User Profile
Walter Yannis,
Why would you want work at one of those "silk stocking law firms." What would you do if you did make it to the "inner sanctum?"
Mwdallas,
King & Spalding does sound like much like anything I would want to have anything to do with.
[QUOTE]King & Spalding Diversity
King & Spalding's most important asset is the talent it attracts, nurtures and develops. This talent enables us to provide the kind of responsive and efficient service that clients expect and deserve. We believe the firm and our clients benefit when people from varied backgrounds and perspectives bring their expertise and experience together.
The best talent is diverse in many ways, including gender, race, sexual orientation and national origin. A diverse talent base provides the range of experience, approach and judgment necessary to achieve the best results for our clients and creates the most collegial and interesting work place environment.
Sexual Orientation
King & Spalding is committed to having the brightest and most diverse lawyers it can find, including members of the Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community. We work hard to foster and maintain an environment where our lawyers can provide the highest level of legal service while being true to themselves in the process. King & Spalding has openly gay and lesbian lawyers at all levels of seniority from junior associates to experienced partners. The firm's non-discrimination policy expressly prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, and domestic partner benefits are offered to all attorneys and staff. Scott Eckas, a partner in our New York office, provides LGBT representation on the firm's Diversity Committee.
King & Spalding encourages and supports its partners, counsel and associates taking leadership roles in organizations serving the LGBT community:
* Beverlee Silva, counsel in our Atlanta office, serves on the Board of Directors of Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a national organization committed to achieving full civil rights for the LGBT community. Beverlee, along with Atlanta partner Sam Griffin, also are involved in hosting Lambda activities in Atlanta.
* Ira Kustin, an associate in our New York office, serves on the Board of Directors of the Hetrick Martin Institute, which provides educational and counseling services to LGBT at-risk youth.
* Michael O'Brien, the Managing Partner of our New York office, serves on the Hetrick Martin Institute's Advisory Committee.
King & Spalding actively recruits Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender law students and seeks opportunities to partner with LGBT student organizations to help their members successfully navigate the process of moving from law student to lawyer. Last year, we sponsored the Harvard Law School Lambda Lesbian Gay Bisexual & Transgender Policy and Law Conference, spoke at NYU Law School's Annual "Out in the Workplace" panel discussion series, and participated in the national Lavender Law Recruiting Conference.
Community King & Spalding also provides ongoing support for various LGBT community organizations. Among others, the firm provides financial and pro bono legal support to:
* Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund
* The Lesbian and Gay Law Association Foundation of Greater New York
* The Hetrick Martin Institute, home of the Harvey Milk High School, in New York
* The ACLU's Lesbian & Gay Rights and AIDS Projects
* The Lambda Legal Atlanta Garden Party
[url]http://www.kslaw.com/[/url][/QUOTE]
2005-02-18 06:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE][Faust]Walter Yannis, Why would you want work at one of those "silk stocking law firms." [/QUOTE]
Money.
[QUOTE]What would you do if you did make it to the "inner sanctum?"[/QUOTE]
Power.
Hey, it's like the old saying goes "money can't buy you love, but poverty will buy you nothing."
We need to recapture these institutions. The Yahoodis infiltrated them and made them their own. We need to pull off a counterrvolution. And we won't win unless we get in there and fight.
Never settle for second best. Those institutions belong to us, and we must win them back.
2005-02-18 07:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=mwdallas]Even in Dallas, my degree from an Ivy League university is a real door opener.[/QUOTE]
If you don't mind my asking, what kind of law are you in?
And as for the college thing...
In re 'debauchery' and the general climate on campus, I can offer the following:
At any large state school, drugs and alcohol are easy to find-but then again, a very small percentage of the student population makes that their lifestyle.
I live in the 'athletes' village, so I see more drug/alcohol use than a typical engineering student might. And at a state school, be prepared to be amazed at how pampered some of the athletes are. I'm a walk-on on the cross-country/track team, so I don't get the same level of attention the scholarship players do...if only I had half the resources of the school at my fingertips! It's disheartening, too, to realize that, even if your school is over 90% white, the football and basketball teams, if they're to be competitive, will have the exact opposite racial make-up.
State schools are good in certain areas-engineering, agriculture, teacher education. However, if you want a true liberal arts education (and prestige), it's better to attend either a prestigious private university, like Duke or Georgetown, or a small liberal arts school, like Macalester or Amherst.
I'm in engineering, so most of my classes aren't going to veer into politics...but I will say, P.C. is the watch-word and diversity is the religion. The 'conservatives' on campus end up either being annoyingly shrill 'College Republicans' with a hard-on for Bush or religious conservatives who are ALWAYS trying to shepard the wayward into the Campus Crusade for Christ revival (I'm not religious and I'm not knocking those who are...but proselytizing over someone's shoulder as they try to finish both lunch and thermo homework is a bit much).
All in all, the university will feel totally alien to any true conservative...even if you happen to be a 'color-blind' one. It's quite a disheartening experience to see pages of classes on "Sexuality and Freud", "Queer Theory", "Racial Supremacism and the Voice of Black Anguish" etc., (and believe me, MANY of them are required!) and then see how few classes focus on "our" heritage (the Greeks, Romans, Anglo-Saxons).
2005-02-23 08:28 | User Profile
Walter, after years of reading your worse-is-better, waiting-for-apocalypse posts, it's interesting to see you with your Pope's hat off, angling your kid into a Good School so she can go fetch a High Paying Job - presumably to thereupon live well, and in a world much like our own, [I]without [/I] blood running in the streets from a coast-to-coast Racial Holy War.
From the tone of [I]most [/I] of what you've offered here at OD, I'da thunk your primary concern would be teaching your kids duck-and-cover techniques, and identifying the edible wild roots, berries and mushrooms in wooded areas. I'm glad to see, when push comes to shove, you can set aside your Catholic annihiliation-fantasies and re-enter the [I]real [/I] world from time to time. Chuck Martel flies out the window once the tuition bills come through the door, I guess.
Anyway, it's after midnight - which means I'm sure the Yannis girls are now fast asleep and the mitre's back atop your noggin.....
2005-02-23 08:45 | User Profile
Spare us from your pointless "kibitzing", ragno.
Petr
2005-02-23 08:56 | User Profile
Wahh wahh [B][I]wahhh![/I][/B]
More saintly sniffling from God's own Smithers.
I'll shut up when you can persuade your deity to zap me with a lightning bolt. Failing that, you're just another snake-oil salesman who has to point up to the clouds to "win" your arguments.
2005-02-23 08:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Walter, after years of reading your worse-is-better, waiting-for-apocalypse posts, it's interesting to see you with your Pope's hat off, angling your kid into a Good School so she can go fetch a High Paying Job - presumably to thereupon live well, and in a world much like our own, [I]without [/I] blood running in the streets from a coast-to-coast Racial Holy War. [/QUOTE]
Ragman, respectfully, you've consistently underestimated my cynicism.
As I've noted long ago, you're much more of an altar boy than me, even in your polymorphous paganism. You just don't get it. But I have to say your innocence is touching.
Look ye here: it's all about power. Getting it. Keeping it. It's all about who rules. That's just the way it works. It's nature. Denying that makes as much sense in politics as denying gravity in civil engineering.
My desire to get my children into the best schools I can and secure for them a place in the upper echelons of a society that will one day belong to them and to no alien (especially Kosher ones) is only what any father with normal instincts would wish for his children. And this is fully in keeping with my admiration of great men like [URL=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14783a.htm]Tomas de Torquemada [/URL] and [URL=http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95sep/richelieu.html]Cardinal Richelieu[/URL]. You misunderstand my religion, Ragman. Like all religion, my Christianity seeks to rule, and rule absolutely, brooking no challenges to its right to rule (although tolerance of religions that accept their subservient position is integral to the system).
Surely none of us will win power over our own house by copping your pollyannish view of the world. Get in there and fight. We all have an obligation to rise as "high and inside" this system as we can, because it is only from that position that we can subvert the system to our own ends. I get pretty livid when I hear some young guy talk about the problems of whites while he never bothered to get a trade, drinks beer and watches Monday Night Football. There's just no time for that.
That's what I tell my kids, and that's what I try to practice myself. I really have little patience for those who counsel morally pure defeat over gritty victory.
And I say that with my mitre very much on.
Warmest regards, Walter
2005-02-23 09:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Ragman, respectfully, you've consistently underestimated my cynicism.
As I've noted long ago, you're much more of an altar boy than me, even in your polymorphous paganism. You just don't get it. But I have to say your innocence is touching.[/QUOTE]
Far from it; I've told you time & again that your worse-is-better pose was just that. Hunkering down among the tins of canned food in one's bunker doesn't jibe with worrying if your kid's toeing the line and hitting the books in DC. (DC, of all places!)
2005-02-23 09:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Far from it; I've told you time & again that your worse-is-better pose was just that. Hunkering down among the tins of canned food in one's bunker doesn't jibe with worrying if your kid's toeing the line and hitting the books in DC. (DC, of all places!)[/QUOTE]
You're mischaracterizing what I've said.
I'm proceeding from Tainter's "Collapse of Complex Societies." If you've read that compelling analysis (be honest, have you read it?) then you know that collapse does not entail a return to the stone age. It does entail rather a falling back to the next lowest quanta of economic complexity. Collapse is more of a reshuffling of the cards, usually among competing ethnic groups (USSR, Yugoslavia).
Of course we need a collapse, from the quanta of imperium to that of nation state. I'm all for that, and I think it advisable to have a back up plan for the time of transition, which is bound to get rough.
I have experience you lack. I've seen collapse with my own eyes. I lived in the Soviet Union in the years when it fractured along ethnic lines. The young people who clawed their way to the top of the Soviet system were the same people who took power in the Russian system. The prize of state power sure as hell didn't go to those who copped a holier-than-thou attitude and hid out in a shack someplace on Lake Ladoga reading Bakunin.
Power did go to those who graduated from the great institutes of Moscow - Moscow State, MGIMO, Plekhanov Institute - and who had already burrowed their way into the state apparatus (although the situation remains very much in flux). These are the folks who now run Russia with its vast power and resources, and not those who were too holy ever to compromise.
As Krsna said to Arjuna, "whence this ignoble cowardice? Join the battle!" Amen to that.
Lie, cheat, steal. But win. Just win.
I see no inconsistency in my views. I do see your inability to comprehend the depth of my cynicism.
Walter
2005-02-23 09:26 | User Profile
[B][I] - "Lie, cheat, steal. But win. Just win."[/I][/B]
This is frankly getting a bit too Jesuitical for my taste.
Petr
2005-02-23 09:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][B][I] - "Lie, cheat, steal. But win. Just win."[/I][/B]
This is frankly getting a bit too Jesuitical for my taste.
Petr[/QUOTE]
Understandable, you being a Protestant and all.
PS: Petr, I am an admirer of Oliver Cromwell. Now there's a man worthy of emulation. He wasn't above wreaking a little mayhem in the name of his cause. Do you reject Cromwell along with the Jesuits?
2005-02-23 22:28 | User Profile
[COLOR=DarkRed][B][I] - "PS: Petr, I am an admirer of Oliver Cromwell. Now there's a man worthy of emulation. He wasn't above wreaking a little mayhem in the name of his cause. Do you reject Cromwell along with the Jesuits?"[/I][/B][/COLOR]
I am not against [I]open onslaught [/I] (upon certain conditions), which is what Cromwell did. Backstabbing and lying techniques I find displeasing, especially if you resort to them without really compelling reasons.
I have studied different pagan and quasi-Christian cults, and I've seen how they have claimed very noble objectives that would require [B]just a little bit [/B] of playing fast and loose with truth and commonly accepted morality, and have ended up as utterly amoral bunch of sociopaths.
When you are staring into abyss, the abyss is also staring at you, and when you are fighting monsters, you better take care that you won't turn into monster yourself.
(Probably Nietzsche's best quip)
Petr