Wotans Krieger #racist

Wotans Krieger #racist aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.co.uk

The last 10-15 years has seen a number of films being made that appeal to racially aware Aryans, some good, some not so good, some plain bloody awful such as The 300 which is nothing more than a piece of anti-Iranian propaganda designed to stir up the feelings and misplaced loyalties of European-Americans.

[...]

The Persians were demonised to the extent that many of them did not look Aryan or even human. This film appeared at a time when American[read zionist] propaganda and war fever was being ramped up against Iran and the non-zionist controlled muslim world. Is it a coincidence that the director of this celluloid ham is a Jew, Zack Snyder?

By contrast one should compare the three fantasy films based on the work and characters of Robert E. Howard:

Conan the Barbarian[1982]
Conan the Destroyer[1984]
Red Sonja[1985]

These films were faithful to the spirit of Howard`s Hyborian Age and were not afraid to use racial stereotypes but not for the purpose of political or war propaganda. Howard`s works have a strong racial awareness to them and as such make highly suitable literature for Aryanists and their families to read. They also have a mystical quality to them and this is brought out not just in the imagery but also the soundtracks of the films.

[...]

A careful selection of such films and their repeated viewing not merely for entertainment purposes will reinforce the heroic yet mystical Aryan archetype in the minds of the young and not so young and as such are useful tools in the cleansing of the mind and spirit of our peoples.

42 comments

old comment by nazani14

"Really? You... you think the fucking masks are the biggest or only complaint people have about the depiction of the Persians in 300?"

I didn't say anything about the "biggest or only complaint" or even anything about what other people thought. My comment was in response to WK's "many of them did not look Aryan or even human" I consider it entirely possible that WK did not recognize the Immortals' masks as such.

The movie was based on a graphic novel, not archaeology. Even if a viewer didn't know that, the first few scenes should tip them off that realism was not much of a concern. As an animal lover, I'm guess I should be out of joint over the behaviorally and anatomically unrealistic portrayal of the animatronic wolf!

old comment by Sargon

@Doubting Thomas

Only very, very loosely. It is essentially a Fantasy movie loosely based on how racist orientalists imagine the Battle of Thermopylae and every other war fought between Europeans and non-yellow Asians. The Persians resembled how racist 19th Century Orientalists saw everywhere that wasn't Europe, and hell even the Greeks were wildly wrong: they fought basically fucking naked, and abandoned the phalanx formation like 10 minutes in, instead relying on the might of their SUPERIOR WHITE BLOOD to carry them through against the DUSKY HORDES OF INFERIOR EASTERN MUD-ALIENS!

And that's not even mentioning the glossing over of Greek slavery, Spartan pederasty, that interesting little rite-of-passage Spartan boys had to complete to be considered men, the Greek ideas of gender equality and the Spartan ideas of marriage, or the movie's apparent notion that the Greeks were more egalitarian or gave women more rights than the Persians (who let their women have their own jobs, own and keep their own income and property, unlike the "enlightened Greeks" whose women couldn't even leave their homes without a male keeper unless they were courtesans or priestesses), and literally just about every other detail.

And yet, again, they're still not as horribly incorrect as the Persians, about whom Frank Miller and Zack Snyder apparently went out of their way to get just about every single minute detail as wrong and offensive as possible, I guess as a good roundabout way of telling the Iranians to go fuck themselves.

Seriously, if they'd just made it a Fantasy movie; maybe called the Spartans something else, and made the Persians... I dunno, dark elves or something, the movie might've actually been decent.

Except for the stuff about TEH JEWS, I'd say his criticism of 300 is surprisingly accurate.

old comment by WK

Well I am amazed that we have found some common ground at least on the issue of The 300 which not only was a very bad film and I could not stomach more than 30 minutes of it but it was sheer naked anti-Iranian propaganda.
I am sure I do not need to tell you that when a country wages war against an enemy or even before it gets to that stage it demonises the opponent to make it easier for their mercenaries[which is all that modern soldiers are-the Latin root of the term(`solidus`-gold coin) is indicative of that]to butcher them.
It is curious thing: I suspect that most of you are Americans and Europoid ones at that. It would seem that many of you are obsessed by skin colour.In Europe we do not think in such simplistic terms as `black` and `white`.Race is a more complex subject and one that has spiritual as well as physical factors.

old comment by Sangfroid

@Whatta Knob

Of course, one hears that Americans are so concerned with race, while Europeans are just above it all. And one might be almost inclined to believe this nonsense, until one spends a bit of time in Europe.

I spent a little time in Europe at the behest of Uncle Sugar a few years back, and this notion Europeans do not think in simplistic terms like black and white is of course simple BS. The French and British are VERY prone to using such simplistic phraseology (or have never heard the French phrase "quartier noir" which I was warned to stay out of, or that delightful French custom of calling Africans "singes" or that lovely British phrase "nig-nog").

The Germans on the other hand, are careful with day to day conversation given what happened during the WAR (as they call it), but I did actually hear a German snarl out the phrase "Juden" during a train trip and it sent shivers down my spine. When I coughed, I got thirty different apologies and typical crap about "I didn't mean it that way..."

Just like I'm sure Knob didn't mean it that way.

old comment by Kuno

@WK:

I am using the definition as found in dictionaries and used for decades, maybe centuries.

anti-Semite
[an-tee-sem-ahyt, an-tahy- or, esp. British, -see-mahyt] Show IPA
noun
a person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews.
Origin:
188085

Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anti-semite?s=t

Languages evolve and words often have meanings that have not much to do with their origins.

@Ultimate Paragon:

Yeah. Europeans are, on average, considerably more racist than Americans.

Do you have a source for that?

@Sangfroid:

I recently argued with someone who wanted to justify his “The Jews (as some kind of hive mind) control Hollywood” conspiracy with “I don’t like Israel’s politics”, as if one has something to do with the other.