The Great Reset: The Deep State vs the Great Awakening [2020)

Something is afoot.

If you’re not curious whether there was election fraud in the U.S. during this recent election, then you’re not paying very much attention.

It has been 22 days since the U.S. election.

For the American mass “news” media, everything is all wrapped up with a bow in a tidy little package.

They pull from here and there.

Yesterday it was Paul Ryan.

Since when did Democrats OR Republicans give a fuck about Paul Ryan?!?

Since pretty much never.

The U.S. “news” media trots out Mitt Romney.

Liz Cheney.

The criminal organization which is attempting to illegitimately install Joe Biden as our next President is DESPERATE to seal the deal.

Which makes it infinitely-interesting that President Trump retweeted a Lin Wood tweet.

The surface layer of content in Lin Wood’s tweet was this:

https://themarshallreport.wordpress.com/2020/11/22/sidney-powells-kraken-is-dod-cyber-warfare-program-we-are-at-war/

But the golden nugget embedded in the article was this:

How long will Alphabet Inc. leave it up?

You have the title.

The Wayback Machine has no working records of the YouTube video.

I would archive it, but I’m sick of fucking signing up for shit and being tracked.

So fuck it.

You can track it down.

And we’re gonna do a little oral transmission here.

Spoiler alert:

this film review will be strictly spoilers and nothing but.

Not my usual m.o..

I’m not selling anything.

I don’t generate income by you clicking on this story.

I have no link to any content creator above.

I write very strange film reviews.

It’s called free fucking speech.

I also write music.

All my music is free to stream and download.

And I’m not gonna post a link.

Go find it.

The purpose of this article is strictly to get information out.

I am a conservative.

The same kind of conservative Donald Trump is.

Like it, or leave it.

I belive in Jesus.

I love God.

If you don’t like my foul mouth, then you can leave now.

I curse because I’m angry.

And I curse because I will not be told what I can and cannot say.

This is my website.

I’m using my free speech.

I’m gonna walk until they make me run.

So I’m here today to tell you about what I think is going on.

I scour the internet every day (especially these past 22 days) in an effort to avail myself of actionable intelligence.

I have a thirst for knowledge.

But more than that, I have a thirst for truth.

I support QAnon.

I support Trump.

I love my country:  the United States of America.

I support our military.

I support our law enforcement officers.

And now I’m going to get around to the fucking point.

I watched this entire one hour, eight minute, and 44 second video – – – – – – so that you don’t have to.

But I still recommend you watch it.

And archive it (if at all possible).

Wayback Machine is my jam.

I’ve never been asked to “log in” until today.

Whatever…

Fuck it.

You can work a little too.

Here’s the beef.

This whole video is good.

All of the guests are good.

But there is one particular guest (the first one) who drops what I find to be some new and illuminating information.

The guest is Major Jeffrey Prather.

It should be noted that several of the six guests (including Maj. Prather) appear to be forthcoming content creators for this new outlet:  American Media Periscope.

I’ve never heard of this outlet.

I get the impression that they have only been around a couple of weeks.

AND ALREADY TWEETED OUT BY THE PRESIDENT!

Which brings me back to my point.

Something in here MUST be salient.

And my guess is that it is the first guest:  Major Prather.

If you haven’t heard of Sidney Powell by now, you have been living under a rock.

While most of America is being blasted with “Sidney Powell is even too crazy for Trump” blah blah bullshit, those who know (Trump voters) are well aware that Ms. Powell is an accomplished lawyer.

Her most recent claim to notoriety is successfully defending General Michael Flynn from the petty bitterness of sore losers.

Update:  if you’re just waking up, the Flynn case has been dismissed (within the past 24 hours).  This according to a tweet by one of Flynn’s brothers.  Go find it yourself.  I.e., Flynn’s not gonna need a pardon.

We’ve known this for awhile.

The government has no case when the government has no prosecutor.

Judge Emmet Sullivan is a really atrocious example of a judicial activist.

An activist.

Not a judge.

Sullivan dragged out the case another three months…after the Department of Justice withdrew its case.

But I digress…

It does not take a fucking genius to imagine that the exceedingly-persecuted Michael Flynn might be very grateful indeed for the legal services of Sidney Powell.

Flynn fought hard for Trump in 2016.

Flynn was unfairly targeted by Obama’s illegal Crossfire Hurricane program (run by the FBI).

Flynn’s life has been ruined (in a worldly sense).

But he has survived.

I believe the man had to sell his home to pay his legal fees.

Thirty years in the U.S. Army and that’s the treatment he got from Obama, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Lisa Page, Loretta Lynch, Susan Rice, Bruce Ohr, Rod Rosenstein, John Brennan, James Clapper, and (last but not least) Joe Biden.

So Michael Flynn has some scores to settle.

Because of his ongoing case, he was essentially precluded by the judge from publicly speaking for the past four years.

What a illegal travesty!

So now we come to what should be obvious to any thinking individual as the massively-fraudulent election of 2020.

We have been waiting three years for any of those aforementioned people to get in trouble…FOR ANYTHING!

We would have been happy if Hillary Clinton had gotten a fucking parking ticket, but she didn’t.

We have waited through:

-Jeff Sessions

-John Huber

-John Bash?

-Bill Barr

and

-John Durham.

We have been built up by a bunch of tick-tock bullshit.

Maybe it had a purpose.

Surely it did.

But what I am about to report casts it in a slightly different light.

You can decide for yourself whether what I convey seems plausible.

I belive Q is legit.

But it is a HIGHLY, HIGHLY complex and nuanced PSYOP.

I do not believe it is a fucking LARP.

And if it’s a LARP, then so what?

It has been effective.

WILDLY-effective.

It is a part of world history.

It has gotten people DIGGING like never before.

Me and a few other people tried to expose 9/11 as an inside job/false-flag stand down/what have you.

We didn’t really prevail.

We were ignored.

Maybe we were completely wrong to doubt the official story of 9/11.

But I don’t think so.

I researched that event like my life depended on it.

BECAUSE IT CHANGED THE WORLD…FOR THE WORSE.

We didn’t need to go to war in Afghanistan.

And we didn’t need to stay there 20 years.

We didn’t need to go to Iraq.

Again.

Correct me if I’m wrong (and I’m sure you will), but I think we could have arrested Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and a few others and called it a day.

Which brings us to the current times.

There wasn’t enough of a GREAT AWAKENING to reach critical mass.

But that was 19 years ago.

I can’t really recall Q ever having talked about 9/11.

That’s alright.

Maybe Q will tell us that 9/11 was actually the work of 19 beardy guys with boxcutters working out of a cave in Afghanistan.

And maybe that’s the whole story.

But I don’t buy it.

I believe the CIA was involved.

So does Dr. Steve Pieczenik.

Do yourself a favor and buy his eBook American Warrior in Crises.

I get nothing for plugging that.

He’s not a friend of mine.

I’ve never spoken to or exchanged correspondence with him.

I just respect his work.

Immensely!

Is he always right?

Probably not.

But for my money, he’s as close as we get to truth in this day and age.

So here’s the rub.

Flynn has some scores to settle.

The other military people who saw Flynn become a political prisoner also have some scores to settle…ON HIS BEHALF.

You cannot fail to serve your country (like Obama) and then turn around and ruin a guy’s life who did (for 30 years!).

You shouldn’t prosecute a guy for a process crime and, in so doing, make him lose his house.

I think I donated 20 bucks to Flynn.

Damn right I did!

I worked at Starbucks.

And I was proud to give my hard-earned money to a MILITARY spy chief.

And there’s the rub.

I used to want to work in intelligence.

Maybe I still do.

But I’m old.

Washed up.

And, honestly, I’m a fucking musician.

So just call me Sherlock Holmes.

And a shabby one at that (perhaps).

But I take great pride in TRYING to know what’s going on.

Because, again, I LOVE MY COUNTRY!

And who taught me to truly love my country?

Donald Trump.

And who else?

Steve Pieczenik.

And who else?

Michael Flynn.

If you don’t think that Sidney Powell is privy to some very interesting information by way of representing General Flynn, then you are incredibly naive.

Which finally brings us to this YouTube video.

Major Prather.

Major Prather (according to his LinkedIn) worked at the Defense Intelligence Agency for 17 years…and in a very high position at that!

General Flynn headed the DIA.

It might be said that the DIA is the military rival in the U.S. to the civilian CIA.

That’s right:  the CIA is a civilian intelligence organization.

A weird thing.

Created in 1947.

The CIA’s predecessor was the OSS:  a military intelligence unit.

Although the OSS were a bit kooky (thanks to their head William J. Donovan), at least they were putting themselves in harm’s way.

But again I digress.

The CIA has lost a little more than 100 officers/operatives in the past 73 years.

That’s the official number.

And it sounds about right.

The DIA has officially lost 21.

That number makes less sense.

But it makes sense in that the DIA is sort of the cream of the crop for military intelligence in the United States.

The NSA may be thought of as being even more elite (and powerful as a unit) because of the unique types of intelligence gathering they do.

The NSA supplies intel to the CIA, FBI, DIA, etc.

The NSA is a military intelligence organization.

Back to these casualty numbers.

The CIA has officially lost 133 of its employees on the job…in 73 years.

The DIA has officially lost 21 of its employees on the job…in 59 years.

But that doesn’t really tell the true story.

Sure, the CIA has its paramilitary strike teams.

They used to be called SAD/SOG (Special Activities Division/Special Operations Group).

These officers were largely recruited from the military special operations units:  Army Delta Force, Navy SEALs, MARSOC, etc.

Other than these agents, the CIA is more pencil-pusher, wear a tie, James Bond shit.

And I do mean shit.

Once upon a time, the CIA used to help overthrow communist governments.

This might seem inhumane.

Until you live under communism.

In which case, you see just how humane it really is.

But the CIA has gotten away from that mission.

So much so that they ended up with a Director who had once voted for a communist for U.S. President.

That’s right:  John Brennan voted for Gus Hall.

It should have been a disqualifying factor by some estimations.

The CIA and FBI apparently share the same requirement upon beginning official employment:  you must pass a lie detector test…and one of the questions is something to the effect of “have you ever supported a group that has sought the overthrow of the U.S. government.”

John Brennan admittedly had a tough time answering that question.

But he might as well have answered:

“Not yet.”

To my eyes, John Brennan is clearly a traitor to the U.S.

Following closely behind him is Michael Hayden (who led both the CIA and NSA respectively).

But Michael Flynn is cut from a different cloth.

He’s a spymaster.

But he cut his teeth doing the real thing.

Serving in Army intelligence (INSCOM).

Putting himself in harm’s way.

The same cannot be said of John Brennan (and most of the CIA).

[Michael Hayden is a strange case of…well, I don’t know…I just have to assume he is corrupted and coopted to such an extraordinary level that he doesn’t even really love his country any more (if he ever did in the first place)–he loves himself…first and foremost]

So I give Major Jeffrey Prather (formerly of the DIA) a great deal of respect as a foregone conclusion.

[keep in mind…the DIA has had its share of bad eggs…James Clapper chiefly among them]

If you watch no other section of the video I posted above, watch the segment with Prather.

Akamai.

Where do they fit in to this election?

Which brings up 9/11.

And the incredibly strange/significant “death” of Daniel Lewin.

Yes, I know I put death in quotes.

I’m about as sure Daniel Lewin died on 9/11 as I am sure that Adam Lanza was a master with an assault rifle.

Which is to say, not very sure.

But the Electoral College will meet on my birthday:  December 14th.

Massachusetts.

Akamai.

Serbia.

Ok, we know about Dominion Voting Systems and all the programmers they have/had in Serbia.  A bit of a strange locale.  Wonder if the company memos are in Cyrillic?

China.

I don’t now why I wrote that down.

I’m going off notes.

Frankfurt.

Ok, yes.

Obviously.

Something appears to have happened there.

I’m not sure what Prather’s point was on this.

What was seized?

From Scytl?

From the CIA?

And seized by whom?

The U.S. Army?

I should take this opportunity to point out a strange assertion of Prather’s.

I find this one a little hard to believe, but I suppose it’s possible.

Prather asserts that the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, and Marines have all had their computer systems compromised.

Might this have something to do with the DoD contract with AWS?

Amazon Web Services.

The CIA uses them too.

Look it up, you lazy fucker!

It’s an article…in The Atlantic.

Dig!

There have been rumors that the votes in (for example) Michigan were sent by Dominion Voting Systems by way of AWS (which is to say, over the internet?  cloud???) to Europe in order for the votes to be tallied.

Giuliani has pointed out just how ludicrous this is.

And it is!

But what’s the exact chain?

We know there is a company called Scytl.

They are headquartered in Barcelona.

They are rumored to have a “back up” data site (servers) in Frankfurt.

There is good evidence that internet traffic in Frankfurt, Germany on the night of the U.S. election set records for that city.

Look it up.

Find it.

WikiLeaks exposed the fact that the U.S. Consulate in Frankfurt is a giant CIA hacking base.

This can be found in the Vault 7 materials from WikiLeaks.

So, did the CIA hack our election?

Seems to me like a high probability.

Indeed, Prather outlines this dichotomy:  the civil war in the U.S. has already started…and the SO/LIC confrontation can so far best be described as DIA vs. CIA (or, perhaps more accurately, military vs. CIA).

I believe this is probably accurate.

It is borne out by all the intelligence I have personally gathered (OSINT) over the past few years.

The CIA has lost its way.

I once applied there.

Thank God I didn’t get the job.

I also once tried to sell my soul to the Devil (true story), but that tale can wait…

I am saved by the grace of Jesus Christ.

I am the worst among sinners.

Which is why I need the grace of Jesus more than anyone.

I also applied for Air Force Intelligence once.

Didn’t get it.

Maybe because I have a fucking music degree and an MBA.

Not exactly what’s commonly thought needed to assess China’s answer to the F-35.

Which brings us to Prather’s point.

According to Major Prather, only the U.S. Air Force and the newly created Space Force have retained the security of their computer networks.

This is a bold claim.

I don’t have anything to really gauge it on.

Except that I have a soft spot for INSCOM (because of Q and Flynn) and a soft spot for the 4th POG (because they followed me on Twitter for some odd reason [before Jack Dorsey squashed me like a bug]).

Prather then pivots to his concerns.

He talked about possibly-imminent “interdictions” against Iran.

We have heard Q talk about Iran.

I love Iranian psychedelic music from the ’60s.

Before the Islamic revolutionaries fucked everything up.

I have nothing against Muslims.

I love them.

I have nothing against Iranians.

I love them.

I LOVE Kiarostami [RIP].

But let’s take stock for a moment here.

Joe Biden “won”.

Netanyahu pretty fucking quickly called to congratulate Joe.

And THEN…YESTERDAY Netanyahu calls to congratulate Jonathan Pollard on his release.

What in the actual fuck?!?

How pro-Israeli does a President [Trump] have to be in order to get a little respect from Israel?

Ok, ok.

I know.

Maybe Netanyahu is working with Trump behind the scenes.

Entirely possible.

Maybe we should have a sort of FVEY agreement with Israel.

But probably not.

Because, you know, remember the U.S.S. Liberty (you fuckers!).

Back to 9/11.

I have no idea if the Israelis were involved.

There was definitely some suspicious shit.

Zim-American Israeli Shipping.

Vacating the WTC right before the attacks.

And the moving truck company [Dominick Suter].

Mossad had some strange presence in and around NYC leading up to 9/11.

I don’t know what they were doing there.

And then there were the Mossad “art students” (which Pieczenik has attested to from personal experience).

All I know is this.

9/11 could not have gone undetected (and undeterred) by our military.

To the list of Rumsfeld and Cheney (Liz’s dad), we should add Ralph Eberhart, Richard Myers, etc.  And almost certainly Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Perle, etc.

Keep in mind, nobody ever got in trouble.

The two tallest buildings in America fell down (were blown up) and all we did was waterboard KSM 183 times.

Perhaps Flynn and Anthony Shaffer could set me straight on some stuff.

I get the general gist of Able Danger.

But it still doesn’t explain a lot of things.

I’m gonna have to side with Pieczenik on this one:  we’ve seen one long procession of (unpunished) false-flags since 9/11.

Now comes the pain.

Pieczenik seemed really sure about those watermarks on the ballots.

And I believe him.

Shaffer seemed to corroborate their likelihood.

But I was of the understanding that DHS was running this election sting.

After watching this YouTube video, it has dawned on me just how suspicious Chad Wolf has been acting.

See something, say something, right?

Why wouldn’t he fire Chris Krebs?

Even more importantly, what in the actual fuck was CISA doing on the night of the election?

Alexandra Bruce brings up some pretty excellent points in this video.

If I understand her correctly, she seems to be saying that cisa WAS IN ON THE WHOLE THING!

[Which would make sense in the same way that NORAD was doubtless in on 9/11]

But here is perhaps the most intriguing bit of information which Major Prather dropped.

It is his assertion that Ezra Cohen-Watnick is, in fact, Q.

Or rather, he says something to the effect that there is a [and I paraphrase] “very high likelihood” of this.

Call me dumb, but I never even thought of that possibility.

I know who ECW is (not personally, of course).

Thomas Wictor drew attention to this personage years ago.

Said there were no pictures of him because he’s military intelligence.

It’s all starting to click.

I find the ECW theory highly-plausible.

But then Prather throws a massive curveball.

Maj. Prather asserts that Bill Barr is getting ready to indict Ezra Cohen-Watnick (!).

For what?

For being Q??

A final bit of potentially disheartening information from Prather is that “Durham has done nothing” (paraphrase).

I.e., John Durham has not, and will not, bring any of the Crossfire Hurricane [coup #1] traitors to justice.

Sure, we got Clinesmith, but give me a fucking break…

I’d still rather see Hillary get a parking ticket.

So there you have it.

The other guests in the video are all quite good.

They all have some rather harrowing predictions for the coming days/weeks/months.

All seem to agree that Trump will probably prevail and be elected to a 2nd term.

But it could get really ugly.

Ms. Burke brings up the specter of military tribunals.

I see her point.

It may be necessary.

I also highly recommend the PSYOP officer.

And the big fat guy with the beautiful brain.

-PD

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy [2004)

The world is fucked up.

This is probably the craziest year most of us have ever lived through.

When has the world, in its entirety, faced such chaos in recent memory?

9/11 brought us terror on a horrific, spectacular* level.

Guy Debord predicted this in 1967 with his seminal book La société du spectacle.

No, he did not pull a Nostradamus (who happens to share my birthday).

He did not predict the three towers (including the 47-story WTC7) falling into their own footprints.

But he predicted something much more useful, or at least applicable, to our present times.

The “locus of illusion” that Debord talked about remains (though it be besieged on all sides) television.

For our purposes, we shall call it “video”.

Moving pictures.

Debord also predicted our current age of social-media dominance.

Though he could not name it then, he described it perfectly as, “a social relationship between people…mediated by images.”

What does the word “Facebook” evoke when you hear it?

Does it sound a bit like a dating site?

What role do memes (manipulated images) play in our social discourse?

“The spectacle”, Debord told us, “…turns reality on its head.”

How much of what you hear “on the news” (whether that be television, radio, Internet, social media) do you trust?

Because you are smart, dear reader, you consider the source.

And so do I.

Debord wanted to say something about fakes.

The epigrammatic beginning to the first chapter of The Society of the Spectacle gets right to this point.

It was the philosopher Feuerbach who said that in, “…the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to the original, representation to reality, the appearance to essence…illusion only is sacred, truth profane.”

Ludwig Feuerbach wrote those words in the 1800s.

But the Irish rock band U2 would come to a similar epiphany in their song “Even Better Than the Real Thing”.

Debord wanted to talk about fake-ness.

But he also wanted to qualify his description of “the spectacle”.

For Debord, “reality erupts within the spectacle, and the spectacle is real”.

To translate (from French to English to philosophy to layman’s terms), there are some aspects of our image-driven information culture that are real (though a good deal of fake news exists).  But owing to the lack of a competing narrative to the overwhelming chorus of voices in agreement (corporate news), “the spectacle” (whatever the talking heads tell you) is, de facto, real.  Never mind that it might all be rubbish.  The sheer repetition of certain truths–day after day, hour after hour (from all the many “options” [ABC, CBS, NBC, New York Times, Washington Post])–renders those “truths” the currency of “factual” discourse.  Without an independent, competing narrative from alternative news sources (which currently lack the scale and reach to pose a symmetric threat to “legacy media”), whatever the aforementioned “usual suspects” (ABCBSNBC…) tell you is TRUE becomes “truth” the moment they report it.  The national news coverage of American current events is indistinguishable whether one has ABC, CBS, or NBC dialed up on the tele.

But the times, they are a-changin’.

Donald Trump’s 3+ years in office have been “a moment of falsehood”, which is to say, truth.

As Debord wrote, “In a world that really has been turned on its head, truth is a moment of falsehood.”

Debord seemed to be describing the “legacy media” when he wrote of an entity “out of reach and beyond all dispute”.

Of particular concern in this current situation (which already existed in Debord’s day) is the role that vision plays in our mediated understanding of the world.

As Debord wrote, “…it is inevitable that it should elevate the human sense of sight to the special place once occupied by touch…”.

He goes on to describe “sight” as, “…the most abstract of the senses, and the most easily deceived…”.

Think about a painting by Monet.

Waterlilies.

What are you seeing?

You are seeing the work of someone [Monet] whose eyesight was impaired.  Literally.  But though it be impaired, he still painted wonderful, huge canvases which EVOKED the atmosphere of a pond with waterlilies.

You are seeing blurry images.

Your brain has to fill in the details.

You are not seeing a high-definition photograph.

Furthermore, you are seeing oil paints which have been applied to a cloth canvas.

You are seeing a depiction.

This takes us all the way back to Plato’s “cave”, but I digress…

What happens when the big three TV networks in the U.S. get something wrong?

What about the New York Times and Washington Post (to just name the two most widely-distributed offenders)?

Do any of these entities make a concerted, SINCERE effort arising from true integrity to correct their previous, faulty coverage on events?

Debord could answer before the question was asked…because he knew the nature of these organizations (even in his native France).

He wrote, “The spectacle is by definition immune from human activity, inaccessible to any projected review or correction.  It is the opposite of dialogue.”

Social media changed this briefly.

But now, Twitter is acting like the generalissimo of a banana republic by banning accounts which “promote” the “conspiracy theory” known as QAnon.

This is just one example–from one social media platform–where the fleeting dialogue which threatened (?) “the spectacle” has been shut down.

Google, working closely with the communist Chinese government, is all too happy to facilitate similar totalitarian censorship in China…all for a buck (or yuan).

So let’s talk about vision/sight for a moment.

Did George Floyd die under the knee of Derek Chauvin?

All of the “usual suspects” (ABCBSNBC) tell me he did.

And there’s video!

Video never lies, does it?

I mean…movies are all true, right?

Is the video that Darnella Frazier ostensibly shot on her cell phone “documentary” footage?

It may be more than one thing.

It is possible to honestly document fake-ness (without knowing you are filming a pageant).

Have you ever seen an actress cry on command?

I have.

It is quite an astounding thing.

I have a friend who is a major motion-picture actress.

She once burst out in tears…right next to me.

I started to offer my condolences.

I was generally concerned.

I almost started crying.

Then she abruptly jumped out of character with a smile…to let me know she was just pranking me.

It was VERY convincing.

She had never done that to me before.

It was novel.

I had no experience against which to measure her crying fit.

I thought of her as a friend first and as an actress second.

I forgot, temporarily, that she was unequivocally a professional faker.

But Guy Debord saw more to “the spectacle” than just a stream of fake-ness.

Debord seemed to also sense an approaching hour when human relations would become totally stifled.

To hear Debord tell it, “Separation is the alpha and omega of the spectacle.”

Both its goal and its essence.

While mass media seems to bring us together (shared touchstones, talismans…), in actuality, it separates us more from one another.

We are always obliged to mention what “the news” says about a certain topic.

It is rare (almost impossible) that two people have a conversation where they each give their opinion of a recent event and “the spectacle” (a mass, homogenized media) is not invoked (in deferential terms) at some stage as a reference point.

Debord describes the “weapons of that system” as ranging “from cars to television”:  all meant to “reinforce the isolation of ‘the lonely crowd'”.

But Guy Debord was not merely taking aim at television and mass media.  He saw further.  He seems to have, though writing in 1967, seen the inevitably of the Internet.

As he describes it, “The spectacle is a map of this new world–a map drawn to the scale of the territory itself.”

While this is indeed a reference to a story by Borges (the world=the map), Debord’s insight in applying this to mass communication and information dissemination is extraordinarily prescient.

Guy Debord, it must be said, was not without fault.

Most importantly, he was an avowed Marxist.

So his perspicacity ended where mass media stops and economics begins.

Which brings us to the film Anchorman…

Will Ferrell is awkward here.

And gloriously so!

We get gender division.

1970s.

As today we continue to get race divisions.

Who is driving this?

Cui bono?

The British were quite good at “divide and conquer”.

In the Indian subcontinent, Hindus and Muslims had lived relatively peaceably together…until the British decided to stoke this latent division for cynical ends.

“If the Hindus and Muslims are fighting each other, they can’t pose a unitary threat to us.”

That is what I can imagine British military strategists saying at the time when India was under their occupation.

And it worked.

It was brilliant.

Evil, but brilliant.

Ask yourself a question:  who benefits (cui bono) from blacks and whites and Hispanics and Asians and police and civilians in America being divided and at each other’s throats?

What series of events led to the isolation (frustration) needed to create the current powder keg that went up in smoke with the George Floyd event?

Ron Burgundy will read anything that is put in front of him on a Tele-Promp-Ter.

…as evidenced by his most unfortunate sign-off, “Go fuck yourself, San Diego!”

Which brings us to Joe Biden.

FDR managed to keep it a secret that he was stricken with polio.

He was carted around in a wheelchair during his Presidency.

He had the Resolute desk in the Oval Office modified so that a panel on the front obscured the prying eyes of news cameras.

You could not see his legs fastened to his wheelchair.

And the press obliged.

They loved FDR.

Good old liberal, Democrat FDR.

Elected to the Presidency FOUR times (an American record).

In the White House for over 12 (!) years.

Our Constitution was amended to make this impossible from there on out.

Now the limit is eight years (two terms).

All that notwithstanding, FDR never lost his mental faculties to any significant degree.

He had a physical disability which prevented him from ambulating fully.

Joe Biden can walk fairly well.

Sadly, there is no desk panel that can hide his mental deterioration.

It is there.  It will be there.  And it will get worse.

Which makes Joe Biden a FAR MORE RIDICULOUS candidate than Donald Trump.

And again, “the spectacle” is running defense for Biden.

Making excuses.

Tossing softball questions (if any at all).

The best thing that vicious, Marxist Democrats in the United States can come up with is a dud missile named Joe Biden.

He is harmless (to extend the missile metaphor), and in that he is very harmful.

He is, as regards the responsibilities of the Chief of the Executive Branch, useless.

Which gives us just one more example of how fakes are being foisted upon us.

Never has there been such a poor candidate for the American Presidency as Joe Biden.

It is becoming apparent to all that, if elected, he would not run his own government.

What a sham!

Why didn’t the Democrats have the foresight to nominate Cory Booker or Kamala Harris?

It couldn’t be because they are RACIST, could it?

Remember, Donald Trump is such a horrible misogynist.

How was it that the Democrats failed to nominate Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar?

Democrats REALLY care about Latinos in the U.S.

That’s why they failed to nominate a guy named Castro.

Democrats are so diverse!

That’s why they passed on nominating a guy named Yang.

And what did the Democrats end up with?

A halfwit, old, white man named Joe Biden.

Halfwit is really too kind a descriptor here.

The mobs wanted Ron Burgundy’s head.

Because he told them to “go fuck themselves”.

But it was a false-flag.

Did Ron Burgundy write the line, “Go fuck yourself, San Diego!” on the Tele-Promp-Ter?

No.

Veronica Corningstone did.

Did the truth about who REALLY wrote it come out?

No.

Not even from a news organization.

Burgundy was summarily fired and his life went to shit.

He ended up wandering the streets like a cross between fat Jim Morrison (Val Kilmer-influenced) and Brian Wilson.

Bathrobe and cheeseburgers.

Nilsson Schmilsson.

Drinking milk in the…hot sun!

But what goes around comes around.

Ms. Corningstone is pushed into a bear pit at the zoo.

An unenviable position, that.

And it takes a little dog to diffuse the situation.

A mob of bears.

A proud species.

Wronged by this intrusion into their hibernation.

But Baxter, the little dog, has a message.

“These are not the droids you are looking for.”

The bears consider the source.

They will not take Ron Burgundy’s word for it.

They will not take Veronica Corningstone’s word for it.

But they will listen to a fellow creature from the animal kingdom.

“I know your cousin,” Baxter says (and I paraphrase).

Baxter’s message rings true.

The bears reconsider.

They are able to retreat gracefully.

Baxter has just acted as crisis negotiator.

A feel-good movie ends with former enemies expressing respect for one another.

Respect.

Not total reconciliation.

But a cessation of the mad chaos.

Brick Tamland (played brilliantly by Steve Carell) ends up (we are told) becoming a “top political advisor” to the Bush administration.

Mass media.

The spectacle.

Hollywood could not help taking a pot shot at a Republican President (even in a light-hearted comedy [and even though the bastard Bush deserved it]).

Why?

Because Bush was a (shitty) Republican (and a war criminal).

But for the eight years of Obama’s Presidency (and the eight years of Bill Clinton’s Presidency), you never saw Hollywood comment (on film) about the merits of these two Democrats.

Why?

Because the Democrat Party is inseparable from the mass media in the United States.

So let me ask you one final question:

do you think you are getting the truth about President Trump, coronavirus, George Floyd, or anything else from this tight-knit cabal of fakers?

Stay classy!

 

-PD

Histoire(s) du cinéma {Chapter 1(a): Toutes les histoires} [1988]

Times seem apocalyptic.

So here is the greatest movie ever made.

But it is not available on iTunes.

You may have a hard time finding it.

And an even harder time playing it.

I did.

Back in the day.

I had to acquire a region-free DVD player.

And I did.

Solely to watch this film.

It is in four parts.

Each of which is divided in two.

So, therefore, eight parts.

This much-féted masterwork was not only released on television (which is to say, it was not a “theatrical” film per se), but it was accompanied by a soundtrack on the very erudite German record label ECM and further augmented by a book (text and screenshots) published by the most famous French publishing house Gallimard.

The soundtrack is very difficult to find on CD, but it is becoming less-difficult to find in the digital realm (unlike the film itself).

You can at least “listen to the movie” on Spotify.

And so for this film review, we will only be considering (to start with) the first section (which runs 51 minutes).

It is the section with which I am most familiar.

It is my personal favorite.

But it is important to note that the entire 266 minute film is essential to the “weight” of this creation (even if this first part is the most finely-crafted).

But we will reconsider as we go along.

The first section of the film (that which is under consideration) dates from 1988.

The book was not released till 1998 (when the film was completed).

So we have a sort of serial composition here (in the sense of Finnegans Wake).

It came out in parts.

It dribbled out.

Like QAnon.

And its influence spread.

Like COVID-19.

We remember William S. Burroughs and his concept of the “word virus”.

That is certainly germane here.

But I return, again, to Finnegans Wake.

No film creation in the history of cinema is more like James Joyce’s aforementioned masterpiece than Histoire(s) du cinéma.

Indeed, the only other creation I know of which enters into this same sui generis realm is Walter Benjamin’s Passagenwerk (translated in English as Arcades Project).

These are DENSE works…these three masterpieces.

One (Joyce) a “novel”.

One (Godard) a “movie”.

And one (Benjamin) a philosophical book.

Two books and a movie.

And the movie eventually became a book (Godard’s Gallimard creation).

The reverse of the usual.

Here, book doesn’t become film.

And there is not “more” in the book than there is in the film in Godard’s case.

If anything, there is certainly less.

Which doesn’t make it any less poignant.

So, what Godard has created for us with the book is a perfect guide to REMEMBERING WHAT WE SAW.

Which is a big theme of Histoire(s) du cinéma.

Film preserves the holiness of real life (to paraphrase).

Film (and video…of which this movie makes extensive use) preserves a moment.

Film can be (and is, always) a document.

Godard outlines a very French dichotomy here.

Film can be either predominantly of the Lumière brothers’ tradition (what we might call “documentary”).

Or of the Méliès tradition (a doctored reality…a “staged” document…what we might call “drama” [and its various subgenres such as “comedy”]).

But this dichotomy is not strictly “mutually exclusive”.

And here Godard brings us the example of Robert Flaherty.

Known as a director of documentaries, Godard points out that Flaherty “staged” his documentaries (which blurs the lines between the Lumière/Méliès dichotomy).

And what of Histoire(s) du cinéma?

Is it a documentary?

In many ways, yes.

It is a history of film.

But it is also a history of the filmmaker who is MAKING that very same history of film (namely, Godard himself).

To add further layers of surreality, Godard must address his own contribution to the history of cinema (which is considerable by even the most unbiased estimation).

Which is to say…

Godard is important to the history of film.

Very important.

Whether you like him and his films or not, he cannot be ignored.

And so we have here a very curious and “loaded” document indeed.

It is a matter of historiography.

Godard cannot (and indeed, does not even try) to remove his own opinion from this exercise of surveying the history of cinema.

That may be, ultimately, because Jean-Luc Godard never stopped being a film critic.

It was as a lowly film critic that he started…and it is as a film critic with his caméra-stylo (“camera pen”) that he continues to create today.

All of his films are, in and of themselves, film criticism.

From Breathless to The Image Book, he is always making a statement.

Pointing out how vapid Hollywood can be.

Pointing out what doesn’t exist in the marketplace.

Perhaps he is creating that which he would most like to watch…as a film lover.

His favorite film didn’t exist (except in his head–except as a vague concept).

No one had made it.

So, in order to watch it, he had to create it himself.

Then he could (theoretically) “enjoy” it.

I imagine he does this with each new film he makes.

It is always an attempt (“essay”…from French etymology…”to try”) to materialize what he would like to watch.

No director has his cutting wit.

No director’s mind pivots so nimbly.

So he must become his own favorite director…over and over and over and over again.

But this film is indeed a special case.

Ten years of creation.

Joyce spent 17 years on Finnegans Wake.

Benjamin spent 13 years on his Arcades Project.

And all of this which I have written is merely a preface.

That is how IMMENSE and pithy(!) Histoire(s) du cinéma truly is.

To be a creator is tiresome.

It makes one weary.

To always dream.

To imagine.

And to sweat in pursuance of crystalizing ones inspiration.

Jean-Luc Godard has always been a bitter sort of chap.

Bitter about Hollywood.

A love/hate relationship (LOVE/HATE…Robert Mitchum…knuckle tats).

And it is true.

Godard delves very early on into the parallel birth and adolescence of cinema and the Holocaust.

Cinema and the Holocaust.

Cinema was still young.

Cinema had a responsibility to document.

The Germans were very technologically advanced (particularly in sound and video recording).

They kept records of everything.

Even when they went astray during the Third Reich.

Germany had already produced great directors by the time of the Holocaust.

At the top of the list would be F.W. Murnau and Fritz Lang.

But they were not alone.

Wiene, Pabst…

There were others.

UFA (which still exists till this day) was a giant.

Think Metropolis.

So where is the documentation of the Holocaust?

[you can see what a “dangerous” question Godard is asking]

Is he “denying” the Holocaust happened?

I don’t think so.

But he’s asking a relatively simple and (I think) sincere question.

Where is the video record?

All that has been passed down to us of the concentration camps (and “death” camps) is the record made by American directors like George Stevens AFTER the camps had been liberated.

So what really went on there?

Are we to really believe the Germans shot no footage whatsoever in these camps?

And if so, why can’t we see it?

Wouldn’t it truly help us to “never forget” and “never again” and stuff etc. etc.???

It is a very inconvenient fact that, as far as the general public has been made aware, there are NO (and I repeat NO) films (NO FOOTAGE) shot by the Nazis in the concentration camps during WWII.

Surely it exists, right?

But where is it?

Who has it?

What does it show?

Godard is the ultimate enfant terrible here (and elsewhere).

He wants to know.

He’s curious.

Because he’s a film lover.

And he ultimately blames Hollywood (which had, by WWII, become the global center of the film industry) for not truly DOCUMENTING what happened in the concentration camps (neither while the camps were active nor anytime afterwards).

But here Godard branches off into an aesthetic direction.

Godard flatly rejects the talentless Spielberg evocation of Schindler’s List.

For Godard, a directer as mediocre as Steven Spielberg has no business trying to tackle humanity’s darkest hour.

This is the conundrum at the heart of Histoire(s) du cinéma.

What Godard (I think) is saying is this:  there is no way to “write” a history of cinema…because a large portion of contemporaneous history (1939-1945) was not addressed in any true way by the BUSINESS (ironically represented heavily by Jews) of Hollywood.

Godard seems to be saying that Hollywood’s Jews (which is to say, Hollywood) let down world jewry during the years 1939-1945…all for a buck (as it were).

It is a persuasive argument in many ways.

But let’s back up a step.

To reiterate, a history of cinema cannot be told…because there is a portion of that history which is MISSING.

This is a very important word here (and a very important term).

There are films which SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE, but weren’t (by Hollywood).

And there are films which may have be made (by the Nazis), but as far as we know (factually) were not made.  They do not exist (officially).

Two kinds of films missing.

Hollywood was responsible for the Méliès portion.

Hollywood should have used its immense power (and magic) to save the Jews of Europe.

EVERY FUCKING FILM should have been about the plight of the Jews in Europe who had been rounded up.

But we know very well that that’s not what Hollywood did.

The Nazis were responsible for the Lumière portion.

As twisted as the Nazis were, there is no way in hell those sick fucks did not film (with their Agfa technology, etc.) what was going on in the camps.

No fucking way.

Of course they filmed.

Like a goddamned serial killer.

And it was of pristine quality.

So where the fuck are those films?

But, sadly, Godard is called an “anti-Semite” for asking about these films.

Very sad.

He is coming from a “pure film” stance.

He wants to see the films.

He wants the world to see them.

And so the history of cinema is incomplete.

There is a gap.

Irving Thalberg.  Howard Hughes.  CIA.  RKO.  Starlets.

Film directors have been projecting their fantasies onto the screen since the beginning.

Their perfect women.

Their dream lovers.

But you can’t approach film history without approaching Hitler.

Film was at such an important point in its development.

And along came Adolph.

Chaplin and Hitler overlap.

They have the same mustache.

The Great Dictator was a comedy…more or less.

But it was also an attempt (“essay”) to address Hitler’s presence on the world stage.

An attempt to repudiate Hitler.

And yet, Chaplin could not quite hit the right tones.

It is maudlin.

As a comedy, The Great Dictator is pretty superb.

But it hasn’t aged that well as a piece of poetic philosophy.

Not really.

In that moment, the great Chaplin was powerless.

But at least he tried.

He tried.

But something was missing.

The camps.

Direct reference to the camps.

Addressing the problem with no beating around the bush.

No horseshit.

We need to see the bodies rotting.

We have seen that.

But we need to see the gas chambers.

We need to see the German efficiency and precision.

We need to see their documents.

Their film documents.

No Hollywood recreation can convey what those mythical reels contain.

No backlot will suffice.

We have the propaganda films.

Leni Riefenstahl.

I think what Godard is saying is this…

Hollywood has, since WWII, had to live with the guilt of NOT DOING ENOUGH during the Holocaust.

At the time (while it was happening), it was not kosher (no pun intended) to address the camps.

The public needed uplifting fare.

And Hollywood provided.

Hollywood provided a service.

Entertainment.

But Hollywood (as an entity) was permanently cheapened by not addressing the deep philosophical issue of mass death…mass murder.

Hollywood could have yelled, “Fire!” in a crowded theater.

And, indeed, the theater WAS on fire.

But Hollywood said nothing.

Hollywood told jokes.

No medium is perfect.

Hollywood is people.

But as an institution, Hollywood was exposed as being essentially artless and vacuous.

There were exceptions.

Hitchcock (British…but part of Hollywood).  Chaplin (British…but part of Hollywood).

Nicholas Ray.  Erich von Stroheim (Germanic…but part of Hollywood).  D.W. Griffith.  Howard Hawks.  Orson Welles.

But WWII was also the death of European cinema.

This is a very important concept that Godard conveys.

Not only were European Jews liquidated by the Nazis, but European cinema was effectively liquidated by Hollywood.

Europe would never be the same.

Fritz Lang.  Jean Renoir.  Abel Gance.  Jean Vigo.  Jean Cocteau.  Roberto Rossellini.  Max Ophüls.

America won the war.

The Soviet Union also won the war.

Germany lost.

France was “liberated”.

Italy lost.

And as Europe was subsequently split in half (the capitalist West and the communist East), the hegemony of American film [Hollywood] spread.

At the end of the Cold War, that hegemony became complete.

And so Godard is lamenting the death of his national film industry.

Godard is Swiss.

But he is, in many ways, also French.

He is a French speaker.

His years of highest-visibility were spent in Paris.

And there is not really a Swiss film industry of which to speak.

French film died (“liberated”/occupied).

Italian film died (lost war…occupied).

German film died (lost war…occupied).

Scandinavian film died.

Everything was pushed out by Hollywood.

Europe was relegated to the the realm of “art film”.

European cinema was put in a corner.

The wrecked economies of Europe could not compete with the war-machine-rich studios of America.

America had the magic–the fantasy–the special effects–the Technicolor.

Weary Europeans wanted happiness.

And they bought into the American idea of happiness.

To the detriment of their own unique cultures and philosophies.

Europe became Americanized (at least in the realm of the cinema).

To be continued…

 

-PD

Chuck Norris vs Communism [2015)

Dear Ilinca Călugăreanu,

You have made a beautiful film.

Which the world needed to see.

And the title made me think it would be imperialist propaganda directed at North Korea.

But I could not have been more wrong.

Because Romania has touched my heart so many times.

And so I am glad to add another name to the list of auteurs.

Cristi Puiu, Corneliu Porumboiu, Cătălin Mitulescu, Cristian Mungiu…

And now Ilinca Călugăreanu.

Yes, it is only right that a young female director should bring us this story.

This documentary.

Ms. Călugăreanu, born in 1981.

Because this film is very much about the 1980s.

VHS.

Videocassettes.

And the situation in Romania.

Chuck Norris is merely a placeholder.

A meme which has undergone a certain détournement.

But there is no substitute for communism in this tale.

Perhaps, authoritarianism.

You see…

if you tell people to do one thing…and you’re really heavy-handed about it,

they will almost certainly do the opposite.

At some point.

And Ms. Călugăreanu’s very persuasive hypothesis is that videocassettes brought down the Ceaușescu regime.

And so there is very little way around this impasse without talking political economy.

First, let us address the very astute current Russian minister of culture Vladimir Medinsky.

The esteemed Mr. Medinsky has famously (?) called Netflix “U.S. government…mind control”.

Or at least that’s how The Washington Times (who needs the Post?) framed it.

But let’s investigate.

Let’s have Mr. Medinsky’s words and not just a CliffsNotes, elevator-pitch summation of them.

He says [translated],

“And, what, you thought these gigantic startups emerge by themselves? One schoolboy sat down, thought for a bit, and then billions of dollars rained down from above?”

That is pursuant to the funding which helped birth Netflix (and, presumably, other American companies with what Mr. Medinsky feels is a global, insidious reach).

He continues [translated],

“It turns out that that our ideological friends [the U.S. government] understand perfectly well that this is the art form that is the most important…”

Ahh, cinema…

And Vladimir Lenin himself knew it!

Mr. Medinsky then seems to evoke the Leonard Cohen of “Tower of Song” when he says [translated],

“They understand how to enter everyone’s homes by getting into every television with the help of Netflix…”

Leonard Cohen (God rest his soul) said it thus:

“Now you can say that I’ve grown bitter but of this you may be sure
The rich have got their channels in the bedrooms of the poor.”

Ah!

What a lyric!!

And that was in 1988!!!

So our director, Ilinca Călugăreanu, knows that of which she speaks.

Because the grip of Ceaușescu was beginning to slip.

But let’s give Mr. Medinsky one more say [translated],

“And through this television, [they get into] the heads of everyone on Earth. But [Russians] don’t grasp this.”

Ok.

Now why was Mr. Medinsky so upset?

Well, because Netflix undertook a vast expansion this past summer.

Indeed, the article from which I’m pirating these quotes (yes, translations are intellectual property) dates from June 23, 2016.

The same article notes pointedly that Netflix’s expansion into Russia, plus a vast number of new territories, means that the streaming service is now available in 190 countries worldwide.

Wait a minute…

How many countries are there, you might ask?  196.  Or 195.

Poor Taiwan, they just can’t catch a break.

So then you might say, well…what the fuck?!?

What countries is Netflix NOT in???

It appears those countries are China, North Korea, Syria, and…Crimea?

Suffice it to say, the international “community” is not unanimous in their appraisal of Crimean statehood.

Is it part of Russia?

Is it part of Ukraine?

What do the words Republic of Crimea even mean if its not an independent country?

Which brings up the specter of “frozen conflict zones”.

I’m guessing that Netflix might be unavailable in Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, and Transnistria.

But I digress…

Because we are on to more specific matters.

There are at least two major ways in which Americans can view the Romanian communist period as it has been depicted in motion pictures.

First, Americans can sympathize with the repression of the Romanian people.

Any doubters should do a little digging on the PATRIOT Act.

Indeed, the psychosis of surveillance (which is mentioned in Chuck Norris vs Communism) could not field a more forbidding bogeyman than the National Security Agency.

And so, dear peoples of the world, would you feel more or less safe living in the same country in which the NSA is headquartered?

Exactly.

Second, Americans could extrapolate Ms. Călugăreanu’s hypothesis to mean that countries such as China will eventually implode as a result of the fulminating combination of repression and technology (even, perhaps, with a starring role for entertainment).

All of that is to say that movies COULD bring down China or North Korea or even Iran.

[Notice the non-Netflix countries…Syria is without, but apparently Iran does have the service.]

Which is to ultimately say, Mr. Medinsky’s fear is completely warranted.

What is at stake in Russia?

The fall of Putin.

A sea change in leadership.

And I will be quite frank.

There is no doubt that Netflix’s catalog is heavily biased towards globalist propaganda.

One of the most glaring areas is India.

I can’t tell you how many watery, transparent premises there are on Netflix which are some permutation of a young person rebelling against a repressive culture.

It’s almost like they’re churning these formulaic films out in a factory.

Boy marries girl from lower caste.  Mayhem follows.

Girl goes to human rights court.  Happily ever after…

Boy rebels against father’s traditional ways [read:  religion].

I mean, at a certain point it’s just pathetic.

But we must hand it to Netflix for some (SOME) of their selections.

Actually, I have found a good many gems on the site.

But it is a very biased (and historically-uninformed collection).

In general, history doesn’t exist for Netflix.

Unless that history is the Holocaust.

Then, of course, there are a plethora of scenarios to “inform” you about the Nazis.

Make no mistake (my best Obama voice), the Nazis were bad.

Really bad.

But do we need 10 fucking films about the Holocaust?

And if Schindler’s List is the zenith of the genre, God help us…

But I digress again…

Chuck Norris vs Communism is a very beautiful film.

It’s about rebellion.

It’s about the little things we do to assert our existence.

And in this case, it’s about a translator (a voiceover dubbing artist) who reached the hearts of innumerable Romanians.

Irina Nistor.

Whether it was Chuck Norris, or Jean-Claude Van Damme, or Sylvester Stallone, Irina’s voice made the dialogue come alive in Romanian.

But it was a subversive activity.

“Imperialist” films were not allowed in Romania.

But Romania was falling apart.

To take the interviewees of our documentary at their word, their lives sucked…without “video” night.

But we must be clear.

Everything (EVERYTHING) about this enterprise was illegal in Romania.

First, the videos had to be smuggled across the border.

Then they had to be copied and dubbed (voiceover).

Then they had to be distributed.

Then some brave schmucks took the risk of screening these films on their TV sets (for a few lei, of course).

But it was dangerous business.

Especially if you were the kingpin.

So it is then strange to meet this kingpin of video piracy face to face.

Zamfir.

Not the guy with the panpipes.

No, this was Teodor Zamfir.

Made a pretty penny.

But the fascinating thing (by Călugăreanu’s hypothesis) is that he completely changed Romanian culture.

The seeds of revolution were sown by Dirty Dancing, Last Tango in Paris, The King of Comedy

And especially by the action films.

Rocky, Rambo, Lone Wolf McQuade…

And so, if you want to piss off a communist (or socialist, or whatever they’re going by these days), you can go with the familiar tack,

“Didn’t they already try that?  Wasn’t it an immense failure?”

I don’t know.

But I don’t doubt the faces of those who lived through Ceaușescu.

No national cinema has been nearly as effective as the Romanian in communicating to the West just what life under communism was like.

And so Romania becomes our lens into the Soviet Union and its satellite states.

I know there are Russians who fondly remember communism.

Let’s be clear:  capitalism can also suck.

Change and upheaval can be deadly.

They say, “Watch the price of eggs” (to demonstrate how a free market dictates prices).

But we see a very similar discontent in the Middle East.

Is this democracy?

Fuck this!

Yes, America has made some mistakes.

And so we should watch everything with a critical eye.

Be your own critic.

Be like Emerson.

Be bold.

And then double back.

Waffle.

Live by palimpsest.

Because you are the ultimate philosopher.

For your life.

I can’t tell you.

And you can’t tell me.

We have to learn.

It must be the right time.

To receive a particular lesson.

I draw courage from Irina Margareta Nistor.

But most of all, I draw courage from the Romanian people.

Perhaps my country’s Hollywood crap (the stuff I took for granted) was just the stuff necessary in the dark times.

Entertainment.  Ass kicking.  Escape.

But the Romanian cinema of today inspires me beyond words.

And so let us remember, whether we are capitalists or socialists, the price paid by the people of Romania in December 1989.

Was it 1,100 people?

11,000 people?

110,000 people?

It’s troubling that nobody knows for sure.

But even if it was a thousand people.

They didn’t just get trampled by goats or run over by garbage trucks.

It wasn’t a bloodless revolution.

At least 1000 people.

They saw their moment.

They seized on a moment.

They capitalized on their opportunity.

There was something which impelled them not to just sit at home and listen.

I salute these brave souls who went out into the streets.

For a thousand people to have died, it seems rather inconceivable that there wasn’t an attempt made by the government to “restore order”.

That’s the line which can’t be crossed.

That’s when a government has lost its legitimacy.

Some stories are twisted.

And full-blown civil wars do erupt.

But it appears, in the end, that repression lost.

And repression, censorship, and heavy-handed tactics (whether adopted by socialists or capitalists) should, by historical lesson, be most strictly avoided.

It is human nature.

The people will not tolerate being treated like livestock.

And something as seemingly inconsequential as VHS tapes can tip the balance.

-PD