Hollywood’s Shock Strategy and the Destruction of the Moral Fabric of Society

I do not have much of an interest in the garbage Hollywood produces nowadays. The one exception was the TV series Succession, the first two seasons of which I quite enjoyed. In short, this show depicts the adult children of a media mogul fighting for their share of the multi-billion dollar corporate pie of their father. Somehow, it is claimed that this show is “satirical”, but I cannot see much satire in it. Season 2 was released in 2019, and season 3 this autumn. There will be a fourth season but I my interest is pretty low at this point as the producers of this show have revealed them to be reprehensible little gits.

The first two seasons are bad enough, however. We witness one of the main protagonist jizzing against the window of his office, presumably expressing that wealth and power sexually arouse him. You watch him from the back as he is jerking off, which is followed by a close-up of some white sticky stuff that as he is wiping it off the window pane. There is excessive swearing, which I find increasingly off-putting, and the relationships that are depicted are portrayed as dysfunctional. You even get to see couples demeaning each other publicly, i.e. husband and wife insulting each other, and the patriarch of the family telling their kids to f— off in far too many scenes. All of this is distasteful enough, but in season 3 the producers decided to ramp it up a notch. One of the biggest story arcs has one of the male protagonist entering a sexual relationship with an obese woman in her 60s. As part of this story angle, you see him sending a picture of his erect cock, and this is shown in close-up. I was incredibly disgusted by this.

The scene in question happened in episode 8 of 9 of season 3, so I finished watching this show regardless. Then, I pondered why this picture was put into the show as opposed to merely alluding to it. After all, it would be easy enough to do so. The answer seems quite obvious. In fact, there is a long line of examples where Hollywood aggressively pushes the boundaries, in an attempt to gradually increase the amount of filth they can put out. To put things in perspective, I should remind you that decades ago even the use of expletives was prohibited. Today, you hear four-letter words sometimes of the rate at several a minute. Do not think that this is a coincidence. I bet the first use of such a word on screen caused a big stir, and after none of the producers found himself dangling from a lamppost, they just took this to be the new base line until it was accepted usage.

There are countless examples of distasteful scenes in movies. Off the top of my head, I could think of the following:
– The Graduate: Young man entering a sexual relationship with an older married woman (yes, this used to be a taboo subject)
– American Pie: Dude penetrates a warm pie and waxes lyrical about it
– All about Mary: Dude masturbates before meeting the titular female character and somehow ends up with jizz in his hair, unbeknownst to him
– Brokeback Mountain: Softporn with two gay cowboys masquerading as a Western
– Silence of the Lambs: Cannibalism
– Cuties: Sexual exploitation of children
– The Exorcist: Satanism
– Basic Instinct: Vivid sexual intercourse in a mainstream movie
– Kids: Teenage sex and drug abuse

As videogames have taken over the leading role in destroying culture, the torch has been passed on. Good examples here are Life is Strange, which features “gender-fluid” main characters and The Last of Us, Part II, in which you play as a trans-woman and get to kill a lot of white men, including fan favorite Joel from the prequel.

I think in all those cases, the goal was simply to break taboos. This is not nearly as daring as it may seem if you own Hollywood and all media. Thus, those movies can be construed as attacks on Christian morality, with the goal of gradually destroying the cultural fabric of society. You start with one heavy blow, for instance by making a gay couple engage in sexual activity the center piece of a movie, and a few years down the line, you get openly gay characters in every movie, and producers who do not do that get lambasted by the media for it. It is a sickening game.

I am not sure the is a good way out of this. Obviously, it would be a shame if the gates of hell opened and swallowed Hollywood as well as the Californian porn industry. Yet, there is a cultural shift going on. The movie industry has been getting ever-more irrelevant. I know very few people who still keep tabs on Hollywood, for instance. This may explain why the powers that be are so upset about alternative media, as it signifies a loss of control over the cultural narrative.

There is probably a light at the end of the tunnel. First, there are demographic factors, i.e. “progressives” having fewer kids. This ideology is a biological dead-end. You will probably not be alive long enough to witness the pendulum fully swinging the other way. However, due to us having access to alternative media, we can shrug off Hollywood garbage. Even ten to fifteen years ago, before fast internet was easily available, you could only take your pick from mainstream media or arthouse faggoty. Today, it is of course the case that Youtube has shut down almost every remotely interesting channel, but I find plenty of material that is to my liking on other sites.

Arguably, the shock strategy of Hollywood was destined to fail in the long run. They thought they were winning, and kept pushing. Meanwhile, more and more people were simply turning away. Today, Hollywood essentially lives off Marvel superhero movies, which seem to have little cultural significance. Probably all of this is yet another example of the quandary of the social engineers: they get too cocky and think they cannot lose. Then they overplay their hand and destroy the basis of their economic success. Hollywoods comparatively low significance nowadays fits this hypothesis. In fact, nowadays, those people need to use fringe TV shows to engage in their cultural nation wrecking, which limits scope dramatically. Yet, the battle is not over yet, so expect more pictures of erect penises to crop up in TV shows for a general audience, just like the f-word has become ubiquitous.

22 thoughts on “Hollywood’s Shock Strategy and the Destruction of the Moral Fabric of Society

  1. Social Engineering, Culture Creation and the poisonous toxification of (not only popular) culture by various government and corporate entities (e.g. our old friends from Langley/VA, Tavistock Institute, Laurel Canyon, the RAND Corporation etc. pp.) is one of the scourges of modernity and has been ever since…

    1. Most people will ask: “But why? It doesn’t make any sense. Why hurt your own system? Why destroy your own culture and society?” –  Well, to bring in a/their NEW system, their NEW answers, their NEW solutions, duh!

      … is that sooo hard to figure out?

  2. This might be a little bit of an exaggeration, unless the point is that transgression in movies and art follows the paradigm of the Pandora’s Box, meaning that when you allow the original, small transgressions that don’t harm anyone, you’re opening the proverbial can of worms, so any taboo-breaking at all is undesirable. But where do you begin? Or what would be the desirable starting point for a society? Victorian England? Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran? The Amish in America?

    This is a rather thorny subject, and it depends on whether you consider yourself simply conservative (I know, conservatives haven’t conserved anything lately) or already puritanical.

    Or maybe I’m just biased because I liked some of the mentioned movies, who knows?

    1. I also liked some of those movies, but that was before I noticed how subversive they are. This is particularly true of The Graduate.

      I think the Amish are onto something. Judging by their birth rate versus the rest of America, I would bet on them to keep civilization alive. It is conceivable that we will go back to a society that shuns technology altogether for a century or two, following a cataclysmic event. From the looks of it, it seems that we are working steadily towards societal collapse. In such a scenario, the Amish are arguably better equipped to survive than all urban preppers combined.

    2. Don’t get me wrong, current Hollywood fare fails to attract my interest at all. Mostly I just watch old stuff and some spin-offs or shows I liked back in the day. I haven’t been inside a movie theater in almost a decade by my own means (I accepted a relative’s invitation to watch the 3D version of Lion King and that’s it).

      But, as I said, where do you draw the line? For example, cannibals have existed since the dawn of time, and if you’d like to tell a story about one, certainly you don’t need a gore fest, but you do need to push some boundaries at least, or risk having to restrain yourself to allegories and storytelling for children (Little Red Riding Hood).

      Regarding the Amish, that they’d be better equipped to have a functioning life than most urban people, or creating (rudimentary) technology from scratch in case of a cataclysmic event is true for almost every countryside population everywhere, that goes without saying.

      1. I cannot give you a precise answer on where I would draw the line. However, iteratively we could probably come to a good solution. As a start, we could roll back the last thirty or forty years of the ongoing cultural revolution, and ban pornography as well. I bet that positive effects on society would be observable within a few months already.

      2. Reasonable.

        It’s been said countless times that the current rot started in the 1960’s, with the so-called 2nd wave feminism, the so-called Civil Rights movements, etc. So you could go back even a bit further.

      3. You have to understand one thing: the american movie industry itself has been stup and run for the most part by people whore primary interests were not to contribute to a healthy and stable “patriarchal” etc. society.
        Through several strands of mindcontrol research and on how the public could be mass traumatized by means of engineered pop culture the amount of degrading toxic content has been gradually but constantly rising.
        The technique of “predictive programming” through mass media is decades old. Take the famous George Cuckor film “Gaslight” from 1944 (this is where the term “gaslighting” originates from). The entire film revolves about a criminal husband who is intentionally traumatizing and breakjng the mind of his unsuspecting wife.

        Where to stop and draw the line? It’s hard to say. Just take western pop-culture mainstream of the Lucas/Spielberg variety:
        – STAR WARS is nothing but occult gnostic and kabbalistic manichaean propgramming for kids and teens, offering them a new (but infantile & empty) replacement religion for waning WASP protestantism, i.e. the “sunshine & prosperity gospel” (Apart from that it’s also propaganda for the U.S. SDI systems of the Ronald Regan 1980s)
        – STAR TREK foreshadows a technocratic, collectivist future of a “one world government”, ruling an entire galaxy (!), the films also perpetuate the alien myth
        – E.T. is actually a story about a pedophile (!) alien (!) capturing the minds of teenage boys
        – JURASSIC PARK is at its core a traumatizing nightmare about dragons taking possession of the souls of kids and adolescents

        Most pop culture is and has been trash.

        But take a highly educated, non-perverse artist like David Lean. All of his films are classics, and rightfully so. Yet BRIEF ENCOUNTER is about illegitimate extramarital sexual desires between married people in post-WW2 Britain. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (arguably one of the greatest, most beautiful and most spectacular filmes ever conceived and realized) is about (traditionally racist) British colonial power games in toppling other empires, putting the corrupt house of Al-Saud in power and redrawing the entire set of WW1 Near East and Arabian borders (the basic cause of most of political instability in the entire region since WW1) v- all told through the main character, who is unmistakenly depicted as GAY (which T.E. Lawrence actually was). But at least Lean’s movies are poetic, intelligent and not overtly corrupting and/or degrading. They do reflect the erudition of their maker…

        Kubrick’s seminal masterpiece”2001 – A Space Odyssee” is about the apotheosis of mankind through technology. It actually doesn’t get more blastant than this incredible artwork of a film.

        I’d say, as long as you are able to recognize the problematic or even ouvertly degrading and programming aspects of a film then it will be much harder to program *you* be means of those movies.

      4. There is some speculation online that the “zombies” trope is another example of predictive programming. Examples of predictive programming include a CDC booklet on how to survive the zombie apocalypse (it’s a joke, goy!), Amazon including a legal clause (!) into their SLA on a zombie apocalypse, countless movies (28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead, Night of the Living Dead, etc.), and video games (The Last of Us, Call of Duty, Days Gone, Resident Evil, …). Given that the Covid vaxx causes neurological damage, the connection is not as outlandish as it initially sounds. Another connection is to the destructive effects of drugs. Watch some footage of Philadelphia or Los Angeles, and compare this to zombie movies! Those people walk around aimlessly and are genuinely frightening in their appearance.

      5. This is good food for thought Lucretius, and you provide some standard for the proverbial “line” I asked Sleazy about.

        I’m capable, though of course not infallibly, to spot when and where I’m being the potential subject for manipulation, but for how many people is that true? And I partially fell for it during my country’s protests in 2018, only 3 years ago and after all the meme wars and considering myself “kind of based”; I can’t imagine how it is for the masses of normies.

        The point being, if it’s good art, I can separate the artist and the work from the author and its ideology, yet for too many people liking something means falling for all the subliminal messages and embracing the ideology to some extent even if they’re don’t know it. Far too many artists and authors lean left, so it’s very hard to try to only follow people whose beliefs are close to yours.

        Interestingly, leftists promote what you call “recognizing the problematic aspects and the programming” all the time when they don’t ban something from the past and are actually agreeing for you to see it, whether it’s “Birth of a Nation” or the old “Tom and Jerry” cartoons. Agreeing that there were reasons for those black stereotypes and that there’s nothing to be scandalized about them is anathema to these people.

  3. @ Sleaze: Fascinating observation about that “zombie” stuff! I hadn’t thought of that, but it’s not too far fetched ….

      1. The blog? I pulled it. My focus of interest has shifted away from anything related to women and sex. So in the end there was no reason even leave it rot as it is. I don’t mind.
        Honestly, I also don’t think that it was THAT special in content.

    1. I did not watch this movie, and have no intention to. However, a quick cursory glance reveals that the usual suspects were involved, such as semite Seth Rogen who recently entered the lime light again with the anti-Christian and anti-Western TV show Santa Inc., which critics loved but viewers hate. Zach and Miri seems like a shock movie similar to black porn: it is completely irrelevant that those are money-losing operations. Instead, they fulfill their purpose of chipping away at the moral bedrock of society.

      It is also quite interesting that this movie came out in 2008, which means that its release was timed with the release of the iPhone. Before the iPhone, the Internet was still relatively geeky and solidly right-leaning. Women and leftists seemed almost absent on blogs and forums. Online porn was also relatively obscure. This all changed once Apple put porn on every phone. Of course, porn is ubiquitous and even systematically pushed onto kids. (This would now go far off-topic, but when I read that 1/3 or so of Zoomers are “gender-fluid”, I cannot help but think that this probably would not have happened if they had not started to watch porn at a young age.)

      1. I honestly doubt that 1/3 of Zoomers really are gender fluid, they just repeat it because 1) its the cool thing to do these days, 2) they have little idea of what gender actually is.

        Sexual identity is mostly genetic (and where not genetic, it mainly comes from factors beyond your control like exposure to testosterone in utero). The overwhelming majority of people are (and have ever been) straight, as you would expect from a sexually reproducing species like homo sapiens. There is even some wiggle room for same sex sexual experimentation, but thats it. I think a lot of these kids nowadays are confusing this with being gender fluid.

        Gender identity has an almost perfect overlap with sexual identity in the long run, I would be much surprised if this correlation changed significantly.

      2. @ Yarara: Does it really matter, whether zoomers or others actually consider themselves to be “gender fluid”, or whether they are merely repeating contemporary propaganda talking points?
        At the end of the day it’s nonsense either way…

  4. On the broader topic of this post, i am not persuaded by the argument that this degradation of culture is somehow deliberate. Pop culture production is and has been, above all, a money making operation.

    I think you might be falling into some sort of attribution fallacy, where observed effects are attributed to intentionality. In other words, the results you observe must have been intended all along, if not by you then by someone else. Its very tempting to “connect dots” and imagine causality or intentionality were there are likely none.

    Seeing how public policy is more often than not the realm of unintended consequences, because human beings have not evolved to deal with complex and unpredictable systems beyond the tribe level, I tend to be skeptical of such attributions.

    You may also be making too many assumptions about how the viewers see these films – i have seen only some of them, but

    Kids – was supposed to be a cautionary tale, as far as i can remember it.

    American Pie – its a comedy… did anyone in his or her sane mind thought Jim was a role model, or should somehow be emulated?

    The Exorcist – i have not watched it since i was a kid, is Satan still the bad guy? I dont remember it endorsing satanism in any way.

    Silence of the Lambs – is Lecter some sort of antihero? I remember him being a monster.

    In addition, we must keep in mind there is generational turnover in the industry – the Hollywood of today is not the same of 20 years ago, and it is very different from 40 or 60 or 80 years ago. There have been boundary pushers in all forms of art, ever, that is the essence of the creative types. The evolution of the industry may be simply reflecting the changing values of society rather than building them.

    One telling indication of this relationship at work is precisely the decline of Hollywood in recent years.

    The people of Hollywood are by now so detached sociologically from the common people that they are largely talking to themselves. They have lost touch with large segments of society, who have fled to other alternatives the minute that technology allowed them to do so.

    Creatively, Hollwood is now a zombie, living largely of sequels, prequels, reimaginings, spinoffs. The motions are there, but they are braindead.

  5. On a brighter note I’d say there do exist some examples of all around “good” films and TV series productions. I’m not an avid film or series binge watcher and haven’t been for quite some time.
    But of the top of my head, just to name a few I’d say:

    – HBO’s 2018 mini series CHERNOBYL is some of the best stuff I’ve ever seen and on any level: visually, dramatically, musically and sound-wise, not told with any kind of “Western bias” POV, neither told with any “Green woke bias” (which is remarkable all in itself nowadays), raising the right questions about truth and lies, factual but still well shaped, not pornographic in its portryal of the many various horrifying aspects of events, not degrading or poisoning the viewer’s mind in any way, deeply moving with a lasting impact, a deep connection with all the characters and their existential situtions, no hidden programming agenda (neither for or agains nuclear power!). Really outstanding. At any rate, watch it if you haven’t already!!

    – Ricky Gervais’ AFTER LIFE on Netflix, funny and sobering at the same time, inventive and entertaining – and yet again not propagandazing or pressuring anything onto the mind of the viewer, no hidden degrading content or messages. Great stuff as well.

    There’s probably more, but as I said: I don’t have much time to waste in front of a TV screen so my perception of pop culture trends is rather limited, but I don’t consider this a grave malus…

    1. One P. S. on mg metion of CHERNOBYL, though: What the series does get wrong is the is the white-washing of Tov. Gorbachev himself of doing anything wrong. Anyone who lived in the USSR knows that all decisions inevitably were made on the very top of the pyramid. You can even read it inside the (now available) Bukovsky or Mitrokhin archives’ documents of the top secret politburo session protocols. So, if one looks for someone to blame, the main perpetrators are *still* above the criticism… at least in the West. Since western left-wing media did almost canonize Mikhail G. back in his heyday this bias apparently *did* get caried over into the TV series. Which is sad, but I guess the truth would have been even more shocking for Western viewers and the Weatern media “elite”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.