"All that it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
-Edmund Burke
The reason the boomers are the way they are, and the reason no one in the west fights back against their dispossession and replacement is an 80 year long program to indoctrinate an Ideology I call "Hollywood Anti-justice".
In almost every piece of media to do with violence, crime, justice, and individual heroism of the past 80 years there is a scene: The "Hero Forgives" scene.
Upon violently defeating, disarming, and capturing the villain, the hero, in spite of his every instinct, in spite of friends screaming at him and reasoning with him with arguments he can't counter, in spite of the villains mocking unrepentance, dead to rights evidence, gleeful confessions, and even vows to reoffend.
Even if the villain is guilty of hundreds of murders, rapes, and treason, even if the hero himself has killed hundreds of henchmen to capture the villain...
The hero will refuse to kill or punish him.
Sometimes the hero will insist that he must go through the courts... Sometimes the villain will openly mock him that the courts are corrupt and will never convict him, and the hero still will refuse to take matters into his own hands...
Sometimes the hero himself IS the lawful authority. Sometimes the hero is a Military officer, post apocalyptic militia captain, Medieval Knight, Greek Hero, Roman Centurion... Etc. And in fact his private judgement IS the official lawful means of passing judgement and executing obviously guilty villains... And he STILL refuses to punish or kill them.
I recently saw El Cid, where the hero, a Knight, refused to hang brigands who had pillaged, raped, burnt a town, confessed and were themselves quite resigned to dying, and even as his fellow knights berated him that the law itself demands he hang them, that it is his sacred duty to hang them, and that it would be treason for him not to...
And the Hero simply cuts their bindings and lets them go... Choosing to be forsworn as a traitor rather than hang the confessed and redhanded guilty.
Now this may be a historical, but as far as I’ve been able to find such an event never occurred, it’s been made up for the film, doubly egregious because the historical El Cid almost certainly executed many criminals and brigands, commiting and ordering justice… Which is NOT depicted in the film.
Even if the hero has been in this exact position before and spared the villain only for more to die, sometimes even his own family and friends, demonstrating the failure of this unspoken philosophy, the hero will STILL let them go... AGAIN.
Ussually there is some Deus Ex Machina that makes this all workout some ironic or divine punishment will find the Villain through their own folly... but not always. Indeed entire franchises have been perpetuated on THE SAME serial killer villain being forgiven, released, allowed to escape, etc. over and over again.
.
And audiences consistently hate this, this is always the most cliched, poorly written, out of character, film breaking scene in the entire work... Supposedly great kings, ruthless bouty-hunters, outlaws, veteran knights, military officers, grey and black market criminal anti-heroes, smugglers... All of them transformer into the most inconsistent pacifists for exactly this scene. I've seen audiences groan and scream at the TV "Just kill him" and yet the hero, often entirely contrary to their character, will not.
This is not an old literary trope, this is a hollywood trope.
You can read the original greek legends, the tales of King Arthur and his Knights, early modern nationalist heroes' stories, the adventure stories of the napoleonic officer, the boys own adventures of empire, and well into contemporary fiction westerns, crime stories, military science fiction, historical fiction, etc.
And in all of them you will see heroes kill their enemies in cold blood, order executions of the guilty, demand deserters, spies, and traitors be shot, seek revenge, order mass hangings... Etc.
Nor is this some uniquely American madness... As late as the 1950s the vigilantes/terrorists of the original reconstruction era (1864-1877) Ku Klux Klan were treated as folk heroes... "Birth of a Nation" was played at the White house when it was released. The idea of vengeance, wild justice, and vigilante killings being some unconscionable moral horror was simply not the case in the first half of the 20th century... It was celebrated, much as it had been for the previous 3000 years of the west.
Why did hollywood invent this trope?
Where hollywood producers just so attached to an Idea of Christian forgiveness and pacifism that they just HAD to include it over the groans and often shouting of their audiences?
Were any of these writers, directors and producers even Christian to begin with!?
Why would the communists, atheists, Jews, and pedophiles that comprise the core of hollywood writing include such an unusual christian theme so insistently and often story breakingly?
Well. why do they insist on bullshit girl-bossery, race mixing, and woke theming today over the protests and disinterest of their audience?
Because it benefits them to brainwash the masses that way.
The hollywood writers never identified with the hero refusing to kill an enemy... They identified with the villain and quite liked for him to get away (indeed many hollywood writers will openly say as much, that they identify with the villains and much prefer writing them)
.
And indeed once you see this ideology of Hollywood Anti-justice, you can see it in every detail.
The villain cannot be killed no matter how the heroes despise him and no matter his crimes, even if the courts are completely corrupt and let a braggingly guilty man go for multiple rapes, the hero just has to accept it... But if some side character snaps and guns down the villain who raped their daughter, if someone seeks vengeance... Then the hero must pursue them to the ends of the earth be they even their own family.
The hero can't forgive and let that go, the courts can't fail to convict in that case, no jury will be crooked and nullify on that charge.
Indeed in many hollywood production the hero betrays the trust of friends and family who desire nothing but the best for them, becoming states witnesses or informants because their family or friends desire revenge and have an innate sense of justice that will not stop just because courts refuse to act.
The hero must forgive ANY crime committed by a degenerate and unrepentant villain who has harmed his friends and family according to hollywood, but under no circumstance his allowed to tolerate or look away from a good and virtuous person possessed of innate morality, that he has seen with his own eyes again and again, if they should happen to conclude that vigilante justice or vengeance is warranted.
this is THE CORE moral lesson of all US modern media and propaganda... it is not any economic idea, patriotism, a sexual norm, not even tolerance and multiculturalism that US media teaches to Americans and westerners...
the core moral instruction of all US media is that under no circumstances can anyone, no matter how virtuous, noble, pure of motivation, or even lawfully empowered according to the legal regime of their own society... Under NO circumstances is it morally permissible to individually enact justice, and the measure of a good person is that they will tolerate any evil, and any corruption, up to any level of society, tolerate any villain to go free, tolerate hundreds if not thousands of murders and rapes, just so long as they NEVER attempt to enact justice themselves.
And that beyond this they must do ANYTHING, betray ANY bond of fellowship or kinship, if they see another person attempting to enact justice on their own.
This is an Alien Idea.
This is contrary to 3000 years of western philosophy and virtue: this is contrary to the Greek Epic and Legends, this is contrary to Roman Poetry, this is contrary to the Norse Sagas, this is Contrary to the Arthurian Romances, this is contrary to Plays of Shakespeare, this is contrary to the early modern novels, this is contrary to the founding fathers, this is contrary to the Boy's Own adventure books about the British empire, This is contrary to a thousand military memoirs, this is contrary to the entire tradition of literary Westerns, this is contrary to the entire tradition of early 20th century crime fiction, this is contrary to literary science fiction and military sci-fi.
This is ENTIRELY alien series of Ideas propagandized into American and western culture by avowed enemies of the western Tradition... Communists, atheists, gays, feminists, Jews, and Pedophiles who OPENLY WROTE in countless essays of their desire to capture culture making institutions and use them to alienate western men from their own values, virtues, and traditions, out of an explicit and stated desire to weaken and overthrow them.
And they targeted this at children. This is most heavily pushed and repeated in children's fiction so that they can brainwash it early and see spirits broken before ever they might engage with the actual art of their own tradition, their heritage of western glory.
To take merely the most artistically made example that really summarizes it...
1993's "Batman: Mask of The Phantasm" is the best Batman Film ever made...This is not an opinion, this is a fact.
A neo-noir masterpiece of artistry, tension, romantic writing...It's a kids' animated film miles more restrained, mature, thematically complex, romantic, and visually compelling than even the best of Burton or Nolan. The kind of primordially refined, simple and beautiful parable that can only exist in animation or films that otherwise place themselves outside realism and into the realm of expressionism, like a silent film, or a black and white Akira Kurosawa samurai picture.
Coming right off the animated TV show, it follows the Animated Bruce Wayne pursuing a mysterious killer of Mafia bosses known only as "The Phantasm" as Batman in the present, and flashing back to recall his early life becoming Batman and a fleeting tragic romance with his former fiance Andrea Beaumont, a woman he was madly in love with before she left with merely a note calling off the wedding...
As the film progresses, Andrea reappears in the present and it is revealed that SHE is the Phantasm. That her and her father were forced to flee due to the mafia bosses coming after him... And that now that they found and killed her father she is back for revenge.
And there's only one mafioso left... The man who subsequently became the Joker.
She is still madly in love with Bruce, she has committed no immorality save killing the men who admittedly and unambiguously killed her father (and countless others), and all it would take for Bruce to finally hang up Batman, set aside his gothic misery, marry the love of his life, and be truly happy... Is set aside his bizarre pacifistic ethics and assist her in killing the Joker... just as EVERY SINGLE HERO in the western canon going back to Gilgamesh would have.
He doesn't, he has to stop her. Indeed even at the end of the film with both of them still alive, they cannot be together because Bruce cannot accept her for her crimes....
Her crime of loving her father and wanting to see him avenged. Bruce can't accept that kind of love and devotion in a wife.
By contrast here is Odysseus's blessing to Nausicaa, the gold standard for what wedded bliss should be going back 3000 years:
"And may the gods grant you all your heart’s desire, a husband and a home, and mutual harmony, in all its beauty. Since nothing is finer or better than when a man and a woman of one heart and mind stay together, a joy to their friends, a sorrow to their enemies"
This is what morality and virtue is: Helping friends, and harming enemies. Commiting justice in good treatment to the virtuous, and committing justice in il treatment to the villainous.
This is why Batman can never be happy. This is why no modern heroes can ever be happy. This is why western man can never be happy.
Why western man like Odysseus is treated as an abused beggar and stranger in his own house as parasites and enemies who traffic in lies devour and destroy that which he has harvested and build... but whereas Odysseus was away for decades, western man has been at home, western man has allowed his home to degrade to it's current state, in front of his own eyes, because he has allowed himself to be propagandized and brainwashed into believing it would be evil for him to defend what is his, and what is just, by his own hand...
Odysseus being so ill used does not accept the injustices committed against him, his house, and his friends... he does not forgive... Instead he commits the first mass shooting in recorded history... Conspiring to aquire his bow, and sending is few loyal friends to lock the doors so the suitors cannot escape, he shoots down all the unarmed suitors and the traitorous servants and women of his house who have colluded with or slept with them.
Everytime hollywood stages this they go out of their way to give the suitors weapons, or have the suitors strike first, one film has the treacherous women arm the suitors and attempt to throw things and poison Odysseus.... But this is not how Homer portrays it. Rather Odysseus and his few confederates had REMOVED the weapons from the hall so that the numerous host would NOT be able to offer him any violence... Homer portrays them panicking and reaching for weapons hanging on the wall only to find the walls bare and to be cutdown unarmed shot in the back.
These men had conspired to rob him, had insulted and humiliated him in own house, had conspired in an attempt to kill his own son... He did not need them to offer further violence to justify killing them. This was vengeance, this was righteous fury, this was a king enacting justice, this was a Greek warrior doing what a greek warrior was supposed to do.
This is a hero, one who encounters injustice, and corrects it by enacting justice of his own will.
This is what western man is supposed to be and WAS until the proliferation of television and mass media propaganda by his enemies.
And it is on you dear reader to unlearn that propaganda.
It is on you to to stop watching TV and Movies by degenerates who rape their actresses and child stars for moral instruction and instead recognize that the lessons they've taught you have been taught to make you weak and make you tolerate evil.
You must actually READ primary texts written before 1900 like the Epics of Homer, the History of Rome, the Sagas of the Vikings, the Romances of the Medieval Knights, the Plays of Elizabethan England, the novels and memoirs of the 18th and 19th century...
You need to see just how ready Western man is to commit violence in all eras. See how ready he is to kill a villian who has wronged him. See how ready he is to cut down or hang with his own hand a monster who has committed a crime... On no authority but his own. See how ready he is to take up arms against tyranny, purely from his own moral innitiative... See how ready he is to enact his moral vision with death and vengeance, even upon a ship's mate who has simply fallen asleep on a watch or a man who has tried to cheat him at cards.
And see how modern Hollywood morality is clearly a form of trained cowardice, cuckery, and anti-justice by comparison... How hatefully your ancestors would see you if they could see you waiting for inquiries or tolerating these injustices for reasons you yourself cannot articulate or have never questioned.
"All that it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Ok then, we might ask, what is something?
Your ancestors have been screaming the answer at you:
Violence.
.
Follow me on Twitter: @FromKulak
Tip:
BITCOIN: bc1qdhj7637sgcssxgxygjaa3ddljwy8tzg5mzw325
MONERO: 8AhA3g9hbtDcAJE5MPmeQsFwwGsf3H9fq9tC6giQ4a6vKnTXv4J4MivKXrPKDpXyEeNc9mfFejbq84kSWkC8pjuj18rAEij
There have been a number of such psyops perpetrated on the West. One of those was to always go along with the group, even if it seems foolish to you. Here is a blog from the guy who developed the 1980s TV show "Dungeons & Dragons."
"The kids were all heroic — all but a semi-heroic member of their troupe named Eric. Eric was a whiner, a complainer, a guy who didn't like to go along with whatever the others wanted to do. Usually, he would grudgingly agree to participate, and it would always turn out well, and Eric would be glad he joined in. He was the one thing I really didn't like about the show.
So why, you may wonder, did I leave him in there? Answer: I had to.
As you may know, there are those out there who attempt to influence the content of childrens' television. We call them "parents groups," although many are not comprised of parents, or at least not of folks whose primary interest is as parents. Study them and you'll find a wide array of agendum at work…and I suspect that, in some cases, their stated goals are far from their real goals.
Nevertheless, they all seek to make kidvid more enriching and redeeming, at least by their definitions, and at the time, they had enough clout to cause the networks to yield. Consultants were brought in and we, the folks who were writing cartoons, were ordered to include certain "pro-social" morals in our shows. At the time, the dominant "pro-social" moral was as follows: The group is always right…the complainer is always wrong.
This was the message of way too many eighties' cartoon shows. If all your friends want to go get pizza and you want a burger, you should bow to the will of the majority and go get pizza with them. There was even a show for one season on CBS called The Get-Along Gang, which was dedicated unabashedly to this principle. Each week, whichever member of the gang didn't get along with the gang learned the error of his or her ways.
We were forced to insert this "lesson" in D & D, which is why Eric was always saying, "I don't want to do that" and paying for his social recalcitrance. I thought it was forced and repetitive, but I especially objected to the lesson. I don't believe you should always go along with the group. What about thinking for yourself? What about developing your own personality and viewpoint? What about doing things because you decide they're the right thing to do, not because the majority ruled and you got outvoted?
We weren't allowed to teach any of that. We had to teach kids to join gangs. And then to do whatever the rest of the gang wanted to do."
https://www.newsfromme.com/pov/col145-2/
As another counter example, I am reminded of the famous Magnum, PI (with Tom Selleck, not the horrible reboot) where Magnum captures a Russian Agent named, of all things, Ivan. Ivan confidently asserts that Magnum, being honorable, would never shoot an unarmed man.
Magnum shoots him in the face.
I remember being absolutely shocked by that.