You have to understand that Hollywood/Burbank were ALWAYS the counter-culture of the 20th century. If John Wayne's name ain't on it, it's bound to be counter-cultural somewhere in it if it has any kind of messaging at all.
But of course, they started out with the position of believing that "be nice to people no matter what they look like" was some sort of bold, brave new idea, just like they're STILL trying to pretend it's some bold, brave new idea.
They claim to be leaders, but they've only ever been followers, and the fact that it took a LOT for them to stop glamourizing fur coats is proof of that (and I notice the self-centred niggers seem to be bringing fur back on the fashion table, while at the same time demonizing animal face costumes ....)
But I guess maybe you should start with The Great Dictator and go from there.
For television, it was called a "great wasteland" because the early stuff didn't have much messaging.
Or did it? Here's another example of Hollywood/Burbank thinking it invented something new and "lefty": Blended families.
The Brady Bunch was seen as just dumb fun humour a la Gilligan's Island, but it was really selling the idea of "blended families" in the early days of easy divorce. But the Bradys were widowed you say? Yes, that's what people were used to .. because blended families were never new. They existed, though, because of husband dying in war or at work, or wifey dying in childbirth, etc. But they wanted you to think that "because now it's divorce, it's new and you better get used to it! reee!"
Actually, digging through all this old shit for examples of hidden "stolen valour" might be an interesting group project.
"Be nice to everyone" may not be the best position for various subversive reasons, but it worked decently in the 90s. The current trend of "Blacks are poor so you must bow before them forever" is downright fucking vile.
You have to understand that Hollywood/Burbank were ALWAYS the counter-culture of the 20th century. If John Wayne's name ain't on it, it's bound to be counter-cultural somewhere in it if it has any kind of messaging at all.
But of course, they started out with the position of believing that "be nice to people no matter what they look like" was some sort of bold, brave new idea, just like they're STILL trying to pretend it's some bold, brave new idea.
They claim to be leaders, but they've only ever been followers, and the fact that it took a LOT for them to stop glamourizing fur coats is proof of that (and I notice the self-centred niggers seem to be bringing fur back on the fashion table, while at the same time demonizing animal face costumes ....)
But I guess maybe you should start with The Great Dictator and go from there.
For television, it was called a "great wasteland" because the early stuff didn't have much messaging.
Or did it? Here's another example of Hollywood/Burbank thinking it invented something new and "lefty": Blended families.
The Brady Bunch was seen as just dumb fun humour a la Gilligan's Island, but it was really selling the idea of "blended families" in the early days of easy divorce. But the Bradys were widowed you say? Yes, that's what people were used to .. because blended families were never new. They existed, though, because of husband dying in war or at work, or wifey dying in childbirth, etc. But they wanted you to think that "because now it's divorce, it's new and you better get used to it! reee!"
Actually, digging through all this old shit for examples of hidden "stolen valour" might be an interesting group project.
"Be nice to everyone" may not be the best position for various subversive reasons, but it worked decently in the 90s. The current trend of "Blacks are poor so you must bow before them forever" is downright fucking vile.