Tag: Dawn of Justice

The Pussy Generation: A ‘Dawn of Justice’ that only Trump can unleash

It was refreshing to hear my favorite actor, Clint Eastwood say what many of us were already thinking.  That is why he has had such a successful career as an actor and director of motion pictures primarily for Warner Bros. Studios.  In his mid-80s, I admire him immensely and I relished it when in Variety magazine he stated when asked about why he was supporting Donald Trump for president that we are “living in the pussy generation.”  He’s right.  Millennials are a lost cause; many have grown up fatherless, or with step-parents raising them with guilt filled ambiguity.  Most if not all of them have been raised in a liberalized public education system, a communist oriented college experience, and a progressive media that has turned their minds to mush.  I feel so sorry for them—because I know many.

When I was a kid in the area of Liberty Township, Ohio it was rare to find a kid who went to my school who hadn’t had the experience of bailing hay for someone, grandparent, neighbor, friends parents—someone.  Now, it is extremely rare for a kid to even know someone who has a farm.  These kids of the pussy generation haven’t learned hard work from anybody, and it shows in their lives.  When they are in their thirties and forties we are in a lot of trouble not only in America, but around the world because those kids are not ready for life.  When people like Eastwood and Donald Trump—classic A Type “American bred men” are gone there won’t be anyone around to teach these kids and their kids anything—except old—outdated movies.  We are literally on a precipice and a lot really hinges on this upcoming election.  With Trump—there may be a chance to reverse course.  Without Trump in the White House, the type of American men who made America an exceptional country will be lost forever.

http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/clint-eastwood-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-1201829966/

That isn’t to dismiss the contributions of women.  It’s just that the role a man plays in the raising of children and the nurturing they provide toward a positive society has been terribly neglected, and we are just beginning to see the horrendous cost to our society.  But it’s not all bad—there are a lot of things that give me hope, and I’ll talk about those things because a lot really hinges on the point of a needle regarding the philosophic approach we all take in just the next couple of months.  I just spent the night staying up and playing Uncharted 4’s multiplayer rounds with people around the world shooting guns and reeking havoc with glorious hoards of fantastic violence—and it was all great fun.  There were thousands of people playing and picking their ammunition and with each round I played I was quite sure that socially these people might support superficial ideas that Hillary Clinton proposes against guns—but guns are very much a part of the life of Millennials.  In spite of Apple’s desire to edit violence from their electronic devices, gun violence and play fighting has left the playgrounds of school yards and moved online much more furiously than I ever experienced as a kid.

I also watched secretly the Batman Versus Superman movie and I found I liked it a lot.  I say secretly because my wife can’t watch that movie until the new Justice League film comes out—for a lot of complicated reasons.  I find I understand those characters in that DC universe and ironically, I can relate to their “meta human” condition.  For instance, in regard to Wonder Woman—she turned away from mankind over a hundred years ago and she at the end of the film is contemplating if saving mankind is even worth it.  Believe me, I can relate.  I am on the same precipice right now.  If Trump gets elected, I may stick around, if not, I will likely do as she did and turn toward my own personal Amazonian paradise and let the world rot.  Like Batman, I find hope in the fight for mankind—but it’s an Ayn Rand destination with H.P. Lovecraft villains oozing from inter-dimensional space that is the threat.  For mankind to turn toward socialism I would have to say “see you later.” That’s just stupid.  I don’t want to live in that world.  With these movies, the various films entertaining these young people, there is some rather deep philosophy going on that the Millennials are getting exposed to that is more sophisticated than the days of Clint Eastwood—so there is some positive evolution going on that is worth noting.  It doesn’t get reported on the 24 hour news cycles, but it’s certainly obvious at 2:30 in the morning playing online games through PlayStation, that something special is going on.  Movie characters had a huge impact on my upbringing and Clint Eastwood led the way.

I have many Clint Eastwood looks that I do subconsciously, burned in my mind as a kid that come out everyday—so I understand how much movies can have an impact on the minds of young people.  Ultimately the people I looked up to as a kid were not the people who bailed hay, and worked on their own cars in the garage.  To me, they were so common that I wanted to be more than them.  So it was Hollywood heroes which I set my goals to.  I fully expected myself to be Christopher Reeve’s Superman.  My wife actually told me that after I proposed to her and I have expected myself to live up to that high image even today.  What you end up with might be more Indiana Jones, but you set the goal high and get the most that you can out of life.  That is the expectation anyway.  But at least I had a foundation of goodness to start with.  Most of these young people from the pussy generation don’t even have that—so all they get are images on a screen or in a video game—but they can’t easily apply those things to real life because the bar is now so low that everything good seems like just a fantasy to them.  So they don’t even try.  But I wouldn’t say they don’t strive for it—because honestly, they’d rather live in fantasy than reality for a reason—because reality has been taken from them by a political class hell-bent on global destruction.

I know young people have been taught socialism in school and in their political life— but when it comes to video games—they understand capitalism.  There is no better incubator anywhere that proves Adam Smith’s capitalism better than the video game industry.  Everything in video games is built on merit, individual gratification, and free market ideas—so the idea of capitalism is there—it will just take a special kind of person from the Executive Office to bring it out in our society.  In that regard, Trump is the perfect presidential candidate for the Millennial generation.  They just don’t know it yet.

I don’t know how long we get to have Clint Eastwood around, or even Donald Trump for that matter.  Trump is only 15 years younger than Eastwood, and when they were kids, most everyone thought the way they do now—and that’s not nearly as bad as the progressive media has attempted to paint it.  There is something special about men who know how to be men, and women who love them for it.  Families grow and prosper based on that necessary biological formula, and when Eastwood and Trump aren’t around anymore—people like me will be as rare in the world as the superheros of the DC comic universe.  Honestly, I don’t know many people in my age bracket who think the way I do about things and under me, there are even fewer more.  Eastwood is truly part of a dying culture and before he’s gone, we should seriously ask if that’s really what we want.  There are many days when I seriously wonder if it’s all worth it.  When I listen to Trump, I think maybe it is worth the fight.  But through a business day when I deal with people who are literally pussies—even though they may be male by sexual designation—the temptation to leave mankind to rot is quite strong.  It’s not because those people are stupid, or even not as smart as I am—it’s because they are just pussies and not worth the time to deal with.

Thank goodness for Clint Eastwood—like the expert in human endeavor that he is, he knew just what to say at just the right time.  Trump had been willing to fight everyone leaving Hillary out of the spotlight, which helped her a lot—because the less the pussy media talks about her, the better she does, which was always the strategy.  Trump quickly got back on message and the results will show quite dramatically from here on out.  It wasn’t Republicans like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich who helped Trump out—likely it was Clint Eastwood’s support through a Variety interview with some 86-year-old advice from Dirty Harry himself.  Trump, like me, has obviously had a lot of Clint Eastwood in his life, so I bet he did listened to the wise old director.  With that, there is still hope that mankind can be saved, and Trump is the special kind of person who could do it—because it will take someone like him to tap into those undiscovered wells of wealth within the population of Millennials.  For a campaign that was finding the Hillary Clinton Democratic Organized Crime racket hard to deal with, Eastwood may have saved mankind one last time with a derogatory word that made everyone look in the mirror—including Donald Trump.  And for that, I thank him immensely.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

‘Batman Versus Superman: The Dawn of Justice’ from the lens of Ayn Rand

Essentially the argument in question revolving around the new Batman Versus Superman: The Dawn of Justice movie is a philosophic argument between Plato/Aristotle and Nietzsche/Ayn Rand. Batman represents the old human concept of law and order whereas Superman represents the overman.   It is a compelling argument and one that I didn’t entirely expect to be conveyed so openly in a comic book movie—but here it is.

Of course it should be expected where my sentiments fall. And I’m sure Ayn Rand would be aghast that I compared her to Frederick Nietzsche. She would break things down by stating that she is more like Aristotle whereas Nietzsche is aligned more properly with the sentimental mysticism of Plato—but for this line of thought I’m breaking down philosophic development into the boundaries of western civilization itself. The minds of man have brought us into the modern age on the philosophy established in Greece. Ayn Rand and the concept of the overman is the future—it is the graduation of mankind from the boundaries of intellectual confinement driven by thousands of years of madness.

I have stated my love for both film franchises, of course the Batman films of Christopher Nolan and the Man of Steel film by the same producer. Both Christopher Nolan renditions of the comic legends have heavy doses of Ayn Rand in them—collectivism versus the individual. Yet Hollywood is directly opposed to Ayn Rand currently favoring heavily the Kantian philosophy of collectivism, altruism, and human depravity. The director of the Man of Steel films and the upcoming Dawn of Justice is Zach Snyder who obviously like Christopher Nolan, prefers Ayn Rand and even though Hollywood may not like it—the hot handed director is at the helm and is poised to deliver a powerful money-making franchise to Warner Bros that will compete directly with the wonderful Marvel Avengers films from Disney.

I’m actually going deeper into this line of thought with my Cliffhanger project, but for the masses right now at the start of the 21st century this Batman versus Superman battle needs to happen, and the trailer captured the essence of it very well. All through human history mankind has fallen in love with power and it has corrupted their minds. An overman on the other hand has no such love for power, because they understand the nature of it. Power is not given to other people through democratic measures. Just because one person can command hundreds, perhaps thousands from the lofty perches of a social title of some kind—there is no real power there—just an acknowledgment of collective will. Real power comes from an individual and will remain no matter what circumstances emerge.

In many ways in a modern since the director Ridley Scott surprisingly grasped this concept in his 2000 release of Gladiator, which won best picture that year along with a best actor award for Russel Crowe. Scott isn’t typically an Ayn Rand fan, but he did grasp the power of the individual in that film where Maximus—the protagonist had been the favored general of Marcus Aurelius due to his skill on the battlefield, but once the Emperor died, his son Commodus, deeply jealous of Maximus sought to put the general to death and kill his family. Maximus escaped, but not in time to save his family. The great man lost everything and is captured and toured around as a gladiator—one step always from death. Yet Maximus is so skilled at fighting that he quickly rose back to the top and eventually challenged again the Emperor of Rome as a masterful tactician. It is clearly one of the best films of its kind and is oozing with Ayn Rand strength centering on the individual over the collective. There is a truth in that particular film that Ridley Scott unintentionally released. I have put that truth to test many times and have discovered that it’s immensely accurate. You can take a great man and cast him onto a remote island in the middle of nowhere and he or she—will succeed in spite of the collective efforts to hold them down. Great people are not driven by collective salvation or sacrifice—they are creators of their own fates and can make success out of any situation—because success is an act of creation—not something granted by luck or the “gods.” A great person will always rise back to the top by default and there is a science to it that is predictable.

Zach Snyder seems compelled by this same resiliency and all the characters in his films embody some aspect of this. So it’s no accident that Christopher Nolan put Snyder in charge of the Superman franchise. There really is no better director today who knows how to handle the Man of Steel mythology. Superman is a superior being from another planet who simply wanted to help mankind become greater. He has absolute power, and came from a planet that collapsed under that power—not by his hand, but those of his people. Superman’s job is to ensure that the same thing doesn’t happen to earth. Batman on the other hand is a broken man who lost his parents at a young age and has spent his life righting wrongs essentially out of a vigilante need to rectify justice. But that justice is very terrestrial as it has been formulated around human perception. Batman is a second generation man of wealth meaning he inherited much of what his father made for him, but he is competent enough to sustain that wealth and apply it to fighting crime. Batman is always one step away from falling off the cliff whereas there is never any real danger that Superman would or could fall. Because no matter what happens Superman will always rise back to the top just like Maximus did from the Gladiator. So Snyder in the second film of his Man of Steel series is pitting these two heroes of entirely different philosophies against each other which is essentially the debate of our day.

The essential suspicion is that no man can resist the temptation toward corruption if given the opportunity. So Superman is a threat to the world even though all his efforts have been in trying to save it. But Superman is not a man of this world; he is essentially an alien functioning from an inner self-assurance that is a graduation of mankind’s limits. Yes, he has absolute power, but he also is immune to the desire to abuse it for the sake of social adornment. An overman knows where their power comes from so the appeasement of the masses does nothing for them. The only measure they have is themselves for success. Whereas the traditional western perspective is that if the masses support the power and authority of an individual that power is thus provided to control those people. This ultimately leads to a collapse of the individual ego upon itself because power is not generated from within, but from without.

It was the Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw who termed the name “overman” or otherwise “superman” in his 1902 play Man and the Superman which would later inspire the comic. In the play established in Act 1 is the concept that the more things a man is ashamed of, the more respectable he is. This of course leads to a disastrous life making men miserable for most of their existence. As Shaw states in his play, “A lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth.” This is the world of Batman—he’s never really happy and feels he is a Dark Night that stands in the shade between right and wrong. However Shaw was a socialist who did not believe in the abilities of mankind to overcome such faults so he regulated his sentiments toward collectivism being lead by the elite in charge—which of course took Nietzsche’s work and perverted it into the Nazi regime. A couple of high school kids from Cleveland, Ohio inspired by many science fiction writers from the early 20s—inspired by Shaw’s play—invented the comic Superman to fight for the rights of left-leaning causes during the Red Decade coming out in 1933. The big difference between Nietzsche’s overman and Siegel and Shuster’s “superman” was that one transcended the limitations of society, religion, and conventional morality while still being fundamentally human. The other was alien and gifted with incredible powers choosing honorable human moral codes, holding himself to a higher standard of adherence to them, purposely. Over time Superman has evolved ending up in the middle of those two viewpoints under Zach Snyder’s care. And that is a good and healthy thing.

So Batman versus Superman is more than another popcorn movie about superheroes. It’s a philosophy for our age that needs articulation. A lot of history has passed since Shaw wrote his play but what has come out in the end is a fully fleshed out philosophy that works. That philosophy is what the theme of this upcoming movie is between two of the most well-known and loved superheroes of our modern mythology. Under Zach Snyder’s care I think he’s going to produce something revolutionary and I’m very excited about it. But in that battle I know already who will win. The overman always comes out on top—because it’s in their nature to always do so.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.