A White Nationalist Classic.
About 20 years ago, I spotted an ad campaign run by the famous Aunt Jemima pancake mix brand, announcing their intention to gradually update the appearance of Aunt Jemima.
Instead of an Aunt Jemima who looked like Hattie McDaniel of "Gone with the Wind" fame, we were to have a slimmer, lighter skinned version "which would have broader appeal to a cross section of the population."
The problem with this campaign was that it made absolutely no sense from any perspective which I could imagine.
What, exactly, were they saying? That a dark skinned black woman was not fit to appear on a box of pancake mix?? How is that going to make the vast majority of blacks feel good about themselves? Did they focus-group this thing in front an audience of black women and find out that black women see themselves, not as they actually are, but rather as very light skinned quadroons??
It was all very baffling.
But then, perhaps they were trying to appeal to White customers.
Did they focus-group this thing in front of White women and find out that they were repulsed by the image of an actual black woman but would buy the product more easily if she were an idealized image of a black woman with a much lighter skin?? But wouldn't an enthusiastic embrace of "diversity" demand that very dark blacks have a public role? Did they discover in the focus groups that White women are repulsed by the look of blacks as most blacks really are, but are comforted by an imaginary ideal of a black race which looks much more like themselves?
Perhaps this is why so many Whites secretly rejoice every time they see that someone else's daughter has a mulatto baby in tow. Despite the insignificant lightening effect such activity can have on the entire black race, and despite the fact that light skinned mulattoes are likely to group together and mount even fiercer group competitive efforts than their blacker cousins, perhaps the average soccer mom thinks group competition for survival and domination would be more pleasant if only the people who habitually vote for race preferences, beat the daylights out of their sons and muscle sex from their daughters also had lighter skins.
What a muddle.
And it was during this Aunt Jemima image campaign that I first realized that the Secular Religion of Equality deprives its adherents of the fundamental ability to recognize the material reality that exists and is plainly visible around them. But more important, I recognized that this disability allows most Whites to cope with the ugliness of the multi-racial experience by creating mental images of competing races, and especially blacks, which are relatively pleasing and far from the average of what actually exists. While the grim reality of the multi-racial experience might give one good reason to be angry and fearful, most people want to feel happy and secure, and during times of prosperity they create images of their racial competitors which facilitate that feeling.
And Hollywood constantly feeds this tendency among Whites by making sure that not one from among the millions that look like Hattie McDaniel ever appear on television. They make sure that our minds eye is filled with pictures of the half dozen or so Halle Berrys they have managed to find.
In order to believe in, or be happy living with this rigidly enforced Secular Religion of Equality you have to gain an ability to deny facts and features which are right in front of you every day. As you celebrate diversity, you try strenuously to blend it out of existence, despite the fairly obvious fact that a uniform blended human race can never be achieved as a practical matter.
Now being aware of this special form of blindness in my own people, when it came time for me to order a copy of the Disney classic "Cinderella" originally produced in 1949, I was shocked to see that the prince - Cinderella's love interest in the so called "black diamond" version of the videotape issued in 1993 - had turned dark brown.
In fact, he was so brown that he looked really strange!
Cinderella has blond hair and blue eyes. The story is set in some imaginary Benelux principality in Northern Europe and everyone in the animated movie has distinctly white skin. But here we have this dark brown prince who doesn't look anything like his father nor anyone else in the movie.
Prince Charming has been Aunt Jemimafied!!
Not only does he have this brown skin, but he retains his original 1949 Northern European line art and facial features, thereby giving us a man who does not look like an Asian, African, Indian, Latin-American or any other recognizable brown skinned human on this planet. He might as well be an alien from outer space.
Now to make matters even more strange, the videotape was re-released in a new "remastered" version in 1995, only two short years after the first "black diamond" release.
Naturally, I expected that in the 1995 version Prince Charming would be even darker and stranger looking than in 1993. After all, there can be no retrograde step to the rear in the darkening and ultimate disappearance of the White race.
But to my shock and surprise, Prince Charming is significantly lighter in the 1995 version.
In fact, you see him right on the front cover of the plastic "clam shell" videotape case for the 1995 version, and he is unmistakably light skinned - the same color as Cinderella. But in the 1995 version of the movie, Prince Charming changes color from scene to scene, appearing white in some and brown in others - Prince Charming is now a racially ambiguous, multicultural chameleon.
Disney sells millions of copies of this movie all over the world. But the primary audience is little girls. And it is impossible to understand how a little Chinese or Japanese girl could be made to feel better about herself by seeing a brown skinned Prince Charming prefer a blue-eyed Nordic blonde like Cinderella.
But, of course, it is the mothers of these little girls who actually buy these movies and the mothers are certainly much more acutely aware of - and likely to be offended by - this fascination of brown males for blonds. So the argument that monkeying with Prince Charming's skin color is done for marketing reasons does not really hold water.
I conclude that the Aunt Jemimafication of Prince Charming has little to do with marketing the film to the Brown peoples of the world. Rather it has to do with the psychic comfort of the individual members of the production team. In all probability they have a vague sense that the 1949 version of the movie is "too White" and that selling the movie world wide is an act of racial imperialism, and that something must be done to make the movie a little less "White", and thus more truly "universal."
Changing Cinderella's skin color would call too much attention to the issue, so they fix upon the relatively minor role of the Prince. And it is not their purpose to turn Prince Charming into a specific Chinaman or a specific African, but rather to turn him into their vision of a generalized blended human who is not and cannot be recognized as belonging to any existing race or group.
If the Disney production team really valued and appreciated the actual and existing racial diversity of this planet, they would produce four additional versions of the movie, one populated with specifically East Asian looking characters, one with Indian looking characters, one with African looking characters, and one with Latin-American Indian looking characters.
The refusal to produce separate versions of the animated classic for the actual and existing races of the world tells you volumes about what really lurks in the minds of those who have adopted the Secular Religion of Equality and own the movie. It is relatively obvious that they are repulsed and frightened by the actual racial diversity which exists on this planet - otherwise they would market to that actual diversity.
In place of the actual racial diversity which exists, they have created a dream world vision of a uniform racially blended man who must replace the current irrational and repulsive multiplicity of races - a uniform racially blended man who, incidentally, bears a marked resemblance to themselves - but with a medium tan. The vision in their heads is pure delusion, but one which gives them great comfort.
For if the true believer in the Secular Religion of Equality should ever admit the right of Chinese, Indians and Africans to racial self-determination, that would imply, by default, that Whites might be left unmolested, and pursue their own evolutionary destiny. But the real driver behind this vision of universal man which egalitarians construct for themselves, is the knowledge that the continuing existence of these various races inevitably means continued group competition for survival, and the primal fear that the various races of mankind might just be equal enough to secure self-determination and control over their own separate evolutionary destiny - with a consequent loss of power for universalists who arrogate unto themselves the authority to force all of humanity to blend in such a way as to conform to the mental pictures they have constructed in their own minds for their own comfort.
But there is a second aspect of the Aunt-Jemimafication process in Cinderella which shows a remarkable carelessness of detail - a carelessness which has special significance.
We have all seen this carelessness before, and I call it the Crema II effect.
About a third of the way into the movie Cinderella, we see the King dreaming about the grandchildren he wants. We see a portrait gallery of his son, the Prince, at various ages ranging from infancy to adulthood, and in each painting the Prince has very light white skin.
For some reason, the animation team left the color of the Prince in the portrait gallery the way it was in 1949 in both the 1993 black diamond version and in the 1995 version. The result is that the Prince we see in these portraits looks nothing like the Prince we see at the royal ball.
As with most Disney animated classics, Cinderella begins and ends with the opening and closing of an illustrated story book. In the final scene of the movie we see Cinderella driving off in a carriage in broad daylight with a brown Prince, and then two seconds later we see a large storybook picture of Cinderella living happily ever after with a very pale skinned White Prince.
Apparently the team charged with monkeying with the Prince's skin color neglected to touch up that skin color in the portrait gallery or the storybook, which remain as they were in 1949.
This inattention to obvious detail must be driven either by a belief system so powerful that the egalitarian universalizer has lost the ability to see any data which might conflict with his belief, or an equally powerful belief that every right thinking viewer of the movie will bring to the movie the same passionate view that a race specific prince is somehow morally inferior to a racially ambiguous prince, and that the skin tones left over from 1949 which are rendered discordant by their later "improvements" help to create that morally superior racial ambiguity which places everyone in their comfort zone.
I call this the Crema II effect for the simple reason that you can see the same inattention to critical details on display at what has become, for the Secular Religion of Equality, the holiest among many shrines to victimhood, namely the official display of a scale model of a working gas chamber built by the Auschwitz State Museum in Poland right alongside the actual remains of Crema II at Birkenau.
The scale model, videotaped by David McCalden back in 1987 and now captured to digital form and preserved for eternity by yours truly, plainly shows a structure with solid concrete support columns as well as supplemental hollow concrete columns and associated rooftop structures for pouring in Cyanide pellets.
The problem is that anyone who views the model can walk 40 feet to the roof of Crema II, climb down into the chamber and see for himself that while the solid reinforced concrete support columns exist, there are no hollow concrete columns nor any associated roof structures or "holes" for introducing Cyanide pellets - as a number of observers on both sides of the Holocaust debate have acknowledged.
But the display and the structural ruins at Birkenau have much more important things to say about the workings of the egalitarian mind than about the specific facts of what happened in Poland in 1944.
The true believer brings to the sacred shrine a firm belief in - and a mental image of - an industrial strength gas chamber. To them, the model built by the State Museum is true, and the fact that the hollow pillars and associated roof structures are home sick and failed to report to their appointed duty station in the ruins on the day they happened to visit the shrine has no significance.
Egalitarian Belief overpowers facts on the ground every time.
It is one thing for a believing tourist or a casual movie viewer to gloss over and ignore discordant details, but it is quite another for the teams which actually doctor thousands of individual frames in a movie or painstakingly construct a scale model of a structure to ignore discordant details.
And it is the process by which participants within working bureaucracies can rationalize their choices and ignore details which is of paramount importance.
If I had been hired to Aunt Jemimafy Prince Charming I would have re-colored him in the portrait gallery and in the story book. Similarly, if I had been curator of the Auschwitz State Museum, I would have modified the remains of Crema II to conform to the scale model. In either case, I would have felt dangerously exposed if I did not "clean up" those significant details.
But the fact that the actual teams do not feel dangerously exposed tells you volumes about the nature of Egalitarian belief.
The egalitarian universalists are so confident of their belief system that they cannot imagine anyone fixing upon such a detail to deny the core belief. Adherence to the Secular Religion of Equality confers status and a sense of moral superiority and self worth. Participants in the bureaucracies which create shrines to victimhood, and propaganda dressed up as entertainment are justified in ignoring the readily observable discordant facts because they know that anyone who calls attention to such facts risks loss of status in front of his fellow citizens. They sense that they can depend upon the status yearnings of the masses to ensure that the discordant facts remain unremarked.
Powerful belief systems - those which are actually enforced - need a means of identifying heretics, but they also need an actual supply of heretics so that the belief system can be reinforced by public displays of punishment and humiliation. While I am certain that this never reaches the level of conscious craft on the part of participants in the bureaucracies which maintain the public monuments to victimhood and create propaganda for the Secular Religion of equality, nevertheless, ignoring details which conflict with egalitarian belief, does serve the socially useful purpose of inducing a small but steady supply of heretics to expose themselves publicly, so that the belief system can be reinforced with public displays of punishment, coercion, and opprobrium.
Shifting gears and returning to the movie itself, I should remark that the earlier "black diamond" version of the movie prompts the above observations. The images of the prince in the 1995 version of Cinderella are largely unobjectionable.
The movie shares many virtues with Snow White, but is vastly more popular because it involves competition between and among females for status and access to males - a competition which is far more interesting and important to young girls than actual interactions with young males.
Thus, Cinderella is and remains a WNC selection.
For those of you possessed of a highly refined taste for the subtler forms of egalitarian foolishness and propaganda, I would suggest Cinderella as an absolute must for adults - the light touch of Crema II effect being just a whisper of fine vermouth in the otherwise solid WNC Bombay Sapphire Gin of the 1949 Disney classic.
Design © 2005 Yggdrasil. All rights reserved. Distribute texts freely.