The reason “talking head” TV (as powered by O’Reilley and his ilk) is so popular is likely because the average person cares more about the personality and physicality of the pundit or politician than the package of ideas they purportedly represent. It could be argued that the “lemming type” who gravitates toward such fare is not mentally equipped to develop a “like” or “dislike” extending very far from superficialities.

A television-based presentation will more heavily weight non-intellectual aspects (the appearance and bombast of the presenter) of the politician or pundit, basically making them little more than a “talking head,” whereas those who would rely upon text alone will have to place far greater emphasis on the logical structure and soundness of their argument.

As someone once said, “the medium is the message.” When that medium is television, expect the intellectual aspects of any argument to be stripped bare, and the weight of the orator’s ability to make pathos-based appeals to come to the fore. This is what the majority of the population wants, unfortunately, and it would be folly to expect the situation to change significantly.

If anything, the public's love of "tout TV" reveals one of democracy's flaws as much as it exposes the blemishes of the common person who gets suckered into favoring such fare. Given that WN is an "elite" movement, it's possible that it will likely never arise democratically. As Alex has stated several times on goyfire, we aren't going to vote our way to power.

It is the media of the modern age, TV. So, this is why WNs are producing their own TV messages.

For example, Glenn Miller's video makes full use of the TV media to produce the message. It can been seen here:

Forever True: The Historical Speeches of Glenn Miller

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9158422089779051101&q=Glenn+Miller

I can remember that William Pierce often wondered why the lemmings need a smiling face to tell them how they should view an issue. Maybe some of the members here can offer some more insight into this printed word vs. TV issue?

Pierce was isolated from what was going on with most whites in the Kwa. I said as much when he was still alive, I'm not kicking a corpse.

The good doctor (and he was damn good when he wanted to be) could not grasp the economic and social realities of the average white American after he hunkered down in the hills in the 70s. All of the corporate downsizings and white community-breaking took place after he stopped being part of his own audience.

Whites who are wounded and made to feel shame about it, e.g. a white husband who lost a good machinist job and can only find work at a convenience store, wants reassurance. The smiley faces on TV give him a false community, false reassurance, false hope.

Community-busting among the white working class from 1975-85 corresponds with the rise of both TV politics and its bastard twin, talk radio. It's easy to see why. Before then, whites gathering at local bars and barbershops would talk directly to each other and compare their view of the world. They'd be dealing with their own realities first-hand.

Once the old communities died and these guys scattered, they had to get that socializing somewhere. So the tube. Then the radio. Sometimes the internet now, but not the same as the old days. The old communities were full of guys who ran boilers, small farms, cut sheet steel, mined coal, and knew each other.

No longer in communities, they found substitutes in mass media. Why TV politics is popular was explained before it existed, in 1950 by Eric Hoffer in The True Believer. If you lack something vital in the real world, Hoffer said, you reach for a substitute. But it's a trap. "You can never get enough of a substitute." Men without real communities will be junkies for fake ones.

It annoyed me that Dr Pierce never saw what I saw during the mass shutdowns, the vital communities turning into ghost towns or crack house heavens in a matter of a few seasons. When the NA approached me to join in (I think) 1993 or 94, I passed. They were already missing the main story and I saw that much, as dumb as I was about other things.

Is it popular? Or are you accepting this as a fact because TV says so? Dont they have an interest in attracting advertising dollars by making it seem so?

I think whites are searching for change politically. When things are going well no one cares much about politics, they are too busy living their lives, making money, planning their next child etc.. Except for the a small minority who happen to be interested in politics, regardless of what is going on around them. Today they know their standard of living is on the decline. The quality of life their parents lived on one income.. they can't match with both members of the couple working long hours.

So they watch talmudvision where they are put on teams of left and right. Where their side has the answers to all the problems they see around them.. and the other side is the root cause.

Jefferson wrote that democracy takes work. TV is simple and easy to understand. Pretty colors, pretty pictures. One network even went so far as to hire a sports producer to produce news programs. People were just not rivetted enough.

Do you even know your own neighbor? Can you remember his name and where he works? Americans are more fractured than ever. At least, whites are. There was a study done about 10 years ago. More Americans are bowling than ever before but bowling leagues have been in drastic decline for the past 20 years. We're not as social as we once were.

It takes effort to read a news article. It takes time to sift through stories and when you know you're being lied to, even more time to sift through the bullshit.

The sad part is that every American knows that something's wrong. We're going downhill. Everybody knows it. But few know what to do and when given the answer, even fewer want to hear it. They've been programed to turn away from it. Nationalism is bad. Everybody knows this.

Dr. Pierce was right. Let the average American keep their Monday Night Football, sitcoms and beer and the world can completely change while they do nothing.

It is simply human stupidity, quantified as an intrinsic inability to get into the substance of an issue. The huge majority of males and the absolute totality of females exhibit this trait.

Have you noticed a peculiar trait among modern inquiry to dwell on inconsequential "graphic" issues to the expense of the subject of enquiry itself? This is intimately linked with the modern idea humans are programmable creatures, therefore exposing the social conditions in which they lived is sufficient to their works' exegesis. For instance, if one studies Voltaire today, he will be bombarded with his sexual adventures, his personal quarrels and other minor issues, instead of what he actually wrote. It is like man has reverted to an animalistic stage where nothing above base needs can be meaningfully understood.

The type of behavior you are addressing: politics degraded to mere posturing, happy attractive empty faces, unchallenged TV authority in all matters, are all manifestations of human baseness and stupidity. Because printed word has no personality to adore, it is SO easy to understand why the same scum prefer TV, where they can actually SEE and FEEL the man's power. Stupid, degenerate weaklings crave to crawl behind some "great figure", vainly thinking they can as such appropriate his "success in life".

I say people you are covering in this thread are of no interest for Aryan Renaissance. Even if our side would gain proeminence, we would still have to feed him with EXACTLY the same tunes...

I was thinking about this issue and when you really take a serious look at it, the obsession Whites have with TV politics is a huge obstacle to the development of White Nationalism.

Let me explain what I mean by "TV Politics". I'm talking about the popular TV news shows like "O'Reilly" or "Hannity & Colmes" or any of the major network nightly news programs. I don't know about you but I know plenty of lemmings who get ALL of their political thoughts/"knowledge" from these kinds of programs. I feel that there has been a serious decline in interest for the printed word. Far too many Whites only want to see a person on TV and gaze into their eyes lovingly as their sole form of political input. I'm mentioning the feminine/emotional aspect of it because I think this is a primary component of the problem.

Seriously I sort of wonder about people today. How many women and even men watched Peter Jennings on the ABC nightly news just because they thought he was "handsome" or "cute"??? And doesn't that kind of odd fixation on the superficial rather than ideas make our job much more difficult because our goal is to essentially unplug the lemming from that world?

Again, this topic occurred to me because I know quite a few lemmings who simply do not hold any political theorist/figure in high regard unless they see them on TV frequently. Worship of TV is like a strange cult, it is extremely difficult to deprogam a person caught up in it.

I wish Alex Linder was still posting here because I know that he devours the printed word so he is the polar opposite of these lemmings who take in everything from TV.

I can remember that William Pierce often wondered why the lemmings need a smiling face to tell them how they should view an issue. Maybe some of the members here can offer some more insight into this printed word vs. TV issue?

Have you seen some of the female commentators these stations employ? My gosh, it's like an all day beauty assault. Those chicks are like talking mannequins, some of them. Shiksa Front 42.

How could she be lying, they think...

A pretty face indeed. If only they knew who was writing the words coming out of her mouth.

Politics is the perfect infotainment. Meaningless, trite, and tangled up in a web of human emotions and passions. Soccer Moms discussing the finer points of nuking Iran. These people need brain transplants.