just figured some shit out. im gonna blow this motherfucker wide open. heads will roll
the little mermaid (1989) was a kids movie about a mermaid who wants to become a human sort of like weeabos want to become japanese and rich layabouts want to become mediocre artists. straightforward enough. seems innocent enough
the movie was based on a 🚩🚩🚩danish🚩🚩🚩 story by a man named hans "christian" andersen
in keeping with disney tradition, culture and ethnicity of the characters matches the national origin of the story, eg prince "Eric"
this is were the trouble starts
ladies and gentlemen, this movie does NOT take place along the north sea. nor does it take place along the baltic
consider the evidence
"Eric" tries to kiss ariel in a "blue lagoon"
the location is apparently semi-tropical. here are the north and baltic coasts of denmark for contrast. no "lagoons" here
local wildlife include singing flamingos. here is the natural range of the flamingo
could they be from the private menagerie of the king of Denmark? perhaps. but this is suggestive that he at least kept them outside comfortably.
and lets consider "erics" attire.
the careful viewer will identify his dress as red sea rig, favored originally by the british navy and later in the diplomatic corps
no self-respecting royal would wear this attire north of hamburg
well. this is all very interesting. clearly the movie is set abroad.
in a danish colony.
heres a map of their empire. compare once more with the range of flamingos
the obvious site from contextual clues is the danish gold coast of africa
however, this doesnt work because red sea rig had barely been /invented/ in the mid 19th century, and rhe danish gold coast was sold off in 1850. plus the gold coast is arid rather than lush
no. this was further east on the far side of the indian ocean
everything fits. the nicobar islands were the last noneuropean colonies abandoned by the dutch, and they could have attended them in red sea rig in 1868. the sale to the uk is further convenient for two reasons
first of all, it explains why Eric would be on a far flung island in red sea rig at all. hes there to oversea the transfer of the islands to the british navy on behalf of his empire and hes wearing clothes to their standard. this is so neat i think its a deliberate tip by disney
second of all, it explains why everyone in a dutch colony is unexpectedly white
wouldnt you have local Help? not if everyone had died of infectious disease from the europeans, or if the europeans had a quarantine to avoid illness themselves
clearly the little mermaid is a story of colonialism and genocide. but that history you know. the truth in the little mermaid is much grimmer
heres a little question for you. if the little mermaid takes place on nicobar island . . . why are the mermaids white
to answer this question we need to revisit aquatic ape theory
AAT speculates that humans diverged from apes when they became more adapted to an aquatic environment. clearly in TLM, AAT was correct; and furthermore at least one branch of humans took it even further, evolving convergently with cetaceans
the most parsimonious explanation for why Eric and Ariel are (1) both white, (2) able to understand each others language, and (3) mutually attracted to one another rather than repulsed is that they share a recent common heritage both genetically and linguistically
put another way, eric and ariel are both offshoots of of the yamnaya expansion--and given their linguist proximity probably a recent wave too. most likely the same wave conquered local land populations, and then further intermixed with the local indigenous fish maidens
so fine: a recent common wave of aryan conquerors took both the land and the sea. the sea conquest took centuries and reached at least as far as nicobar, where a grandee set in place his kingdom
in his wake he left genocide
those indigenous fish people were not the only indigenous fish people. to get to nicobar King Triton's ancestors would have had to cut their way from the north sea, through biscay and around the cape of good hope, past egypt and lanka, slaughtering everyone in their path
TLM is a story drenched in an ocean of blood, a secret history mouldering behind a blithe animated romp like a murder victim immured beneath wallpaper
Eric imagines he is marrying into royalty, but he will bed a monster. His children will walk on land, yet their hearts will be the hearts of the Scourge-beneath-the-Waves
his wedding marks the start of a new age of Man. an age of blood and tears
anyway. just a little something to think about when you watch disney movies. never can be too sure what your feeding you kids and you dont want em to grow up. you know.
funny
cannot BELIEVE disney went woke on this. mfs are going to doom us all and they know EXACTLY what theyre doing
the reason that nerds are unhappy about trump firing federal reserve people isnt because they particularly like those specific people
issue is that it makes the fed look beholden to the executive and this is a very bad outcome for economic stability
the fed hasnt covered itself in glory lately for sure but the counterfactual where its progressively and openly politicized is pretty much just a world of hyperinflation and impoverishment because thats a side effect of how unstable governments use politicized central banks
i think a steelman for "end the fed" is that we've left this absurdly powerful yet nigh defenseless institution sitting in plain sight like a loaded gun during a period of immensely high trust and as that period comes to a close someone is gonna make a first grab at the pistol
ok finally discovered a kind of lore i want to know about in a non clickbait way:
what one-shotted you?
eg for me it was 90s movies about how having a career and a house in the burbs is the worst thing that can ever happen to someone
i didn't realize i'd been Had until my 30s
everyone will give boomers and millennials shit about the social justice and narcissism, and rightly so. but the motherfuckers who tricked me into nearly ruining my life are genx
for those of you not familiar getting one shotted is getting wrecked on first contact with something. classic deployment attached
"everyone is the same and nations are fake" is the core dogma of the mid-late 20C liberalism that grew out of the war era. in the years since it's become a mostly-unstated and broadly-unassailable assumption of imperial policy
regrettably it is also disastrously incorrect
the history of this idea is worth studying. you can see the modern notion start to emerge in the progressive era and out of socialist thought, and gain some traction with (eg) the league of nations
ideologues might say that league failed bc it wasn't REAL world government
among socialism-inclined intellectuals, which is to say nearly all intellectuals until molotov-ribbentrop broke some out of their reveries, ww1 was understood to be a failure _caused by_ national identity
the leftist compulsion to degrade national identity in democratic countries will be the undoing of their welfare state plank, because it turns out when you remove the nation people just default to narrower identities and don't care to pay for the outgroup's well-being
you can get support for fargroups in time limited cases. there's a long history of (eg) american assistance for people on the other side of the world in disaster recovery
but duration breeds resentment, and organized charity is very hard to maintain with this sentiment
when you're talking about an outgroup for whom that resentment is ingrained and continuously salient, forget it
"multiculturalism" kills welfare states in the long run
amusingly this was one reason some of the more libertarian neoliberals supported open borders
i was disappointed that liberals did nothing in the face of the awokening. but that can at least be explained as cowardess
what's worse is that the awokening is over, they're not taking the fact that the awokening occurred as a serious problem to be guarded against going forward
one is left with the impression that either they are fine with everything that happened or they learned absolutely nothing from the experience. both of these possibilities seem disqualifying
what is the point of liberals who can't be bothered to care for liberty, one wonders