Archive

Posts Tagged ‘entertainment industry’

Explanation for the Intense Hatred of Trump by ‘Hollywood’ Celebrities

December 23, 2018 12 comments

The election of Trump on November 8, 2016 has had many interesting and peculiar effects on the state of public and private discourse in this country. For example, we have recently seen multiple prominent democrats and their surrogates loudly proclaim that Bush43 was not as big a disaster as Trumpdespite the incredibly bad track record of the former. As some of you might be aware, there is an ongoing effort to rehabilitate the public image and legacy of Bush43 and his recently deceased father (Bush41). In case you require help remembering how incredibly disastrous the Bush43 presidency really was, let me remind you it began with a stolen presidential election, went through 9/11 and its aftermath, a failed invasion and occupation of Iraq, the incredibly poor response to aftermath of hurricane Katrina and ended with the Global Financial Crisis of 2008.

And this brings me to an interesting observation about the difference in reaction of Hollywood and entertainment “celebrities” to the presidencies of Bush43 and Trump45. Why did a president as disastrous such as Bush43 never get anywhere near level of hate as that ineffectual orange-haired buffoon is getting right now? Think about it.. Bush43 presided over many monumental fuckups which were unusually expensive in terms of human lives and money, not to mention the other irreversible representational hits to this country. In my opinion, he makes Trump45 look positively benign by comparison. Yet, we never saw anything close to the continual attempts by entertainment “celebrities” to ‘take down’, ‘destroy’, trash-talk or fixate on Trump45 during the two terms of Bush43. My question is.. why not?

Some of you might believe that this has something to do with social media and the internet being far more ubiquitous in 2018 that in 2001, 2003, 2005 or 2008. Well.. that is a small part of the story. But a much larger part concerns how the inadequacies of each president were presented by the corporate media and seen by the deep state. Bush43, for all of his horrendously expensive failings, was seen as a borderline brain-damaged guy who could be reliably counted on to rubber-stamp whatever the elite and deep state types wanted. Oddly enough, though Trump45 has also been largely beholden to the wishes of elites and deep state types- he somehow elicits multiple magnitudes more hate and contempt from entertainment types than Bush43. What makes this even more peculiar is that Trump was quite popular with them before running for the presidency.

So.. how did Trump go from being somebody who was very acceptable to socialize with prior to 2016 to the literal embodiment of everything wrong about this country? Let us be honest.. his basic personality has not changed over the past few decades. He has always been a narcissistic blowhard and pussygrabber who loved the media spotlight, in addition to being moderately racist. To put it another way, he did not suddenly transform into what these “celebrities” claim to hate after he announced his presidential campaign in 2016. His lack of business acumen has been common knowledge for years and his odd interest in his eldest daughter (Ivanka) is an open secret. Just google ‘ivanka donald trump sitting lap‘ and see for yourself, or not.

My point is that all these entertainment “celebrities” who now claim to denounce and hate Trump with every breath had zero issues hanging out with him and (in some cases) even having sex with him before mid-2015. And they had far more knowledge about his numerous oddities and shortcomings than the general public. So what explains their sudden change in behavior towards Trump. How did he go from just another billionaire they hung out with (often, a lot) to a hated and detested pariah- in their eyes. And let us get real, the entertainment sector is filled with some of the most mentally screwed up and depraved people alive today. Have you heard these allegedly moral “celebrities” condemn the misadventures of Henry Kissinger in Cambodia or Bush43 in Iraq to anywhere near the level they rail against every single brain-fart.. I mean Tweet.. posted by Trump. Have they ever questioned HRC about the disastrous effects of her policies (as secretary of state) in countries such as Libya or Syria?

Anyway.. let us get back to the main focus of this post and talk about my explanation(S) for the newfound and peculiar hatred of Trump by entertainment “celebrities”.

1] A significant part of the public hate displayed by entertainment “celebrities” towards Trump after he became president comes down to virtue signalling. See.. in a place like Hollywood (used to describe the film, TV, music and related sectors), there is far more talent than there are opportunities. Consequently, everyone and their dog is trying to make sure that they maximize their chances of getting that first break or next assignment which will either make them famous or maintain their position. Since most of the hiring and casting in that sector is based on highly subjective criteria, everyone who cares about their next big paycheck (or simply a paycheck) has to make sure not to disqualify themselves. That is why everyone (who has not hit the big time yet) appears to have an unusually sunny and optimistic mindset. Face it.. that is also why there so are so many gurus, cults and other new-agey bullshit in that sector.

2] What is the common factor which unites the most vocal anti-Trump “celebrities”? Think about it.. what is common to Debra Messing, Alyssa Milano, Kathy Griffin, Jimmy Kimmel, Meryl Streep, Chelsea Handler, J.K. Rowling, Robert De Niro, Madonna and Ben Stiller. Let me give you a hint.. think of the last time they were successful in their field. In most cases, their last big hits were over ten years ago. Sure.. those were big hits, but nothing they have done since then have been significant. Perhaps they want to feel culturally relevant again? Another class of minor “celebrities” such as John Oliver, Lena Dunham, Aziz Ansari, Amy Schumer etc are leveraging their public displays to further improve their visibility. And let us not kid ourselves, the anti-Trump bandwagon has proven to be quite profitable for some people such as Stephen Colbert, Alec Balwin in addition to subscriptions for NYT and WP.

3] It is well-known that the entertainment sector tends to attract people with unusually high levels of narcissism. That is why, for example, cults which promise enhanced personal development to their followers can recruit so easily in that sector. Such levels of narcissism also translate into believing that they are somehow special, enlightened or chosen to guide others. To be fair, a lot of the elite class in this country suffer from that affliction. Just look at how CEOs in Silly Valley want to “make the world a better place”, ivy-league dipshits who are certain of their superior mental capabilities or neo-liberal politicians who never had a real job in their lives talk about hard work and meritocracy. Long story short, some of Trump’s haters are getting high on their own drug supply- which is darkly comic.

In conclusion, Trump is an incompetent and ineffectual orange-haired buffoon. However, all the “celebrities” who go to considerable lengths to demonstrate their dislike and hatred of him are dishonest and cynical narcissists. In my opinion, they truly deserve each other.

What do you think? Comments?

Blowback to ‘MeToo’ Movement in Entertainment Industry is Inevitable

June 18, 2018 28 comments

In the past few months, we have seen a number of famous and not-so-famous people in the entertainment industry (almost exclusively men) being accused of sexual harassment by often previously unknown accusers (almost exclusively women) resulting in the former losing their jobs or careers. More relevantly for the rest of this post, many of these accusations are based on accepting woman accuser’s word as the truth and lack of due process for accused. Even being a bit allegedly “mean” to women is now sufficient for femfists and their dickless ‘male allies’ to act like lynch mobs on social media platforms.

The list of men in the entertainment industry who have been accused of sexual harassment or just being too “mean” and “disrespectful” to women is long and ever-growing. Curiously, many of those accused were once big supporters of the same feminist bullshit which has now screwed them over. It is, therefore, hard to feel much sympathy for guys who once enthusiastic supported really bad ideas such as “women can do no wrong or lie” or “women are always morally superior to men”. Perhaps they thought that mouthing platitudes about, and expressing support for, feminism would somehow protect them from such accusations. Guess what.. it did not!

Moving on.. we have now reached the point where basically any women can accuse any male celebrity she interacted, or had repeated consensual sex, with anything from sexual harassment, emotional abuse, sexual assault or pretty much anything else even if she had zero proof that her allegations are true. The recent examples of some starfucker accusing Aziz Ansari of sexual assault and Chris Hardwick being accused of sexual assault and emotional cruelty by his ex-girlfriend (who is quite the headcase) are particularly instructive since they show that feminists are striving for a ‘brave new world’ where consent can be revoked after the fact.

So here is a somewhat unpleasant, but realistic, prediction of the type of blowback we might soon see in response to men losing their livelihoods and careers over accusations which could not have been successfully prosecuted in a court of law. Spoiler.. the term ‘blowback’ will assume a whole new meaning in this context. Faced with the destruction of their career and lack of due process, a small percentage of men accused in this manner might decide that killing their accuser is the most appropriate response to such accusations. To be clear, I neither condone, nor condemn such a response- just pointing out that sooner or later, something along these lines is inevitable.

And there are a couple of well-known precedents for this sort of reaction. Most of you must have heard or read about at least a few cases of men killing their ex-wives or ex-partners because of a perception that civil court system was very unfair to them during their divorce or child-custody hearings. Well.. what is the real difference between a guy who lost his house during a divorce which he did not initiate and an actor losing his career because of accusations which cannot be proven in a court of law? Not much, and the later example is potentially worse than the former.

Another precedent for such reactions comes from looking at the profile of mass shooters in USA. With a few exceptions, mass shooters tend to chronically single or functionally incel men with poor job and career prospects for the future. The corporate media and every other discredited institutions can blame ‘mental health’ all they want, but the fact that some men who would rather go on rampage shootings or overdose themselves with opioids says far more about that society than the men. To summarize, we have seen violent blowback from men in similar situations and under similar constraints.

The psychological profile of those who work in entertainment industry tends towards higher levels of risk taking and emotional responses than average. I mean.. look at the incidence of addiction, overdosing, risky sexual behavior etc prevalent in that group versus the general population. It would therefore be not surprising if we started seeing a few men subject to such kangaroo court trials by social media decide to make their accuser pay for her accusations. While it hard to predict when such a trend will become public, everything we know about human behavior and responses makes it almost inevitable.

What do you think? Comments?

On the Connection Between ‘Hollywood’ and Establishment Democrats

November 8, 2017 7 comments

One interesting feature of the so-called “#resistance” formed in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s 2016 electoral victory concerns its highly skewed membership composition. Most readers might have noticed that almost every single person associated with that useless hashtag is from either the entertainment industry and mainstream media or is a political consultant of some sort.

While it is easy to figure out why opportunistic cocksuckers.. I mean political consultants.. have jumped on the “#resistance” bandwagon, the extensive support for such useless “activism” within the ranks of the entertainment industry and mainstream media is a bit harder to understand- especially since their fortunes have not been negatively affected by Trump’s election.

And yet, not a day (or hour) goes by without some “celebrity” from one of those two industries making some negative or controversial statement about Trump which is then widely circulated on Twitter, FaceBook and other social media platforms. This is followed by another “celebrity” doing something similar resulting in another wave of worthless online activism, seemingly ad infinitum.

To be clear, Donald Trump is a shitty president. However his actions and decisions to date have not been significantly different from his equally shitty predecessors such as Clinton42, Bush43 and Obama44, to name a few. He has yet to pass sweeping neoliberal “reforms” like Clinton42, start large disastrous wars like Bush43 or enable systemic abuses of the 99% by the 1% like Obama44.

So what is the real source of the profound hatred towards Trump from members of the entertainment industry and mainstream media? Why are they so anti-Trump? Also, why are they still pro-HRC and supportive of democratic party establishment? And why were so few of them pro-Bernie during the democratic party primaries or even after Trump defeated their anointed candidate aka HRC.

Now, it is well-known that the entertainment industry aka ‘Hollywood’ has always been a strong supporter of the post-1940s democratic party. But why is that the case? And has the nature of that support changed over time? Conventional explanations for this phenomena have ranged from percentage of Jewish people in that sector, the high degree of unionization within some parts of that industry to the republican party supporting socially regressive causes since 1968.

While there is some truth to all those common explanations, they cannot explain the incredibly high levels of support for the democratic party establishment (especially the establishment) within that industry. This level of support is especially apparent once you start looking at the amount of money contributed by people within that sector to the democratic party establishment. So why is that industry so eager and willing to support the democratic establishment?

In my opinion, a comprehensive explanation for this phenomena can be divided into two components. So let us begin with the first and easier component of the answer, namely why the industry favors the democratic party over its republican counterpart. The answer to that question is fairly easily and comes down to the profile of those who vote for republicans and the type of people they elect.

Simply put, average republican voters (despite what they might themselves believe) are not the sharpest tool in the shed. Almost nobody who works in an industry that is highly image conscious wants to be associated with fat, bland and mediocre white working class types or suburbanites. This is doubly so if the group in question also openly professes to belief in traditional religion, white supremacy and other retrograde beliefs.

The people elected by republican voters are no better. Have a look at both elected establishment republicans and tea-party types. Would anybody possessing even a moderate degree of image consciousness want to hang out with them? And what would you talk about with them, anyway? How about crowd pleasers such “jesus wants to ban abortion” or “let people die on the street because medical care is a privilege, rather than a right (as it is in every other developed country)”.

My point is that associating with republican voters or elected representatives is bad for your image especially in a sector as heavily dependent on image projection and public personas as the entertainment industry. So that explains why the entertainment industry does not spend much time trying to appeal to republicans. But why are they so willing to support the democratic party establishment?

One of the more amusing features of the 2016 presidential election was the degree to which “celebrities” supported the stale and unpopular neoliberal aka HRC over the democratic socialist aka Bernie Sanders. While it is true that a few celebrities did support Sanders the bulk of such endorsements and more importantly fundraising by Hollywood-types was directed towards the spectacular failure of the HRC campaign. But why did that occur? What did so many Hollywood types see in an unpopular neoliberal politician?

Alternatively, why were Hollywood types still so eager to promote the presidencies of Clinton42 and Obama44? Why did HRC have no problems raising tons of money from the entertainment industry? Why were so many Hollywood-types despondent after she lost on Nov 8, 2016? As I have pointed out in previous posts, the policies and actions of neoliberal democrats have not significantly better than their republican counterparts. Why the love for establishment democrats?

Well.. it comes down the fact that the entertainment industry aka ‘Hollywood’ was always a fair neoliberal place and has become more so in the previous two decades. The structure of that industry- from a few powerful gatekeepers, their flunkies, good unions for a small percentage of people in that industry on top of a large and poorly paid workforce which does most of the real work is a microcosm of neoliberal society.

The entertainment industry also promotes the false ideology of meritocracy, when in fact sucking the cock of somebody like Harvey Weinstein is what really makes your career. The neoliberal ideology of democratic party establishment is, therefore, a perfect mental fit for people who run ‘Hollywood’. Their mutual association allows for many cross promotion opportunities and allow both to feel important, current and popular. Because, let us face it, both groups are into promoting and celebrating neofeudalism which is a little less socially regressive than their competition.

What do you think? Comments?