2012 / 2009

Anybody who has read my novel Mister will have easily guessed that I enjoy apocalyptic scenarios, and there is no doubt I have been influenced, partly, by 1970s disaster films. It will therefore come as no surprise that, although I very seldom have a desire to go to the cinema, some of few the times I do go are to watch disaster and doomsday pictures. As the incurable misanthrope and extremist that that I am, I enjoy witnessing the catastrophes, the destruction, the desperate situations, the mass panics, and the loss of life that pervade such scenarios. 2012 is the latest example of the doomsday genre, presenting us with an ecological catastrophe that supersedes all previous filmic attempts at ending the world and extinguishing our species.

The basic premise is simple: neutrinos from an exceptionally large solar flare act like microwaves and rapidly heat the Earth’s core. Scientists discover this, governments are warned, and, faced with a planetary cataclysm, secret plans are implemented to save humanity. Only government officials and the rich benefit from these plans, of course, and the secondary storyline consists of a writer’s accidentally finding out something is up and then narrowly escaping a series of escalating natural disasters as he tries to save his family and get them to safety in the Himalayas, where it is rumored space ships have been built, and where they eventually arrive to discover seven Old Testament-style arks, one of which they manage to board, thus ensuring their survival.

As can be expected in the age of CGI, when hundreds of millions of dollars are spent making a film, the special effects, the sound, and the situations faced by the characters are truly mind-blowing. My wife and I were both on the edge of our seats for the film’s whole two and a half hours’ duration, our jaws not only on the floor, but rolling down the incline of the cinema theater, out of the door, down the street, and into the River Wey, where they sank straight to the bottom, to be devoured by the piranhas and the crocodiles. During this time we witnessed crust-shattering Earthquakes, miles-high mega-tsunamis, exploding volcanic calderas, whole coastal regions and cities falling into the sea, global flooding, and even massive continental displacements.

On this level, if you love seeing the Earth destroyed in graphic detail, this film is terrific escapism. But, as is usually the case with Jewish cinema, doomsday films like these serve as a vehicle for indoctrination into a “humanist,” liberal, anti-White ideology. (I put “humanist” in quotation marks because although the ideology in question is often described as “humanist,” or “universalist,” it is also one that contemptuously rejects the notion that the White race is worth preserving at all, in which case it cannot accurately be described as “humanist.”) 2012 is to date the most aggressively anti-White doomsday film I have seen.

Firstly, both the scientist who discovers the phenomenon (Satnam, played by Jimi Mistry) is Indian; and the one who learns of it and then goes on to advise the president of the United States (Dr. Adrian Helmsley, played by the London-born Nigerian Chiwetel Ejiofor) is Black. Secondly, the President of the United States is not only Black, but deep Black, played by Danny Glover. Satnam, Helmsley, and Glover are portrayed very sympathetically, and the latter two are selfless, thoughtful, strong, determined, humanist heroes.

And the White characters? Ah, yes, I forgot. As an afterthought, and for the purposes of bearing the brunt of the brainless, emotion-laden action, we have Jackson Curtis (played by John Cusack), the writer I mentioned earlier. Curtis is a complete loser: author of a science fiction novel that barely sold; the excised element of a failed marriage; and a disorganized, unremarkable, overall underachiever, who works part-time as a limousine driver for a repulsive Russian billionaire. The remaining White characters are just peons, necessary to keep the plotline going, physically attractive, but otherwise completely vacuous, shallow, small-minded, none-to-bright, and interchangeable.

When not all of the above, it is Charlie Frost (played by Woody Harrelson), a creepy, hermetic conspiracy theorist and general nutcase, whose residence is a derelict trailer, and whose diet consists entirely of gherkins and beer.

None of the latter White characters have anything to do with saving the human species: this is only made possible by Black and Indian scientists, a Black president (who leads the effort), and Chinese engineers (who build the arks, within a time-frame thought impossible by the Whites). The Whites are simply beneficiaries for colored talent, industry, and generosity.

We see where we stand with writer, producer, and director Roland Emmerich.

Who is this Emmerich? He is the same gentleman of ultra-liberal and militantly homosexualist persuasion who brought us films like Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow. These were films that emphasized special effects and epic disasters, yet evinced an epicly poor grasp of the science: in Independence Day, for example, the alien ship was Mac-compatible and the positioning of a ship that was a quarter of the mass of the moon in near-Earth orbit caused no seismic activity.

These were also films with an anti-White, anti-European racial agenda: in Independence Day the heroes were a Black man (played by Will Smith) and a Jew (played by Jeff Goldblum); and in The Day After Tomorrow we are treated (as we are several times in 2012) to an interracial couple as well as the arrogant and ignorant derision of Friedrich Nietzsche as a crank who harbored inappropriate affections for his sister.

Emmerich spoke at the 2009 Atlanta Jewish Film Festival; supported the odious Hillary Clinton in her race for presidential candidature; has campaigned and donated funds to further gay and lesbian and third world causes; and does not like Hollywood because, among other reasons, he finds it racist and homophobic. Well, well, well – what a surprise.

We can now see 2012 is quite harmonious with his system of beliefs. Besides anti-White, multiculturalist zealotry, we find the film a quasi-communistic, spitting-mad screed against what the hard Left would term “privilege.” When it transpires that only the super-rich and a pre-selected list had advance warning and access to tickets to ride the arks while the rest of humanity was kept in the dark, Dr. Helmsley is outraged. He is outraged again when he sees the size of his cabin – “You could have fit ten people in here!” And he is outraged yet again when, one of the arks having suffered structural damage, it is the intention of Mr. Anheuser, the commander in chief, to leave its intended occupants all stranded in the face of certain death, rather than open the gates to his ark to let the horde in. The remaining world leaders of the G8, all White, eventually respond to his extemporaneous and impassioned appeal, but are nevertheless slow to react, and in any event, only follow the lead of the female German chancellor; the Black US president, we know for certain, would have ordered the gates to be opened, as the reason for this abnegating and down-to-Earth leader’s absence is that he chose to stay behind to look after his desperate and doomed citizens, having opened the doors to the Whitehouse to offer them comfort and succor.

We also find in the film gleeful vengeance meted out against Catholicism, with the destruction of a number of Catholic icons, such as St Peter’s basilica, whose dome topples over a crowd of praying faithful, killing them all; and the statue of Christ the Redeemer, in Rio de Janeiro, which crumbles to pieces, killing more faithful.

Apparently, Emmerich had planned to show catastrophic scenes of the destruction of Al-Masjid al-Ḥarām in Mecca, the mosque where the Muslim faithful congregate during the Hajj, but decided to excise said scenes for fear of a fatwa. (Apparently he feels he has nothing to fear from Christians.) Both Catholicism and Islam have traditionally been intolerant of homosexuality.

Interestingly, although Emmerich claims to be against organized religion, he does not show scenes of destruction involving Jewish temples. Was this an editing error? An oversight, perhaps?

As to the end of the film, in case we have not had enough Afrocentricity, or have been too obtuse to notice its having been relentlessly piledriven into our brains for the past 160+ minutes, we are shown that Southern Africa – the Cape of Good Hope, the new “roof of the world” – is to be the new home of what remains of humanity, the place where humanity is to begin again in the new flooded and re-jiggled Earth. Hence, out of Africa and back to Africa we go, is Emmerich’s sledgehammer moral. Afrocentrism reigns supreme.

It is a shame that it is people like Emmerich making these types of motion pictures. If only we were allowed to enjoy a rollicking disaster film without having him ram his repugnant  – and, frankly, fatuous and silly – ideology down our throats, or having to endure the thought of this repellent creature growing obscenely rich while contemning the very same White people who fund his lifestyle for the most part – if only we were allowed that, we could speak of relatively innocuous entertainment.

Unfortunately, however, our enjoyment is spoilt, and our resentment stoked, by the obnoxious subtext pervading every frame. And it is this type of subtext that causes me (and no doubt others) to long for the day when the corrupt, idiotic, myopic, and criminal establishment that legitimates Emmerich’s message is swept out of power, dismembered politically, ostracized socially, decimated fiscally, disprivileged academically, and extinguished forever as a force of destruction in the entire Western world.

Is not that what they have been trying to do to us for the past sixty years?