So the Socialist agenda is slowly seeping it's way through prime time television. While this is nothing new, it is more obvious than ever. Admittedly the liberal agenda has indeed thrived through the media, just a tad more covertly. The "30 days" guy is one such example, The 30 Days on Minimum Wage, 30 Days with a Gun Nut, etc. These were just poorly disguised soap boxes used to sell liberalism. Then we have others throughout cable, like "Going Tribal." A show that promotes the "environmentalist" fascist agenda. They bound around the rain forests with no shoes screaming about the "rape of the land," and the "evil Westerners." Pretty much nothing new there either.But the newest show I have seen takes sentiments right out of the Emperor's campaign slogans. Specifically, "Spread the wealth around," and "time to pitch in." The show is called The Secret Millionaire on Fox. Basically it is a show about a millionaire that goes under cover to live in a bad area of lower income. At the end he reveals what he truly is and then gives them money to help them. I will pause for the "awww's" and weeping. To the lay man this is just a sweet little program about how nice this millionaire is. To the skeptic and intelligent eye however, I see it for what it is.
In the intro to this show they actually say " A man that decides he needs to SPREAD THE WEALTH." As you watch this obscene display of conspicuous socialist advocacy it becomes unbearable. The man and his wife go to Watts, an extremely bad neighborhood in South Central L.A. While they do show how bad it is, they high light another aspect of the neighborhood I found interesting. They show citizens in the community talking about how "good the people are here." How they all try to "help each other." Then in obvious contrast they cut to the wife of the millionaire who complains about how that "isn't like her neighborhood." The theme? To show how cold the rich neighborhoods are, and how down to earth, civil, and warm Watts is. A reasonable comparison right?
The goal of this show is to promote the idea that the rich should apologize for their success. Not only to apologize, but to be self-loathing at the same time. The goal is to make those who are well off feel like bad people if they to do not either "spread their wealth," or PROMOTE THE THEORY of re-distribution. The point of the show is say that there are others out there that "deserve" the money more than you. And that the only way to facilitate this "economic justice" is to take from those who have and give to those who don't. We in economics and on planet Earth have a word for this theory, it is called Socialism. This is just yet another example of the enemy within infiltrating America. They are and have been slowly manipulating the public through these "cute" little shows. The sad part is, the public seems too stupid to figure out what is going on. Fox really took the "spread the wealth around," comments of the Furor to heart. Maybe soon they will come out with Who Wants to be a Communist?
I'm Drew D. and that's the truth.
5 comments:
I watched one episode of "The Secret Millionaire" - not the episode in Watts, but the one in a town that was ravished by Katrina. I didn't notice any 'hidden agenda' ... I thought it was just people helping other people. It was a very uplifting show, especially around the Holidays. It just reinforced the fact that not everyone has it as good as I do. It also showed how the community ppl went out of their way to help this family, when they had nothing, so the millionaires rewarded them in the end for their help. That reminded me that ppl really do have good hearts. I just thought it was a good show & I'm sure like the majority of Americans, never thought or read anything else into it. But I guess I'm showing my "communist" side again. Oh well, love ya!!! :]
Sorry Ash, but I fail to recognize the "uplifting" nature of a show that glorifies the "spread the wealth" theory. While I totally agree that it is heart warming to see those more fortunate helping out the needy especially during the Holidays, this was not the purpose of the show. If it was a show illustrating generosity across the nation with no narrative to it I would agree with you.
Yes, it was in summary a show of "people helping people." However, you must recognize the obvious class war-fare mentality that the show promoted. You interpreted the show as they wanted you to, to accept it with open arms as an "uplifting" story. I am not denegrating you for this interpretation I am just offering a view from someone outside the box.
Notice the people chosen to be the millionaires and the people chosen to be helped. The millionaires spent more time feeling sorry for themselves over their success than they did anything else. The apologetic tone of these people was sickening. It was clear that their self-loathing guilt is what drove them to nationally broadcasted charity.
Then take a look at the ones' who were helped, you already mentioned the Katrina victims. Interesting they chose Katrina. Absolutely no controversy over that whole deal is there? The media has spent its lifetime villinizing the rich and powerful. This show aids in this endeavor.
The point of the show was not just to show "random" acts of charity. The point of the show was to make the viewers feel that this is such an "uplifting" idea that it should be done more often. In fact not only should this be done by more millionaires, but every millionaire should be ashamed of themselves if they choose not to. This inevitably creates envy and eventually hatred towards the wealthy. With people hurting so much out there these miilionaires have got alot of nerve to just be able to sit on their money up in the hills. When this mindset runs rampant it leads to the advocacy of force. If those greedy enough to hold on to every last dime don't want to give, then we must make them. It is called "for the greater good," a term coined through Communism.
I agree that all this seems like a paranoid dilusion. I agree that I might be reading more into this than is called for. However, the under lying purpose of the show remains. The promotion of the class warfare mentality. To highlight the differences and exploit them for the advancement of the agenda. The wealthy should spread it around, because everyone should be equal. The rich don't desreve the money any more than that struggling woman in Watts. To show how wonderful the world could be if the wealthy would just stop being so greedy and help everyone who truly needs it. The wealthy should do this, and if not, be forced to. If they don't know what's best, then the government will show them. Class warfare, the Democratic platform since before the dawn.
I appreciate your view, but sometimes you should look under the surface. These are just my thoughts, take them as you want, but I know Socialist glorification when I see it.
I gotta call you on this one, Drew, for a few reasons.
First, Fox didn't think this one up as a result of anything to do with Obama. As a matter of fact, Fox didn't think this show up at all. It's a British show that we have been watching down here for months.
That said, it is possible that the show might be pushing a socialist agenda, but also possible is that the show trying to portray the compassion of rich people who want to give something back, too. Hell, I could make the case that Jesus himself would approve!
If it was socialist propaganda, they would show how the tax money collected from a different eeeeevil rich fucker each week was allocated to some community re-development project or paid for the roof on some poor family's house - all competently and responsibly administered by government bureaucrats, of course.
Remember, socialism isn't necessarily about "spreading the wealth around". It's about the government spreading your wealth around for you, by coercion.
If a man or woman willingly chooses to spread their own wealth is none of my concern.
Let me add, also, that, in light of your response to Ash, it appears that the US version of the show has a slightly different format than the British show.
In the British show there is none of the "guilt" as you portrayed it happening on the US show. I watched one where the millionaire was a rags-to-riches story, and he went back to a run-down area near where he had lived as a very young child, got a flat and a menial job while he cased the neighborhood for causes he deemed worthy of a bit of financial help.
I agree with you Joe in the sense that perhaps you could make a case that it shows the compassion of the rich. However, that is not the way the show in the states came across. This is just me I know, but I still have my opinion. I did mention how I don't think it IS a socialist show per say, but how it promotes the idea of it. The show here in the states does indeed pour on the sappy guilt cuts of the rich guy.
I don't know, I guess I just have a skeptical eye towards these things. I would say I am not all crazy, maybe slightly, but there is at least some truth to this otherwise I don't think it would have stuck out so much. Maybe the impending nightmare here in the states is getting me hawkish.
I appreciate the comments either way. I always like others to weigh in with intelligent thoughts. I actually invite the disagreements, constant "dittoing" can get a little monotenous.
Post a Comment