Hadn't considered the electric grid effect theory...movieweb.com theories are all plausible reads of the film. You're on the money attending to narratives - but my take is it was VERY coherent because every element presents a condensation of the social justice ideology narrative so that it's CRT meets Red Dawn: the chaos and nuclear bombs are not the tragic ending - Rose unwittingly succumbing to her mom's Whiteness delusion in the bunker is (Whiteness: capitalism makes white views unseen natural commodity).
The film depicts the Robin DiAngelo white fragility, CRT, and 1619 project criticism of US capitalism and democracy - it served white people to the point they are disturbed by marginalized people (lost father scared of Spanish-speaking woman warning him) and degraded Nature (polluted beaches, white people unnerved by nature's silence, animals etc.), and their only way to cope is consuming more fake food and media via ill-gotten wealth, like Rose, who gluts herself on junk food and keeps deluding herself via White media (Friends) in an ill-gotten rich prepper's bunker. Filled with capitalistic cultural appropriation no less, literally feeding off of the images of black people, native Americans, etc as comfort during their own constructed crisis (foreground in focus contains food brands that portrayed African American and Native American stereotypes: Aunt Jemima, Cream of Wheat, Indian Head White Corn Meal, Injun Orangd drink mix, Barilla pasta (ceo made homophobic remarks), Dixie Beer, & Trader Jose's Mexican Beer)). The stories white people tell themselves (Friends) are lies, just manufactured nostalgia for 'a time that never existed' (Baudrillard's simulacra, Plato's cave). Hence, white people 'Leave the World' (actual people and Earth). Tells how whiteness is an oppressive, alienating, capitalistic construction as Julia Roberts exits a store called Point Comfort.
Basically, the Robert's opening monologue shows she unknowingly hates people cuz her white society constructs her to be that way (internalize her oppressor role), which she gets by the end (sort of?). The white male dad is totally lost, afraid, in a vast landscape when all he needed to do was look thru trees to the city being attacked. Our enemy is not Iran, North Korea, Islamic terrorists - it's us white people and systemic racism. Rogue military exploited that delusion via Arabic pamphlets. The mass delusion the mom references - Lippmann's pseudo environment, Chomsky's manufactured consent, Marx's false consciousness etc. - misuses psychiatric terminology to Other white people culturally. Basically, maintaining whiteness is cultural suicide, but still comforts White people from the problems their dominant systemic narratives tell about themselves. The renting white family lives on top floor while black family who owns the house lives in basement (the oppressor/oppressed binary). Boats, planes, and deer/flamingos crash in on them, then the mom and black daughter turn primal and go crazy, yelling screaming like an exorcism - capitalism deludes and alienates them and their labor from their Nature. Whiteness benefits only white people even in self-created crises. Cynical take on race and market relations in this film.
Wow! The race elements were definitely present in the movie, but had no idea to the extent of the breakdown in literally all aspects of the movie. The movie definitely stirs up race tensions even more -- pushing that agenda even further. Thanks for this feedback and insight!
After watching the movie, I read the book it was based on. Very very very interesting to note the differences (which were considerable in the doomsday department) of the book and the movie. And worth noting that while the movie focuses on racial tension and the prospect of neighbor turning on neighbor—-the book arguably has as its theme the idea that in a crisis that terrorizes and traumatizes humans understand their collective humanity and there is beauty in embracing that. Get the book, read it….note the differences and ask yourself why would they rewrite the story the author told in the ways they did.
The other fascinating thing….isn’t it funny that the additions to the movie emphasize and portray the “conspiracy” that the progressive left and the likes of Obama have sought to censor Americans through DHS and CISA. Hmmmm….So we can’t ask questions and express concerns about the size and scope of the fin/tech elite’s power and control over our lives and yet they can serve it up as “entertainment”?
Please make the world make sense again because these days I am tempted to leave our current reality behind.
Anytime Teresa! Regarding good references on the atomic bomb, I don't have any "good references" per se. I think the references mentioned by Truth Barbarian may be the best on the atomic bomb (aside from SL's) that I've seen in a while.
I did come across the following pieces of information that may help.
I put the word "good references" because in some ways, I hear the word "good" as in scholarly evidence (not saying that's how you meant it, but that's how my brain is interpreting it -- who know why lol). This scholarly evidence is essentially datas and studies that are showing that the bomb is fake. I don't have that at this time.
I do plan on making an article on this topic (and others like this) and the reason is that a lot of these "fakery" as we've been told have been in place for quite some time that any "reputable" reference to disprove it may not exist (i.e., you question the impossibility of the moon landing, the data isn't even considered and you're labeled a tinfoil wearer). The goal of this article is to make a rationale as to why we should accept not having "good" reference - but rather be comfortable with a strong enough sniff test that says, "hmm, something smells fishy here."
May be more info that you wanted (sorry!) but this comment definitively made me think some more! Thanks for this!
Awesome! So glad you could find a new potential resource and kindred perspective. I'm a big fan of your work and your grind. Good on you for pushing out so much - you must be truly driven to do what you can to shift knowledge and consciousness. Bravo!
Hadn't considered the electric grid effect theory...movieweb.com theories are all plausible reads of the film. You're on the money attending to narratives - but my take is it was VERY coherent because every element presents a condensation of the social justice ideology narrative so that it's CRT meets Red Dawn: the chaos and nuclear bombs are not the tragic ending - Rose unwittingly succumbing to her mom's Whiteness delusion in the bunker is (Whiteness: capitalism makes white views unseen natural commodity).
The film depicts the Robin DiAngelo white fragility, CRT, and 1619 project criticism of US capitalism and democracy - it served white people to the point they are disturbed by marginalized people (lost father scared of Spanish-speaking woman warning him) and degraded Nature (polluted beaches, white people unnerved by nature's silence, animals etc.), and their only way to cope is consuming more fake food and media via ill-gotten wealth, like Rose, who gluts herself on junk food and keeps deluding herself via White media (Friends) in an ill-gotten rich prepper's bunker. Filled with capitalistic cultural appropriation no less, literally feeding off of the images of black people, native Americans, etc as comfort during their own constructed crisis (foreground in focus contains food brands that portrayed African American and Native American stereotypes: Aunt Jemima, Cream of Wheat, Indian Head White Corn Meal, Injun Orangd drink mix, Barilla pasta (ceo made homophobic remarks), Dixie Beer, & Trader Jose's Mexican Beer)). The stories white people tell themselves (Friends) are lies, just manufactured nostalgia for 'a time that never existed' (Baudrillard's simulacra, Plato's cave). Hence, white people 'Leave the World' (actual people and Earth). Tells how whiteness is an oppressive, alienating, capitalistic construction as Julia Roberts exits a store called Point Comfort.
Basically, the Robert's opening monologue shows she unknowingly hates people cuz her white society constructs her to be that way (internalize her oppressor role), which she gets by the end (sort of?). The white male dad is totally lost, afraid, in a vast landscape when all he needed to do was look thru trees to the city being attacked. Our enemy is not Iran, North Korea, Islamic terrorists - it's us white people and systemic racism. Rogue military exploited that delusion via Arabic pamphlets. The mass delusion the mom references - Lippmann's pseudo environment, Chomsky's manufactured consent, Marx's false consciousness etc. - misuses psychiatric terminology to Other white people culturally. Basically, maintaining whiteness is cultural suicide, but still comforts White people from the problems their dominant systemic narratives tell about themselves. The renting white family lives on top floor while black family who owns the house lives in basement (the oppressor/oppressed binary). Boats, planes, and deer/flamingos crash in on them, then the mom and black daughter turn primal and go crazy, yelling screaming like an exorcism - capitalism deludes and alienates them and their labor from their Nature. Whiteness benefits only white people even in self-created crises. Cynical take on race and market relations in this film.
Wow! The race elements were definitely present in the movie, but had no idea to the extent of the breakdown in literally all aspects of the movie. The movie definitely stirs up race tensions even more -- pushing that agenda even further. Thanks for this feedback and insight!
A divisive ideology framed in the apocalypse genre. And you opened my eyes to a new way to interpret it. Thx!
Ha ha, interesting, because I just published mine last night, albeit, a tad more scathing, and much less cerebral!
https://myriadmike.substack.com/p/movie-review-leave-the-world-behind
Cheers!
Thanks for letting me know! Definitely looking forward to checking it out!
I stopped supporting 💩FLIX after the “Cuties” movie. I’d never support ANYTHING BHO produced. He is a traitor and he’s evil in my opinion.
I bought “The Invisible Rainbow” two years ago. Excellent book!
That was the book that really got me thinking about our world!
https://substack.com/profile/100124894-steven-berger/note/c-44886120
After watching the movie, I read the book it was based on. Very very very interesting to note the differences (which were considerable in the doomsday department) of the book and the movie. And worth noting that while the movie focuses on racial tension and the prospect of neighbor turning on neighbor—-the book arguably has as its theme the idea that in a crisis that terrorizes and traumatizes humans understand their collective humanity and there is beauty in embracing that. Get the book, read it….note the differences and ask yourself why would they rewrite the story the author told in the ways they did.
The other fascinating thing….isn’t it funny that the additions to the movie emphasize and portray the “conspiracy” that the progressive left and the likes of Obama have sought to censor Americans through DHS and CISA. Hmmmm….So we can’t ask questions and express concerns about the size and scope of the fin/tech elite’s power and control over our lives and yet they can serve it up as “entertainment”?
Please make the world make sense again because these days I am tempted to leave our current reality behind.
Anytime Teresa! Regarding good references on the atomic bomb, I don't have any "good references" per se. I think the references mentioned by Truth Barbarian may be the best on the atomic bomb (aside from SL's) that I've seen in a while.
I did come across the following pieces of information that may help.
- A 30min video on Odsyee: https://odysee.com/@ivikthor:c/the-nuclear-hoax-what-really-happened-to-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-y2bs.com:f
- A Forum discussing the Atomic Weapons: https://www.big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/i-am-new-why-do-you-think-nukes-are-fake.html
I put the word "good references" because in some ways, I hear the word "good" as in scholarly evidence (not saying that's how you meant it, but that's how my brain is interpreting it -- who know why lol). This scholarly evidence is essentially datas and studies that are showing that the bomb is fake. I don't have that at this time.
I do plan on making an article on this topic (and others like this) and the reason is that a lot of these "fakery" as we've been told have been in place for quite some time that any "reputable" reference to disprove it may not exist (i.e., you question the impossibility of the moon landing, the data isn't even considered and you're labeled a tinfoil wearer). The goal of this article is to make a rationale as to why we should accept not having "good" reference - but rather be comfortable with a strong enough sniff test that says, "hmm, something smells fishy here."
May be more info that you wanted (sorry!) but this comment definitively made me think some more! Thanks for this!
I really need to organize my notes and bookmarks and keep them better! I have seen a fair bit over the years challenging the atom bomb.
I only mentally noted these and haven't dived in to listen/evaluate worthiness:
https://dfreality.substack.com/p/the-nuke-hoax-part-i
https://dfreality.substack.com/p/the-nuke-hoax-part-ii
You could also try this one as Crrow777 is pretty good at well researched and verified info:
https://www.crrow777radio.com/507-the-radioactive-wastelands-that-never-were/
cheers
Truth! Thanks for this comment! Thanks to you, I just found Dfreality's page! Looks like we're onto something similar!
Awesome! So glad you could find a new potential resource and kindred perspective. I'm a big fan of your work and your grind. Good on you for pushing out so much - you must be truly driven to do what you can to shift knowledge and consciousness. Bravo!