by Andy Nowicki@Andy Nowicki
AT&T, being a powerful, multinational corporate conglomerate, is obviously affiliated with that malignant monster known collectively by many ominous designations ("the Deep State," "the Oligarchy," "the Pedovorous Elite," and so forth).
Just as obviously, this hydra-headed Beast of Many Names has manifested as a simultaneous promoter and enforcer of globalism, with its ubiquitously concomitant tenet of sponsoring the spread of ethnomasochism among native Westerners—i.e., white people.
Even so, I was astonished to witness the lack of subtlety in the commercial that they are blitzing right now as part of their "More For Your Thing" (stupid name) campaign to sell DIRECT TV to new potential customers (see below).
The spot uses what has now become a quite cliched scene of feminine vindictiveness, in which an angry ex-girlfriend flings her spurned lover's belongings out of her window while he stands helplessly on the sidewalk below watching his stuff scatter around him. In most previous depictions, the scene is not without a certain humor at the woman's expense; her fishwifely behavior is contrasted with the man's impotence in the face of this barrage of unreasoning female rage.
In this commercial, however, the woman's actions are infused with a "you go, girl!!!" tune on the soundtrack, reinforcing the notion that she is perfectly right to go on her hormonally-driven rampage, even to the point of destroying her now-out-of-favor beau's guitar and electronic equipment.
What is more—and this is most crucial to note—the woman in this commercial is black, while the man she is fiercely rejecting, to the point of actually criminally damaging his possessions, is white.
Well now, wait... Just a minute there, AT and T!
In your zealousness to paint the white guy as the hapless, gutless chump, you might have strayed into dubious territory, at least from a globalist perspective.
For are you not, in effect, effectively sending a message that interracial pairings are a thing to be avoided? Was this inadvertent, or have you decided to subtly signal, behind the familiar anti-white crusade, that you are now throwing in your lot with racial tribalism?
Just as obviously, this hydra-headed Beast of Many Names has manifested as a simultaneous promoter and enforcer of globalism, with its ubiquitously concomitant tenet of sponsoring the spread of ethnomasochism among native Westerners—i.e., white people.
Even so, I was astonished to witness the lack of subtlety in the commercial that they are blitzing right now as part of their "More For Your Thing" (stupid name) campaign to sell DIRECT TV to new potential customers (see below).
The spot uses what has now become a quite cliched scene of feminine vindictiveness, in which an angry ex-girlfriend flings her spurned lover's belongings out of her window while he stands helplessly on the sidewalk below watching his stuff scatter around him. In most previous depictions, the scene is not without a certain humor at the woman's expense; her fishwifely behavior is contrasted with the man's impotence in the face of this barrage of unreasoning female rage.
In this commercial, however, the woman's actions are infused with a "you go, girl!!!" tune on the soundtrack, reinforcing the notion that she is perfectly right to go on her hormonally-driven rampage, even to the point of destroying her now-out-of-favor beau's guitar and electronic equipment.
What is more—and this is most crucial to note—the woman in this commercial is black, while the man she is fiercely rejecting, to the point of actually criminally damaging his possessions, is white.
Well now, wait... Just a minute there, AT and T!
In your zealousness to paint the white guy as the hapless, gutless chump, you might have strayed into dubious territory, at least from a globalist perspective.
For are you not, in effect, effectively sending a message that interracial pairings are a thing to be avoided? Was this inadvertent, or have you decided to subtly signal, behind the familiar anti-white crusade, that you are now throwing in your lot with racial tribalism?
