💬 Off-Topic Louis Theroux's Forbidden America

The issue people have with him is that he takes a moralizing stance on grifters saying edgy shit for the shekels but at the same time, he is a much better-paid grifter who says politically correct shit for the shekels. It's basically a cow fight, but in one corner you have a cow with managers.
Cannot imagine the genuine brain rot it takes to type something this poorly thought out.
 
I'm actually a big fan of his documentaries I saw as a teenager and I've always admired his ability to hold back and just let people entangle themselves in their own internal contradictions. He's very talented, but unfortunately I think he lets his personal perspectives influence the narrative here and he thinks that "X is homophobic" is an argument in and of itself. None of them had the audacity or balls to just accept that label so he beat them around with it.
I am reminded of that old cannard. Where when you read the newspaper on a subject you're knowledgable about, you just get appalled by how much they get wrong.

And then you turn the page and read about a subject you're not knowledgable on and just take it all in.

As for Louis, I think it's clear why he doesnt want to admit jews control media.
0_Sir-Jimmy-Savile-OBE-and-Louis-Theroux.jpg

Screenshot_20220216-165841_Lightning.jpg

---

One of the funny things about this documentary is the old vs new media styles at conflict with each other. The old which pretends to be neutral, and the new which embraces that it's not.

And another funny thing was Louis Theroux taking issue with the idea of women not being good for politics and then Brittany Venti doing her best to tank this movement despite supposedly agreeing with most of it.

edit: found a link to the old docu: You need a vimeo account, but not even need to verify your e-mail address, so you can make an account with a fake address.
 
Última edición:
If he was looking for an "evil white nationalist" who could actually argue he would have talked to Jared Taylor instead of youtubers famous for memes.
Jared Taylor is pretty damn smart and actually knows how to argue. I doubt he would agree to an obvious hitpiece documentary made by the BBC either. He is much harder to milk for content then catboi Fuentes who is all talk and no brains.
 
One of the funny things about this documentary is the old vs new media styles at conflict with each other. The old which pretends to be neutral, and the new which embraces that it's not.
I haven't watched this new episode yet but I feel like the people who say this stuff were never really understood Louis in the first place, which is fine, but weird. His documentaries have never felt objective, and they've never tried to play an objective role. He's a talented journalist because he lets people talk. The people he's chosen to talk about, and what he's chosen to let them talk about, has never been "objective". That's why they choose Louis for all the weird shit. It's because his on camera personality meshes well with the degenerates he talks to.

Louis shit is good because his method of gonzo journalism is inserting himself as this unassuming figure that needs to be told everything in plain english. It's the same reason he pretends not to understand innuendo etc that the people he's interviewing are saying. But at the end of the day he's always been a "Louis" not some random objective journalist. Every local news journalist can ask a fucking question and let the subject talk. It's Louis personal method of doing so that makes him popular. He's never been an objective eye.
 
Everybody who condemns these people seems to willfully forget the wave the right was riding back in 2016. I’d bet my life there are critics here who’d be backing them whole heartedly less than a decade ago. There are people here who certainly remember when the term alt right wasn’t a loaded pejorative that people increasingly distanced themselves from. I’m not saying they’re good people, but they came to prominence in a very different time.

They’re the dregs of a dead movement, that failed to survive the colossal disappointment of Trumps presidency, and Theroux is a vulture. I’d listen to him talk to TDS or David Duke for a couple of hours, but that wouldn’t work because those people don’t engage in apologetics or evasion. Itd just be ‘so you think Jews control the economy’ they’d say ‘yes’ and that’d be that.
 
Everybody who condemns these people seems to willfully forget the wave the right was riding back in 2016. I’d bet my life there are critics here who’d be backing them whole heartedly less than a decade ago. There are people here who certainly remember when the term alt right wasn’t a loaded pejorative that people increasingly distanced themselves from. I’m not saying they’re good people, but they came to prominence in a very different time.

They’re the dregs of a dead movement, that failed to survive the colossal disappointment of Trumps presidency, and Theroux is a vulture. I’d listen to him talk to TDS or David Duke for a couple of hours, but that wouldn’t work because those people don’t engage in apologetics or evasion. Itd just be ‘so you think Jews control the economy’ they’d say ‘yes’ and that’d be that.
You know he's interviewed people who are direct before right? He still never shied away lol. He literally spoke to American neo nazis who did not engage in apologetics or evasion. He also spoke to Apartheid supporters in South Africa. It's such a weird take to imagine that these total other badasses would somehow leave him stumped.
 
I'll never stop being astonished at the right-wing's willingness to entertain MSM requests for "interviews." It's a hit piece 100% of the time. (haven't watched it yet, I have precognition for cringe and can't handle it)
It's 100% ego. Every single time they want the spotlight and don't care if that means a mainstream news outlet mocking them infront of tens of thousands.
- Literally every single person Louis talked to almost managed to defend themselves, and would have if they stopped talking at a certain point. For instance, Louis asked one person if they believed in white supremacy. Their response was "no," gave a good defense, then messed it up by saying "but..." and talking about white genocide.
White nationalists need to drop the muh white genocide name and just start calling it what it is, white replacement. I don't think they realize how fucking stupid and childish it sounds to normalfags when you say there is a GENOCIDE which of course invokes the six trillion and gas chambers. This "genocide" is a combination of mass third world immigration with a low white birth rate. There is no "genocide" happening in the sense that 99% of people know about it.
 
You know he's interviewed people who are direct before right? He still never shied away lol. He literally spoke to American neo nazis who did not engage in apologetics or evasion. He also spoke to Apartheid supporters in South Africa. It's such a weird take to imagine that these total other badasses would somehow leave him stumped.

I didn’t say it’d leave him stumped, but a guy talking about the overrepresentation of Jews in Bolshevism isn’t as good TV as some trailer park cranks doing a BBQ in klan gear or whatever.

On top of that, I doubt they’d talk with him if it was not on their own platform, for obvious reasons.
 
I'm really fucking mad that the DDoS faggotry kept us all from reacting to this trashfire.
 
It's 100% ego. Every single time they want the spotlight and don't care if that means a mainstream news outlet mocking them infront of tens of thousands.
This always ends in hilarity or disgust/pity. Same with the reddit "antiwork" autist that got on Fox news. If you're going to go somewhere you know is going to be hostile to you and your views how can you be so stupid as to think you don't need to prepare at all? Internet "people" need to learn to at least have a challenging conversation before they accept something like this
 
I haven't watched this new episode yet but I feel like the people who say this stuff were never really understood Louis in the first place, which is fine, but weird. His documentaries have never felt objective, and they've never tried to play an objective role. He's a talented journalist because he lets people talk. The people he's chosen to talk about, and what he's chosen to let them talk about, has never been "objective". That's why they choose Louis for all the weird shit. It's because his on camera personality meshes well with the degenerates he talks to.

Louis shit is good because his method of gonzo journalism is inserting himself as this unassuming figure that needs to be told everything in plain english. It's the same reason he pretends not to understand innuendo etc that the people he's interviewing are saying. But at the end of the day he's always been a "Louis" not some random objective journalist. Every local news journalist can ask a fucking question and let the subject talk. It's Louis personal method of doing so that makes him popular. He's never been an objective eye.
The absolute state of journalism. "He's a talented journalist because he lets people talk."

My old vs. new media comment wasn't intended to say that new media is 100% better, though I admit it can be read that way. Old media is comfy, it tells you everything is alright in the world, and the powers that be have things under control and anyone that threatens status quo is ridiculous and it's well crafted enough to let you think you've come to that conclusion yourself.

New media is autistic, loud, annoying, it tells you everything from every angle and you're likely to be more confused afterwards than before you went into it about the subject. But unlike old media, the comments are enabled, which allows the same alaska stream to dunk on alaska with the human vs. subhuman comment, as well as theroux with the jimmy saville comment.

I'm not exactly what you think I've not understood about Louis. I point out that it isn't objective, because many people are fooled by that style thinking that it's objective. He wears clothes, acts, talks, presents himself as objective in the same way that fuentes does with presenting himself as heterosexual catholic. It's worth pointing because it's true and some people fall for the style instead of the substance.

Not exactly sure why you disagree with me when your comment, that he isn't objective, is actually in agreement with me. Besides my comment was more about media in general and the clash of styles that this documentary showed and how theroux actually has difficulty keeping up with modern trends and you can see his (understandable) distaste when encountering it.

The only moment of rapport that happened was between theroux and fuentes when theroux asked him about the other documentary that was being made and fuentes said it is a self-made one and theroux remarks "that way you can choose what goes in" and fuentes laughs and agrees. But also with baked and beardson, there is that clash of media, with theroux instantly being on baked stream and theroux even saying he tries to get out of the picture for being used for clout, even as he makes a documentary on the other person, and interesting moment.

Then there's also the interesting moment with beardson and theroux, where theroux injects himself back onto beardson's stream by calling him after having been thrown out of the hobbit burrough. The clash of old and new media is probably the thing I'll take away from this documentary and could still think of in years to come.
 
I'll never stop being astonished at the right-wing's willingness to entertain MSM requests for "interviews." It's a hit piece 100% of the time. (haven't watched it yet, I have precognition for cringe and can't handle it)
Because the only ones dumb enough to crown themselves as white nationalist pundits in this day and age are retards and attention whores. Anyone who shares those sentiments but also possesses a brain would instantly recognize that putting themselves out there like that is a colossally stupid move.

Everybody who condemns these people seems to willfully forget the wave the right was riding back in 2016. I’d bet my life there are critics here who’d be backing them whole heartedly less than a decade ago. There are people here who certainly remember when the term alt right wasn’t a loaded pejorative that people increasingly distanced themselves from. I’m not saying they’re good people, but they came to prominence in a very different time.

They’re the dregs of a dead movement, that failed to survive the colossal disappointment of Trumps presidency, and Theroux is a vulture. I’d listen to him talk to TDS or David Duke for a couple of hours, but that wouldn’t work because those people don’t engage in apologetics or evasion. Itd just be ‘so you think Jews control the economy’ they’d say ‘yes’ and that’d be that.
I hate to burst your bubble, but only retards believed the New York real estate/reality moghul with enough Steins as in-laws to settle the West Bank was going to usher in the Fourth Reich. Hence the cavalcade of freaks and opportunists that elected themselves as leaders of the newly-baptized Alt-Right.

Alaska and Venti have been flip-flopping grifters for the whole of their 'careers', and I'm pretty sure Fuentes didn't start his until well into the presidency. Not one of them is a hapless victim.
 
My old vs. new media comment wasn't intended to say that new media is 100% better, though I admit it can be read that way. Old media is comfy, it tells you everything is alright in the world, and the powers that be have things under control and anyone that threatens status quo is ridiculous and it's well crafted enough to let you think you've come to that conclusion yourself.

New media is autistic, loud, annoying, it tells you everything from every angle and you're likely to be more confused afterwards than before you went into it about the subject. But unlike old media, the comments are enabled, which allows the same alaska stream to dunk on alaska with the human vs. subhuman comment, as well as theroux with the jimmy saville comment.

I'm not exactly what you think I've not understood about Louis. I point out that it isn't objective, because many people are fooled by that style thinking that it's objective. He wears clothes, acts, talks, presents himself as objective in the same way that fuentes does with presenting himself as heterosexual catholic. It's worth pointing because it's true and some people fall for the style instead of the substance.
With your clarification I definitely agree with you more. My main issue was that to me Louis never really tries to play the objective guy. I think retards automatically assume that he is, just like every talking head, I just dont think that's his angle on it whether or not his audience is too dumb to tell. So im not sure it's fair to include him in that branch. But then that opens an entirely different conversation about how much intent makes a difference.
 
When Louis asked Beardson about his Nazi salute saying "when it came to avoiding comparisons to nazis, you literally had only one job", that broke his brain and I laughed my ass off.

"Get outta my house!"
"I'm not in your house"
 
Yeah, that spooky music and voiceovers really made Baked Alaska and Beardson look like complete retards, it couldn't possibly have been that they are actual retards.
Thats the point. You don't need to add fluff to push your narrative. Let people talk.

Hell, his episode on actual nazis is less dramatic.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo