Skip to main content

Liz Taylor joins MJ. Good Riddance.

“In a statement, her son Michael Wilding called her "an extraordinary woman who lived life to the fullest".”

Well, that’s not surprising given the millions she made from pretending to be a host of characters on screen. But then again, someone who doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with being worshipped by the masses and making millions from being a mere actress, won’t have enough sense to know what life’s about would she - other than having the life of one who thinks too much of the little she does just because all those mindless fans out there have been reduced enough to live their lives vicariously through them. I'd admire the one who lived her/is life to the fullest despite debilitating social conditions. But not one who debilitates the masses to do so.

“One-time co-star Sir Michael Caine also paid tribute, remembering her as "a beautiful woman, a wonderful actress, and a great human being."”
I'd admire the one who lived her/is life to the fullest despite debilitating social conditions. But not one who debilitates the masses to do so. A ‘great human being’? Strange that people can discount the Gods, or a 'Son of God' who elected to be born in a humble stable instead of the purple-silked bed of an aristocrat, and hold up greedy, dumb, self-serving twits as icons. Oh yes, she, like the so-called ‘Princess’ Diana, amongst others, did some good in their lives, but that is just pennies that they handed out from their millions. It’s too bad i never met either of them before they buggered off to the next life. They might have had a once in a lifetime opportunity to kiss my ass. There is much to be said of Jesus talking about an old women giving all she had to the needy than the rich giving a pittance from their relatively greater wealth.

The celeb-worshipping BBC heads their article dedicated to performing egoistic cunnilingus on Liz Taylor with, ‘Ultimate Star’. I shudder at such self-absorption amongst the whiteys sometimes. ‘Ultimate Star’. Compared to, say, the Japs, or the South Indians, these western stars are just kids play-acting. I sometimes wonder why they have these interviews and analysis of some silly whitey movie that tells us how profound this or that part is supposed to be, or what emotions these or that superficial scene is supposed to convey. Western films, along with their over-hyped actresses and actors, generally, 9 out of 10 times, are shallow, superficial, and generally designed for those whom are intellectually, perspectivally, and emotionally retarded. It is from that fact that the likes of Liz Taylor, or her little monkey, Michael Jackson, amongst a host of others, can become ‘celebs’. Of course, if you’ve been retarded by overexposure to western rubbish from birth, you aren’t going to know better, nor have the personality to appreciate it if it bit you on der Arsch. I suppose i used to be enthralled by Liz amongst other western stars myself as a child. But, through exposure to other perspectives and cultures, I grew out of it as would a child grow out of those colourful carousels suspended above cribs. Seems like americans, amongst others, never got out of it and just had it replaced with a ceiling mounted telly.

Says William Mann, Liz Taylor’s biographer,

“"People nowadays will do anything for maximum media exposure," says Mann, "but she got maximum media exposure because she lived a life that was fascinating to millions."
Stars being involved in 'charitable' work is simply an effort to sanitise their otherwise illegitimate lives and gains, and their own complicity in the production of evils that require charity to address them.
This bloke is certainly a certifiable moron and his mom should have been given a smack for bringing such idiocy into the world. How on earth are millions to be fascinated by her life if it wasn’t for the media coverage in the first place mate. It’s easy to get people to go down on celebs given that they are taught to live their lives vicariously from birth through media indoctrination. And once they are thus trained, they then move on to make ‘independent’ choices based on their ‘individual’ tastes. Oh yeah, they make choices alright, but from a buffet they’ve been taught to appreciate as the only fare that’s on offer. How else, for instance, can the BBC, term this overpaid bimbo an ‘ultimate star’ and get away with, or Mann, for making such a dumb statement and not having shoes flung at him? People generally have their sense and sensibilities captured from childhood by overexposure to American or Americanised media.

“She was the highest-paid actress of her time, negotiating a cool $1m for her role in Cleopatra, as well as a share of the profits for the film. This is now the model for many big stars.”

A role Liz would never have gotten at that time if she was black. And, by the way, the historical Cleopatra was a BLACK woman. But what would she care, she was depending on the racist tendencies of the west then to make her millions. Let’s not forget the context that made Liz a ‘star’ shall we.

“But Taylor will also be remembered for harnessing her star power to help good causes. In the 1980s, after her friend Rock Hudson died, she became one of the first celebrities to speak out about Aids.
"Hollywood took a lesson on that too, and every star now has their own personal cause and charity," says Mann.“

You could say that, for every star that is born, a million are sent to their deaths.Which is it. ‘Harnessing her star power to help good causes.’ or ‘using good causes to serve as PR for her stardom’, or ‘using good causes to blind people from appreciating the true value of a mere entertainer’. It’s not unlike those bimbos who sign up for Miss Universe/Miss World/Miss Earth contests, and who sport degrees and work experience amongst the disadvantaged to cover the fact that they are dumb enough to think physical ‘beauty’ of enough value to make money off, or self-centred enough to not bother about this promotes the tendency amongst people to judge each other on the contours of one’s skin as opposed to content of character. Stars being involved in 'charitable' work is simply an effort to sanitise their otherwise illegitimate lives and gains, and their own complicity in the production of evils that require charity to address them. It does not have to be intentional on their part. If they are a significant part of the problem, and their actions serve to blind the people from this fact, then that's what it is.

And let’s keep in mind the most important thing.  What these stars, like Liz, amongst others, are actually doing, albeit unwittingly, is that on the one hand they promote superficiality amongst the people by encouraging and living off celeb-worship. And on the other, they front ‘charitable’ causes. Think about what I’m going to say now,

The superficiality that they encourage amongst the people by living on their celeb-worshipping tendencies, also serves as the foundation for the emergence of great evils which the people, being superficial, will not be able to recognise till it becomes a problem requiring a charity fronted by a ‘celeb’ to address. In other words, they reinforce the foundational cause of the evils they then get the people to address. It’s a vicious cycle. But the real victors at the end are still the ‘celebs’.

(1)Celeb-worship > superficiality amongst the masses > leading to oversights that allow global problems to become worse > Celebs fronting the charities and organisations purposed to address them > stature of celeb increases > go back to (1)

Of course ‘celebs’ aren’t the sole causes of evils. But they are the entertaining arm of the elite who disarm the ire of the people in the face of the privilege of the elite by being a part of the elite class, whilst identifying with the people through acting out their lives on screen. Get it.

You could say, that for every star that is born, a million are sent to their deaths.

Enough of Liz.



Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…