For complete transparency, I have been on a soft boycott of Hollywood for many years. And by “soft” boycott, I mean I will only go to see movies that are verified “unwoke.” That’s why in the past five years I’ve only seen Top Gun: Maverick and John Wick 4.
I mention that because I may be biased with my belief that I’m not missing much. Hollywood has been stuck in a creative slump for years with everyone seemingly focused on remakes, reboots, regurgitations, and comic book blockbusters, none of which make for good moviemaking. Now, it seems Hollywood will take its failures and exacerbate them by ramping up their omnipresent wokeness to ludicrous speed.
Here’s a brief writeup by Discern News Wire followed by my further commentary:
Controversy Surrounds Academy Awards’ New Diversity Guidelines for Best Picture Nominees
The Academy Awards have come under fire for their recent implementation of diversity and inclusion guidelines, specifically for films vying for the “Best Picture” Oscar. Several voting members have expressed their concerns after the Academy Awards introduced the Aperture 2025 initiative, a comprehensive set of regulations aimed at promoting equity and diversity in Hollywood.
Critics argue that the guidelines are excessive and undermine the authenticity of the casting process. One director interviewed by The Post stated, “I’m all for diversity, but mandating specific types of people for nominations? It feels contrived. The best person for the role should be chosen. Why limit the choices? Unfortunately, this is the world we live in now. It’s crazy.”
Starting in 2024, film producers and directors will be required to submit a dossier to the Academy, providing information about the race, gender, sexual orientation, and disability status of the cast and crew members involved in their films. According to reports, one prominent Hollywood producer mentioned that very few industry insiders support these guidelines but choose not to speak out due to fears of cancel culture.
Critics argue that iconic films such as “The Godfather” and “Schindler’s List” might not have qualified for Best Picture under the new inclusion guidelines. Concerns have been raised about the potential chilling effect on artistic freedom and creativity if every film is required to conform to specific criteria for a nomination. Additionally, esteemed actor Richard Dreyfuss strongly condemned the new inclusivity standards in a recent interview, describing them as nauseating.
During an interview on “Firing Line,” Dreyfuss expressed his vehement opposition, stating, “They make me vomit.” He defended his rejection of the concept, emphasizing that film is not only a commercial endeavor but also an art form. He firmly believed that artists should not be compelled to conform to constantly shifting moral standards.
Dreyfuss further argued against special treatment for any particular group, stating, “I don’t think there’s a minority or a majority in the country that has to be catered to like that.”
The Oscars released the controversial guidelines in 2020, stating that they aimed to encourage equitable representation both on and off the screen, reflecting the diversity of movie audiences. Failure to adhere to these stringent guidelines could result in disqualification from Oscar consideration for films lacking sufficient representation of people of color, individuals with disabilities, or those who identify as LGBTQ+.
Despite facing backlash from Oscar voters and critics, a Best Picture winner at the 2023 Academy Awards, “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” managed to meet the inclusion criteria. The sci-fi indie film featured a predominantly Asian cast, including Michelle Yeoh and Ke Huy Quan.
Some Hollywood executives are willing to accept the new guidelines but with certain reservations. One executive stated, “We want to be inclusive, but it’s essential to make the best movie. It’s unreasonable to include a person from a specific ethnic group if they don’t belong to the story being told. Similarly, featuring an LGBTQ+ character should align with the narrative. Imposing restrictions can undermine the integrity of the film and hinder its success at the box office.”
The debate surrounding these diversity guidelines continues as industry insiders grapple with the balance between fostering inclusivity and maintaining creative freedom in filmmaking.
Diversity Versus Forced Diversity
Let’s be clear. I’m all for natural diversity. I’m a mixed-race legal immigrant married to a mixed-race American citizen with very mixed-race children. I believe that diversity in the proper context can strengthen us. But that’s a far cry from the forced diversity that’s plaguing this nation and forcing institutions to make decisions based solely on race, gender, and other Cultural Marxist considerations rather than merit.
Imagine a world in which Godfather couldn’t even qualify to win Best Picture. That’s the world we live in today. So when I say I have been soft-boycotting Hollywood for years, I think it’s finally time to make it a hard boycott.
But this isn’t really about Hollywood. This is about our society’s collision course with oblivion. Movies are frivolous. Meaningless. What happens when forced diversity impacts areas that are not frivolous?
The military is an obvious example. For the first time in my life, I’m actually very concerned that our warfighters are not properly prepared to face threats abroad. It’s not because the warfighters themselves are any worse than in the past. It’s not that our technology hasn’t kept pace. It’s the woke attitude pervasive in the Pentagon that concerns me.
What about education? Healthcare? Law enforcement? What about the fact that airline pilot qualifications are being hampered by forced diversity to the point that the best pilots are being passed over because they don’t check enough boxes?
This isn’t something we can vote our way out of any time soon. Any surge of lucid patriots making their way into offices of government cannot come quickly enough. We’re faced with two possible outcomes. Either we will watch forced diversity prompt a massive disaster (and not just in the form of Kamala Harris) or we will double our efforts to dispel this worldview.
Pushing back on Bud Light and Target for trans-indoctrination practices is a start, but it’s not nearly enough. We need every business that engages in forced diversity to hear the same message that Anheuser-Busch got, only louder. It’s not just about LGBTQIA+ supremacy. It’s about all forms of forced diversity.
We either address this now while we still have a nation or we will watch helplessly as the truly “woke” get their wish of a dismantled United States of America.
At Last, a Company With Integrity in the Gold IRA Industry
For several years, I’ve been vetting out precious metals companies in search of the best. I believe in gold and silver but it’s hard to find integrity in the Gold IRA industry. The vast majority operate with shady tactics and gigantic spreads that take advantage of Americans who simply want to protect their life’s savings.
I’ve found a handful that I like and I’ve worked with some of them. By no means would I “unrecommend” them because, again, I vetted them out and found them to be above the fold. Unfortunately, it isn’t hard to be better than the rest when the rest are so darn awful.
After years of searching, I finally found a company that truly operates with integrity. Augusta Precious Metals has three important attributes that set them far above the competition:
- Non-Commissioned Sales Team: I cannot stress how important and unique this is. With just about every other company in the Gold IRA industry, the sales teams make commission from every account they open. This means they steer their clients toward the gold and silver products with the highest commission. With Augusta Precious Metals, the team is solely focused on putting the best gold and silver for their clients into their IRA. They get paid to serve the best interests of the Gold IRA client, NOT their own commission pay.
- Incredibly Low Fees: Most Americans would be shocked if they knew the spread other Gold IRA companies charge. Augusta charges just 5% versus up to 45% elsewhere.
- No Pressure, No Gimmicks: There’s an understanding among most in the Gold IRA industry that fear and pressure is the way to go. Augusta Precious Metals takes a sober approach when working with clients because they hold integrity in the highest possible regard. This is why they don’t offer gimmicks like “free” or “bonus” silver. It’s also why they do not apply pressure tactics to get quick sales. Their educational and transparent approach to doing business is exceedingly rare in the Gold IRA industry.
Reach out to Augusta Precious Metals to learn more about protecting your wealth and retirement with physical precious metals.
