Posted On: Monday - July 29th 2019 12:11PM MST
In Topics:   TV, aka Gov't Media  Global Climate Stupidity  Globalists  Media Stupidity  Geography
In a short post, back near our blogogins (blog origins, that is), Peak Stupidity discussed the downfall of the once great National Geographic magazine. "National Geographic, no more girly pics of the natives ...." was just about the magazine, but it's the loss of the whole concept of the great "Societies" of Astronomers, Physicists, and, yes, Geographers too, that I'll about in the 2nd part.
"Nat Geo" is the modern, shortened (in the vein of JLo and AMLO) name for the TV channel of the National Geographic brand, as in, I'm guessing, a better way to make money than with the old glossy magazine. Who knows whether there is anything about geography on that channel anymore? We've mentioned a number of times in posts with the TV, aka Gov't Media Topic Key(see "The TV Mythbusters vs. Science & Engineering" and "Women of the Weather Channel") that TV channels over the last 2 decades have been just "platforms" for various formats or themes that they can morph between without ever changing the channel/network names - cheaper this way, I guess. Last I recall, Nat Geo was about animals, and everyone LUVS animals. They also sells kid's education books/toys, so maybe they really don't care about the magazine anymore.
Let's talk about the magazine though, as a new article I read brought back my thoughts on National Geographic. VDare writer Lance Welton in his article What Makes NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC’s Race-Denying Editor Susan Goldberg Run?*, explained that the background of that previous-5-years' editor is the problem. Without any argument with Mr. Welton, I don't really care about this Susan Goldberg's ethnicity and background - the magazine has been a piece of ctrl-lefty crap for at least 20 years now. She's apparently made it even worse, though.
The pro-immigration and Globalist views of this purported geography magazine are what the VDare article rails against. After all, if all nations (except the non-white ones that are A-OK to keep anyone they want out) are to be of mixed peoples from around the globe, why would we need this magazine? The kind of real diversity that one could look forward to seeing in beautiful color pictures and reading about, in far away corners of the world won't exist anymore if Globalists have their way. By becoming "diverse" all nations will become the same - "Welcome to Brazil, sector IIIa".
Peak Stupidity's beef, in the past, with this formerly great publication has been more about their incessant agenda of
May as well spend that savings to go see the turtles,
excuse me, tortoises, before we're all gone.
This is just a shame for the young people. Maybe they couldn't give a dang about an exciting glossy magazine coming every month - man, what an ancient concept! In the past though, National Geographic, with its excellent photography and writers who went where most people would never get to go, was a beautiful window to the world. That world had an actual DIVERSITY of people, economies, animals, and other things. Now, the magazine is pushing for the modern definition of diversity, which pretty much means destroy and traditional-white-run places. As the first cover above shows, National Geographic celebrates the same, bleak, lame-ass Globo-Homo culture being spread the world over. Why would I want to go anywhere now?
The next post on this will get into the old Royal Societies and such, and what a great age of discovery it was.
* It's on the Unz site for comments here