Intersectional lines of attack in the arts: The dialectical destruction of culture

It’s been quite a few years now since people started noticing how many TV series’ and movies suddenly had homosexual or otherwise ‘woke’ characters in them. Series and movies where there was no actual value to the story by having a homosexual or otherwise non-typical sexual practitioner as a lead role. It served no purpose other than to shove gay characters in front of the audience within a series or movie which had earned a significant platform by its own merits. A usurpation of sorts of a meritorious production in order to either cause people to disconnect from the story, thereby destroying its value as a cultural icon, or to get people to accept as normal the imposition and injection of political narratives into the culture. Therefore, a win-win for the leftist social engineers. Dialecticians more accurately since the purpose was destruction in the final outcome.

They destroy the aspect, icon, component of the culture or, they warp it to their own purpose. Either way, a win for the left.

We are of course defining the left as a strategy for the destruction of the West, and any culture for that matter down to the roots and below using dialectics. As time goes by, it becomes more and more clear that this is what it is. Listen to CBC TV or radio for any given hour with a clear head about what you are actually hearing and you get at least an undergrad degree in the process. They cannot have a single interview about anything without injecting one or another state narratives into the subject. Global warming, the evil of the right, Orange-man-bad or whatever it is. And this could be in an interview about squirrel migration patterns or the curious patterns of Scottish socks.

Examples are legion. This process, this form of attack has permeated almost all pop culture at this point. But a couple of examples stick out for me, although each of you I am sure will have your own examples of ruined pop-culture that sticks in your craw. They are even doing it to sports with rainbow days or whatever.

This campaign which permeated Hockey and NFL Football was called, “Hockey is for Everyone” or “Football is for Everyone”. This of course is using the inclusion dialectic device. Typically inclusive is a word weaponized to mean, everyone but the people who normally are involved. In this case it is more a function of. if hockey is for everyone it’s for no one. Which is like the end state they are after. it isn’t like gay people etc. couldn’t enjoy hockey before this if they wanted to. Or play it. They just couldn’t have men dress like women in ball gowns and make up and read to kids on the ice while dancing suggestively.

I think the odd team told them to stick it but all to often we see pro football, baseball and even hockey doing ‘pride’ gestures at games.

Again, a win win for the left. The public comes to accept the unacceptable or lose interest in professional sports. Either way, the destruction of the culture is the teleological goal.

Star Wars is probably the single most iconic cultural product for white American young men, now pretty much totally ruined by awful sequels and TV series where the writing centred around aliens with bizarre sexual practices and their discussions around them along with the usual victim oppressor narratives. People tuned out. The franchise is dead. Commenters would talk about the woke nature of the shows and movies, but mistakenly thought that it was a fashion error on the part of the writers. They don’t get the intention of it all. There is simply no way this can happen by accident.

A vastly smaller example, but one where the same or similar device was used to destroy other icons, was the series The Exorcist. It was a short lived TV series based on the next generation from the movie. In the series, the daughter who was possessed, played in the movie by Linda Blair, is now a mother of her own children. I wont’ say more cause the point doesn’t need spoilers.

The first season was actually pretty good. But in season 2, the rugged priest who was the essence of a moral, John Wayne like, quiet suffering noble character goes and has sex with a rugged fisherman he meets somewhere. Purely unnecessary to the story. But an excellent way to nuke the series off the air as well as pollute one’s vision of the priesthood, the movie, the series, and everything related.

This device is used a lot to ruin iconic cultural products of the West.

Again, the issue is not having a homosexual character. it is using one to be an intersectional line of attack against the series, movie or concepts within it, itself.

It is weaponizing non-typical sexuality. Prior to the revolution there were many gay people in movies and on TV. They were participants in the culture. There was no issue, or there was no issue remotely like the one today.

This brings me forward to a story told to me by a musician recently. He had gone to an amateur coffee house to see a singer guitar player and see what was up. It was a typical young woman who could strum a few chords and sing a few songs. Still, nice to see people go to that instead of sitting on their phones. Live music should be a more important part of our culture than it is today.

But the second song he saw was interesting. It had a very familiar melody, arrangement and, well frankly absolutely everything about it was exactly familiar to a famous song except the lyrics.

After thinking on it a bit, he figured out what the original song was.

Here are a couple of videos of the original song. Then the version that was played at the coffee house:

Personally I love the Whitney Houston version a lot:

So the title: The Battle Hymn of the Republic

The Hook line prior to the Chorus: His Truth goes marching on

The Chorus: Glory Glory Hallelujah 

He did not record the artist. But the song she did turns out to be a well known one in certain circles:

Title: Solidarity Forever

The hook line prior to the Chorus: The Union Makes us Strong

Chorus: Solidarity Forever

Every note and the arrangement is a steal from The battle Hymn. This is not an accident.

Often when these attacks first started, the odd person asked the question: “Hey why do they have to inject all this woke crap into movies and music? Why can’t they write their own”? The answer is why these things exist. They were never meant to be artistic expression. They are a Marxist form of attack on culture itself. They are a less obvious form of attack than Post Modernism which shows contempt for art through its own cynical creativity. Most famously as an example, the man who submitted a urinal from a mens room to a gallery sculpture competition. Cynical, contemptuous of art, but at least it was an original idea. The musical equivalent? Listen to Yoko Ono Sing.

Seriously, Listen to Ono sing but keep one or two aspirins nearby and for the love of God not the whole bottle. Leave her on for too long and the temptation to MAiD oneself could be overwhelming.

She is clearly doing a postmodern attack on Music. Which is a pretty cynical thing for the wife of John Lennon to do.

In this case though, this is a direct intersectional line of attack on a musical cultural icon of the United States. The song is patriotic, Christian, profound and meaningful to American culture and belief. And it was copied note for note into a communist anthem and sung by someone who had never seen the inside of a mine or swung a pickaxe in her entire life.

This is the dialectic negation of culture via art.

Source: https://vladtepesblog.com/2026/07/14/intersectional-lines-of-attack-in-the-arts-the-dialectical-destruction-of-culture/