Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Badly Needed, and Long Overdue

On the one year anniversary of GamerGate, Vox Day released what may end up being the most important, practical and useful literary work to have been spawned by the reactionary fringes of our fever swamps out here on Teh Interwebz: SJWs Always lie: Taking Down the Thought Police. 

I say most important, not because it's a literary masterpiece of brilliant prose, but because it provides a relevant and comprehensive - but concise and easily digested - manual for weathering the media storms of the 21st century witch hunts for ThoughtCrimes and BadThink, that occur on a frequent basis in our Brave New World Order.

To date, the body count of casualties in the culture wars that have commenced since the Frankfurt School deployed it's entryist hordes to begin their long march through the West's institutions, is nearly impossible to fully enumerate.

For every person whose career or social standings and reputations have been ruined by a Social Justice Warrior swarm and media attack, the advice Vox doles out here could have undoubtedly helped them avoid their inevitable ruination and/or slandered reputations, had they been aware of the motivations, mindset and modus operandi of the SJW Thought Police, as Vox lays out and deconstructs brilliantly in this book.

Indeed, the advice Vox proffers to the reader on how to survive an SJW swarm attack is so important, you don't even have to spend the five fiat bucks or so it costs to buy the digital version of this book, as he offers a free .pdf survival guide compiled from excerpts in Chapter 7: What to Do When SJWs attack:

The eight stages of the SJW attack sequence are as follows:

1. Locate or Create a Violation of the Narrative.
2. Point and Shriek.
3. Isolate and Swarm.
4. Reject and Transform.
5. Press for Surrender.
6. Appeal to Amenable Authority.
7. Show Trial.
8. Victory Parade.

Much of the first half of the book deals with how Vox arrived at this identification of their predictable sequence, both from his own personal experience and from examples of other high profile cases like the  former CEO of Mozilla Brendan Eich and Nobel Laureate Dr. James Watson...men who resigned from high profile positions after being attacked by the SJW lynch mob. As he notes in the opening paragraph of Chapter Three: When SJWs Attack:

"SJWs have refined speech-policing to an extent seldom imagined outside the world of George Orwell's 1984, and in doing so they have created an Animal Farm-like world where some animals are definitely more equal than others."

Vox then follows up with a short list of high profile cases. While many of these cases he cites have occurred recently, making this book timely and current. But just off the top of my head, I can think of a number of cases of SJW swarm attacks that have damaged the careers and reputations of people going back decades:

* Former MLB pitcher John Rocker commenting on the vibrancy of the New York City subway passengers;

* Former Harvard President Larry Summers suggesting that Women don't go into STEM programs due to their own interests;

* Rush Limbaugh, the Godfather of Right-Wing talk radio, forced to resign from ESPN for stating that the media was hyping up Donovan McNabb because they were desirous of a black Quarterback succeeding in the NFL;

* Former Vice President Dan Quayle for criticizing the sitcom Murphy Brown for it's storyline normalizing bastardy and single motherhood by choice;

* MLB legend, Jimmy the Greek, for commenting that slavery bred better black athletes;

* Former PGA Golfer Fuzzy Zoeller lost millions in endorsements for making a sterotypical joke about Tiger Wood's  choice of cuisine for the tournament champions banquet;

* Sports media "shock jock" Don Imus referring to black women college Basketball players as "nappy-headed hos."

* Sitcom star Charlie Sheen, for "crossing the Jewbicon;"

* Mel Gibson cursing the dominance of Jews in Hollywood while being arrested for D.W.I.;

* Former Right Wing Talk Radio Personalities Dr. Laura Schlessinger and Michael Savage both eventually lost their lucrative talk radio careers for referring to homosexuality and homosexuals negatively;

* UFC Heavyweight Fighter Matt Mitrione was suspended (and had a bout cancelled) by the UFC for calling transgendered Women's MMA fighter Fallon Fox "...lying, sick, sociopathic, disgusting freak."

* Former Cooking show star Paula Dean was reported to have once used the N-Word in her youth.

In every one of these cases that I can recall, all of these personalities made a comment or stated their opinion that violated the SJW speechcode, and the resulting SJW swarm of manufactured outrage resulted in each particular ThoughtCriminal eventually losing their careers or millions of dollars in endorsements, and having their names permanently associated with the SJW brands of "racist," "sexist," "homophobe," or "transphobe."

And in every single instance I just recalled, the person under attack was forced to abase themselves before the merciless media and abjectly apologize and grovel in a bid to keep their jobs, careers and/or livelihoods after suffering from the swell of SJW manufactured outrage. If only they had followed  Vox's Survival Guide proscriptions, "2. Don't try to reason with them," and "3. Do not apologize." they may  have experienced a different outcome.

You cannot appease the perpetually offended (as all SJWs are), and they will never offer you the grace of redemption nor forgiveness for your apparent transgression. Apologies and reasoning only serve as confirmation of your guilt as a ThoughtCriminal.

As Vox notes: "Normal people seek apologies because they want to know that you feel bad about what you have done and that you will at least attempt to avoid doing it again in the future. When SJWs push you for an apology after pointing-and-shrieking at you, what they are seeking is a confession to bolster their indictment."

Indeed, normal people need to realize that SJWs are the frontline keyboard warriors of the culture war to destroy Western Civilization, and that they are not looking to "help you see the error of your ways" and "rehabilitate" your thoughts and attitudes so that you can then become "acceptable" to the "mainstream" as defined by SJW programming.

No, they are looking to make an example of you to keep all the rest of the sheeple in line. SJW attack swarms are the 21st version of the Reign of Terror.

For the thought criminal, their is never a chance for redemption. So if you ever do find yourself in the cross hairs of the SJWs shrieking hordes, your ONLY shot at survival is to follow Vox's advice, which really does echo a classic sentiment embodied by the following quote: "Better that we should die on our feet rather than live on our knees" - François-Noël Gracchus Babeufe


There is far more to this book than simply surviving a modern day SJW manufactured, media-driven witch hunt. The most important part for the "normal person" to grok is in Chapter 10: How to Talk to SJWs. This chapter explains to the average normal person who may have never studied classic philosophy, the important difference between dialectic and rhetoric. Vox writes: "Dialectic and rhetoric are two different languages, and the number of people who can speak both of them fluently is relatively small."

This chapter belabors to help the reader understand the difference, since most "normal" folks are not even familiar with the term "dialectic" but still consider themselves intellectually honest and objectively-minded when discussing any topics considered controversial. I myself only became familiar with the difference in discourse because I'm a regular reader of Vox's blog. I certainly didn't learn about it at during my own University Credentialed Indoctrination classes on philosophy in my Liberal Arts curriculum. But I digress.

His first example in differentiating between the two forms of persuasive argumentation, deals with the title of the book itself:

"Let me give you a practical example of how this works. If I say “SJWs occasionally lie” in response to an SJW's false statement, this is proper dialectic but poor rhetoric, as it is likely to fail to persuade a rhetoric-speaker of the actual truth, namely, that the SJW is lying in the present circumstance. The better rhetorical statement is “SJWs always lie”, which is not dialectically sound, (or if you prefer, untrue), but despite its lack of soundness it is more likely to persuade the rhetoric-speaker to believe the relevant truth, which is that the SJW is lying.

Hence the importance of knowing your audience and understanding which language of discourse they speak. When you speak in rhetoric to a dialectic-speaker, you will tend to sound very dishonest even when you are utilizing effective rhetoric that is perfectly in line with the truth. But you can’t speak dialectic to a rhetoric-speaker for the obvious reason that they cannot be informed or persuaded by it. They simply don’t have the capacity."

The reason why this is so, is that the dialectically incapable were made that way by their lifetime of indoctrination by our SJW-subverted establishment. SJWs are the product of a system that was intentionally designed to dumb down the masses and make them subservient to their emotional whimsy, base natures and arrested development. This deliberate enstupidation was effected so as to render the sheeple much more easily controlled, pacified and enslaved by materialism, consumerism and fiat financing. The SJWs don't even know that their highly credentialed educations were nothing more than socially engineered programming telling them WHAT to think, while denying them the training on HOW to think.

While I have eschewed voting in any election in the grand theatre of American Democracy for quite some time, I do still vote with my fiat dollars in the only true Democracy that exists today - the global marketplace. I bought SJWs Always Lie, because I wanted to do my small part in making this book rise up in the Amazon rankings. I want this book to break through the mass media indoctrinated mainstream, and spread it's tactical knowledge to the masses of people that nominally stand in opposition to the SJW thought policing and progressive culture wars that are fundamentally transforming our culture and society for the worse. I bought this book, because I ascribe to a high-minded ideal of ---

---oh who am I kidding?

I bought this book because I wanted to indulge in schadenfraude! I wanted to help the Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil punch back twice as hard at the snivelling hordes of brainwashed lickspittles and useful idiots that march under the banner of the SJW. No War but Culture War! This book is a badly needed, long overdue counterattack against the long march. For that, I consider it money and time well spent. 


Anonymous said...

Speaking of Manospherian books, have you noticed that 'No Ma-am' is active again? Looks like some new installments of a new book too, though I haven't had time to check it all out yet.

I told you Rob wouldn't be away forever LOL

Keoni Galt said...

Yeah, looks like Rob is back from the dead! I've been reading the Masculine Principle every time a new No Ma'am post shows up on my blogroll.

I've read it all before, but it's always good stuff I don't mind reading again.

Black Poison Soul said...

I also have been enjoying re-reading the updates on No-Ma'am and The Masculine Principle. Is why I took my epub's of his books down - it was disrespectful to keep them up, given the man was back. I'm glad to see the all of it again.

Interesting to learn about Dialectic/Rhetoric. One thing that I've come to realize about myself is that I place Feminists and SJWs - both of whom I consider to be brainless herd-animals - together into a lump of "junk I can't be bothered about". Equally boring and senseless, if that makes sense.

Because of this mindset, I find myself acting basically like #6 on this list when it comes to both of them.

Bob Wallace said...

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn pointed out decades ago that leftists have no honor and always lie.

Robert What? said...

Ok, "if SJWs always lie" is dialectically unsound how about "SJWs mostly lie" meaning that to proceed as though they are currently lying is the soundest and safest course, even though there is an extremely small but extant possibility they are not lying at the current moment. Although that might be too long for a book title.

bob k. mando said...

Robert What? said...
"if SJWs always lie" is dialectically unsound how about "SJWs mostly lie"

you are fundamentally misapprehending the difference/purposes of rhetoric and dialectic.

you use dialectic for reasoning.

rhetoric is 'effective and emotionally convincing speech'. always / usually / mostly / often / sometimes / occasionally / rarely / never are variations on a continuum. all of them are 'correct' at times EXCEPT FOR the first and last options because those are ABSOLUTES.

in the real world, how often is something true on EVERY occasion? in a literal sense, almost / never ( as well as other absolutes ) cannot be proven to be true for every conceivable variation or circumstance. because the variations run almost to infinity. therefore, in a dialectical sense, the words shouldn't exist.

but they do, and we use them all the time. because, encoded within them, is the understanding that rather than being "literally true", we understand them to mean 'true in most circumstances in which you are likely to experience them'.

so getting hung up on the precise dialectical presentation of "SJWs always lie" for everyday speech so you can be more technically correct ( the best kind of correct ) is a waste of time.

if you want more 'precision' for thinking about it in private, "SJWs reliably and often make knowingly deceptive statements for the purposes of emotional manipulation" would be the phrase you want.

that's a waste of time when speaking in front of most third parties, though.