Liberalism

Diversity Doesn’t Sell

Even the rabidly regressive ideologues at Marvel who have spent the last 3 years denouncing pissed-off fans rejecting their shoving of SJW values down everyone’s throats are admitting that they have a bottom-line problem:


Reading between the lines of the signals from Marvel, it seems the company is pulling back on its push for greater representation and diversity in their titles and pursuing a strategy similar to what DC Comics dubbed “meat and potatoes” before their DC Rebirth relaunch.

A lot of people scoffed at Bleeding Cool’s reports as spin or rumormongering, but in a recent interview with ICv2, Marvel VP of Sales David Gabriel is blunt with his assessment of a Marvel sales slump that began last October. The reason given by Gabriel: people are “turning their noses up” at diversity.

From the interview:

Part of it, but I think also it seemed like tastes changed, because stuff you had been doing in the past wasn’t working the same way.  Did you perceive that or are we misreading that?

-No, I think so.  I don’t know if those customers with the tastes that had been around for three years really supporting nearly anything that we would try, anything that we would attempt, any of the new characters we brought up, either they weren’t shopping in that time period, or maybe like you said their tastes have changed.

There was definitely a sort of nose-turning at the things that we had been doing successfully for the past three years, no longer viable.  We saw that, and that’s what we had to react to.  Yes, it’s all of that.


People just aren’t drinking their Kool aid and buying the bullshit, more so nowadays when liberal dogmas are getting torn down around their ears everywhere. The emperor is naked and even the most rabid of SJW writers in Marvel’s lineup can’t deny it. It’s hard for anybody, much less the ever-increasing number of Red Pills to see output like the following as anything but ham-fisted SJW rubbish:

hxyqrzdThe only thing really accurate to real life about this picture is the constantly offended scowl of Miss Fempowered

p00l2gp
Tone deaf lazy writing that assumes your readership see these concepts in the same negative light tends to be bad for your bottom line.

czxcj3vwqam6uec
Subtle, that’s some high class prose making an eloquent argument for progressive dogma on gender right there

thisiswhatmarvelbelieves_eac15f_5879624The writers probably didn’t realise that most people ending up rooting for their strawmen caricatures of non-progressives.

6a0120a58aead7970c01b8d0d52b0b970c-800wiNice shoutout to feminism here, too bad feminists haven’t really been buying the books.

The is why any organisation with some semblance of common sense needs to be aware of the social justice snake oil salesmen offering to make some progressive deforms reforms around their business model. These people are ideologues, they are in the game to bend things to their twisted religion, not to help you.

Liberal Cross Dressing Own Goals

You can’t make this stuff up.

 

Maybe there’s a reason why there appears to be a lack of copypasta progressive memes from the west among progressives here of late, things are getting so unhinged over there that even SJWs here are thinking twice about trying this out.

Sometimes stuff like this makes me hope that one of our local liberals actually tries pull this off, it’s certainly popcorn worthy material. I do happen to know some self-professed male feminists that might actually take this seriously, one can hope.

Liberal Shibboleths: Singapore Edition

5e3

An article published by the Straits Times regarding local firms putting money into Pink Dot 2017 provides some insight into the current shibboleths in circulation within the liberal community in Singapore. While the current state of LGBT affairs and Pink Dot is something Talon does have a fair bit to write on that is for another post. What I am going to address here is how a quick look at the press statements of the supporting organisations quickly ticks off the checkboxes of terms liberals are fond of using:


Another sponsor is TV production company Hoods Inc. Its co-founder Bratina Tay, 42, said: “We believe in equality and we do not believe in discrimination. We’re not imposing our beliefs on other people; it’s just what we believe in. If this helps to bring awareness to the public, we are happy to do so.”

Digital agency Xpointo Media contributed $5,000. Its managing director, Ms Kathy Teo, 45, said: “Diversity and inclusion are important values to our company. Broadcasting our commitment to these values is good for business.”


Shibboleths, a shorthand term for the commonly repeated terms, ideas and beliefs within a community, are a good way of sizing up the idealogical stances of people around you. You should be especially alert if you hear someone dropping them at a good rate. At the rate these common liberal shibboleths were being dropped in the quotes, one can get a good picture of the probable idealogical stances of these people beyond just putting money for Pink Dot.

The terms commonly tagged to liberal Shibboleths aren’t merely words, they are refined expressions of the ideology they come from and carry a lot of baggage. When a progressive uses terms like “equality”, “discrimination”, “awareness”,”diversity” or “inclusion”, they don’t mean it in a way that people commonly understand them, but rather the way that progressives do.

The trick is to convince everyone that it is the progressive definition of the term, with all it’s associated progressive ideological baggage, is the one that everyone should go by. If not subjected to Red Pill resistance, the redefinition of these terms to come under the regressive agenda is all but inevitable.

You see it everywhere in how terms like “racism” and “privilege” have been somewhat successfully subverted by regressives to the advantage of their ideologies. Language is a powerful tool and the one who controls the definition of words holds the power.

As Red Pill social insurgents who can see through the regressive liberal delusions, shibboleths are useful as it allows you to quickly sound off and size up the people you interact with and gain intel on what ideologies they subscribe to as well as the level of their commitment to cause.

A person dropping one or two shibboleths occasionally is probably just your run of the mill Blue Pill who has had exposure to liberal ideas in common media and has has a layperson’s understanding of it, and might even prove a good prospect for you to plant the seed of Red Pill doubt in them by gently cracking these ideas with them in casual conversation. The ones dropping multiple shibboleths repeatedly almost all the time are probably not casuals, and are people you certainly need to be careful around.

As always, be careful in letting your own shibboleths slip when talking to non-Red Pills. If possible, find new ways of presenting Red Pill ideas without resorting to cliches or terms that are in common use within the Manosphere.

This serves several purposes- it helps you to maintain cover as a social insurgent, it prevents people who have been programmed by mainstream bluepill thought from being triggered at the mere mention of Red Pill terms, and crucially, also allows you to approach your own ideas from new angles to find new memetic combinations to strike out in your insurgency against the regressive invasion.

Understanding shibboleths and using them to maximal effect for your Red-Pill insurgency to is a crucial skill. Master not just your own memes, but that of your enemy’s as well.

The Manipulations of Chinese Privilege

puppet_original_9439

It has been a few years since Sangeetha started her Chinese Privilege gig, creating a meme that has managed to make significant headway into the ideological space of the English-educated and speaking crowd in Singapore.

While Sangeetha apparently hasn’t been able to make much money off her original subscription model of SJWism for her Singaporean Chinese Privilege blog, which apparently had only two subscribers after an extended run, she has moved out into farming Chinese Privilege by hawking it in educational institutions as well as shaking down guilty Chinese Allies for money or bashing whatever non-Southern Indian group that has earned her ire. The demands for money, resources and power can get quite comedic at times, and they make for good popcorn time material.

Whatever you may think of Sangeetha and her histrionics, you cannot deny that she has managed to create something that is expected to be around for quite a while which will be an issue that every Red Pill social insurgent will eventually have to tackle.

There are excellent takedowns of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege out there, and they provide deep analysis and deconstruction, showing why as a social theory to describe and approach race relations in Singapore it is not only highly suspect, but also dangerous for the social fabric of Singapore. These are works you should verse yourself in to better understand the issue.

But while I do think these works are great takedowns of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege, I do feel they lack something fundamental that has limited that effectiveness in changing opinions on the matter.

They are logical.

Yep that’s the problem, they are too logical.

The Chinese Privilege gig sells well to the progressive leftist crowd in Singapore not because it is a well-constructed thesis but because it is designed to push as many emotional buttons as possible among minorities and English-speaking Chinese Progressives in Singapore. As a work of manipulating emotions and recruiting minorities and liberals it has proven to be quite useful.

Logical takedowns of Sangeetha miss the manipulative nature of her ideology out entirely to focus on the rational merit of argument she is making, forgetting that Chinese Privilege sells not based on logic, but by provoking emotion.

While Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege may take the appearance of an academic exercise, it is just that, a facade.

Remember the whole Chinese Privilege meme is not meant to be logically consistent, but just appear plausibly enough so in order to stoke minority anger.

To understand how to best combat the damaging effects of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege narrative on the social fabric of Singapore one needs to understand that nature of how it persuades, provokes and spreads its influence. Logical takedowns generally neglect this, and end up serving merely as textbook answers that lack persuasive power.

So with that, Talon shall look at the foundations of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege memes in terms of how it is structured to persuade and manipulate.

Chinese Privilege has proven to be quite effective in manipulating people because it works on multiple levels. Let’s look at them now:

1) Manipulating Emotions- Casual Irritations as Systemic Racism

Understanding the meme of Chinese Privilege as one that generally spreads via an appeal to emotion becomes useful when you look beyond the academic writings that Sangeetha puts out to examine the secondary material in her inflammatory anti-Chinese hysterics on social media. These serve as an informal “real-world” expression of her ideology.

While these hysterics serve an to stoke emotions among her social circle in support of her social theories, and also provide us social insurgents some insight into her psyche, it is important to note that the “academic” side of Chinese Privilege gives justifications for Sangeetha acting in ways that could be quite reasonably considered racist.

For the people who have been harbouring large grudges against the Chinese majority in Singapore for various reasons, an academic justification allowing them to act out in is incredibly attractive. This is why a fair bit of people are willing to ignore the inconsistencies and sheer fabrications of fact even when they are glaringly obvious.

Sangeetha has managed to successfully up-sell latent casual racism in Singapore as systemic, exaggerating the actions of an insensitive minority of the Chinese as an institutional issue. On top of that, she has also redefined any inconvenience that minorities often face by virtue of being different from the rest as an issue of overt racism and discrimination, as opposed to finding alternative plausible explanations for that.

Remember under Chinese Privilege, any bad feels from the minority in regards to the majority is a result of Chinese racism.

Now casual racism is latent in all populations due to individual dispositions. This is unfortunate but it is another thing to claim it’s a systemic issue (ie. The system is actively out to get you.)

It is simple math in action. Even if all the races in Singapore had similar levels of casual racism, a member of the minority is simply way more likely to run into an idiot from the majority by virtue of the sheer numbers of them around. This does not mean that the majority as a group is out to get you, but that you are more likely to run into an idiot from it.

Sangeetha spins this statistical reality and distorts it to convince minorities that the Chinese as a class (if they aren’t self-identified allies on her bandwagon) are out to get them, and it works because most people can’t understand proportional representation.

To top this off, Sangeetha moves to reframe things that are due to simple demographic math in play as an example of deliberate systemic discrimination. The economies of scale that the Chinese can employ by virtue of being more numerous, such as being able to use Mandarin as a lingua franca for non-English speakers in employment are now redefined as racism. Advertisements targeted at the biggest demographic market is sold as discrimination against minorities (because targeted marketing ignoring is racist). So on so forth.

All unfortunate minor irritations (microaggressions) that minorities face are reframed as an example of a massive Chinese hegemonic conspiracy to disenfranchise minorities under the meme of Chinese Privilege.

It does not matter that there are alternative explanations that are more inane and don’t need to bring up accusations of racism, why? Because these explanations do not provide emotional relief in giving a bogeyman to bash.

A great part of the manipulative power Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege meme comes from the ability to continually redefine all minor irritations that minorities face as racism. While such “everything annoying is racism” sentiments are not new Sangeetha has managed to present an easily understood, applicable and seemingly academic method of codifying and concentrating such feelings under the banner of “Chinese Privilege”.

Know that the logic often does not matter, what matters is the emotional payoff an aggrieved person can get from putting a “Chinese Privilege!” stamp on anything about the Chinese that causes unhappy feelings.

2) Appealing to Rabbit Psychology 

Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege is also structured to appeal specifically the psychologies of the Rabbit people. If you don’t know what Rabbit means you can refer to the post with the grand summary on Wolves and Rabbits.

The core of Rabbit psychology is anti-competitive, seeking to eliminate all inequality of outcomes no matter the reason. Rabbits value models are also intrinsic, deeply focused on inherent rights, identities and status entitlements without the corresponding extrinsic justifications for such.

As such, claims that Singaporean Chinese are stealing resources and status from that should be rightfully accorded to minorities in Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege meme are deeply convincing to the Rabbit people that tend to populate the progressive demographic in Singapore.

Not that it does not matter if one can point out other more plausible reasons why there are different outcomes between the Chinese majority and the rest, Rabbit people are cognitively predisposed towards believing the narrative of a hegemonic racist Chinese conspiracy to oppress the rest because that is the quickest way to make the loudest noise and greatest push for resource redistribution.

In short, the radical claims of Sangeetha are specifically designed to best provoke Rabbit instincts among local progressives. This provocation is powerful enough progressives are compelled to move along with it, with the less-rabbity of those who attempt be the moderate voices largely ignored or even attacked outright.

Sangeetha has also hedged her bets well by setting up a local version of the progressive stack and making a hard sell for it in the opening arguments for her Chinese Privilege gig several years back, conveniently placing herself, an overweight, dark-skinned southern Indian woman sorely at the bottom of the stack in order to claim the right as progressive moral arbiter over everyone else. This has allowed her relatively free reign to control and redefine a great deal of discourse on race in progressive circles although there is some indication that she might be overreaching of late and alienating segments of her ilk higher up her stack.

To sum it up, Chinese Privilege has been rather convincing to anyone of a progressive disposition due to it being able to appeal well to various aspects of Rabbit psychology. This has allowed Chinese Privilege as a meme to entrench itself deeply within liberal circles in Singapore, of which uprooting it will probably require monumental effort from moderates.

Interestingly, the specific construction of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege in order to appeal to Rabbit people can be seen via the contrast of reactions in minority individuals who have more Wolf dispositions- they tend to be less welcoming of Sangeetha’s assertions, and sometimes even outrightly hostile. The Wolf people rightfully reject all this race-baiting as nonsense, even when it promises them a moral high horse.

3) Memetic Hijack of Western Progressive Memes

On a technical level there is nothing terribly original about Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege- it’s original presentation was chunks of writings on White Privilege by Western Progressives taken wholesale with the racial terms swapped to turn White to Chinese, completely ignoring the differing cultural and historical contexts that exist.

Criticisms of Chinese Privilege as being plagiarised and shoehorned to fit a local perspective miss the point. Sangeetha doesn’t need Chinese Privilege to be original or even appropriate for application here as a cultural theory- all she needs is something that will catch the attention of local liberals already using all the buzzwords and rhetoric they are familiar with.

This outright appropriation of White Privilege serves several purposes: being a cookie-cutter term-swapped social theory Chinese Privilege can piggyback on established memes within the headspace of local progressives already set up by the White Privilege narrative, giving the same feel of authenticity and credibility White Privilege already has.

This is why the output of local progressives on Chinese and White privilege often appear indistinguishable, in their heads it is literally the same meme, just with different skin colours.

The power of this transposing effect was so much that several minorities I observed who drank Sangeetha’s cool aid started equating their situation in Singapore as equivalent to that of African Americans!

Far from being a weakness, the shameless plagiarisation of White Privilege in Chinese a Privilege is a rhetoric strength, a memetic hijack that has paid dividends for local race-baiters.

Remember, an argument does not need to be valid to be convincing, it can take on the guise of other accepted arguments in an act of rhetorical mimicry to slip in and set root.

4) Meeting Regressive Idealogical Demand

One also needs to examine and understand local idealogical market forces to understand how Chinese Privilege has obtained it’s manipulative power.

For a long time liberalism in Singapore has been largely tied to opposition politics with parties such as the SDP being the flag bearer for the further left of the spectrum. While civil society did exist and was ideologically leftist and probably more so, the bulk of minds in the populace on the left was occupied by local opposition politics.

Then came the the stunning opposition victories of 2011 which built up support for opposition politics to a frothing fever pitch (as a matter of fact opposition supporters often behaved in a manner similar to SJWs), with local liberals confident that GE 2015 would be another stunning success.

Then came the crushing defeats they routed and discredited the opposition as the ground swung to the PAP in 2015, a trend that has not let up in a series of losing streaks and misfortunes for local political parties.

This was however a boon for local Progressives as there was now a power vacuum in local leftism since the collapse of the political opposition. Where your idealistic young uni undergrads may once have seen opposition political activism in the years of 2011-2015 as an outlet to their inflated-self perception of revolutionary righteousness, the post 2015 environment only has SJWism for them to sign up for.

This has consequently led to a swell in the ranks of progressives in Singapore. This sets up a buyers market for any progressive idea that can be successfully localised- after all it’s more payoff to SJWing on stuff here as opposed to posting about social issues in America.

This demand for local progressive memes is a natural market for Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege narrative and its various permutations. While basically repurposed White Privilege, Sangeetha has managed to hawk a meme that appears localised enough for local regressive to latch onto and propagate.

Conclusion and Initial Insurgent Strategy 

Chinese Privilege as a meme has proven to be effective in infiltrating and entrenching itself in the idealogical landscape of Singapore. While currently generally restricted to the English-educated and speaking liberal demographic one expects that barring the takeover of another more attractive progressive ideology it is expected to progress.

Chinese Privilege as a meme finds it’s success and appeal not because it is a valid work of academic social commentary, by manipulating several key centers of gravity in the idealogical battlefield to becoming rather convincing, they are:

1) Manipulating the emotions of aggrieved minorities by providing a plausible and codified belief system to concentrate, amplify and direct the negativity.

2) Manipulating the Rabbit psychology of liberals by structuring the rhetoric within Chinese Privilege to trigger instinctive Rabbit anti-competitiveness and aversion to differential outcomes, biasing such individuals towards be ideology.

3) Appropriating accepted memes such as White Privilege to take advantage of meme hijack in order to expedite acceptance of Chinese Privilege in the headspace of Progressives.

4) Meeting pent-up market demand for localised ideologies among local Progressives looking for a justification to conduct local activism.

These 4 main factors are why Chinese Privilege by Sangeetha as been relatively successful as a local progressive meme, which is at this point largely self-sustaining without much action on its originator.

Many traditional attempts to address Chinese Privilege are conducted on logical validity of the ideas themselves instead of understanding these 4 factors, and hence they fall short of even starting to dent it’s memetic appeal.

Red Pill social insurgents operating outside traditional paradigms of discourse need to realise that Chinese Privilege as a meme can only be defeated if these 4 centers of gravity are addressed. Fortunately as Red Pills, you are in possession of powerful knowledge that allows you to do just that. Talon will be addressing those in other posts on the matter.

You need to realise that the ultimate endgame of Chinese Privilege is not the elimination of racism from Singaporean society but rather the amplification of fault lines within the social fabric of Singapore. As a meme that finds its sustenance for existence by finding and defining racism in everything it will never stop until it’s acolytes are completely offended by everything, no matter how innocuous, with the races further from common ground as they have ever been.

We only need to look to America to see how badly this can turn out and mark my worlds that this is the outcome if the destructive meme of Chinese Privilege is allowed to run unchecked.

Choose The Right Weapon

ddac8456502fb078751207e46e06907e

A common mistake I see Red Pill social insurgents new to the game make in online debate is that they tend to engage with infodumps containing Red Pill walls-of-texts to debunk Progressive lies.

Remember that it doesn’t matter how watertight your carefully-argued post is if it is so dense that nobody bothers to read through all of it. Remember that arguments online are rarely won by making your opponent concede through the sheer force of logic, facts and reason itself especially if you are dealing with Rabbit psychologies, which you most probably will be when engaging Progressives.

Rather remember that you are conducting this debate for an audience, and the trick is to present your arguments in such a way that it appeals to the neutral third-party audience reading all this. The debate is a platform on which you have an opportunity to present Red Pill truths to the wider world in the guise of competing with mainstream Progressive ideology. Wall-of-texts are a terrible way of doing this, especially if the exchange ends up being back and forth engagements consisting of such.

Know that wall-of-text debates only has an audience of two- you and your enemy and are often a waste of time and energy to engage in. The exception is if you are engaging with a person who is really interested in the truth and acting in good faith even if they disagree, at which case wall-of-texts may be worth it as an exercise of one-t0-one persuation and to hone your own arguments and thoughts.

Instead of the noob infodump tactic, remember that being effective in a debate with your enemy (idealogical opponent acting in bad faith) will involve being able to be linguistically devastating to both their arguments, ideas, egos and psyches in as little words as possible. Learn to keep your posts short and to the point, demonstrating full control of the situation with as little effort as possible.

Remember that less is often more. One devastatingly powerful realtalk smackdown given in just two lines utterly shattering your opponent is often better than a 10 paragraph point-by-point debunking. This works even better if your opponent is Wall-Of-Texting as the contrast between one party who just can’t shut up and another who knows how to smash his opponent in just a tweet makes you appear masterful.

So look through your opponent’s argument and find the fatal flaw, exploit that for a single powerful attack instead of trying to hit every nit-pick, losing focus and the audience’s attention in the process.

Remember to choose the right tools. Less is more; learn to destroy your ideological enemies in just a paragraph demonstrating Red Pill truths, confidence, and mastery. The audience will see the contrast and naturally gravitate towards the more charismatic side, even if they don’t say it. Bonus points if your SJW opponent helps by melting down. It’s going to take practice, and the sooner you start learning your basic Shitlording skills the better.

 

Wolf and Rabbit People: A Summary

wolf14

I’ve noticed an uptick of readers to this blog recently, especially on posts involving social commentary. Be you a new or regular visitor to this blog you might have realise I often use the terms “Wolf” and “Rabbit” when describing people. This might be confusing to new readers who are not aware of the basics of r/K Selection theory and how it has been used in many aspects of Manosphere thought to analyse social issues.

It is from r/K selection theory that we get the terms “Wolf” and “Rabbit”, which are archetypes used to describe the psychologies of individuals based on how they fall on the r/K spectrum. These terms are useful because their namesakes closely resemble the types of psychologies we see in r or K selected people.

Understanding r/K psychologies can provide you with a useful model to decipher the underlying instincts and motivations that drive human behaviour. Man is often an irrational creature that gives retroactive justifications to his actions to give them a veneer of rationality, more so if he has subscribed to reality-denying ideologies like Progressivism.

A common mistake many new social insurgents make when they first enter the ideological battlefield is that they attempt to achieve their aims by convincing neutrals and defeating enemies through the brute force approach of attempting to “logic” their way to victory. While Red Pill truths can be a powerful knife that cuts to the core of many Blue Pill psyches the brute force reasoning approach rarely works as the natural inclinations of people to avoid cognitive dissonance will cause them to deny reality even if it stares them in the face.

This is why you often can’t unplug many invested Betas just by hitting them with cold hard reason and truth, more often than not they will just double down because that feels better.

To be effective you need to truly understand their underlying subconscious instincts and motivations, making your influence felt there instead of just on the intellectual plane. This is why a good understanding of how the Rabbit and Wolf people tick is imperative for your success in the ideological battlefield.

So without ado, a short cheat sheet and some exposition on how things work regarding the psychology of the Wolf and Rabbit people:

The Grand Matrix of Wolf and Rabbit People

 Attribute

Wolf

Rabbit

Attitude towards Competition Competitive Anti-Competitive
Resource Perspective Resources viewed as limited- needs to be worked for and carefully managed

Resources viewed as unlimited and readily available

Value Model Extrinsic, based on merit (eg. social ranking, meritocracy) Intrinsic, assumes value by virtue of existing. (eg. basic unalienable rights)
Sexuality Favours late sexualisation of young, controlled breeding, conservative and puritanical

Favours promiscuity, young sexualised early. Novelty seeking prioritised

Investment in offspring

High- young receives high level of parental investment. Parents want best for offspring

Low- reduced investment in raising young, parents less interested in offspring outcome
Resource Distribution Merit-based
(earn what you eat)
Redistributive
(everyone gets an equal share)
Group Loyalty High- loyalty to in-group is seen as important, associations tend to be deliberate and formal Low- trust and loyalty is not important to in-group, associations tend to be a matter of convenience
Response to Threats Fight/Resist Flee/Submit
Violence Highly structured and ritualised with formal rules of combat Unstructured, spontaneous mob violence with no rules of combat
Value System Principle Based- making and breaking the rules structured on formal principals even if unpleasant Emotion Based- rules are made and broken based on how good they make one feel
Favoured Environment Harsh, Resource-restricted Easy, Resource-abundant
Gender Model Dimorphic- clear division of roles between the genders. Males tend to be more masculine and females feminine

Androgynous- males can be more feminised while females more masculine. Genders roles more interchanagable  

There you have it, the main attributes and differences between the Wolf and Rabbit people summed up in one big table, you will probably start to realise that a good deal of your friends mainly fit into one archetype as you go down this table. You would also realise that your Progressive acquaintances tend to be hardcore Rabbit.

While nobody cleanly fits into either archetype fully- it’s a spectrum after all, understanding the key aspects of Wolf and Rabbit psychology will allow you to better deconstruct a lot of the leftist memes that are flooding the ideological battlefield. Understanding your enemy will also allow you to choose better approaches.

For example, if you realise that a people you are engaging are hardcore Rabbits, appealing to their sense of loyalty in order to make an argument is a very poor move as Rabbits have low in-group loyalty. Calling them as disloyal is unlikely to illicit much of a response as Rabbits do not really understand the concept of loyalty to the in-group and might even see it as a virtue to sell everyone out for personal gain.

A common mistake that people make when formulating rhetorical attacks is creating them based on what they personally fear instead of their enemy is actually afraid of. This is psychological projection and is a poor method of picking your linguistic kill-shots. I’ve also seen many Wolves who engaged Rabbits expecting a fair and honourable fight on the plains of logic only to get dogpiled and Doxxed because they didn’t understand Rabbit violence is unregulated and anarchic with no respect for the rules of war to limit damage to all parties involved. You need to understand your Rabbit opponent and know what makes them tick in order to safeguard yourself and be effective.

Being anti-competitive, the real fear that Rabbits face is the prospect of being trust back into a competitive environment where they have to compete with the Wolf people for resources. This fear underlies much of their rhetoric on why resources should always be redistributed regardless of merit and society be made as “equal” as possible. Hence, forcing through verbal guile to make a Rabbit conclude that they need to earn their keep is a good way to make them freak out and lose control.

Understanding that Rabbit morality is emotionally rather than rule based will also pay dividends in making sense of the various SJW ideologies that are churned out en masse by the Cultural Marxist machine. When you know that they are structured with the end goal of making sure there are no bad feels on the part of their holders, the various logical incongruences start to make sense because the ideology, despite having an appearance of being a logical argument, was never intended to be one in the first place.

Know that the a good way to attack these ideologies are by taking advantage of the emotional nature of Rabbit emotions to make them dismantle themselves. Very often you can mobilise one SJW ideology with greater emotional impact to demolish another one simply by setting one SJW to clash with another, the low-trust and unstructured nature of how Rabbits conduct violence will mean that it often ends up being a zero-sum game between the two. All this is way more effective than attacking the fortress of their ideas from the outside of the Rabbit warrens.

As always, knowledge is power and as a social insurgent you need to know the enemy and attack all their weak spots. Know your Wolf and Rabbit people well.

Racist! Sexist!Misogynist! Homophobic! Xenophobic!!!

jupzeyaljnzfv9vhfk_e8-nw5fmlei-ph633sfpukcs

Every belief system that has achieved some level of dominance in mainstream thought will have gatekeeping memes in place to protect the entire memeplex. These gatekeeping memes serve to defend the ideology against the assault of heretical ideas and ideological opponents.

Progressive ideologies like feminism and all your various leftist social justice causes are no different, being the dominant narrative in the mainstream they have come to determine the frame of what is considered appropriate discourse in society, they have several powerful gatekeeping memes in play to defend Progressivism from rival ideologies. When all else has failed and an offender cannot be brought to kneel to the demands of Progressive ideas, these gatekeeping memes are brought out as a blunt instrument to motivate compliance through coercion and fear.

The most prominent gatekeeping memes in play with these ideologies play upon the fear of social ostracisation by falling afoul of progressive standards, which are assumed to be common morality. They involve accusing the offender with labels that brand them as having breached progressive standards of moral behaviour.

Hence the oft-heard cry of Racist! Sexist! Misogynist! Homophobic! Xenophobic! being applied liberally (no pun intended) when an issue isn’t quite going the liberal way.

These labels do not need to be valid in order to have their intended effect of shutting the offender up. The very risk of being labeled with these accusations have a powerful chilling effect on most people who have come to accept the liberal frame of morality as the dominant standard in soceity. Even if one does not subscribe to liberal ideas, the very act of being subjected to such accusations put intense social pressure to submit.

As gatekeeping memes, the liberal accusation of faux-Racism, Sexism, Misogyny and other sins that offend liberal sensibilities serve as very powerful memetic antibiotics to quickly remove and shut down the propagation rival ideas.

But they overused it.

The inherent usefulness of these labelling tactic has led to them being applied liberally by progressives in every imaginable situation as a shortcut to actual discourse when it comes convincing others of their ideas. Sitting with your legs too wide? You’re a sexist manspreader. Rocket scientist wearing a raunchy shirt? He’s a sexist oppressor holding back women from STEM fields. Pointing out the higher rates of HIV infections among men who have sex with men? You must be homophobic. Questioning the dogma that mass immigration and diversity is always good? Xenophobic.

Modern progressivism has gotten increasingly anti-intellectual because it has devolved to being an ideology of labels. The very usefulness of these labels in forcing compliance has led to their overuse and substitution in the place of doing actual thinking and convincing.

This is why when you get any one of these labels applied to you by a feminist or SJW, you should know that the debate has more or less already been won by you and the enemy is just resorting to the last-ditch use of gatekeeping memetics to force you to submit. Realise that this is a desperate play and call it out for what it is.

Do not submit to their frame, stay on point, and keep hammering in on their collapsing argument while showing that you are completely unfazed by their attempts to label as a racist/sexist/whateverist. Watch them get increasingly desperate as they realise their last-ditch effort to bully you into silence isn’t working, and enjoy the squirming as they desperately try to disengage- better still if it’s through a meltdown throwing every term in the SJW in a bid to make something stick.

Your victory and unflappability in the face of tactics that liberals have long used to bully and dominate others into submission, will embolden many others who have felt the overbearing gaze of progressive moral policing. For what is their choice after all? To live in fear of the progressive moral police or start sticking it up to them?

For many it will be an easy choice

The fire rises.

One of the reasons why the social insurgency represented by the reactionary right has been so successful in the ideological battlefield versus mainstream progressivism is because they have proven to be all but immune to the memetic attacks of liberal labelling, leaving bewildered progressives wondering why their trusty rhetorical weapons now have no bite.

This refusal to accept the progressive frame, along with an unrelenting outright attack on everything they stand for proved not only decisive in removing a lot of the idealogical dominance they used to hold in the mainstream, but also an emboldenment of others who have long felt the heavy yoke of progressive dogma, leading to more being aware of and supporting the insurgency.

So remember, SJWs always lie. When confronted and rendered weaponless they invariably crumble. In fact, being called a sexist, racist, or whatever they would care to label you with is often a good sign that the progressive you are engaging is at the end of his or her tether.

Press the attack and win.

Insurgents vs.The Weakening Liberal Narrative

maxresdefault

The stunning defeats the mainstream progressive narrative suffered recently offer a good study in how a smaller, but more nimble and motivated force can punch way above it’s weight while facing a larger and more powerful foe.

On paper it shouldn’t even be a contest, over the past decades since winning the culture war progressives have controlled mainstream dialogue on what is considered moral and managed to emplaced the all-powerful memes of “racism/sexism/whateverism” in popular consciousness to serve as gatekeepers to their narrative. Run afoul of liberal dogma and see how quickly these terms will be used on you to bring you to heel.

On top of that, the progressive movement has enjoyed virtually uncontested support in mainstream media coverage, being able to bring the heavy hand of the media and associated lynch mobs upon any who threaten the modern progressive narrative with heresy.

While most of this has been happening in the West, even Singapore is not immune to the rise of such regressive culture, having seen several incidents in which local regressives have mobilised in an attempt to bring Western-style liberal outrage mobs to respond to any breach of the liberal narrative. While Singapore may not be fully aware of it, the frame of public consciousness, especially among the english-educated crowd is shifting to the liberal narrative, slowing uprooting the traditional Singaporean mindset as the various memes of regressivism sink their roots.

In any case, in most parts of the first-world in the West liberals control the frame. They are the new moral majority have have been since the won the culture wars of the 60s. They hold many advantages over other idealogical narratives and have the means to ruthlessly crush opposing ideas without much effort.

So how they they suffer so many stunning defeats of late? How did the cultural juggernauts of progressivism, feminism and social justice packing all the advantages lose out to an unorganised rabble of deplorables?

That’s because they’ve gotten fat, complacent, and are fighting yesterday’s war.

Your modern progressive is a descendent of the original liberals that fought and won the culture wars against the traditional right. As much as the modern progressive/feminist/SJW claims to be fighting, they actually function more like occupation troops seeking to police and entrench their narrative in a cultural battlefield that they have already won. The various strategies, tactics, and weapons were designed to be effective against traditional conservatives and people who have accepted their framing of social issues.

By and large they are playing by the rules of the game that have more or less been accepted by everyone in the mainstream on both left and right since the 60s- diversity is good, racism and sexism are bad, equality is an unquestionable good, and all the various conventions that have come to make up what is considered the modern progressive dogma.

Traditional conservatives, foolishly accepting the progressive framing of morality, are constantly on the defensive will never be able to out left the left and are stuck trying to explain why their position is more moral in a time when everybody is shifting left from them. This is why traditional mainstream conservatives cannot, and will not win the culture war.

It is in such an environment where liberals, now victorious as the new mainstream moral majority have made themselves into the cultural establishment. It is in this cultural establishment that modern progressives, feminists and SJWs patrol and carry out their various forms of cultural policing and politicking for higher positions in the liberal hierarchy. The traditional right is not a threat because the methods to contain them are established.

But the victory of the left sowed the seeds of the Red Pill movement that would eventually burst out into a fully-fledged social insurgency that would prove to be immune to most of the traditional weapons that the left could bring to bear in the battlefield of ideas.

This social insurgency was unlike what the progressive establishment was used to fighting- there were no central figures to take down in a classic decapitation strike and what few figures that appeared to be important were just riding the wave of the insurgency as opposed to guiding it. While there were many differing strands of ideology within the insurgency, several contradictory at times they were all united and focused in their common goal of taking down the left.

The traditional tools of suppressing ideological opponents by drawing from the traditional rhetorical toolbox of calling them racists and sexists didn’t work, drawing dismissive derision instead of capitulation.

This social insurgency was also fast and nimble, being able to quickly react to changing circumstances and put out memes and counter-memes much faster than what their mainstream opponents could do while the progressives were at a loss to finding something that could work.

The energy was infectious, as it gained momentum more people joined the insurgency or supported it quietly from the sidelines, seeing it as something that could finally deal damage against the progressive juggernaut that previously seemed untouchable.

While all this was happening the progressive response was confused and muddled, unsure of how to respond to a new and deadly threat that was unlike anything they had seen before. Worse, the politicking in their own ranks prevented them from forming a unified response with a good deal of energy being wasted on infighting.

The progressives were fighting yesterday’s war while the insurgency is fighting from the future. The progressive narrative was maintained by vested interests in existing structures by virtue of being the establishment and hence intrinsically tied to defending them while the insurgency was free to move and strike and will.

While the progressives are spread out defending a massive memeplex of ideas in all areas of mainstream public thought the insurgents could focus on individual areas and attack them in strength, cycling through many different methods of assault while possessing few apparent weaknesses that their opponents can exploit.

All this wasn’t apparent at first, as in their arrogance progressives have assumed themselves to be the endpoint of history and did not foresee a effective large-scale challenge to their stranglehold on mainstream ideological space. It wasn’t until a series of stunning defeats to the liberal narrative did they realise that the barbarians are sacking Rome.

It is in this battlefield that you, the social insurgent find yourself now. You are part of a global reactionary movement to save your culture against the extinction of regressive progressivism that has made several key victories recently. While these victories are encouraging more work still needs to be done.

The progressive narrative has been dealt several heavy blows recently but it remains dangerous. It is now fully aware of the threat the social insurgency poses and more likely that not will become more effective in tackling the insurgency. There is no time to rest and every social insurgent needs to move fast.

The new culture wars have started, and things are about to get real interesting in the coming years.

 

Identity Politics, For Singapore?

aaeaaqaaaaaaaadraaaajdkyzmm0m2q0ltvlmtctngu3ni1ioda3ltnhzdizzwqym2vhza

It is no secret that progressives are neck-deep in identity politics. Basically all of the multi-headed Hydra of idealogical movements in modern regressive liberalism draw their rationale from the fount of identity politics. White privilege, sexism, transphobia, fat acceptance and what have you not all find their basis and reason for being there.

While us in the Reactionary Red Pill Social Insurgency reject modern regressive liberalism and many of it’s values outright, it would behoove one as a social insurgent to better understand the certain premises that the progressives use to construct their world views in order to better wage effective memetic warfare.

The truth of the matter is identity politics is ultimately divisive as the inherent nature of sorting issues out based on what people are will end up splitting them into different groups more often than not at odds.

For example, the idea of white privilege as SJWs and progressives present it necessarily single out Whites as a group from the rest, regardless of if individuals within the group truly qualify as privileged.

While the goals of white privilege as a social theory is to examine and remove racial inequity (by taking privilege away from whites), in practice as a memeplex white privilege often ends up being about the irrevocable eternal villianhood of the Caucasian as the last thing those with vested interests in peddling the theory would want is for it to actually achieve it’s stated goals and put the progressives who have benefited from it out of business.

Progressive identity politics is inherently divisive and self-sustaining with no endgame in sight. It will make a lot of noise about wanting to remove inequity but isn’t interested in true equality and will seek to continually find ever more extreme justifications to keep the memeplex running, even if it is to the point of ludicrosity.

Because it was never about equality in the first place. It is about defining an in-group of desirables and an out-group to demonise, mining social resources by attempting to arm-twist concessions out of the out-group until something gives.

This is why you don’t try to please SJWs, it is never enough. It will never be enough.

 

Now the human being is a pack animal and identity politics is not just unique to regressive progressivism. Humans have long used group selection narratives in order to strengthen social bonds, which obviously served us well in survival. Not all forms of group identification are bad or unhealthy. The incohesive group will be defeated by another that can work as a team.

But SJW identity politics is that it is inherently dyscivic. It sets up and amplifies divisions within a civillisation that are detrimental to it’s long-term survival. It is a parasitic form of group-selection that largely leeches from civillisation by setting up an aggrieved group with a chip off the shoulder demanding more from the rest while giving nothing in return. It encourages an aggrieved group to seperate their goals from the combined interests of the civillisation hosting it.

The question is do we want this here in Singapore?

Singapore has a couple of mainstream narratives running that help to define an identity for it in order for the various groups within it to function in a pro-social and harmonious manner. Our nation after all is a constructed one that rose from a unique set of circumstances that required a deliberate effort in nation building.

The mainstream Singaporean narrative asserts that the main races (seperate but equal), work together as Singaporeans first for the progress and benefit of all. Unlike the “melting pot” model of multiculturalism in the west, Singapore’s approach towards it has always been to carefully tread the lines between various groups while giving case-by-case concessions to keep everybody happy while working together towards one general vision, which generally involves peace and prosperity for all.

One could criticise all this as an artificial and constructed identity and they might have a point. But the nobody can deny that it works- the result are clear for all to see especially if you compare it to the muddled results of identity politics up north.

Despite being constructed, the mainstream Singapore model of identity politics worked because people were willing to overlook several inconvenient inconsistencies in the narratives for the big-picture view of peace and prosperity for all. The stakes were high after all as the survival of the island republic was at stake during the early decades of independence.Everybody was in the same boat together, even if we didn’t see eye-to-eye on everything.

At the end of the day, identity only matters because we identify by them. One could see the various narratives of group identity as collective hallucinations. Some collective hallucinations are more useful than others in helping us to survive. We knew that the collective hallucination of identifying as Singaporeans was more useful to our survival during the turbulent years of nation building instead of segregated collective hallucinations of race and religion creating groups constantly at odds. The pioneer generation acted accordingly and choose their brand of identity politics to go by, that of a collective, united Singapore and built up something quite unique in the world.

But things are different now that Singapore has achieved resource security. Group survival is less of an issue now and in such an easy environment, the rationale of needing to have a collective Singaporean identity is less pressing.

There is more advantage now in splitting, not uniting. Now that things are easy, the focus is not on bringing Singapore forward together as a nation but rather how various groups have been, justifiably or not, been perceived to be shortchanged by others.

It is in this environment where we start to see SJW identity politics start to rise. SJW identity politics is not rational, it has no desire to be. It relies on generating negative emotions, dividing people, putting them at odds, and creating a zero sum game where one must prevail over the other.


Screen Shot 2016-07-15 at 5.37.54 pm


 

There are many ways to respond to this of course. One could attempt to dump all forms of identity politics but this is unlikely given that we are tribal animals.

What is more likely to happen is that the out-group, which is usually the majority considered the most privileged will silently tolerate the increasing attacks on them via SJW identity politics until they decide to play the same game and lash back, which is what we are seeing this with the rise of White Nationalism with the alt-right in America right now. As opposed to capitulating to the ever-increasing demonisation of Whites under identity politics, an increasing number of disgrunted white folks are deciding to play the same game instead, but on their terms.

The eventual endgame of SJW identity politics if allowed to run unchecked, is racial and religious conflict.

I’ve observed the steady drumbeat of race baiters in Singapore attempt to import the American culture wars here, slowly tearing at the weakening national narratives that had kept our nation united and moving forward till now. They think that their anger and disgruntlement is righteous, and are trying to make as many people in their demarcated in-group disgruntled and unhappy as possible. They look at the identity politics in America and wish it here, delusionally seeing themselves as central figures in a dawning social movement.

They do not know it, but they are playing with fire.

 

 

The Insurgency Rises

131210-F-MO006-259

If you haven’t been living under a rock and have been following world events for the past year (a bad idea, for a Masculine man should always be informed on happenings) you would have noticed that there is an ongoing shift in the zeitgeist of many first-world nations.

Namely, the monolithic liberal narrative that has come to dominate the mainstream since the left won the culture war of the 60s is starting to show weakness. Stunning defeats to the liberal world view by world events such as Brexit and the rise of Trump, events unthinkable just years ago indicate that there is a sea change coming.

The change will be sudden, it will be huge, and it will be unexpected for those who are unprepared. The worldwide social insurgency against the monolithic liberal narrative is rising.

It’s hard to say how this will affect Singapore, given as a nation the liberal narrative is still trying to make headway in here. But my take is in the next few years local progressives are suddenly going to find themselves cut off from their source of idealogical supply as the dominance of the left in Europe and America is challenged by the rise of Red-Pill social insurgency there. As far as social justice goes in Singapore, local SJWs basically import their ideas wholesale with some terms switched out to barely pass for local.

This will start to be more difficult as each meme the left puts out will be co-opted and countered by several memes the Red-Pill social insurgency in short order. We have seen this happen in the past year and this will only keep up as long as the left fails to understand the nature of their opponent.

Our SJWs will have to start making up their own social theories and memes, because the ones coming in from the west will arrive increasingly ineffective.

The left is on the defensive, the pivot point has happened.

What does this mean for you, the social insurgent here? These are ripe times to seize the initiative and strike several decisive blows to the progressive degeneracy that is threatening to take root in Singapore.

The Red-Pill insurgency is moving and reacting much faster than the left, putting out memes and ideas at a higher rate, as long as local SJWs rely on progressive ideas from the left they are fighting a losing battle, attempting to force their way into social consciousness by using the old and tired cliches of “racist! sexist! xenophobic!”.

Take them down in debate without mercy, and recruit even more like minded and energetic people to your side. Drop deep into enemy territory and hit them where they least expect it in all their safe-spaced. The regressive left is losing, they just haven’t realised it yet but there is blood in the water.

It’s time for the social insurgency here to rise. The simmering culture war is about to get hot here. Your job as a masculine man is to save your culture from it’s slow progressive slide to degeneracy.