(10-02-2015 09:00 AM)amity Wrote:  What do forum members think is the best way to enlighten friends or colleagues about this, as a counter to the manipulative emotional propaganda on the media?
Almost everything I've tried so far hasn't worked and has left me deflated and frustrated, having to bite my lip/stop from typing on occasions, so as not to 'offend' people with some hard facts.

Social media:
Forget it, I've tried and failed, 90% of people either prefer holiday/baby pics or are quite(sometimes very) negative about anything which isn't completely pro-migration/invasion.

Blog:
Again, anyone who's interested enough in blogging or online stuff is nearly always coming from the liberal side, and so react negatively to anything I say that questions the narrative.

Email contact with friends/colleagues:
Can be time consuming and can also be met with opposition, but does appear to meet with a better reception than going online.

Face to face:
I've had limited success with this, but some failures too, but at least nobody seems to be hostile when you bring it up in person, to me this appears to be the best way to engage peoples' minds about this, with little chance of people flying off the handle and becoming antagonistic like is wont to happen online.

If you want to troll them, accuse them of having "white savior complex" and tell them it's racist to bring these people here rather than help them in their own countries. Tell them that they are tacitly admitting they think Europe is better than these people's countries and that it's a problematic outgrowth of their own subconscious, concealed white supremacy.

Basically if you want to rustle their jimmies you have to out-signal them. They must never be allowed to feel good about the stupid shit they do or advocate for, otherwise they'll keep doing it. Shame, shame shame. You take away their good feels and maybe they'll abandon this shit and move on to something else. Trying to convince them with facts is mostly impossible, because this shit isn't based on facts or logic. It's based on feels.

Some will eventually be mugged by reality and convinced, but don't count on that happening for most people.

Nobody talks about the atrocities that Allied Forces committed on the German civilians and especially by the Russians soldiers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war..._civilians

As Solzhenitsyn admits:

"We all knew very well that if the girls were Germans, we could rape them and then shoot them. It was almost a sign of battle honors."

In his poem "Prussian nights " he wrote:

"Hering Strasse, number 22. The house was not burned, just looted and devastated. Someone was sobbing by the wall, half muffled. The mother was wounded, the daughter half-dead. The youngest daughter on the mattress - dead. How many were on top of her? The whole platoon? The girl became a woman, and the woman turned into a corpse ... The mother cried: " Soldier, kill me!"

Blaster, you're blatantly asking for more censorship whether you consciously acknowledge it or not. I've seen your work in other threads and you seem to have a clear allergy to when anything that can be deemed racist pops up, you're very ready to disavow it. Accept that some topics in this thread have triggered you and if that's because: it's personal, you're not used to seeing discussion like this, your habits and political leanings are too distant for it to reside in your comfort zone.

I'm not trying to call you out either, but I feel the need to bring attention to these types of responses because it seems like whenever these discourses are allowed to run, the dialog continues unaffected. The people who are emotionally affected take a break or leave. The people with nothing substantial to add leave as well. RVF doesn't need the stringent moderating that so many call for. We might as well be mommy bloggers if tone and possible interpretation warrants action on members. I prefer to debate or argue it out. It's cleansing with that alternative.


Edit:
What slays me the most in these debates on what's beyond the pale to discuss or say is how many who use reasons for censoring don't realize how hypocritical their position is.

Defend A because C, don't defend B because C. C is not effect of B put upon A, but an independent situation or concern.

Quote:Blaster, you're blatantly asking for more censorship whether you consciously acknowledge it or not.

I'm merely requesting (as politely as I can) that certain controversial topics be kept out of the thread unless there's clear and logical case for relevance. That's not censorship, that's just staying on-topic.

Quote:I've seen your work in other threads and you seem to have a clear allergy

This is a personal attack.

Quote:I'm not trying to call you out either,

Bullshit.

Quote:to when anything that can be deemed racist pops up, you're very ready to disavow it.

Then take it up with me in those threads.

Quote:Accept that some topics in this thread have triggered you and if that's because:

The only post in this thread that has made me angry about anything other than the migrant crisis itself is yours.

(10-02-2015 09:29 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  The correct approach is not to lay out the facts for them to pick up, but to mock and ridicule anyone spreading the bullshit. Point out their hypocrisy, highlight their lack of logic. Use their own catchphrases and motivations against them. They won't be convinced personally, but reading your discussion, a hundred others will. Someone being shamed leads to a far larger loss of face than someone being proven wrong. Use it to your advantage.

I completely agree. Mockery and ridicule are the best tactics.

Here is a good quote from George Orwell to use against liberals and SJWs: Liberal: a power worshipper without power.

You're clearly angry as you stated and I find that shameful. Sorry, you're not authority on everything you're desperately trying to be. People will be allowed to discuss things and if the tone bothers you because you're not ready, leave the thread. They aren't the problem, but you're not willing to accept that. That's unfortunate.


Edit:

Oh, and you have no right to cry over a supposed personal attack.
Samseau, Scorpion, Zelcorpion, Blik Mang and many others are regularly called racists for daring to speak outside the programming box. Their assumed reputations follow them thread to thread and there's certainly a baby social justice league aimed at banning some (like Samseau) for pointing out inconvenient facts that destroy PC narratives and such. If they can be blamed for agenda driving and spreading racism thread to thread, I'm more than welcomed to point out how you're driving a specific cause home here as I've witnessed you do elsewhere, despite facts or prudence. You're behavior was the reason for the statement of "I've seen you do so in many threads" to be relevant or meaningful in the first place. You provided a disprovable takedown of the 'Erectus' book in that thread because you didn't like the subject or idea it put forth.

It's all fun and games, and fine with me, until members insist something not be discussed anymore, threads closed or members banned because it makes that individual queasy in the feels. Grow up.

(10-02-2015 12:17 PM)Blaster Wrote:  

Quote:Blaster, you're blatantly asking for more censorship whether you consciously acknowledge it or not.

I'm merely requesting (as politely as I can) that certain controversial topics be kept out of the thread unless there's clear and logical case for relevance. That's not censorship, that's just staying on-topic.

Quote:I've seen your work in other threads and you seem to have a clear allergy

This is a personal attack.

Quote:I'm not trying to call you out either,

Bullshit.

Quote:to when anything that can be deemed racist pops up, you're very ready to disavow it.

Then take it up with me in those threads.

Quote:Accept that some topics in this thread have triggered you and if that's because:

The only post in this thread that has made me angry about anything other than the migrant crisis itself is yours.

I motion for this thread to be included in the Hall of fame threads as I have learned so much just in this thread from everyone but am afraid that this thread is approaching Goodwin's law.

Close to 3000 posts in 30 days, has to be some sort of RVF record.

(10-02-2015 09:00 AM)amity Wrote:  What do forum members think is the best way to enlighten friends or colleagues about this, as a counter to the manipulative emotional propaganda on the media?

Humour.

You have to speak Leftist. Don't argue with facts: just contemptuously snark at people having the argument like you believe you're the cool kid sitting at the back of the class and just so far above it all.

This is the classic liberal narcissistic self-construct - because they can't measure up to the traditional standards of mainstream society, they reject those values to project their self-image, most commonly through moral-superiority over and mockery of those who believe in their values.

As such, by signalling the false appearance of caring the least you can shift desired behavioural attitudes to the right.

Basically, Be John Stewart.

This is a predictable audience-identification character in any show made by Leftists:









Joss Whedon writes this character again and again, giving his work a lightweight, emotionally-cheap tone.

The tells are them always positioning themselves as being superior to others, and being one stepped removed from the action: 'above it all'.

When they write fiction, you'll get a constant parade of characters chuckling over their own jokes, and eternally raising-eyebrows.



Every Goony-Bearded Tech or Media Beta / Gamma deeply-believes that they're this character, and you won't be able to unseat their delusion except by offering superior social proof.

I deeply, deeply hate these characters: I prefer the company of genuine people who are willing to risk social status for their deeply-felt passions, and people who are in the moment rather than outside of it, but, if you want to control the discourse, fake being this character.

Having a wide social circle of musician friends - the majority of whom I'd class as being deeply politically-left - I find it hilarious that the very things they pompously-sneer at as being Bad For 'Real' Music somehow becomes Good when applied to wider society.

So if they're droning on about the recent SJW shift from Equality of Opportunity to Equality Of Outcome, I'd simply post this:

Quote:Before Equality of Outcome:



With Equality of Outcome:

So, in the case of 'Cultural Enrichment', I'd probably post this:

Quote:Because nothing succeeds in bringing people together like diversifying their beliefs, desired actions and long-term goals does.

With Unity:



With Diversity:

This might seem trivial and trite, but its been a very-successful long term behavioural modification tactic for me when I was sick of certain users bleating the same talking points ad nauseam. Leftists are more concerned with appearing Cool and Intelligent than being Genuinely-Concerned about others, since the narcissistic supply gained from giving the appearance of helping others can't compete with the larger, more visible gains gathered from being perceived as being above others.

http://galliawatch.blogspot.com/2015/09/...nning.html

Quote:Jean Raspail: "We are only at the beginning..."

Here is an interview with Jean Raspail that appears in Le Point. It is no surprise that he is unashamedly realistic about the inevitable collapse of Western civilization - unless we give up our "compassion".

- Le Point: Some on the right consider your book The Camp of the Saints, written in 1972, as visionary, especially since the refugee crisis. How do you feel about that?

- JR: This migrant crisis puts an end to thirty years of insults and slander against me. I have been called a fascist because of this book considered to be a racist work…

- Are you a racist?

- No, not at all! You can't spend your life traveling the world, be a member of the Society of French Explorers, meet I don't know how many endangered populations, and be a racist. That would be hard, it seems to me. When it came out in 1972 the book shocked people tremendously, and for a reason. There was a period, notably during the seven-year term of Valéry Giscard d'Estaing when a veritable intellectual terrorism was employed against right-wing writers.

- "Intellectual terrorism", already?

- Yes. They insulted me, dragged me in the dirt, then gradually it subsided. Because, little by little they began to experience what I had described in the book. A certain number of intellectuals, including those on the left, acknowledged that there was some truth in what I had announced. Bertrand Poirot-Delpech, who had crucified me in Le Monde when the book came out, declared in an article in the same newspaper in 1998, that in the end I was right. Now it's over.

- The Camp of the Saints also inspires a rejection as well as an evocation of your name…

- Among the anti-Raspail irredentists, only Laurent Joffrin remains. There's nothing you can do about him, he continues to spit on me, he can't help it. But my friend Denis Tillinac has offered to reply to him. I'm not revengeful. I'm now in my proper place.

Note: Joffrin is head of the left-wing newspaper Libération.

- If this book is not racist, how would you describe it?

- It's a surprising book.

- Surprising?

- This book came into being in a strange way. Before, I had written books about my travels and novels, with little success. One day in 1972, I was in the South of France staying with one of my wife's aunts, near Saint-Raphaël, in Vallauris. I had an office with a view of the sea and I said to myself: "And what if they came?" This "they" was not clearly defined at first. Then I imagined that the Third World would rush into this blessed country that is France. It's a surprising book. It took a long time to write it, but it came to me on its own. I would stop writing in the evening and start again in the morning without knowing where I was going. There is an inspiration in this book that is alien to myself. I am not saying it is divine, but strange.

- There is one thing you didn't anticipate: the rejection generated by this book from the moment it appeared…

- When my publisher Robert Laffont, an apolitical man, read the manuscript, he was very enthusiastic and did not change a comma. Moreover, I did not change anything.

- Would such a book have been possible today?

- At first, The Camp of the Saints did not sell. For at least five or six years it stagnated. Very few sales. Then three years later, suddenly, the sales went up. Success came by word-of-mouth and thanks to the promotion from right-wing writers, Until the day, in 2001, when a boatload of Kurdish refugees went ashore in Boulouris, near Saint-Raphaël, a few yards from the office where I wrote The Camp of the Saints! This affair made a terrible row in the region. Right away they began talking about my book again and it reached a wide public. It was the beginning of the arrival by sea of people from elsewhere. I am a bit ashamed, because whenever there is a large influx of migrants, it gets reprinted. It's consubstantial with what is happening.

- Is it a political book?

- Perhaps a little, yes. The last stronghold of faithful and of fighters is composed of patriots attached to their identity and their land. They rise up against general fraternity and miscegenation (métissage)…

- You say you are not of the extreme right, but your book has become like a tract within certain xenophobic groups. Are you sorry about that?

- You're speaking of the extreme of the extreme right! It's possible that this book is being misused and there can be, at times, language that is excessive. There's nothing I can do about that. Anyway, I don't go to the Internet, I have not entered the 21st century, so I don't know what they're saying. Personally I am on the right, and it doesn't bother me to say so. I am even "right-right".

- Which means?

- Let's say more to the right than Juppé. I am first of all a free man, never beholden to a party. I patrol the borders.

Note: Alain Juppé, mayor of Bordeaux, is hardly on the right. A former member of Sarkozy's cabinet, he is known as an activist for the Muslim population of his city and has promoted the building of mosques.

- Do you vote?

- Not always. I'm a royalist. I vote in the last round of the presidential elections. I don't vote left, that's for sure.

- Have you thought about a sequel to The Camp of the Saints?

- It is certain that there will be one, but not from me. Will it come out before the great collapse? I'm not sure.

- In your book you speak of the "ferocious" nature of the migrants. But we see today that those arriving from Syria or elsewhere don't have a knife between their teeth…

Note: The interviewer is wrong. Rapes and attacks are reported everyday. The interviewer's name is Saïd Mahrane. I know nothing about him.

- What's happening today isn't important, it's anecdotal, for we are only at the beginning. Right now, the whole world is talking about this, there are thousands of specialists on the issue of migrants, it's a chaos of commentary. Not one looks at the thirty-five years that lie ahead. The situation we are living through today is nothing compared to what awaits us in 2050. There will be nine billion people on the earth. Africa has gone from one hundred million to one billion inhabitants in a century, and perhaps twice that in 2050. Will the world be livable? The overpopulation and the wars of religion will make the situation fragile. That's when the invasion will occur, it is ineluctable. The migrants will come in great part from Africa, the Middle East and the borders of Asia…

- Should we fight the evil at the roots and bomb the strategic points of Daesh, as France has just done?

- It's their problem not ours. It doesn't concern us. What are we doing in this business? Why do we want to play a role? Let them cope! Years ago we got out of these regions? Why go back?

- And what do we do when Syria sends out orders to attack France?

- We block them. We prevent them from entering French territory. The politicians have no solution to this problem. It's like the debt - we pass it on to our grandchildren. Our grandchildren will have to manage this problem of massive migration.

- The Catholic Church is not at all on this wave length. It is urging the faithful to show their generosity…

- I have written that Christian charity will suffer a bit when faced with the answers to the influx of migrants. It will have to steel itself and suppress compassion of all sorts. Otherwise, our countries will be submerged.

- Refuse everybody, including the Eastern Christians?

- Possibly. But they are closer to the Westerners through their religion. This is why many Frenchmen would like to accept them. France, this country with no religious belief, proves that the basis of Western civilization is a Christian basis. People, even if they don't go to church anymore and or practice, react in accordance with this Christian basis.

I'd also argue that the estimated ten percent are enough.

I've found it's most productive to feed people controversial ideas when they are disguised as irrelevant or uncontroversial information.

For instance; the youtube videos on aleksandr Solzhenitsyn that cover long dead battles are priceless. Only overt communists will argue against that, and they usually won't if they are because they know that open communism is a fringe element itself in USA.

If you rope people in with what appears harmless, yet informative they will often do follow up on their own. I've watched this take affect many times. You don't control people, nor should that be your goal. We are not the insane ones, our enemies are. Your associates will always display their individual ideas and ideals, but your impact will be obvious.

To get people thinking, well those able to, what you definitely can't do is attack them or their ideas straight on. It makes them defensive and they double down. What is best is using 'gateway ideas' and encouraing rational thought. This is why libertarian thought is actually a great place to begin. It has all the GoodPerson benefits of leftism, but encourages thinking for yourself, rationality and sense of selfdetermination. It also preaches the difference between negative rights - the right to be left alone - to positive rights - the right to get something from someone else. Positive rights are what SJWs and leftists use as 'rights' which does not stand to rational analysis. In order to even understand this, you have to be able to think rationally. Libertarianism is a great beginning.

Once people are beginning to express rational libertarian ideas, meaning they begin examining their environment, arguments and history from a logical standpoint, then it's very easy to ask Socratic questions such as 'is there really a gender gap, if all else being equal'?

As for women, I think Trump has shown the way, be strong and unwaveringly unapologetic, without using any taboo subjects. I've never found any women to actually take a strong stand on any ideological issues if I was fucking them. If we want to change women's opinion we simply need more redpill men. It's that easy.

(10-02-2015 04:14 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  http://galliawatch.blogspot.com/2015/09/...nning.html

Quote:Jean Raspail: "We are only at the beginning..."
;;;;
- I have written that Christian charity will suffer a bit when faced with the answers to the influx of migrants. It will have to steel itself and suppress compassion of all sorts. Otherwise, our countries will be submerged.

- Refuse everybody, including the Eastern Christians?

- Possibly. But they are closer to the Westerners through their religion. This is why many Frenchmen would like to accept them. France, this country with no religious belief, proves that the basis of Western civilization is a Christian basis. People, even if they don't go to church anymore and or practice, react in accordance with this Christian basis.

That man was ahead of his time understanding the danger of unfettered immigration by highly diverse people.

It seems almost as if some elite bugger has read the book and said: "Yup - that's going to work - destroy them by a dose of Camp of the Saints."



Let's defeat them with their Christian compassion.

All races and civilizations are equal:

   

And who is going to pay for all of this? That little guy:




While I don't think that Whites will disappear - the top will remain white, it will simply destroy utterly the previous cultures:

Hehe - Logic of the Greens - backwards vs enriching:





And yeah - politicians lying nonetheless:



Sweden's civilization has come from elsewhere and it would be great if Sweden became like Africa. I guess that's why so many Africans try to leave their continent. They want to bring their superior civilization and prosperity to us Europeans, so that we may be more like them.



The only good thing is that it's still in the early phases and there is time to react or move.

Germany has just passed a law enabling the city of Hamburg to seize "empty" commercial properties, in order to house migrants. And Winter has not started yet: soon, they will allow for seizure of private properties...

Can you imagine the scene? Imagine: you have just bought a commercial property, to build a restaurant or car repair shop on it, and one morning you discover that your property has been seized, to accommodate young migrant males...

And meanwhile, Syrians (actually Egyptians or Palestinians, most of them) and Afghans are fighting each others in the "refugees" centers...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34422558

"Hamburg has become the first German city to pass a law allowing the seizure of empty commercial properties in order to house migrants.

The influx of migrants has put pressure on the authorities of the northern city to find accommodation. Some migrants are sleeping rough outdoors.

....
On Thursday more than 200 migrants fought each other in a mass brawl at a reception centre in Hamburg-Bergedorf. Police said Syrians and Afghans were involved in the latest clash.
Similar fights have erupted at some other migrant centres in Germany. A bigger brawl took place near Kassel, in central Germany, at the end of September."

But Germans start to get seriously worried: " a new survey by broadcaster ARD said 51% of people admitted the influx of migrants scared them. It suggests a four-year low in Chancellor Angela Merkel's popularity. "

Zelcorpion, do my eyes deceive me or are those memes in French and German? That's good. It means the message is being spread in those languages.

If you speak with leftists and other SJWs, you'll notice that they dispute the facts, contest the figures.

Especially, they will say: "40 or 50% of the refugees coming into Europe are families". Yeah sure... at most, 10% are families... but anyway, I'll tell you what I answer to them (given that nobody totally agrees on the ratio of families versus single males):

So I say to them : Anyway, we can be sure of one thing: 0% of these migrants are single women...

It shuts the leftists off. I mean, they can pretend that "many families, lots of families" come to Europe, but, they can't pretend that single women are among the crowds of migrants.

So one thing is indisputable: Among this million of migrants (having illegally come into Europe this year), 0% are single women. So, zero percent are useful to me, as a single straight man.

A fact that makes all men (even leftists) pause and think twice... hordes of people coming in, and among them, 0% of single women!

(10-02-2015 05:26 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  Zelcorpion, do my eyes deceive me or are those memes in French and German? That's good. It means the message is being spread in those languages.

Yes, they are, in part, in French...

About France, the most important data is illustrated in the following picture. It is about drepanocytose, a disease affecting babies born from at least one African parent.

So, hospitals in France systematically test for the drepanocytose disease, and thus, we obtain statistics on the number of African babies born in France (there is no other official racial statistics in France, the governments being to afraid of the truth).

So, below, the figures that you see written are the percentages of African babies born in France, by regions... and you'll notice that, for example in Paris, more than 60% of newborn babies have one or two African parents...

Germans are now flocking to get "Refugees Welcome" tattoos.

^ Good. Now we can identify them.

(10-02-2015 07:35 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  ^ Good. Now we can identify them.

Yep, it hope they all get them, it will just make them easier to purge later.

(10-02-2015 07:35 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  ^ Good. Now we can identify them.

When we send back the invaders, we can send them complementary white slaves back with them.

G

They want to live in diversity? They will get their wish.

(10-02-2015 07:31 PM)iop890 Wrote:  Germans are now flocking to get "Refugees Welcome" tattoos.

That tattoo doesn't even make any sense. The silhouette should be young arab men with samsung tvs under each arm and one in the background wearing a bomb vest.

And here in Australia, one of those refugees from Iraq we welcomed a few years ago just blew the head off a policeman in a random terrorist attack.

(10-02-2015 09:46 PM)RawGod Wrote:  And here in Australia, one of those refugees from Iraq we welcomed a few years ago just blew the head off a policeman in a random terrorist attack.

No media coverage of that in the UK.

Got any links?

(10-02-2015 11:16 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

(10-02-2015 09:46 PM)RawGod Wrote:  And here in Australia, one of those refugees from Iraq we welcomed a few years ago just blew the head off a policeman in a random terrorist attack.

No media coverage of that in the UK.

Got any links?

http://www.theage.com.au/nsw/parramatta-...k0h73.html