Written by Samurai Robots.
“You’ve got to be mindful of the consequences of the words”, as no less an orator than former President George W. Bush once said. We humans use our words to describe our realities, but the words we employ may not always correspond faithfully to the physical actualities around us. While imperfect, language is probably the best tool we have as a species; however, we should be aware that the map is not the territory, or, to put it another way, that the meme is not necessarily the meaning.
In the political arena, language becomes a weapon, both offensive and defensive. The idea is to get your opponent to follow the routes you lay down while you keep to the high ground and avoid the dead ends, false trails, and ambushes set by your adversaries. A successful politician is not necessarily someone who brings good fortune to his country, but someone who can set the frame of, and thereby dominate, the debates of the day. As such, politicians tend to be masters of evading difficult questions and avoiding linguistic traps. Or, in the case of Theresa “Maybot” May, they may simply opt to repeat the same simplistic phrases (“strong and stable!“) ad nauseam.
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is another such simple slogan, a Jedi mind trick, designed to force you into a dilemma: support BLM or admit to being a racist. In reality, BLM is a well-funded and organised movement with a radical anti-White agenda forming part of a larger cultural campaign against White interests that has been ongoing for decades. Ultimately, BLM seek to usurp and replace Whites in their own countries and destroying statues and memorials is one way to demoralise Whites and convince them of their powerlessness. All this is done while pushing a victim narrative and framing the Whites that resist as oppressors.
The goal here is to provide you with a false dichotomy in which not supporting an organisation which despises you is conflated with a callous indifference to the plight of poor black people cruelly murdered by the police. Outing yourself as a “racist” still carries a significant social penalty so understandably, when faced with a choice between two doors, one marked “RACIST!” and the other “GOOD PERSON!”, most people opt for the former, without necessarily worrying too much about what may be lurking in the room behind. Incidentally, speaking of linguistic tricks, it always strikes me as funny that say, Nigerians, are an “ethnic minority” despite outnumbering the ethnic English about 8 to 1 (and not just in Nigeria, in some parts of London too no doubt).
At the end of the day, whether I or anyone else support BLM or not (and you can probably guess my stance on the matter) has very little effect on whether black people are going to continue to shoot one another or fight with the cops in America. All this is pretty much lost on the politically naïve, who are forced to go along with the pre-packaged narrative, although perhaps with a sense that the paradise beyond the non-racist door wasn’t quite all it was promised to be, as they see BLM gleefully burning down their downtown areas.
We can often expose the disingenuous nature of this kind of proposition by inverting it. For example, if, in response to BLM’s screeching, someone retorts “White Lives Matter”, or even the completely inoffensive “All Lives Matter”, the pink haired idiot brigade scream that this is tantamount to openly supporting Hitler, thereby revealing the inherent hypocrisy in the slogan. “It’s OK to be White.” was another such mind trick that laid bare the anti-White double standards under which we live. The battle among White/black/All Lives is not the first clash between competing slogans. In regards to abortion, we had the “Pro-choice” side – hey, everyone likes choice, right? – against the “Pro-life” side, life also being something most people are very keen on, freedom-loving Patrick Henry* types being perhaps the exception.
One of our own slippery politicians, Dominic Raab, refused to fall into the verbal snare set for him by Sophy Ridge in a recent interview when she asked him whether “All Votes Count” in relation to the 2020 US presidential election. This innocent inquiry hid a trap intended to trick Raab into picking a side or appearing anti-democratic. Ridge knew it and Raab knew it. The savvy foreign secretary nimbly sidestepped the potential landmine, saying diplomatically that it was right to proceed “carefully and sensitively” in welcoming Joe Biden’s victory following the fraught US election.
It’s probably no exaggeration to say that, for most of us, voting itself feels like a trap, a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, yet, unlike Raab, we can’t simply dodge the dilemma. As another aside, while I can’t stand the man, Jordan Peterson’s interview with Cathy Newman was an absolute masterclass in how to avoid such attempts at entrapment, with the far more intelligent Peterson dropping the ham-fisted Newman into her own spiked pits every time she clumsily tried to misdirect him.
Back in the here and now, we have, or had, two competing narratives: “All Votes Count”, coming from the Democrats, and “Stop The Count”, from the Trump side. Team Trump quickly realised that “Stop The Count” was by far the inferior slogan – “What?! You don’t think votes should count?!” – and pivoted to the alliterative, if slightly grammatically forced, “Stop The Steal” instead. No one likes a thief, after all.
We now find ourselves at a fork in the road with two maps to guide us. I believe that there were, in all likelihood, extreme levels of voter fraud involved in the recent election, ultimately allowing dementia Joe, horrible Harris, et al to steal the election. Unlike our political leaders and the fake news media, numbers do not lie and, in this case, the numbers simply do not add up. Thus, it is now up to the Trump campaign’s lawyers to prove their allegations in court, through what I can only imagine will be the mother of all legal battles, a sort of law-maggedon if you will.
Alongside the incoming legal shenanigans is the narrative battle and this is a fight we can all take part in. Both sides may well be crooked as hell, but we will see the Dems and their allies repeating phrases like “conspiracy theory”, “without evidence” (I mean, what even is the Internet? Never heard of it.), and, as a man who’s always willing to give a clever pun its due, my personal favourite “Bideniers”. Their opponents, who are at least for now /our guys/, must not only win the day in court, but also present themselves as staunch defenders of electoral integrity while painting the – ironically named – Democrats as the dirty riggers that they truly are.
To win, we must insist that we are correct, that Trump is a martyr, brought down by a globalist fraud, and Biden is an illegitimate leader, a thief-in-chief, not to mention a senile old child-sniffer. There is enough evidence of fraud, dead voters, computer glitches, legal violations, and the like to create a noxious cloud of suspicion that will never go away, no matter who finally “wins” the election. The Democrats hurled baseless accusations at Trump for years (as well as a few true ones, I admit), it’s only fair that their own skulduggery return to haunt them for a long time to come. An example of one powerful meme is the diagram of red and blue graph lines in which the blue line suddenly overtakes the red one. This is the kind of image that needs to be shoved down the lefts’ throats.
We must stay strong and concede nothing to these people. Their hollow calls for peace and reconciliation are a sick joke; raving communists like AOC are already calling for vile Trump supporters to be placed on lists, presumably to be shipped off to a gulag after their guns have been confiscated. Behind the Dems, we have the fake news mafia, big tech, and assorted globalists around the world, while backing up the Donald, we have 70 million disenfranchised deplorables as well as, it must be said, the facts. While it certainly helps if reality is on your side, victory is by no means assured. Yet Trump has pulled off miracles before – now let’s see what happens when an enraged billionaire President with his back to the wall strikes back.
*Patrick Henry (May 29, 1736 – June 6, 1799) was an American Founding Father best known for his declaration: “Give me liberty, or give me death!”