all 12 comments

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Number 1 when dealing with leftists is to NEVER EVER go into a semantic debate or to allow them to frame the discussion or to accept their terms. NEVER do that. If they cannot accept your terms and your framing, then simply refuse to move on. Tell them that they are trying to derail the conversation or that they are in bad faith and then use your time to tell the audience why they want to reframe or change the meaning of terms. It is obvious to anyone what they are doing.

Number 2 I accept woke arguments if they are woke. They want less white representation because whites are overrepresented? Say that they only want that because they hate whites and when they say no, (because leftists always start out by denying), then ask them if they would do the same if another group is overrepresented, and when they say yes, ask them to demonstrate that whites are overrepresented in the government.
When they demonstrate this, tell them that they are hateful against christian whites and that their generalisation/categorization is specifically designed to hurt white christians. And when they say no, (leftists always start out by denying), then ask them if they support intersectionality, to which they reply yes, and then ask them why they aren't including RELIGION in their analysis because to you it seems like they are specifically going against white christians with the way they have done their analysis and that you do not believe that christian whites are overrepresented.
Now they will reach the conclusion that JEWS are overrepresented and they will have to either admit that they are antiwhite or that they want to decrease jewish overrepresentation.

The reason Number 2 is effective is that if jews are not the moderators of the forum, then you cannot be targeted by their stupid racism rules, because you are not the one wanting to discriminate against jews, THEY are. You are merely defending against racism towards white people.

Number 1, the way to reframe it is to frame it as an attack on white people and NEVER EVER attack others. Never say whites are better or blacks are stupid or anything like this, but always point out how leftists are hateful and evil towards white people.

And I am just as dishonest as leftists.
Any disparity that doesn't favor whites equals systemic racism against white people. It must be due to the lived experiences of whites and their marginalization.

Whites are charged more for X crime? Police is antiwhite
Whites are found guilty of X crime more? The courts are antiwhite
etc.

They want to say whites earn more on average? Point out jews earn more on average

[–]curious2[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thoughtful response. Could you link to a particular example of this in action?

Now they will reach the conclusion that JEWS are overrepresented and they will have to either admit that they are antiwhite or that they want to decrease jewish overrepresentation.

Do you find that they’re ok with over representation in area “x” because there is under representation in area “y”.

As for the first strategy, if someone calls you a racist, what are you saying is the appropriate response?

I know this isn’t a Trump forum, but when Trump supporters “leaned in” to being called deplorables, that seemed to be pretty effective. Basically, instead of denying it and arguing semantics, hijack it, and put the burden on them to prove why their usage of that term makes it a pejorative.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you find that they’re ok with over representation in area “x” because there is under representation in area “y”.

That would be the same for every group. By definition, if you are overrepresented in one area, you must be underrepresented in another area.

As for the first strategy, if someone calls you a racist, what are you saying is the appropriate response?

I never defend myself, I always attack them. If they call you racist, you say that they are the ones being racist and hateful towards whites. You say that they are the ones wanting to discriminate against white people, that you are anti racist and that you oppose their racism and evil ways. I do the opposite of what Ben Shapiro advices us to do, and I assume malice in everything leftists do. I want to paint them as the worst possible people because they are. They are liars, racists, evil, degenerate, pedophiles, hateful, violent, etc.
And it is easy to point it out because it is the truth.

They say love is hate. They say anti racism is racism because THEY hate white people. They make its okay to be white controversial because THEY hate whites. They are against white lives matter because THEY are racist towards white people. They promote immigration because THEY hate white people and want to undermine white people and because they love brown people. They hate christianity but defend islam because THEY hate white people and think of christianity = white and islam = brown. Antiwhiteness is an everyday thing now so you can literally just link to "todays anti whiteness" and shape the conversation against them around that. Leftists wont dunk on other lefties, so I simply say that this is how the left is and they will try to defend that its okay to be racist against whites.
If they do not defend the antiwhiteness, then its them admitting that antiwhiteness is bad and then you have to nail them down on it. An apology is a guilty verdict, as per SJW rules. So you single them out and get them to distance themselves from this antiwhiteness among the left. Just like how leftists have done for years to the right "No I am not a racist like those other right wingers". Make them defend themselves from your accusations.

I don't really go into a debate with a leftist to "debate" or "discuss", I go into a debate to point out how evil they are and I twist everything that is bad for whites as racism against whites.

Example:
https://saidit.net/s/AskSaidIt/comments/9wo6/if_slavery_was_so_bad_why_didnt_they_just_run_away/zy63?context=3

Note I attack jews more than I would in other forums because it is allowed here.

I know this isn’t a Trump forum, but when Trump supporters “leaned in” to being called deplorables, that seemed to be pretty effective. Basically, instead of denying it and arguing semantics, hijack it, and put the burden on them to prove why their usage of that term makes it a pejorative.

Being racist can land me in jail for years so its not really a term that I can "own" or "hijack". It will also get you deplatformed in a lot of normie spaces with antiracism rules.
With my approach I can get leftists banned for racism on normie platforms.

And yes being anti immigration is being an anti racist and equality, because Africa doesn't have 13% white population so why should white countries have 13% african population? That's just antiwhite and racist and not fair.

Edit: They are the ones wanting to genocide whites so we are the ones defending and they are the ones attacking. That is just reality. Point it out. They are the ones being anti white and thats evil. Its not "hateful" or "bigoted" to defend yourself against leftists attacking you for being white.

[–]bug-in-recovery 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do a needs assessment to figure out what is important to people.

Being against foreign wars, or predatory financial policy, or not being demonized for your race, or wanting lower crime, etc

All of those topics can easily lead to our politics, so first do some honest probing and see what people find valuable.

[–]NeoRail 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yes. If you are approaching the conversation with a constructive goal, you should never debate. You can debate for fun, if you'd like. For constructive purposes, you should only ever have neutral discussions.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Agreed. Debates are by definition performative. Truth always matters though.

[–]SoylentCapitalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

People that value truth will learn from debates.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. Debates are for the audience.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Having the truth on your side. Knowing the history of your topic.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The truth doesn't matter. Media control matters.

[–]Fitter_HappierWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Find a few irrefutable points and keep hammering them. e.g. "What, a bunch of Jews are sitting around deciding how to act in unison? That's crazy talk."

Answer: What about the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations? "The proven and effective voice of organized American Jewry for more than half a century, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations Fund advances the interests of the American Jewish community..."

[–]Fitter_HappierWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)