How To Trump SJWs Page 4

  By far, the South Carolina Republican debate showed more than anything that Trump was willing to point out false narratives that no one else had the guts to address. He garnered a lot of support from libertarians and independents when he took on a man they consider the worst president in history, George W. Bush. At the debate, Jeb! attacked Trump, saying, “And while Donald Trump was building a reality TV show, my brother was building a security apparatus to keep us safe.”

  Trump hit back a point no one else had ever dared to say: “The World Trade Center came down during your brother’s reign, remember that.”

  Marco Rubio tried to jump in to defend Bush, to which Trump once again pointed out the obvious: “How did he keep us safe when the World Trade Center — the World — excuse me. I lost hundreds of friends. The World Trade Center came down during the reign of George Bush. He kept us safe? That is not safe. That is not safe, Marco. That is not safe.”

  Jeb! then acted like a child when he said, “ I'm not going to invite Donald Trump to the rally in Charleston on Monday afternoon when my brother is coming to speak.”

  Trump nailed it when he replied, “I don't want to go.” Peals of laughter erupted from the audience.

  It was the same speech where Jeb! said his mother was the strongest woman he knew. Trump interjected, “She should be running.”

  Rule No. 4: Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.

  SJWs have become masters at using this, but they’re so sloppy that their antics come crumbling apart once a little logic is applied. SJWs like this tactic because it’s easy — all you have to do is call out hypocrisy. The bad news for them is that along with Rule No. 5, ridicule, it’s one of the only tactics that younger, less-educated SJWs know how to use. That means that once you learn to stump SJWs when they use this tactic, they don’t have much ammunition left over.

  One of SJWs’ favorite ways to “make the enemy live up to its own book of rules” is to cite Bible verses at conservatives. Their goal is to make their opponent feel like a Christian hypocrite and get him sidetracked. Conservatives fall into the trap when they assume the SJW is trying to have a genuine theological discussion about the meaning of a certain verse.

  The Christian hypocrisy tactic comes up a lot in the debate over America accepting refugees. A typical SJW will quote “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31) and “ Do to others as you would have them do to you ” (Luke 6:31). The biggest mistake you can make is to get into a debate with them about what Jesus actually meant. Save that for talking with people who are actually Christians. If you engage with them on little points like this, you lose in two ways: 1) They win by successfully diverting you from the real issue, refugees, and getting you engaged on a totally different topic, Christian theology; 2) They win because you’re taking them at face value, rather than calling them out for using a sneaky diversion tactic.

  First of all, it’s illogical to think that you can win a debate over the true meaning of Christianity with an SJW. Christians have been arguing about what it means to be a “true Christian” for two millennia, and even today, there’s no consensus on what’s required for salvation or even what books should be in the Christian canon.

  Secondly, SJWs don’t really care about what the Bible says. They’re simply trying to make you live up to your own book of rules. Most SJWs aren’t Christians, and some will even lie and say they are just to get you to take them seriously. SJWs aren’t concerned with the true meaning of Jesus’ teachings. They only like the verses in line with their ideology — the same Bible verses they’ll use against you to paint you as a hypocrite, either in public or in your private conscience.

  This rule is the best example of why conservatives should study logic. Not to debate Leftists — as we’ve already seen that’s often pointless — but simply as a means to use logic to trip them up.

  Logic, in its simplest definition, is the methodology used to construct a sound argument. In the above example of refugees, an SJW is using the following logic: “You’re a Christian. Christians follow the Bible. In the Bible, Jesus says “Love your neighbor.” Refugees are our global neighbor. Therefore, we must love refugees. If we love someone we’ll help them. Helping means letting them into our country. So if you’re a Christian you’ll support refugees coming into America.”

  You can probably notice numerous holes in this argument, and that’s fine from the SJW’s point of view. In fact, it’s exactly what they want. Leftists want you to get caught up in discussing the meaning of “love” or the definition of “neighbor.” As long as you’re doing that, you’re not debating the real issue of refugees. When you’re on the defensive, they win.

  If you want to win, you’ve got to go outside of the loop they’re trying to create. Say, “Hold on a minute. Are you advocating that we base all American policies on the Bible?” They’ll squirm and try to get out of answering. Maybe they’ll tell you you’re a hypocrite or say that you’re the one who wants that because you’re a Christian. These are all diversion tactics — don’t fall for them!

  Instead, keep pushing back. They don’t actually want American foreign policy to be based on the Bible. They’re assuming you do and constructing an entire false narrative around it. Stay on the attack. Ask them why they’re advocating for a religious theocracy, which is what America would be if we made policy decision based on Biblical teachings. If they don’t run away, your goal is to get them to discuss actual facts — like the high percentage of Muslim immigrants who support Sharia law, the high cost of refugees to taxpayers, and how from a financial standpoint more refugees can be helped if they stay in the Middle East due to the high cost of living in the U.S.

  Arguments like this example are a type of logical fallacy called a red herring. While no one knows the exact origin of the term, it likely refers to the use of a pungent fish to throw hounds off a scent. In logic, a red herring is a diversionary tactic — something that seems related to the subject at hand but is actually irrelevant.

  One of the blessings of how illogical SJWs are, is that when they try to make you live up to your own book of rules, they’re usually dead wrong. It’s easy to call out the fallacies they use. And in the same way that SJWs try to label you as a hypocrite, you must do the same back to them — only with the Left it’s so much easier to point out ways they’re actually hypocritical.

  Trump is a mastermind at making his opponents live up to their own rules. Republicans like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz — both very logical — point out many of the same inconsistencies as Trump, but they’re too long-winded. It barely makes the news, if at all. Trump, on the other hand, is hilariously bold in describing how the Left doesn’t follow its own rules. That means he gets more press, expands his audience and people have fun watching him.

  A few examples:

  We all know Obama loves to preach about climate change. He even shut down Yellowstone National Park over part of a busy Father’s Day weekend in 2016 so he could give a speech about it. Trump called him out for jetting off to Hawaii on Air Force One — an old Boeing 747 with old engines: “ But think of it. Flies a 747 to Hawaii and back, and then he gets up and gives a speech about global warming. I mean, give me a break,” Trump said. [42]

  When Hillary Clinton tried to play the women’s card, Trump called her out because the Clinton Foundation pays male executives 38 percent more than female executives. [43]

  When Hillary called Trump sexist, he brought up how she was an “enabler,” alluding to how she participated in the harassment of women Bill had affairs with or raped (as detailed in Roger Stone’s book The Clinton’s War on Women ). [44] In September 2015, Hillary said to victims of sexual assault: “You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed and we're with you." [45] At a campaign event few months later Hillary was asked whether J uanita Broderick, Kathleen Wiley and Paula Jones — who claimed Bill Clinton raped and/or sexually assaulted them — should be believed. Hillary’s response was obviously scripted: “Well, I would sa
y that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.” [46] And then, brilliantly, Trump came out with the ad “Is Hillary really protecting women?” The ad uses voices of some of Bill Clinton’s sexual assault victims, followed by Hillary cackling. It was a subtle video. Their names weren’t mentioned, and it was only 15 seconds long. The ad didn’t need to be specific though — reporters took care of filling in all the details. [47]

  Remember that when you’re debating with Leftists, it’s not really a debate. They’re incapable of logic, they don’t actually care about the issue, and all you need to do is trip them up. There’s always some way in which they’re being hypocritical — you only have to find it.

  Watch Last Week Tonight with John Oliver or The Rachel Maddow Show and you’ll start to notice deep flaws in the thinking of the radical Left. Read a couple books or watch some videos on logic and debate. Watch Trump, especially his interviews with liberals like George Stephanopoulos and Anderson Cooper. Or his news conference on the $6 million he raised for veterans at Trump Tower, which will go down as one of the biggest attacks on the mainstream media in history. [48] Once you start to pick apart the logical fallacies of the Left, you can use those same tools for almost any topic.

  Rule No. 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.

  Ridicule is subjecting someone “to contemptuous and dismissive language or behavior.” Liberals have been using ridicule for years now, whether it’s trying to paint all Republicans as “rednecks” or making fun of them on The Daily Show , where the only “news” reported on is mischaracterization of conservatives.

  The Right traditionally has been hesitant to ridicule people because we’re too concerned with bourgeois values like “being nice.” The Left knows conservatives have this propensity for decentness, and they turn it against us. They claim to be concerned with people’s feelings, but then attempt to censor people by calling them names like “racist” and “sexist.” They know mainstream conservatives are too nice to hit them back. Let’s hope we take a cue from Trump and start using ridicule more, because it’s truly a powerful weapon.

  Democrats wouldn’t have so many votes except people are ridiculed for being conservative, especially the younger generation. Among millennials especially, there are now “liberal rednecks” — basically rural kids who are insecure about their worldliness, who identify as Democrats for no obvious reason than trying to prove they’re not hicks.

  Ridicule works on SJWs because words really do hurt them. That’s why on college campuses they demand “safe spaces” free from “mean words.” At Emory University in Atlanta in May 2016, students woke up one morning to find pro-Trump messages written in chalk on sidewalks all over campus. SJWs were so upset that they stormed the office of the president to talk about how they felt unsafe and intimidated. As Reason noted in its coverage, Trump “represents glorious resistance to the noxious political correctness and censorship that has come to define the modern college experience.” SJWs know it, and they play the victim when others use free speech and try to shut it down.

  It’s a rather unfair playing field. SJWs get upset about Republicans writing “Trump 2016” in chalk. Conservatives have to worry that SJWs’ claims that they’re sexist or racist will get them fired. To combat this, conservatives need to do two things simultaneously: shun all claims of “racism,” “sexism,” and “Islamophobia” as ridiculous, and attack the Left with both ridicule and the same words, like “bigoted,” “racist,” and “intolerant.” SJWs use these words because to them, they’re the worst insults imaginable. That’s why it’s good to throw the same words back in their faces. For the virtue signaling, ignorant SJWs, it’s only fear of being labeled sexist or racist that keeps them loyal to the liberal agenda.

  SJWs never admit that they only care about the feelings of people on their own side. They’re certainly not calling people “bigots” as a compliment, and they know how horrible these insults can make people feel and the negative impacts it can have on their life. Their goal is to humiliate you and get you to concede, not to be nice to you. SJWs will go out of their way to hurt you, as evidenced by the many people who’ve been fired or let themselves be pushed into resigning due to SJW pressure.

  So while SJWs claim to be morally superior, they’re actually the exact opposite. They are mean bullies who verbally abuse those who disagree with them without any remorse. Even Alinsky said, “in war the end justifies almost any means.” [49] The Right needs to realize that the Left has actually declared war on us, and start fighting back.

  Another reason conservatives don’t default to ridicule is because we’re logical. When we see someone like Trump called sexist, we know it’s completely illogical, not backed up by any facts, and that it doesn’t fit any definition of sexist that exists outside of the warped mind of an SJW. Conservatives don’t want to call someone a name unless it’s actually true. This is another thing we need to stop. SJWs use ridicule and name-calling because it’s effective, not because it’s a sound argument.

  To demoralize SJWs the most, ridicule them in areas that you know are weak spots and will hurt them the most. Obviously you wouldn’t use these words with co-workers you need to have a good relationship with, but for online SJW trolls and those who call you names to your face, those people deserve to be given the same treatment.

  We know most SJWs are insecure about their lack of success, so call them “pathetic” and “losers.” We know SJW women are insecure about their appearance, otherwise they wouldn’t try to banning photos of attractive women in advertisements. Call them “fat” or “ugly,” or say how it’s not surprising they haven’t found a husband yet. When someone can’t answer your questions after starting a debate with you, fall back on names they use — “low education,” “low information” or “redneck.” Ask why should you even waste your time with someone who can’t even answer simple questions. It sounds mean, but if you’re engaging with a Leftist who’s not willing to debate but only call you names, it’s perfectly fair to hit back.

  Keep in mind that successful ridicule involves devaluing the person you’re attacking. If you had a real threat — like a business competitor with a stellar reputation — you might need to show him some respect. But ridicule involves not even taking the other side seriously enough to think they deserve any respect. As Alinsky advised:

  “Is should be remembered that you can threaten the enemy and get away with it. You can insult and annoy him, but the one thing that is unforgivable and that is certain to get him to react is to laugh at him. This causes an irrational anger.” [50]

  SJWs are particularly vulnerable to being laughed at and ridiculed since they live in a bubble where everyone agrees with them. Laughing at someone completely devalues him. That’s the outcome ridicule aims at.

  Trump uses the tactic of shaking his head of making faces at people. Those tactics are great to use, especially in situations like a family reunion or the office where you don’t want to draw too much attention to your disapproval.

  To affect culture — which ultimately creates policy — the Right has to quit relying solely on reason, and instead use techniques like ridicule that have made the Left so appealing to younger voters. Most young Democrat supporters don’t dislike Trump because they’ve actually thought about his policies. They hate him because the liberal media has created a narrative where being a Democrat is hip and cool, and conservatives are ridiculed as redneck, low-information and low-education.

  Younger members of the Right are already effectively fighting back by ridiculing SJWs. Just go to YouTube and search for “SJWs” or “social justice warriors” and you’ll find a plethora of videos showing civilian journalists and Trump supporters ridiculing liberals for their ridiculous policies and for not being able to provide any data to back up their statements.

  Members of the Alt-Right are notorious for making memes out of SJWs. Many SJWs caught on video have now been given names to cause embarrassment. Some of the most fa
mous SJWS are:

  Trigglypuff: A morbidly obese Hampshire College student who threw a tantrum during an event hosted by conservatives Milo Yiannopolous, Steven Crowder and Christina Hoff Sommers because they were criticizing feminism. [51]

  Carl the Cuck and AIDS Skrillex are two SJWs who protested a Trump rally in St. Louis, Missouri, and made fools of themselves when they clashed with Trump supporters. The YouTube video about anti-Trump protesters going berserk went viral, and now their faces are used on memes even months later. [52]

  Safe-Space Sally, a middle-aged woman who screamed “You’re a f-cking white man who gets to do whatever he wants to.” Then she added, “Your privilege is not welcome here.” [53]

  Chanty Binx (aka Big Red), who screamed at a Christian black man, “You’re being disrespectful by showing up and spewing your Jesus shit at a fucking Pride event!” while wearing a “SLUT” sticker. [54]

  Wailing Banshee, who screamed what sounded like “zombies” and threw a trash can ahead of a Yiannopolous speech at UCLA. [55]

  Big Red’s Husband, a guy who was part of a protest against a Yiannopolous and Sommers event at the University of Minnesota where SJWs were chanting “ They say free speech we say hate speech!" The student told the person filming the protestors that he was a misogynist and told him he should “go home and blow your f-cking brains out.” The SJW kept cursing at him and telling him he shouldn’t even exist and should have been aborted. [56]

  If you ever doubt that SJWs hate you and want you dead, just refer back to some of these videos and see how crazy and intolerant they are.

  I’m not suggesting you walk up to every feminazi and call them names. Filming them and asking them questions is a great way to make your points. Spreading the video online makes the ridicule more powerful.