5 Ugly Framing Tactics Leftists Use To Insult Dissenters

Against the liberal propensity to push leftwards constantly, conservatives have spent decades emphasizing common sense and “values.” They derided liberal intellectuals for fetishizing language, thus losing track of seemingly evident realities and boundaries.

It may be true that at least a non-negligible proportion of liberals give an excessive importance to words, to the point where key concepts of life are considered as arbitrary “social constructions.” Yet, so far, the liberal approach has been more powerful. Libtards may be wrong on their explanations but they know how to manipulate, pressure, enforce boundaries, twist language, and further their own narrative in the process.

You likely already heard about frames: when approaching a girl, you may want to come across as playful and funny, and if she doesn’t turn you off, you will start escalating and sexualize the interaction. If you never sexualize, be it only through talking about relationships and sex, the girl will likely perceive you as asexual or shy—or of a low value—and put you into the dreaded friendzone. Bantering, negging, sexualizing are ways to frame the interaction so that you can lead it to a notch.

Frames matter in social life. They also matter in politics. Frames structure the thoughts and interaction. They draw attention on some aspects of life while letting other aspects ignored. If unconscious, and they are never more efficient than when unfelt, they lead to bias and implicit assumptions. Leftists know this, and this is why their whole school-media-culture machine is loaded with biased descriptions, unsaid taboos and hysterical denials.

This piece is the first of a series about concepts often used by Leftism to frame public consciousness and acceptable discourse and that need, as their own vocabulary says, some deconstruction. We’re starting with the insults.

1. “Far right”

According to them, that’s us. The manosphere is supposed to belong to the “far right.” Schematically, we are supposedly more on the right than the “standard right.” Said right has shown spineless, ideologically weak, ready to do various lobbies’ biddings and back down when SJWs attack. When you are aware of this, you can deduce that being considered more on the right is perhaps a sign of integrity—but the left eagerly denies the RINO’s mainstream “right”’s weakness in order to pretend they had an adversary.

The mainstream, that is, cucked culture, paints the “far right” through a rather negative light. The label is associated with Hitler, the Holocaust, and various sensations such as marching boots sounds and the sight of ugly skinheads, not to mention scary music. A lot of priming is going on here: when we were children, we could barely understand a thing about politics, but the teachers already ingrained us with what retrospectively seems crude war propaganda.

Indeed, the very Left that says any acknowledgment of human biodiversity is essentialist entertains itself an essentialist conception of the “far right.” The label denotes a kind of quintessential negative in politics, a perpetual villain that always threatens to swamp “democracy” or other positive buzzwords but is also defeated by heroic liberals—or cuckservatives if the “far right” appears embodied by foreigners.

In a blue-pilled mind, the “far right” label sparks a psychology of cleanliness. It is seen as ritually unclean, like a moral equivalent of feces, something dirty or infectious one would rather put aside than even try to understand. In 2002, when the National Front president Jean-Marie Le Pen reached the second round of the president election, journalists hysterically shouted: “Quarantine them off!” As if a legal political party embodied a kind of disease. Of course, when such a negativity is ascribed without reflection to someone, the “normal” have no problem throwing on him any negative epithet. Hence the conflation of anything the Left would shriek at with the arch-villainous Hitler. Doubts about feminism or immigration? That’s “far right”, and if it is “far right”, then Hitler!

When one enters the actual social or cultural milieu beyond the label, one quickly sees the falsehood of the leftist-essentialist view. Ideologies that were deemed progressive and left-leaning on their time, such as classical liberalism, end up labelled “far right” after the political mainstream kept drifting leftwards, thus abandoning those who wouldn’t drift. This is why the place is loaded with ideological diversity: everything labelled “far right” doesn’t share a common essence but have all been dumped there by the left. The enduring use of the expression among liberals merely shows how much they need to craft a bogey enemy to legitimate their own perpetual discontent and play on fears.

2. Extremism

Everywhere there is a continuum, things or categories span from average to extreme depending on their relative position. Extremes tend to be more visible because of their sheer difference from the average or center. In politics, extremes are always relative to a particular Overton window and associated range of acceptability.

The so-called progressives have had their extremists. After 1789, secularist revolutionaries in France quickly drifted towards terror, massively using the guillotine against anyone straying out of their ideological path, massacring hundreds of thousands of peasants in Vendée. Likewise, Bolshevists gruesomely killed an untold number of people to build a “classless” society in Russia, before Maoists in China did the same at an even greater scale during the “Great Leap Forward.”

When confronted to noticeable extremists of its own, the left uses a variety of strategies. One of them is sheer self-complacent progressivism: what appeared extremist at moment A became normal at B and C because it was part of an intrinsic “progress.” The mainstream at A was simply less evolved than the mainstream at B and C, and the seemingly extremist became normal because it ought to.

Another strategy is the sophistication, mainstreaming, and de-responsabilization of Leftist extremism. The radical left—“radical” sounding better than “far”—is deemed interesting to study with high standards of charity and detail. It then becomes an object of culture, and turns mainstream. At the same time, so-called researchers start to deny the responsibility of extremists, blaming it on external circumstances, or flat-out denying that extremists come from the Left in spite of their paths and practices. For example, “Stalin was not a leftist” or “John Money’s experiences have nothing to do with gender feminism.”

Both of these positive reinforcement strategies have a reversal with negative ones geared against us. We are supposedly conservative or reactionary—categories deemed uncool, unfashionable, barely tolerated at the wrong side of the system—and aren’t considered through an intellectual charity principle but rather as metapolitical scoundrels who can be freely amalgamated with other intellectual scoundrels, be them Margaret Thatcher or Hitler, without possibility to appeal.

We are “extremists” when seen through the lenses of a distorted, degenerated standard. What is the legitimacy of a cultural world that deems Maoists scholars “normal”, immigrant rapists “victims”, and shrieking obese women heroic, whereas patriots, fathers and blond families are labelled extremists?

3. “Supremacism”

According to the accusatory Leftist narrative, we, straight-white-males—it is supposed to be a social identity—are alleged to have been dominating the world through “oppression.” Incidentally, “the world” quickly becomes synonymous with “minorities”, a concept used to create class identities from very different and previously unsuspecting social categories.

Women, although they are more numerous than men, are deemed a “minority.” Patriarchy is understood as “male supremacy” over women. Is that really so? Actually, a patriarchy means complementarity and natural harmony: men and women, having different abilities and different needs, also have different social roles and sets of responsibilities. This existed in all civilizations for thousands of years. The very late charge of “male supremacy” aims at making women willing to be men and dissatisfied with their natural condition.

The “supremacist” label also appears associated with “white.” Then, I ask, supremacy on what? If “white supremacism” denotes wanting to remain the majority and in control of the lands of our ancestors, in a civilization built by our ancestors, then “white supremacism” is exactly what the left supported for other peoples: a right to self-determination and autonomy, emancipation from invaders and unwanted immigration, the recovering of sovereignty.

More than often, the desire for holding again the reins of our own civilization is associated with the defence of reciprocity—which contradicts “supremacism.” Most of us, I think, would be OK with Muslims practicing their religion on their own lands and refraining from invading ours. Respect entails reciprocity. The Left constantly ignores this and pushes baseless accusations in order to paint us as perpetual villains. Also, the left’s very intolerance to intellectual diversity allows to speak fairly of its only too real ideological supremacism.

4. Privilege

One of the main totem poles in colleges these days is the “X privilege.” White privilege! Male privilege! Check your privilege! I’m miserable because I’m oppressed by you! I may be a millionaire actress, I’m still oppressed by the mere existence of cishets!

Two things ought to be noticed. First, the notion of privilege as used by leftists opposes both merit and fair inheritance. Merit stems from ability, work, choices. Someone who worked hard and skillfully to answer a particular need deserves his reward. Likewise, inheritance is what maintains an identity beyond generations and motivates to work. For example, I want to hand down at least some of my books to my children at a later age, and I haven’t been “privileged” to get them—I scanned the market and pondered before buying this one and letting that one to someone else.

“Privilege” implies that individuals are all equal, all the same. They were simply born in different situations. They would have no merit, no right to inheritance, no genuine identity or vocation. They only live in a situation painted as unfair. Thus, those who are lucky enough to be recognized as “underprivileged” are not to be judged according to their peculiar abilities or choices—everything is blamed on the environment and then on us, even though we have already been much dispossessed for decades.

Second, the Leftist narrative and corollary accusations ignore actual privilege. I mean, pseudo-rights that are undeserved, untied to deep identity, wholly created by Leftist managers such as being handed a job from affirmative action, pussy pass, or having a high sexual market value with scant or no effort.

5. “Troll!”

This one is mostly used as an imputation of intention. If you are labelled a troll, you are accused of willfully trying to disrupt a previously equilibrated and peaceful social exchange. It is highly ironical when media and liberals accuse us of trolling whereas they have been playing on emotional rhetoric and pushing for disruptive “causes” for decades. Some researchers tried to psychologize and essentialize the “trolls” as Dark Triads, a maneuver implying a clear double standard, as we can be deemed psychopaths through a biased and uncontextualized study while noticing the lower IQ or impulse control of a well-known ethnic group is deemed unacceptable. Of course, we’ve got no excuse for trolling (if we are really trolling once), it is all our fault with no external cause—the exact opposite of the minority-are-responsible-for-nothing view.

Trolling is real and complex. It can be interpreted as art. It can also be explained by political correctness—some of us needed to troll because they couldn’t identify with what the social world had become, or clumsily tried to rid themselves of ingrained Leftism. I suspect some people became real trolls because they were labelled as such and unduly punished by Leftist with authority positions.


Everything proper to the Cathedral’s narrative and viewpoints ought to be sifted. A neotraditional or neomasculine perspective associated with the use of a critical viewpoint is a winning combination.

Negative buzzwords crafted against us, beside their immediate relevance, give a window into the wider conceptual universe of libtards. Some of the suspicious concepts raised here along the way will be considered later. Stay tuned.

Read Next: Two Major Media Outlets That Defamed ROK As Pro-Rape Are Laying Off Hundreds Of Journalists

172 thoughts on “5 Ugly Framing Tactics Leftists Use To Insult Dissenters”

  1. “The mainstream, that is, cucked culture, paints the “far right” through a rather negative light. The label is associated with Hitler, the Holocaust, and various sensations such as marching boots sounds and the sight of ugly skinheads, not to mention scary music.”
    I don’t see anything wrong with Hitler, apart from his failure.
    And I quite like Marilyn Manson. Not that keen on skinheads though, they seem a bit gay to me.

    1. So all the murder means nothing to you, o Uebermensch?
      Trolling the left into a fit is one thing, believing your own trolling is something else.

        1. I try to talk online the way I talk to people in person.
          That being said, I’m going to assume you know why that’s in bad faith and move on.

      1. If somebody kills people who hate me, why should I worry? The enemy of my enemy ….. etc.

        1. So the women, the children, the priests, the Dutch, French, German and Belgian patriots, the priests and pastors, all hate you?
          I understand the desire to be edgy but you need to repent. Evil isn’t a fun toy to play with and scare the normies. This is big league stuff.

        2. Collateral damage, accepted by all governments including Israel.
          “From time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots.”

        3. I can’t help feeling the world (Europe in particular) would be a better place now if Nazi Germany had won the war. I know many other Europeans who feel the same way.

        4. It’s not collateral if it’s not covered by double effect. Which it isn’t when you have goon squads targeting people on purpose.
          Do you think Bonhoeffer, von Stauffenberg, and St. Maximilian Kolbe resisted for their health? Do you think Erik von Kuehnelt Leddihn and von Hildebrand fled the scene because they were too stupid to recognize the greatness of Hitler’s ideas?
          Do you think you would have been on the right side of the gun at the time?
          Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is your enemy. The crips are a bigger gang than the bloods, but any cop who supports the bloods as a lesser evil is out of his mind.

        5. Europe would have been a better place if the Jacobins had been strung up as soon as they made their move.
          Make no mistake, the Nazis were renegade socialists who replaced class struggle with racial struggle. Unknown story but after improvements from the reintroduction of order, socialism was quickly strangling their economy. They destroyed German education and took one of the most intelligent peoples of Europe and reduced them to party line automatons.
          It’s the whole communist program, why do you think the flag was red or that they called it the “revolution of 1933”, or had all the hammer and worker symbolism?
          Not being communist /= all there is for a good society.

        6. I’m always on the right side of the gun. Evil is a construct of those in power.
          Jews are evil to non Jews. They are just as into racial purity as Hitler ever was. Same for Muslims.

        7. You don’t believe that because no one does. You know some things are wrong in essence, not just by convention.
          Always on the right side of the gun? No one is.

  2. You’re a pedophile nazi. You’re denying being a pedophile because you are a Nazi. You’re denying being a Nazi because you’re a pedophile.
    (circular argumentation, plus there’s no such thing like bad publicity…unless you’re accused of being a Nazi and/or a pedophile.

    1. You would need to define pedophile first, there doesn’t seem to be a consensus and the age of consent varies wildly with geographical location. You would also need to define NAZI, if you limit them to members of the National Socialist German Workers Party then I’m not, If you expand it to include people who don’t like being told what to do by Jews (or anyone else for that matter), then I am.

      1. Being a pedophile, like being a Nazi, have Nothing in common with consent age or national socialists.
        That’s the beauty of the thing.
        It’s – before other thing- a ThoughtCrime. It exists because official mainstream media says it exists and you are guilty of it because they say so.
        Ex: Trump is a nazi, Milo is a pedophile.
        But Kinsey, who worked with Nazi Pédophiles FOR REAL is a martyr scientist, a hero, a symbol of freedom for the général population.

        1. I don’t see how Trump can be called a Nazi when all his children are married to Jews. That’s just nonsense.

        2. Trump as a nazi (Google image)
          By the way, you can be jewish AND be called a nazi…because that haven’t to make sense !
          If you disturb the wrong people, you can be a Rabbi hero…you’ll end up being called a Nazi.
          That’s how bad things are…

        3. If “Nazi” was taking the Na from National, why the zi from Sociazist?
          It wouldn’t be because Zion would it? ….

        4. That’s because Nazi is an abbreviation of German words, the full name of the political party was the “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei”
          Apparently the Germans pronounce National as Nat-zi-o-nal. So they just abbreviated the name to the first two syllables of the first word.

        5. On the plus side, it would make a great musical one day… Because you can always make money on Nazi stories… It béguins as shame, it ends up as Entertainment.
          My guess: it was a play all along

        6. Germans rely on abbreviations because so many of there words are created from smashing together groups of other words.

    2. Tell them that the Nazi were the best socialists of all time then sit back and watch them lose their shit!

  3. Great article! Had my laughing at ‘Far Right’ and the notion that us lot commenting on RoK are a bunch of Fascists!
    Sure there are a few whack-jobs who post occasionally, although for the most part the regular crowd here do a great job of sending them away, but far right? Give me a break!
    I’ve found very few communities online with the depth of real-world experience, fine minds engaging in interesting debate, and not a few great comedians.
    So, throwing out a nazi salute to my fellow fascist scum on RoK!

    1. I consider myself “Fascist scum” and I openly claim to be one. According to liberal-bolshevik standards, that is.
      And I proudly wear that badge: my Hungarian ancestors in the 1956 anti-Communist revolution were branded as “Fascist scum” by the Party.
      In the real world, I am just a normal person, with right-wing politics.

      1. Yeah, I think you might have the right approach… We’re ‘deplorables’, and now we’re fascists…. There…. Not so bad!

        1. Agree & amplify.
          Always agree and amplify!
          Not only are we deplorable Fascists, we are literally to the right of the literal Hitler, that lefty, liberal hippie who was too soft on the Jews! 🙂
          Agree & amplify rulez!

        2. Hitler? That nanby-pamby leftish little manlet? He made Gandhi look like a warmongering, psychotic, genocidal maniac! What you mentioning that faggot for?

      2. The thing that gets me is the claim that Nazis and Fascists were right wing based solely on “they claimed to be left wing, but their actions were more right wing” as though that’s proof enough.

        1. Well, as far as I can tell, those original ganxstas, or OGs, the Nazis were not right-wing in the classical or conservative sense. Rather, they were a reactionary and radical right-wing movement.
          The Nazis realised that the workers are NOT internationalists but nationalists, and that the working class is included in the nation and must be represented by a proper nationalist party, in order to defeat internationalist communism.

        2. The problem here is that we have allowed the left to become the deciders of what is left and what is right ,and the point of origin for all of this ? The holocaust , that is the stick they use against us , I say it’s time to awaken from our slumber and take our world back from this sick twisted scum.

        3. I am not convinced about that, although it is a theory widely accepted in the classical, conservative right wing circles who see the radical far-right as enemies in the quest for power.
          Nazism is National Socialism, but just as the state represents the workers as well as the capitalists of the nation, and does NOT deny private ownership and private enterprise. It is in favor of national capital.
          And the most important distinction: it has national leadership as opposed to the Jewish leadership of Communism.
          I would rather if National Socialism really grabbed the world…

        4. Economically fascism promotes what they call efficiency. That is a few government regulated but privately owned corporations who then only face limited competition if any. A sort of hybrid of crony capitalism and socialism.

        5. very true , the only problem i have with national socialism is that it looks like the same people provided the finance for its begining as financed the bolshevik “revolution” , so it looks like somebody tried to use one of these or either of these to establish the principle of a one world government (which no doubt they would then take over for themselves ) , looks like since both of these failed they are now trying to use islam to prep the world for them .

        6. Don’t know about that. Hitler said the Communists want to eliminate national capital, and play thir wealth over into the hands of international capital on the long run. That is exactly what happened in Eastern-Europe after 1989 so the old rouge was spot on. What I heard is Hitler got backing from German tycoons and magnates, not from the international Jewish financiers of Communism.

        7. True. And the workers were better off of that, much more than under capitalism or communism. On the other hand, the holders of capital knew thez were safe and could plan profit on the long run as long as thez plaz the game and not ripping off the national working force. Sounds like a fair system. Small wonder the powers that be want to bury this knowledge under the lid of “whatever Nazis did was evil”…

        8. Except eventually any political influence workers might have in the fascist economy dies out leaving only the corporations and the politicians. And that’s just the beginning of the problems because another issue is that innovation stagnates as does increasing the standard of living. Industries start to fall behind their foreign competition on the world market.
          FDR implemented various fascist policies in the USA and some still cause problems today. They harmed people in the 1930s and extended the depression considerably.
          Fascism is ultimately just another way of a small group running the economy and society for their own benefit.

        9. I do not know about that. I mean Tiger Panzer, V2, nearly atomic bomb… the National Socialist state did not lack for innovation. Besides, compared to FDR’s USA, the living standard of the average worker in the Reich was so much higher that it is nearlz uncomparable.

        10. Nazi Germany didn’t exist long enough. The USA’s experiment did. By the 1970s the protected industries were dying from foreign competition. Even today we suffer from the same problem. A regulatory state of Earl Butz’s “get big or get out” description. As a result old companies die but there is nothing here to replace them and nothing can because of the barriers to entry. The regulatory state cuts off the rebirth mechanism. It destroys the upstarts. We can only have upstarts in areas not yet regulated or with new angles to avoid the regulation.

        11. NAZIs were the national socialist party. The only thing right wing about them was the nationalism part.

    2. All one need do to fit that criterion is to appear to disagree with the orthodoxy.
      And back atcha!

    3. As someone said, they are so far-Left that anyone to the right of Jane Fonda is far-Right to them. Le Pen is described as far-Right. But has anyone bothered to read her party platform?

  4. What’s ridiculous is leftist “intellectuals” speak often about the concepts of “the other”, “dehumanization”, “diversity”, etc.
    Yet rather than discussing the basic premises of right-wing thinking in order to sympathize with their ideological “other”, they resort to slander and creating straw-men.
    Reminds me of something Socrates said…

    1. Gay men engage in really dehumanizing acts, considering how they meet each other as strangers in their seedy venues to objectivize each others bodies and bugger each other without bothering to learn each other’s names. They have perfected the lifestyle of abstracting the human body from the person and using it instrumentally, just like the capitalists in Marxist philosophy who do that to men’s labor as a means of exploiting workers and alienating them from their essential humanity as producers.

      1. I’ve worked in nightclubs for years and gay men will literally (Hitler) come right up to you and offer to suck your dick. When you tell them no they beg. It’s really quite bizarre…

        1. nah, cheesy 90s tune, guy looks like the Rock with a ponytail…band’s name escapes me

        2. I think its becausd by denying them this validation you take away the one thing theyve been basing their worth on.
          This generation has dehumanized everyone to a terrifying point.

        3. There might be some enlightened gay men out there, but the majority of the one’s I’ve met have been emotionally unbalanced and weird. Lots of image-obsessed addicts, very few relaxed gays.
          They want to pretend like their relationships are on par with relationships between men and women, but they must know that what they are doing can never be said to bear the same weight and significance as starting a family.
          As men their development is necessarily stunted because they will never contend with these primordial forces.

      2. Want to feel worse? They’re also adopting innocent children now. Want your kids to go to school with their daughter some day? I don’t want to know what she thinks is acceptable growing up and hearing who knows what through the walls. And we all know that one guy who walked in on his parents.

        1. This has to be stopped. Innocent people are being destroyed and will turn around and continue this.

        2. same sex marriage was pushed for that very reason, so they can adopt third world kids and screw them in a dark basement for pleasure. That’s the real motivation behind it,

  5. As I keep asking, if progressive utopians really believe their own propaganda about “equality,” then why don’t they worry that some nonwhite girl has the power to become “literally Hitler” some day, instead of becoming a menial service worker, like a hotel maid, as usually happens with these women? It looks as if they implicitly acknowledge that only a white man has the goods to rise up to Literally Hitler standards. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16277d7d3b5b14c882eab2ecd04edf349477ac7304ef0075f4e6f37e8ed0d6ab.jpg

  6. Embrace the labels like a badge of honor. The cucks and the SJW’s will always hate you no matter what you do or say. The worse the labels get, the more you know you are getting under their skin. What is best in life, gentlemen? Of course we all know the answer: “To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of the women!!”

  7. You have to turn this “equality” nonsense around. If “equality” is real, then why does it require a machinery of propaganda, indoctrination, shaming, gaslighting and coercion to enforce compliance to the idea?
    Also look at the real effects of this system: When you elevate “equality” as the social goal, you remove the standards that a hierarchical society offers and rewards individuals for meeting. Our ancestors called the worthy people above them in the hierarchy their “betters” for a reason. With the rise of equality, we’ve seen deterioration in people’s dress, hygiene, health, physical condition, manners, grooming and so forth. If you can’t make yourself better than anyone else, then why bother getting a job, watching your weight or brushing your teeth? Doing these things won’t improve your status in an egalitarian system.

    1. They misunderstand the meaning of equality and mix it up with hierarchy. Just because someone is a leader doesn’t mean he’s any happier– hierarchy is the natural means to keep order and has nothing to do with our value in God’s eyes. The hedonic treadmill proves that our existence is fair.
      Marx was a real idiot and his lie is perhaps the greatest ever.

    2. Sowell had a short video on “Social Justice” on YT. You may find it interesting.

    3. No absolute equality is possible but there should be opportunity for all to get a good preparation for work and a decent job with a living wage. After that, people should be able to get as rich as they want. They just need to plow back some of the money in society, just as a farmer does not use all of his seed, but holds some back for the next season.

  8. “Two things ought to be noticed. First, the notion of privilege as used by leftists opposes both merit and fair inheritance.”
    As a man whose inheritance was squandered by a foolish relative, well said. You show me white privelage, and I’ll show you the crushing weight of responsibility. I mean, if there ever was a ‘white fast-pass’–tell me again–it’s for which ride? The only rides in town are wellfare and the 9-5, and the 9-5 is kicking my life goals in the ass. And let me tell you about equality at the wellfare office. Pilgrim in an unholy land. It’s fat with obese minority sluts, unwashed 40-something brown guys, I-don’t-know-whats in hejabs, hispanic kids on new Nintendo Hand-helds and rolling on the floor. Hope you’re privelaged enough to afford nose plugs.

    1. Democrats will not stop applauding Islamic terrorism.
      They wish to frame it as, it’s whitey’s fault the muzzies are a bloodthirsty rape cult, so we should happily take it up the ass from islam to atone for our toxic whiteness, while singing the praises of how muzzies are freedom loving and peaceful.
      Modern democrats are all-out masochistic traitors.

        1. Interesting research suggests Islam didn’t actually exist back then. It has to do with early caliphs putting Christian symbols on their currency – if Islam existed in its current state, that would be unthinkable.
          Also, the Quran apparently has a very different meaning in Syriac than it does in Arabic.
          I’d love to see more research to know if it’s true or not, but Muslim scholars apparently think it’s murder-worthy to question their holy tenets.

        2. Islamic Jihad : against the Jews of Medina in 622 AD.
          Jihad on Byzantium started in 634 at Yarmuk, then the Muslims relentlessly attacked the Byzantine Christians for the next eight hundred years.

  9. The word “privilege’ is used to promote guilt. I have white privilege so therefore I should feel bad about that and allow millions of third world slime to take over Western society. I have male privilege so therefore I should feel bad about that too and allow women to emasculate men and turn them into eunuchs. I am a healthy body weight so I have thin privilege to boot.

    1. “Male Privilege.”
      Just caught an NPR story regarding female ONLY Ride Shares. Companies only employing female drivers and only accepting patronage from womyn. If a male wants a ride, he has to be accompanied by a female. (Not making this up!)
      Male Privilege? Seems more like Female Privilege — considering anytime a “female only” operation goes into business, it doesn’t face the scrutiny of discrimination.
      I’m all for private companies discriminating and segregating if they only want to serve a certain demographic. But don’t we all know what would occur if a guy created a “male only” operation . . .

        1. And you know the sick thing? Had this happened w/out anyone around, guy would have been plastered on various media outlets, accused of assaulting his Uber rider.
          There’s another video in Canada. Think specifically Toronto. 3 bitches refused to pay cab fare and run to someone, told them the cabbie sexually assaulted them. The cabbie was on verge of going to prison when he told courts he had video demonstrating the cunts made whole thing up. Think anything happened to the galz ? Ha. Of course not.

      1. Definitely , for a hundred years or so we have been listening to feminists screetching over any imagined infringement of womens rights by white men , even opening a door for a women has been declared “sexist” by them , but they are strangely silent about the muslim rape gangs stalking some european streets at the moment .

        1. Thats because muslim rape gangs, havent been pussified by centuries of christianity, feminism is basically christianity on steroids, feminism is christian extremism unleashed on society at large, which is why it only seems to effect anglo saxon countrys, with the exception of pussified indians
          Women see muslims & refugees as alphas, while white men as betas, in short women are idiots … lol

    2. The remarkable thing about white privilege is that East Asians perform much better than Whites. So much so that Harvard has a fixed quota for them lest they admit far too many. Somehow white privilege has been unable to stop the East Asians from getting ahead.
      – This whole concept is nothing but the reaction of mediocre people who are filled with resentment.

  10. -Check your privilege!! -Well, why don’t you check your assumptions? -But that’s hard work!!

  11. The label “far right” and “right wing” and variants thereof is something the Left has manipulated to its own purposes for ages. For example, mainstream accounts of the JFK assassination continually harp on the “right wing atmosphere of hate” in Dallas before the shooting. Yet Oswald was a Communist nut!

  12. What happens when liberalism spins wildly out of control? Lots of weird things. So late yesterday afternoon I’m talking on my cell phone to a client out behind my hotel, right next to this walking track. And here comes a petite Hispanic woman who looked to be in her mid-20s, with a huge German Shepherd in tow; this dog had to weigh 100 pounds. The woman couldn’t see me at that point, because I’m standing behind some trees a bit ahead of her and to her left. The dog’s on a leash and they are walking together fairly briskly. Suddenly, as I’m watching them draw abreast of my position, the dog lags behind a bit, sniffs the woman’s ass, raises up off the ground very quickly, wraps his forelegs around her waist, and he starts to thrust his humongous boner against her ass from behind.
    The woman lets out a grunt of surprise, and laughs, telling the dog to get down. But he doesn’t get down, he just keeps humping. So then she starts to panic a bit, and she yells at him to get down, and then she looks around to see if anybody is watching. And there I am, about 10 yards to her left, standing in the trees, the only person nearby who could see what was going on. She looked at me with this look of abject shame on her face because she knew she’d been busted, and I looked back at her and just shook my head, and that look on her face told me everything that I didn’t want to know about her relationship with her dog…

      1. I would not have thought it was that high of a percentage, but then, I’d never seen evidence of it. Now I’m thinking you are right – and it might be higher than that. Fucking…sick.

        1. It´s hard to prove. It´s shameful so they keep it private. Only in internet era we can see glimpse of this subculture. Look for the red flags. She lives alone, the dog is huge, it´s obsessed with her dog, the dog live inside the house, the dog sleep in the bed with her, she let´s the dog lick her face and she kiss the dog. Then you adds point for every slut sign, tattooed with a slut face high chances she is fucking the dog.

    1. “How many partners have you had?”
      “I’ve only ever been with one man before you”

      1. I short circuit this conversation with one of my favorite lines ever. When a girl drops some line about an ex or someone she fucked or whatever to try to see your reaction (shit test you) I just smile, wave her off and let her know that she has nothing to be worried about — I consider women virgins until I’ve had them

        1. Dude you should consider writing a book about the escapades of being a New York playboy. You’re obviously a solid writer and you pull off some epic shit. The manosphere seems to be going in such a political direction that it might be a breath of fresh air.

      2. “Partners? Two-legged or four-legged?” I cannot get what I saw out of my head. I’ve heard about this happening, and I’ve read about it, but to see the look on that woman’s face, when she saw that I was watching her and her dog. Holy shit. Eye bleach won’t help, but at least now I know for sure. Women fuck their dogs.

    2. I thought only I experience weird shit when I go out.
      Now I realize why so many older NYC women are twisted face bitter – they have small dogs…

        1. saw a gay guy gaily strolling with 2 Great Danes.
          feel sorry for some of these women now.
          no kids, picking up dog shit in the mornings…real sad.
          feminism – winning

        2. With a bare bodkin?
          Edit: I am really proud of this one

        3. Insane to keep dogs like that in the city. why would you want a dog that drops a deuce on par with a Clydesdale’s?

        4. My sister has a gay friend who teaches at a college with her. He has a live-in “partner”. They have two big Great Danes and those dogs are unruly as hell. Couldn’t figure out why they kept such big, unruly animals. Now it all makes sense…

        5. couldn’t agree more. That’s one of my biggest pet-peeves -these assholes that have to own these designer pets just to lock them in a cage 20 hours/day….

        6. Thank you. I feel I did as well. This joke works on three distinct levels that I count

      1. come up town, the doctors fix that. Have you been to Santina on wasington street?

        1. Thinking of going there tomorrow then maybe to one of the “Russian Hookers search for coke” clubs like bagatelle it has been a long time

        2. it is a great area. take a walk thru Chelsea Market – early before 7PM is fun, interesting, loaded with people and great little food venues…
          Also the hotels Standard, Gaansvort, Catch — and their rooftop bars… all same area..

        3. yeah I will wind up at the standard or gaansavort rooftop before the night is over. I am in the mood for something —- new

        4. I do it up right btw, I make a business expense of bottle service and bring a long some of the younger guys I deal with in the construction biz here. Between these 7 guys someone will know someone somewhere so there is no line waiting ever, totally above the crowd. I don’t know how people mull about crowded clubs without construction, sports, music or finance connections.

        5. what time period?
          I imagine the action starts after 10PM – I occasionally hang out at the lobby bar -early. bed by 9PM these days.
          I went to Gaansvort rooftop once with gf and another couple – he is well known security guy – so straight in…
          yea waiting in line in the cold –seems beta as fuck…

        6. yeah I will have dinner around 730 which will be a long affair and then around 1030-11 head to the bars

      1. Not only do you have to compete with foreigners for women, but with pets too.
        Dogs probably know how to cockblock as well.

      1. I thought about getting a quick BJ from her, but the thought of her dog breath killed it for me…

        1. I hear ya. With my luck I’d be in a car accident later and the ER report would mention that my dik smelled like Alpo….

        2. Yeah, and then you’d have to get dewormed, etc. I’m going to wonder what’s been up inside every woman I fuck from now on…that shit sicked me out.

        3. I know people who actually cook for their dogs. Get a hummer then some chicken dinner, some dogs have it better than most men

        4. Congratulations, you are now being made aware of the downside of slut culture.

      1. I might refrain from fucking women for a long time after seeing that…seriously.

    3. I’m actually really weirded out by this.
      Yesterday lolknee mentioned his girl wants to walk home with his jizz on her face.
      So at home she either has a dog, or a beta-bucks husband…She probably doesn’t differentiate.
      I will never again do the rapid passion/lust… they must shower perhaps a quarantine period.

      1. I’m completely weirded out by this. It’s going to take quite a while for me to process it…

    4. My dogs prefer their partners’ hands to be nailed to a tree prior to romantic engagement. Unfortunately we have to kill all of them afterwards or they never stop calling.

    5. bob, with the jems you have you could write stories for pornhub or xhamster … thats funny as hell

  13. 6. “populism” you are “populists”.
    Like that is something bad in a democracy. That is what you should want. But according to leftists that is bad, because not political correct, doesn’t come from a moral superior thinking etc. Politician should do what people want to happen. If that is the deathpenality, so be it. If that is legalized abortion, so be it. If it is nazism, so be it.
    7. The “underbelly”
    That is what the socialists here name the opinions they don’t want to here about or want to adress, mainly immigration and integration topics. Immigrant crime etc. Those opinions come, according to them “from the underbelly” like being worried is a fart, diarrhea. It’s a clincher.

  14. the common cycle I see and experience.
    Step 1: attack – mock/shame, ad-hominum, straw-man, filibuster.
    any logical retort -sensible, calm or otherwise.
    Step 2: shock horror, victim complex. accuse of misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, racism, genocide, hate speech, etc… repeat step 1.

    1. Step 3: Flee and pretend that the conversation never happened. This goes on all the time in the comments here when dealing with Leftists. Corner them, they ghost.

  15. Whenever someone uses an ‘ism’ word or accuses you of privilege, dont disagree. Dont debate. Dont try and claim “well my grandpappy was a one legged irish coal miner” crap. You wont win.
    You tell the person using it that you deny the legitimacy of the term and their right to apply it. Then accuse them of verbal terrorism.
    Intellectually no-platform them.

    1. I either do that or agree and amplify so they eventually realise just how ridiculously absurd they look. If they call me a ‘Fascist’ I smile and say, ‘Yes, from the Franco and Pinochet school’; sexist, ‘Why yes I am-I’m flattered you noticed-now, why did your man let you of the kitchen and without a leash? I should give them a scolding for letting down the man-race’; racist ‘Don’t blame me for having such very good genes and being descended from a race of supermen that shaped Western civilisation’; in short, if you show that these empty epithets bother you they win.

  16. The reality is that leftism is illogical. Its methods and doctrines have failed throughout human history. You can’t debate or even have a real convo with people who don’t come to this conclusion on their own.
    Leftism/liberalism and the redpill male are completely incompatible.

  17. OP is using the term “liberal” which is one of those Newspeak labels the Marxists use to frame debate. There’s nothing liberal about what they are doing or trying to do, which includes trying to destroy the Bill of Rights for anyone who disagrees with them, plus trying to get people fired from their jobs, etc.

  18. This a good article. These points are necessary to understand the enemy.
    However I think ultimately winning the culture war is going to come down to who can shout the loudest, the longest and the most obnoxiously.
    Or mock the other side in the same fashion.

  19. The left has turned “nationalism” into a dirty word also. An American President who’s “America first” policy is labeled “Hitlerian”. They have become an absurd parody of themselves.

  20. Interesting math to the murder totals between the “far right” and the leftists. They recon the Nazi’s contributed around 25 million deaths, give or take a million or two. The Nazis were National Socialists….. which actually doesn’t make them “right” at all, just another face of the socialist coin. The leftists between Stalin (Second world war, five year plan, purges, etc.), Mao (as mentioned above), Khmer Rouge (Cambodia), Vietnam war, Cuban revolution, and whatever other war for the Marxist Utopia contributed…….. between 90 and a hundred million deaths in the 20th century. That’s around four times the supposed “far rights” grand total. Hit the sjw’s with that fact and watch them squirm.

    1. I do it all the time and laugh as I see them recoil much as Dracula does when doused with holy water. Facts cause them to have brain implosions.

    2. Bring up socialists have killed more people than all the religious wars in history put together and watch them hamster.
      When someone tries to lay a “nazi” tag on me, I point out that I am not a socialist, but you are and unfortunately that means you have become what you (supposedly) hate.

    3. They often answer with mala fide analytic spirit, like “John Money has nothing to see with feminism” or “Stalin was not a real communist.” Some say stuff like “intentions matter, communists had good intentions whereas nutzee had not.” In these cases, I answer “yeah, just like Islam has nothing to see with Quran or Muslims” or “so destroying entire classes of people and bludgeoning millions in the name of equality was good?”. Leftists use a dishonest framing and attention focus. They present a positive or favourable framing for whatever relates to the Left and focus on cherrypicked stuff that looks positive whereas doing the opposite (presenting badly, focusing on the apparently bad stuff) on the Right.

      1. When they use the “communism has never been properly tried” line, respond with “then its unworkable. If it cannot be properly tried after all this time and effort, then it means its not a practical theory”.
        Did that once and the asshole shut up.

  21. One tactic I love is the “you are stupid because I possess X academic credential”. Seriously that makes you look like more of an idiot because you spent money on X academic credential. Lately, any argument I get into with a liberal (and I have no idea why I waste my time) they use this line every time. “Well I have an MBA therefore your input is irrelevant…” is the name of the game. These people actually think that spending 100’s of thousands of dollars to attend brainwashing camp makes them important and not just an idiot that wasted their money.

    1. They always go for the credentials sooner or later. The entire left is based on believing and repeating what authority tells them.
      I see this in “climate change” debates mostly because I use the climate scientists’ data and analysis, show what they are doing and refrain from adding commentary outside of describing what is going on. This forces the credentials argument of them telling me that the experts can add a warming signal to the data because they know better than I do. Upon which I’ll tell them that they can have faith in authority if they want but I prefer measurements.
      Another favorite of mine is to get them to cite Bill Nye, the celebrity scientist and use the credential argument. My own credentials exceed Nye’s. Makes for another good trap.

      1. Yes when you are discussing “global warming” errr…. I mean the coming “ice age”….errrr….I mean “climate change”….or whatever they call it now you will always get the “no peer reviewed scientist disagrees there is man made whatever”. What a crock of BS. “Peer review” these days is just asking all of my friends who have confirmation bias to rubber stamp whatever I think is a good idea. “Climate change” is just junk science used by the left to forward their radical agenda. That is all it is.

    2. Most uber liberals don’t have MBAs – they have masters of sociology or black history or some BS like that. Many MBAs are too libertarian, and I say that as a mostly libertarian with a MBA from a T10 program.

      1. I find that most liberals are below average IQ. They like to say they are smart, but exhibit traits that prove otherwise. Most are full of group think and confirmation bias. They live in a bubble that has never been challenged by logic or facts. Most are intellectual midgets that rest their laurels on a piece of paper they paid for with a few hundred thousands of dollars. That just makes them idiots in the eyes of any reasonable man.

  22. Ever hear conservative people debate liberals, and when the conservative makes a good, strong point, the liberal will start laughing? Sometimes they laugh-interrupt right over what was being said to them. It could be that they’re stalling for time, or that they’re fucking bananas, but it always seems to come off as this pretentious disrespectful display. The conservative will sometimes have to ask the liberal to reply after this, and there’s a solid chance that the lib-tard’s gonna lose his cool at this point–cry, or yell, or throw up his hands, or tag in some support. Sometimes they laugh like a real-crazy bastard, sometimes it’s that tea-time titter like Clinton, but they always seem to think they’re being natural or spontaneous. I shit you not, though. Look for it. I think it’s even more obnoxious than John Oliver’s contageous fuckin’ fake astonishment.

  23. A troll to the left includes someone who simply disagrees with them and has the facts that show he’s correct, the skills to present them logically, and fortitude not to back down to them.

  24. These are the tactics of Political Correctness (or Cultural Marxism). Currently, the following steps have taken place in our Western countries.
    1. Indoctrinate the population with a feeling of guilt.
    2. Create an in-group morality based on the idea of making up for this guilt by living up to certain universal morals, such as caring for the entire world, the idea of tolerance; and the idea that every culture is equal (cultural relativism); which will lead to the in-group supporting multiculturalism and mass migration.
    3. The media and academic world must support the in-group morality, creating the illusion that the in-group is very large and therefore powerful.
    4. The media and academia must also demonise, degrade and ridicule the own culture. The own culture and history is seen as “evil”. Other cultures are seen as “exotic”, “interesting”, etc. This goes further than cultural relativism. This is cultural marxism. The own culture is “evil” and “nothing special”, so the way to solve this is by multiculturalism.
    5. Not agreeing with the universal morality of the in-group will leads to social exclusion from the in-group. Those outside of the group are immoral and must be demonised (“nazi”, “hiter”, “racist”, “white supremacist”, etc).
    Once this climate has been established, the trick is to gradually flood the country with mass migration from outside of the Western world. It is the best to do so in a gradual, but constant and consistent manner, so that the new reality becomes “normal”.
    Anyone who disagrees with this must be demonised.

  25. I guess that when you’re actually far left, even the most moderate liberal looks far right to you. Also, I really doubt Hitler was actually far right. It seems to me that the automatic association of “fascism” with “right wing” is a strategy by the leftist academic elite to demonise all conservatives. When you look at Hitler’s policies, it doesn’t look like something a staunch conservative would support, for instance, the national workers union Deutsche Arbeitfront. The Nazi-supported DAF implemented things like ocean side resorts for workers and social security programs. Furthermore, their mission statement was to fight capitalism and liberalism and to promote the interest of the National SOCIALIST party.
    While it is true that Hitler was socially conservative in some regards (anti-gay, banned degenerate art, was a Roman Catholic etc..) he was definitely a socialist and had clear anti-capitalist and anti-individualist views. Ironically, it is the left today that most ressembles Hitler and not the right because it is the left that wants to ban “offensive art”, they want to ban guns, they are anti-heterosexuals, they are racist against white people and they worship Muslims as a brown Aryan race that are the victims of jewish oppression and, most importantly, they are dangerously collectivist.

      1. Technically that’s true, but he did it in a way that pissed off everyone else to the point of agression. If he hadn’t been a megalomanical expansionist, history would have turned out very different… At least no “refugee crisis” in Europe.

  26. What they call “privilege” and “entitlement” is a birth right. It’s sad that countless generations toiled and died so weak cowards could conflate that sacrifice with “privilege.” It’s a mental projection from pampered minds so diseased that they are shocked when you don’t share that delusion.

  27. I am not going to claim that conservatives are trolls, extremists, or supremacists, but it is a fact that the wealthy have greater privileges and that is fine too. I believe that some allegedly conservative ideas are great. I believe we MUST conserve our Constitutional rights including the right to bear arms. I also believe our borders should be secured so that those coming in from outside need to go through customs.
    I also believe we need to conserve our environments by preventing pollution and cleaning up spills. We need to maintain and improve our infrastructure and housing and make sure everyone has a place to live, adequate food and clean water, educational opportunity, jobs or job training to prepare for getting a job with decent wages and benefits.
    The rich need to pay a higher tax rate but should be able to deduct investments they make here in the Homeland. I agree with the following: Under President Eisenhower’s Administration, the rate on the rich was 90% but they had those deductions giving them incentive to invest here and not overseas.
    “We need to maintain law and order and peace in the world. We need to protect the environment. We need to have some degree of social justice, equality of opportunity. The markets are not designed to take care of those needs. That depends on a political process.” George Soros

  28. Has RoK done Dalia Dippolito yet? I’m surprised there isn’t an article yet

    Videos to get started on

  29. Good thing lefties eschew firearms for now because sooner or later culture wars always come down to killing. Never forget that Bolsheviks and French anti-monarchists gladly turned to murder when their revolution wasn’t moving fast enough for them.

  30. I had a girl say to me things like “CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE” and such, she turned out to be incredibly manipulative and a guilt tripper.

    1. last time I had a car in front of mine with a “CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE” sticker. A black car…

  31. Right-wing, left, fascism, nazi, etc. A bunch of newspeak buzzwords a honest and red pilled man should never use.

Comments are closed.