The Dissident Right Needs Better Public Speakers

Heather Mac Donald was recently a guest on NPR to discuss (as the one token representative of the right to balance the four leftists) the myth of the black lives matter narrative. Her hatefacts were unassailable, and to her credit she did not shy from dropping the most explosive truth bombs on the NPRatchiks (you could practically hear them sucking in breath between their teeth). But, her speaking and debating style was halting, labored, and lacking inflection, leaving the listener with the obviously misleading perception that she lacked the smarts or gravitas to know what she was talking about.

This is something I’ve noticed with more than a few public Realtalkers; they express themselves much more cleanly and forcefully in writing than at roundtables full of sneering leftoids. If the Dissident Party is to get off the ground, it needs better impromptu public speakers — Trump is a great example — who can parry leftoids on their turf. Machiavellianism comes more naturally to leftoids, so taking them on will demand a certain facility with the crimson arts.

I think what holds back Dissident mastery of the public sphere is self-doubt. There still lingers a hesitation to embrace the ugly truth with both arms, hugging it till it becomes one with the soul. When the last shadow of doubt is expelled, the fire within can glow again, and only then will NPR echo chambers quake and crumble under the persuasive might of righteous alt-right rebellion.

Executive summary: Game matters, most of all when the truth needs selling to a catatonic public.

 

 





Comments


  1. on October 29, 2015 at 11:32 am Nikron Ptolemides

    Yes to all of the foregoing.
    One thing to avoid: Do NOT preface anything with “I think …”
    I see politicians doing it and I want to slap them. It is weak. I saw Rand Paul on a clip starting every sentence with it. Pathetic. You want to be Commander in Chief? “I think we should fire the missile and kill the target as well as all the guests at the wedding.” No: “Fire the missile.” “The sky is blue.” Not: “I think the sky is blue.” Assert facts as fact. Assert opinions as fact. Assert beliefs as fact. Assert controversial views as fact. Don’t hedge. Let others scale the cliff to disagree, don’t invite them to contradict you. “Hillary Clinton is a felon who should be arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned.” “My research leads me to think that … .” No. Say it. And be prepared to say why, and stick with it.

    Like


  2. I hear what you are saying and thats why Nigel Farage is such a rock star. The guy can deliver in public.

    Like


  3. A combination of self-doubt and the understanding that expressing hate facts as if one should actually change public policy can get you Richwine’d or Watson’d or Summers’d or Derb’d. Much safer for one’s own hide to express hate facts as curious academic findings warranting further study. Only a truly NFG spokesman, like Trump, will deliver the message in a populist, convincing way. If one has anything of value to lose, the enemy is too strong at the moment. Hence the reason Le Heartiste is anonymous.

    [CH: fair point. ps the term of art is ZFG.]

    Like


    • Absolutely…it’s much easier when one has nothing to lose.

      So you should be very rich or very poor.

      Like


      • The problem with being very poor is the lack of credibility. The problem with anyone very rich sticking his/her neck out is that it is better for the very rich to maintain the status quo. Trump would get richer staffing all his properties’ custodial services with illegal aliens. Why is he advocating the opposite of his personal pecuniary interests? He’s a patriot, like George Washington before him.

        Like


    • Jean Marie Lepen has been at the front of right wing politics for more than 50 years in France (saddly getting a bit old and senile now).

      The next generation looks pretty hot: Marion Maréchal Lepen . She is a bit softer/more pc than her grand-father.

      Like


    • The left didn’t win by asserting all its beliefs outright. It won by playing on the sympathies of neutral fair-minded conservatives while denying the final outcomes. Affirmative actions? These will NEVER be quotas! No discrimination against homosexuals? Of course we don’t mean homosexual marriage! Peace in Vietnam? No, we don’t support the Cong!

      The Right can’t help the fact that it’s coming from behind so it has be just as sneaky, now that the Left controls the levers of cultural power. In that sense Tyler Cowen is actually doing his bit to shift the terms of the debate rightwards and introduce hatefacts into public discourse while seemingly adhering to a moderate version of what unglued libertarians like Caplan believe.

      But the movement needs its both fanatics and its Machiavelli’s.

      Like


    • You know, it’s curious that white people might want to express themselves? with their own interests?

      You know, i think that, if white people would like to think of themselves as a separate group? they might want to figure out how to speak for themselves?

      Like with confidence, in what they have to say?

      Like


  4. The Right has trouble in debates because they’re required to think before they speak, which eliminates the cool, suave wittiness of friendly conversation. The Left doesn’t need to think; they merely recite the same things “everybody” else is saying, with enough individualized spin, charisma, attitude, or what-have-you to make their words sound better. They aren’t challenging each other, nor are they learning anything of value by listening to each other. They don’t think.

    That’s what makes a debate between the Right and the Left so difficult. The Right has to think their way through the conversation (like Men), while the Left thoughtlessly vomits up whatever nonsense they’ve heard that made them feel good about themselves (like women).

    Game is brilliant in these matters. Don’t bother debating. Hold frame. Tease them. Call them out on their nonsense and make them feel bad, then give them a conversational pathway to feel good. They’ll take it. They have to. They don’t have the mental ability to think for themselves, and they have no idea what you’re doing or how game works or why they like you so much even though they hate you.

    Don’t worry about the issues. That argument was previously lost, and it can’t be gained back in a culture that openly despises logic. So work their feelings. It’s their weak point, as they’ve purposely built up their own personal feelings as more important that truth, reality, or general Goodness. You can’t win with the issues. You can only win by teasing them until they feel too silly to speak.

    Like


    • It’s debate v. rhetoric. The Left, behind rabbits, are only doing one (rhetoric), while the right starts doing the other (dialectic) and then don’t switch to rhetoric to counter the left.

      The left have the high ground on rhetoric overall in this day and age…sadly.

      [CH: the supplanting of dialectic by rhetoric as the primary engine of public influence is a sure sign of culture decline.]

      Like


      • Well put. Rhetoric vs dialectic. I’ve never gotten laid with dialectic, myself. Anyone else?

        Like


      • The problem there I think is the same one that the GOP faces; they internally believe the other side is right or get stuck playing into their frame. “Take your pick: do you want to help single mothers or do you hate women? Do you want to acknowledge that black people live in a white-privileged society, or are you a filthy racist who hates non-lily-white people?” They can’t reframe as, to your point, they assume that the other-side is playing by the rules and using (dialectic? I’d never considered that word), and are legitimately serious in their accusations. The idea that they’re cheating is utterly outside of their comprehension.

        Last night’s debate; my favorite point was somewhat meta; with the exception of Bush, none of the candidates fell for the gotchas and each reframed into Red vs. Blue. The “Moderators” being the Blue. It was the most civil debate I think I’ve ever seen, with some miraculous recognition on the part of the candidates that they, all, were on the same team and shouldn’t bad-mouth each other (except Bush), and the Moderators were the Enemy with whom they should be debating. But that’s a whole nother topic.

        Like


      • Well put. Rhetoric vs dialectic. I’ve never gotten laid with dialectic, myself. Anyone else?

        “Here are the reasons why we fit so well together….”

        There is a 2001 movie, A Beautiful Mind, where Russell Crowe plays the mathematician John Nash. He tries that when he is dating a woman:

        “I find you attractive. Your aggressive moves toward me … indicate that you feel the same way. But still, ritual requires that we continue with a number of platonic activities … before we have sex. I am proceeding with these activities, but in point of actual fact, all I really want to do is have intercourse with you as soon as possible.”

        And:

        “I don’t exactly know what I am required to say in order for you to have intercourse with me. But could we assume that I said all that – I mean essentially we are talking about fluid exchange, right? So could we just go straight to the sex?”

        Like


      • Dialectic easily crosses over into sophistry (or lawyering, if you will) which tends to be worthless. Take the opportunity to learn about the tricks of this field though and you can often make your opponents look like fools. (They will then run crying to some pozzed authority which will expel you, but at least you won.)

        As usual, I myself enjoyed Schopenhauer’s take (in AC Grayling’s translation): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right

        Like


      • I think you meant “rhetoric” there.

        Like


      • on October 30, 2015 at 1:27 pm The Spirit Within

        Cicero and the entire canon of Western thinkers up through the nineteenth century would disagree with the presence of rhetoric as a sign of cultural decline.

        Like


      • As usual, the Faggot Within fails.

        “Cicero and the entire canon of Western thinkers up through the nineteenth century” would agree that rhetoric should not supplant dialectic. Rhetrotic had its place in argument, but it should not be used at all times in in all discourse.

        As you lefties have completely done.

        Faggot Within rape!

        Like


    • Well, then, the answer is obvious: Take the leftist rhetoric, craft answers and memorize them so they roll off the tongue.

      Like


      • “As white Americans, it is in our interests that our children receive an education that works best for them, that is suited to their talents and capacities.”

        “As a white person, i would like to see other groups take care of themselves, and not take from the limited resources that we have.”

        “As white people, let us start looking out for ourselves. Let us start by placing our children at the front of the line.”

        Like


      • In therapy the value of self-affirming speech is an accepted technique. Sounds awfully flaky and hippy-dippy, but in terms of real world debate, it is effective.

        In dialectic, self-affirmation is a pre-condition that ought to be a presumption – but is not. In rhetoric, it is effective in its obviousness.

        “As a white person concerned about the future, i am representing my children’s interest. They are white, and that is part of who they are.”

        Like


    • Exactly right. Relatedly, another problem is that it’s very easy to launch a spirited, superficially plausible defense of modern leftism (or harm based morality), childish and simplistic as it is. Heck, many of us here could argue in favor of it more convincingly than most shitlibs could, assuming we were able to keep a straight face while doing it.

      Comparably, things such as the erosion of social capital via diversity or loss of tradition, and indeed why that’s a big deal to begin with, are significantly more abstract and thus more challenging to conceptualize for your average low-info audience. And this difficulty is exacerbated of course by the opposition bombarding said audience with propaganda about the war on women or the plight of those poor refugees and other messages meant to tug at their heart strings.

      Like


  5. ben shapiro i think handles situations pretty well (like that monster tranny death grip) but it seems like probably because he’s autistically unaware of other people’s emotions more than anything else.

    ideally mark steyn would go full red pill and tear them a new one laughing all the way. he doesn’t back down

    Like


    • Ben Shapiro is a great at verbal war but he pulls the same magic act on nice conservative folk that has been done to them for 60 years: Align on a few issues, but eskimoisrael is the absolute #1 no compromise.

      I wanted to like him, I really wanted to like him after his gun debate with sniveling Piers Morgan, but he is very staunchly pro-eskimo in a way that is really irritating. If you want to find his few golden quips, you have to sift through mountains of him calling people anti-semitic.

      Like


      • Yes, and with such folks, you will ALWAYS be betrayed. Those unaware of this are surprised when suddenly the Zionists and their loyals suddenly turn against the best and brightest on the Right, denouncing them as “extremists”. The average member doesn’t understand and says “Why can’t we all just get along?”

        “Because he said this and this!” shout the Zios. “So he’s an extremist! He makes us all look bad!”

        The ordinary member will go along with them for the sake of peace. Only a few people will be expelled, but then there will be peace. And those people get so angry during this process (surprise, surprise), so maybe the Zios were right, they really do cause trouble.

        And then one of those expelled says something REALLY forbidden about the Zios, because he just doesn’t care to keep silent anymore. Now, we can’t have that. The ordinary member is relieved that he now has a good reason for supporting the expulsion.

        And so it begins. This happens over and over again in nationalist parties, which are infiltrated by the usual suspects – but only when the hard, initial work has been done for many years, so that the party could get off the ground.

        It will happen in the alt-Right too. People are holding up the Breitbart website as alt-Right now. That website is a very late member, set up by the Jew Breitbart only after people sacrificed careers and relationships to spread the truth for many years. Now you have a Jew like the homosexual Milo Yiannopolous there, saying some easy anti-mainstream lines – then denouncing “White supremacists”.

        The same guy also declares that he would never sleep with a White man, only Black men. They love saying disgusting things as a by-the-way in a discussion about something else, knowing people will keep silent for the sake of unity. And he claims that homosexuals are “natural allies” to the alt-Right because they are “anti-mainstream”, the media being mainstream. False and absurd, but people keep silent in the comment section so as to not rock the boat. Giving loyalty to those who show no loyalty. You have to recognize the infiltrators’ modus operandi.

        Like


      • The most important thing on the alt-right is that we stick with our own kind.

        Don’t trust a yid or black on anything.

        It’s like these cucks who want to get behind Ben Carson because he throws you a few bones.

        Have you learned nothing?

        Like


      • Generally, anyone who is pro-Israel without having the excuse of being a Jew should be rejected. If it’s a Jew, then he should be rejected if he tries to make you give a fuck about the Jews vs Muslim thing beyond your self-interest.

        Like


    • They’re yids, lol

      Ask your barber if you need a haircut.

      Like


    • Ben Shapiro is nasally voice little know-it-all.

      Like


    • Actually Mark Steyn and Anne Coulter are probably the closest to big name Alt Right writers and speakers. They are not all the way there, either through personal philosophy or just the recognition that you go to far and you’re off the TV cameras forever.

      And that’s the issue. You’ll vanish from the media if you adopt a full alt right persona, in whatever version; either HBD or Neoreaction or the other flavors.

      Heather MacDonald is an academic who probably has not done the amount of public speaking required to be really good at it, but if she had, we would never see her on camera, or hear her on the radio again.

      Like


  6. on October 29, 2015 at 11:46 am elmer t. jones

    It’s what I am saying about writing fiction vs practical non-fiction. The former is like masturbating. You can make shit up as you go along. The latter requires real effort to get it right in a way that captivates readers. Leftists write fiction.

    Like


  7. It doesn’t help that most right-wing women, especially “reasonable” ones like Heather MacDonald, are natural appeasers and temporizers, as opposed to the deranged harpies of the left. It take a woman who is a fanatic, and two-thirds nuts herself, like Ann Coulter, to really go for the throat and stuff these people. As Eric Hoffer once said, “If you have a cause that needs fighting for, you had better get yourself some fanatics, because you won’t win without them.” Hence the enduring failure of the Cuck Right…

    Like


    • He cucks: no one is fanatically moderate.

      Like


    • To be precise, though, a fanatic is someone who decides what conclusion he wants, and sorts out the facts he hears accordingly, and gets obsessed with this. Ann Coulter doesn’t do that, she simply presents the facts about mass immigration. The only similarity with fanatics is that she has a cause, but her cause comes from following where the facts lead.

      Like


      • How many white children does Ann Coulter have?

        [CH: ann coulter’s words are her white children.]

        Like


      • Who cares, Pubicus? How many White children do you have, moron? Or to leave that nonsense argument and reach a real one: what have you ever done for Whites? I am sure of the answer: Nothing. What has Ann Coulter done for Whites? Far more than almost anyone. Not even one percent of Whites have done as much as she has.

        Like


      • 2, pussy. And I spread the word of this place with my real name in the real world, every day, at great risk to my livelihood.

        Like


      • Also, spell my name correctly, bitch.

        Like


      • Ann’s probably reading, so Hi Ann keep up the anti-cuck fight.

        Like any woman, the laws of hypergamy are in effect, and she’s so strong willed the level off asshole game required to hold her in place was probably non-existent among her circle of cocktail party whites. She’s also very tall, which dominates the typical media dweebs around her and eliminates 90% of men from her dating pool, and taller women have notably lower fertility for whatever reason anyway.

        Ann, I’m 6’2”, I have a CCW and I’ll call you a bitch when you need it. Swoon.

        Like


      • Well, Ann’s a bit too thin for my tastes, romantically… but if she needs somebody to act as a wall between her and those who would do her harm, I’m there.

        Like


    • Absolutely.

      We need to start standing behind our fanatics too instead of disavowing them.

      Like


      • No enemy to the Right; instead of fighting over who is the true “respectable” conservative. God knows, Dems have no enemy to the Left.

        Like


  8. on October 29, 2015 at 11:52 am TornadoByProxy

    Absolutely right. The Realtalkers MUST learn that facts do not matter to the mouth breathers they are trying to win over. The only route for the Right is condescension and mockery. Sprinkle in facts as needed, but in today’s age, debates are only won by making the other guy look like the bigger fool.

    Like


    • It is impossible to debate facts and logic with either a libtard or an angry woman.

      http://www.thisblogisdangerous.com/we-do-not-debate-with-the-left/

      We will take back our society, and libtards and dindus will behave or get out. Eventually, our women will thank us.

      Like


      • So hit them with rhetoric which tugs at heartstrings.

        Like


      • Wow, good article. I know it was meant for the guys but I needed that advice myself. I have engaged in plenty of debates with leftoids and you’re right, it’s a waste of time. The men are usually just as angry as the women too.

        Like


      • I’ve been saying this ad nauseum for awhile now… a future for White children is NOT a subject for debate… and especially here at the chateau, reply to the shills only with drive-by mockery and disdain… sprinkle lightly with facts, if you must… if only for the sake of the peanut gallery… but don’t engage the SJW shills, the yids and snarky darkies on their terms.

        Like


  9. So true CH; between people duckin me and people with verbal tourettes, i might hafta retire.

    Like


  10. […] The Dissident Right Needs Better Public Speakers […]

    Like


  11. I think what holds back Dissident mastery of the public sphere is self-doubt. There still lingers a hesitation to embrace the ugly truth with both arms, hugging it till it becomes one with the soul. When the last shadow of doubt is expelled, the fire within can glow again

    I heard this from a man in a nationalist party who was going to debate a local politician for the first time, in front of a high school audience I believe it was. It was the first time he would be in a debate and he was nervous, and he prepared thoroughly as the other guy was a Real Politician.

    “But when it started I realized, he didn’t have anything! He only had the usual platitudes that they throw at each other. That you either need more welfare or lower taxes for immigrants. When I brought up all the statistics that we talk about he didn’t have anything to say. His hands even shivered and he looked down and got all red in the face.”

    If there had been screaming leftist cohorts in the audience, that would surely have strengthened the mainstream politician, or if there had been a moderator who had propped him up as they usually do. But lacking moderator or audience support he had nothing. Anti-Whites can never win an unrigged debate with pro-Whites. And this was a revelation for my friend, who toughened up in future debates and interviews.

    He also learned that you can never try to reason with reporters, or with those politicians who know the score and who willingly serve the media owners. (As opposed to the aforementioned politician who was simply a bureaucrat who believed his party.) If you meet those, you have to know it’s not a debate as such. They simply set out to deliver lies and half-truths meant to fool the people. You don’t “debate” them, you steamroll them before they steamroll you. You show clearly that you know they are the enemy.

    Tekki. Have you seen the scene in Shogun where Blackthorne meets Lord Toranaga for the first time, and the interpreter is a monk from Portugal, a country at war with Britain? He doesn’t try to placate the monk – he doesn’t try that in the whole series. He points to the monk and says “tekki,” the Japanese word for enemy, so that Toranaga will know their interaction won’t be as advertised.

    That is what Trump does with the media. He points to them and loudly says “tekki,” to tell people that the media won’t relay information about him in an honest manner. This is also a big difference between alt-Right and cuckservative Right.

    Like


    • Good point, treat them as enemies from the start.

      I learned this as a boy from fighting nogs.

      In many debates, facts get glossed over.

      Barbs subtly laced with facts work better, the crowd wants to see who’s stronger.

      Like


    • on October 29, 2015 at 1:07 pm Experienced Father

      Tekki. Have you seen the scene in Shogun where Blackthorne meets Lord Toranaga for the first time, and the interpreter is a monk from Portugal, a country at war with Britain? He doesn’t try to placate the monk – he doesn’t try that in the whole series. He points to the monk and says “tekki,” the Japanese word for enemy, so that Toranaga will know their interaction won’t be as advertised.

      That is what Trump does with the media. He points to them and loudly says “tekki,” to tell people that the media won’t relay information about him in an honest manner. This is also a big difference between alt-Right and cuckservative Right.

      That was a profound observation. I’m going to use it

      +1000

      Like


    • How do you phonetically pronounce tekki?

      Like


  12. I think Dissident Rightists need to be a bit less pedantic in their style of speaking (as opposed to writing). These days it’s the soundbite and the emotive word-picture that will convert people – remember, you’re seeking to convert, not to reinforce the beliefs of those who already agree with you. Enoch Powell’s “Tiber foaming with much blood” speech was a great piece of oratory, but today at least, it would work better if the warning were expressed more demotically.

    Like


    • Yes, as long as the soundbite doesn’t sound prepared and forced. Like Jeb Bush talking about Rubio missing votes in the Senate: “The senate, what is it, a French work week?”

      Picking on the French, tee-hee! Why not demand that French fries should be named Freedom fries in the Congress restaurant again.

      Rubio had a reply prepared. @ricky_vaughn99 believes that Rubio knew it was coming, and he could be right: a neocon loyal tweeted before the debate that he had learned one of the candidates would make a “career destroying move” during the debate, and as soon as Jeb had said that to Rubio, and Rubio had answered him, both National Review and Weekly Standard attacked Jeb, saying Rubio’s reply had sunk Jeb’s campaign, he is “finished”, whatever.

      Seems their choice now is Marco Rubio. Perhaps Zio Sheldon Adelson has decided to give Rubio his millions, the Prize all the candidates except Trump have been competing for. Though it’s not a monolith, as we have seen others in the cuckservative media propped up first Fiorina and then Carson. After Carson’s lame performance maybe they too will shift to Rubio.

      Like


  13. on October 29, 2015 at 12:22 pm Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

    We need to have game even when we’re walking.

    If a man just sort of minces along, he is a TOTAL BETA.

    Alphas will stride purposefully, head held high, chest out.

    Like


  14. The right needs strong, forceful men who will say what they mean and mean what they say. If Trump has taught us anything, it’s that the populace will respond – positively – to an unapologetically bold RealTalker who tells it like it is. Speaking skills are important, but eloquence is secondary to pure boldness and confidence. People always seek an authority. They tend to gravitate to the one with the most forceful and energetic personality.

    Like


  15. Don’t send a woman to do a man’s job.

    Like


    • Interesting point. I don’t see any women or glass ceilings or pay gaps here:

      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Russian_Troops_NGM-v31-p379.jpg.

      I never seem to see any glass ceilings or women:

      – at construction sites
      – at roadwork project sites
      – on boats a sea doing fishing or oil rigging
      – doing the real dangerous work of the police or military

      Like


      • True. They want equality in the sense of being media bigshots or highflying lawyers, the way every kid used to want to be an astronaut. When you see a headline about ten people being killed in some workplace accident, you can be nearly sure they’re all men.

        Like


      • How tough is fishing?

        Like


      • Ho, he means commercial fishing where you don’t find women as a rule… or were you being snarky again? :-p

        Like


      • – doing the real dangerous work of the police or military

        Statistically speaking, police work isn’t that dangerous. It’s not even in the top ten most dangerous occupations. 99.999% of the time the cops just cruise around stuffing their faces with donuts and writing harmless white people tickets.

        Get those stupid pigs off of your pedestal. They have two functions and two functions only: To extract revenue from peaceable white families and to protect feral dindus from pissed-off white vigilantes. If they ever catch any real criminals, it’s on accident and for all the wrong reasons.

        Like


      • How tough is fishing?

        The smaller commercial vessels often lose crew members to injury and death… I think the crab and lobster vessels are the most dangerous.

        Like


      • The smaller commercial vessels often lose crew members to injury and death… I think the crab and lobster vessels are the most dangerous.

        Yes, statistically speaking, commercial fishing is quite dangerous. Last I checked, it was in the top three most dangerous occupations. (The other two, in case anyone cares, are mining and logging.)

        Like


      • Never fear, Ho is here to be retarded and weird, again. The others already answered your retarded fag-comment.

        Commercial fishing is dangerous as fuck, ma’am. Many deaths and injuries. Out at fucking sea. Sometimes the waves are big. Takes strength to do the work like pulling heavy ropes and chains and shit. There are very few women there and no glass ceilings.

        #deathgap
        #homelessnessgap

        Like


      • “Never fear, Ho is here to be retarded and weird, again. The others already answered your retarded fag-comment.”

        Hey moron, I wasn’t denying that it’s tough, I was asking for info from guys who know more than I. (me?)

        Like


      • “Ho, he means commercial fishing where you don’t find women as a rule… or were you being snarky again? :-p”

        Nah, I just don’t know much about life at sea.

        Like


      • The sea was angry that day, my friend… like an old man trying to send back soup at a deli…

        Like


      • I get it now. Ho is about 16 years old. Sorry kid. I didn’t mean to pick on you. I didn’t realize you are a kid.

        Like


  16. they need to have the courage to point out that the ni99ers aren’t wearing any orange jumpsuits

    political correctness: the belief that it’s truly possible to pick up the clean end of a turd

    Like


  17. I remember about a year ago listening to a local NPR affiliate roundtable on policing and race relations… this was in the wake of the Baltimore riots. The table was all set for a SJW circle jerk with a nice white lady hostess, an obsequious white man, an obligatory black grievance studies professor, and to round it out, the local police chief, who was black. Everything was going well until the chief of police stopped cooperating. He started talking about how the preponderance of black crime could account for the disproportionate police stops, the absence of fathers in black communities, ect…

    The hostess, who was of course a J$w, was audibly perturbed that the negro police chief wasn’t falling in line with the black lives matter approved narrative. As he dropped hatefact after hatefact, her voice tuned into the instantly recognizable shrill ululation of an SJW backed into a corner… She eventually shut the police chief out of the conversation as the other panel members wowjustwowed their way through the remainder of the discussion.

    Like


  18. The right needs some old martyr’s courgage. We need to lose the fear of ridiculousness, ostracism and poverty. It’s not much more than that, but it’s ultimately the hardest part.

    Like


  19. Good read: http://www.thisblogisdangerous.com/the-retreat-of-the-state/

    Never lose sight of the fact that the communists currently in charge, our overlords, are fighting very hard to disarm white men and white families, and white men’s ability to protect our women and children, when they know that there will be no money for police eventually, after the fiat dollar ponzi scheme collapses, which would leave us vulnerable to roving packs of 230 to 330 pound feral dindus.

    The Second Amendment is, indeed, equal to the First in importance.

    Actually, all ten of the Bill of Rights Amendments are critical, including the 9th and 10th, which have been dead for dedades.

    Liked by 1 person


    • yes. once they take away our guns it’s game over. but I suspect there will be a revolution before that happens.

      if you want to cast your vote for a free white America, buy a gun. buy MANY guns

      Like


    • The Constitution has been dead since 1861 when Lincoln overthrew it.

      Because of the lip service to it until fairly recently, the large body of the populace did not recognize it. Now it is becoming well known to all.

      Like


  20. Do you have a link to her appearance?

    Like


  21. Word. How you say it is just as important as what you say.

    Like


  22. One who comes to mind is Peter Hitchens. He’s half Eskimo, however this fact was hidden from him (and his brother) well into their adult years. He possesses mastery of that English Public School cum Oxford Union debating style.

    Like


  23. Among all the problems, it is difficult for most people (but not for Trump) to stand up to a group of people that has you way outnumbered. The temptation to to try to make them your friends by giving points away is very strong. Not that it works…

    Like


  24. on October 29, 2015 at 12:51 pm Days of Broken Arrows

    I’ve noticed the British guys like Paul Joseph Watson and Milo Yiannopoulos actually have some verve and vigor when they speak. They’re bringing a British Invasion sense of style that’s making the old guard look like the black-and-white-TV teen idols the Fab Four replaced.

    Like


  25. Listen to Jon Lott from Gun Owners of America speak sometime. He’s a great writer but a horrible whiner and squeaky voice in real life.

    Like


  26. It’s time to speak the language of emotion, race realists can save the academic talk for elsewhere. People vote with their hearts not their heads.

    Like


    • I’ve got a comment in mod about this. On immigration/race, work to make their FEAR emotion stronger than their pathological altruism. Another couple examples I neglected to include in my other comment: “Why should Indians coming to America and take all of our tech jobs, which were created by whites?” (Fear of job/prosperity loss) or ” it has been scientifically proven, repeatedly, that the average black has an IQ of 15 to 20 points below the average white person. It is also been Ruben that it is harder for people with lower intelligence understand their own emotions and the emotions of others. This explains why Africa has made no advance is culturally or technologically, and why they are so violent. We need to ask ourselves whether we want more of Africa in the United States, and whether we should cater to these people all the time rather than defending the interest of an intelligent group of people that has made virtually every technological and cultural advancement in the modern world. It is time for the blacks to thank us profusely for what we have done for the world, rather than treating us with disrespect.”

      Like


  27. Heidi Klum is still hamstering about Trump’s appraisal of her now months later. Google her people magazine article.

    The neg turns the truly hot (and formerly hot) women into puddy.

    Everyone should try this. Next time you’re talking to a really hot girl… give a neg a little harsher than your brain is telling you can get away with.

    Some say “don’t neg HB7s or lower” or crap like that, but its shortsighted analysis IMO. Rather than being purely about looks, the negs effectiveness is perfectly correlated with the woman’s EGO. If you think “hey I’m objectively higher value than this girl, I shouldn’t neg”… you are probably wrong if you are talking to a woman in a feminist country. Neg away.

    Like


    • yes. neg anyone and everyone. it’s the verbal equivalent of modern day jousting. how someone responds tells you what the pecking order is.

      take whatever attribute a person specially cultivates to garner positive attention and turn it into a joke on them. like south park.

      you can get away with almost anything, far more than most people realize.

      the candidates would do well to start off the debates negging the moderators, ripping on their style choices, the way they speak, humiliating them and mocking them at the slightest stutter. then we’d be getting somewhere

      Like


      • i’ve noticed many of the candidates and celebrities exhibit classic butthurtness when put on the spot by the media. it’s time for them to start humiliating the media in return

        hivemind media idiot: “Mr. Trump, are you an evil comic book villain?”

        huge swingin cock: “Are you kidding me??? You’re on national television asking 4th grader questions, AND wearing THOSE heels with THAT dress??? You need to fire your stylist!”

        Like


    • Shartiste-
      “The neg turns the truly hot (and formerly hot) women into puddy.”

      I don’t know if you meant pudding, putty, or a puddle, but your new word seems to encompass all three. Well done.

      Like


  28. on October 29, 2015 at 1:32 pm WaterUnderTheFridge

    The best method I’ve found to undermine leftists beliefs, and persuade them, is a very specific affectation:

    A man who sincerely, and in good will wants to understand and appreciate their logic (though you know it’s absent) but who is patiently and benevolently handling the frustration of failing to connect the dots in what they are saying (because the dots don’t connect). When they don’t perceive you as an adversary (and thus do not disqualify you in their little hamster brains) their focus instead turns to a frustration and insecurity that comes from not being able to explain what they believe.

    I then, without being aggressive, didactic or condescending (supposedly) nor apolegetic, nor intimated present the logical ideas that make sense to me, though I’ve never studied or considered it in detail (whether true or not). And then I change the subject. They’re happy to leave the sensation of ignorance and incompetence, but the seeds have been planted, later they very often share with me the evolution that has occurred in their mind, and I’m the “accidental” progenitor of a marginally better brain.

    Over the long term substantial change can be made.

    I’m not sure how this could be adapted to a public media event where the speakers are expected/understood to be experts with a clear side they defend.

    Notably this tactic works fairly well with the religious too. The left and the religious have been inoculated against those who undermine their belief system, but if their antibodies cannot recognize me….

    I am the vector of infection. I will sicken your mind with logic so that it can heal… Assuming I give a shit about what you think to begin with.

    I’ve yet to try this as a method on that famois fool’s errand, unplugging Beta friends…. But what if it works?

    Like


  29. Even more than having effective public speakers, the right needs to control at least one channel on the public airwaves. The left can have 100, and they do already, but all it would take would be for one independent right controlled television station to break the monopoly ( I say TV because images are more powerful than words).

    Imagine what a slickly produced one hour per week Chateau Heartiste TV program would be like? Or a program produced by VDare or SBPDL? It would be a riot… literally. Information like Heather MacDonald’s talk needs to be broadcast directly to the public and it will hit liberals like drilling into a raw nerve.

    [CH: race cuck guests get to sit on a stool in the corner of the studio.]

    Like


  30. We Realtalkers can turn the tables on the common white woman/shitlib in conversation by appealing to the primary subconscious “decision-making” mechanism of the unenlightened, their emotions. Particularly on the subject of immigration and race, a person’s pathological altruism can often be replaced with fear via a few well-placed comments (we would call them facts) that reframe the conversation away from (pathological) altruism toward invaders to FEAR of what those invaders will do and are doing to our society. Instead of relying exclusively on logic, use powerful tidbits of logic that AWAKEN FEAR. Examples:
    “If there were no blacks or Latinos in the U.S., crime would instantly drop 80 percent.”
    “There are thousands of black on white rapes each year, but zero white on black rapes.”
    “Whites have undeniably built by far the most desirable societies and nations (into which everyone wants to move), and have created almost every major invention and improvement to humanity’s quality of life, with a tip of the hat to the Japanese, while every other ethnicity’s contributions in this regard (blacks, Arabs, Indians, Latinos) is a essentially zero. These ethnicities have had their regions of the world for as long or longer than whites, yet they’re still hellholes, and the regions to which they move in the US and Europe become hellholes as well. Yes some people claim that white people should not be able to defend their own interests. If you spend years or decades building a beautiful house, would you not defend it against squatters? Do you want the US and Europe to become like the Muslim world, Latin America, or Africa? Simple question. Do you want your children to live in Africa, Latin America, or the Muslim world? If not, you had better begin to defend white interests, because if whites don’t defend their own interests, their nations will become Africa, the Muslim world, and Latin America. Every other ethnic group is encouraged to defend their own interests, and whites must do so as well. It is not racist for whites to do something that every other ethnic group does.”
    For Christians: “There was a very good reason that God separated people into different ethnicities and groups at the Tower of Babel. Don’t you think God was using wisdom when he did that? Yes, the US is a nation of immigrants, but primarily white immigrants. As soon as you start introducing other ethnicities God’s decision at the Tower of Babel starts to be reversed, and the consequences are terrible.”

    Etc. I’m sure the intelligent readers of this blog to come up with many more, and many better.

    Like


    • I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again .
      Whites + pile of bricks = city.
      NIgra’s +city = pile of bricks.

      =

      Like


  31. you guys have more excuses than 6 ni66ers in a stolen car

    Like


  32. A little something of interest – 93% of communication is non-verbal according to this paper – Gaining Compliance through Non-Verbal Communication.

    The below is familiar to any Gamemeisters:

    “Non-verbal behaviors have the power to make the “sender appear more
    attractive, signal the sender’s attraction for the receiver, or signify similarity
    between the sender and the receiver.” 50 Physical appearance, body language,proximity, artifacts, eye contact, and other non-verbal actions may
    serve not only as behaviors that enhance attraction and similarity during an
    interaction, but also as pre-interactional elements in that they may draw people together. In this manner, non-verbal cues may predispose people to interact and be susceptible to influence even before the first word is uttered.”

    http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1098&context=drlj

    Like


  33. This is something I’ve noticed with more than a few public Realtalkers; they express themselves much more cleanly and forcefully in writing than at roundtables full of sneering leftoids.

    That is because we are all human and no-one likes to be outnumbered sneered at and spit upon.

    Unless you are rocking a cluster-b personality in which case your time has come!

    [CH: lol]

    Like


  34. it’s sickeing how much of a H1B open borders nutter Rubio is but at least he has figured out how to use that hole right below his nose on his face to make noises that confound libs.

    Like how C. Rose couldn’t even sound coherent trying to get Rubes to apologize for calling hillary a liar.

    Like


  35. Ron Paul really had trouble with this IMO. He needed some coaching to (1) slow down and (2) keep the message simple and consistent.

    Like


  36. on October 29, 2015 at 7:18 pm Boots on the Ground

    Conservatives are under the illusion that we are having some kind of ideological battle that we somehow can’t find the words to win. The fact is that even if we found the words to lift every dindu and feed, educate and house the entire world the left would still hate our guts.

    A large part of frame is contextualizing the other. We all need to see these people as the scum of the earth, and treat them accordingly, as they treated us from the outset. They are subhuman scum. We are Golden Gods.

    [CH: well said. frame is king.]

    Like


    • The problem is that you are not golden gods. You are mortal men. In the past, when you had control, you made policy as if you were golden gods, and this screwed you in every way here on Earth. Liberals are just carrying on that tradition, and the only difference between you and them is that because you tend to have more children than those who’ve gone full Caligula, you feel the consequences of the stupidity on your own flesh and blood…but you’re still emotionally blinded Claudiuses.

      Yes, I went there. We are talking about your trouble with public speaking, after all.

      Like


    • Good post. we are way past the war war of words and idea’s part , now it’s going to be clinical. with blood and guts left all over the floor.
      It did not have to get to this, but it did (not to my surprise,nor to many others ) and we are gonna have to deal with it , and quickly.

      Like


  37. It is better for a man to die on his feet than live on his knees, action speaks louder that words , and your fellow nubians and shit-stirring ‘mos are fixing to hear and feel it . And I garron-damn -tee you are not gonna like the result.
    Wanna put odds on it, jewess Mossad op ?

    Like


    • John, not my heart, but my money is always on the most alpha…in natural and actual terms, not in wishful thinking terms.

      Just remember that even if you win, nothing changes for the poor. If you’re a de facto slave now, you’ll still be one in the new order unless you can figure a way to raise your status. You won’t do that without becoming machiavellian.

      So the cycle will just continue, even if you manage to kill all the non “white” people in the U.S.

      Like


      • The poor will always be among us, Nicole. But if a man or woman does not want to work, ( if they are able) they should not eat. I know you are a jew, you feed the lazy bastards, don’t ask the rest of us to do it . Fuck your Tikkin Olam.

        Like


  38. It takes careful rehearsing of talking points to be an effective “pundit.” It’s not a natural undertaking for most honest, introverted folk. That’s why Milo Yananopolis somehow became a spokesman for the right. You have to love drama and be willing to fantasize and rehearse potential confrontations to be truly great at it. Trump too. We call it Zero Fucks Given, but he actually gives all the fucks. He loves the spotlight and cares what people think of him. That doesn’t mean he apologizes, but he spends lots of time manipulating how he’s perceived. For the more logical minded types, a step-by-step guide may be required to prepare for the insidious world of punditry.

    Like


  39. The term “alt-right” is for cucks. If you’re pro-White, stop the faggotry and just state it.

    Like


  40. One problem is that most Realtalkers almost always find themselves completely alone, isolated islands in a vast ocean of company line narrative BS. The only people I ever come across who openly admit to being conservative or anything similar are (White) guys over 50 and maybe the odd hayseed shitkicker Redneck survivalist ultra-Chris-chun from the boondocks (also White, duh). Everyone else is far too cowed by and perhaps even afraid of the dominant culture, which is very dominant indeed. You can sometimes tell that there are some people in a group who (silently) agree with you – they’re the ones who aren’t screeching expletives at you and aren’t trying to get you lynched by today’s version of Cotton Mather’s witch hunters.
    Works on fora, too.
    I sometimes post on the forum of a relatively large European newspaper, and if my comments (which are always civil) aren’t deleted by the left-liberal staff, it is fascinating to see not only the hate-spitting comments other posters leave, but also the green stripes (= agreement) I get versus the red……..
    Disagreement being VERY vocal and hyper-aggressive, agreement silent.

    Like


  41. It’s grimly hilarious when things happen in real life that Heartiste predicted (and Roosh, and Mike C., Jokeocracy Duck, etc). It happened last night.

    So last night your guy here is at book club (don’t hate). Conversation got on to a past selection, Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale. I don’t waste my time with femtrash Margaret Atwood typing, nor should you, so I feigned ignorance and asked what it’s about. Here’s where the comedy starts.

    A regular at book club is a fat, homely, socially awkward feminist (but I repeat myself). She routinely talks more than most, and not entertainingly. Last night conversation veered to Uber, yeah the taxi service venture.

    No surprise that most of the members are women. The general consensus (is that redundant?) is that Uber is great. The fat girl sputters yeah but yeah but they need to be regulated (I’m paraphrasing) because you can get raped!!!!

    Calmly, I ask from across the coffee table, “Who’s in danger of getting raped?”
    She looks at me like I’m stupid for asking. “Uh, women who use Uber!”
    Me: “Raped?”
    Her: “Yes!”
    Me (still calmly): “Nobody’s getting raped.”

    I know what you’re thinking, so let me confirm it for you. Yes, the group of regulars includes at least two attractive recent graduates. And they sit on either side of her. And they don’t speak much.

    Strangely, afterwards when we’re up and milling around and picking at the rest of the drinks and food, she comes up to me and really sweetly says “So, how have you been? How was your summer?”

    Like


  42. Riddle me this: was Hillary Clinton asked about the #deathgap or #homelessness gap at the Democratic debate, like Trump was asked about the “war on women” or the problem of white racist cops?

    zlzolzozlzolzoz we all know the answer without having watched that evil commie-fest.

    Like


  43. NPR – National Public Relations.

    Listen not for the news but to learn where the left aims to guide things.

    Like


  44. I’d bang Heather macdonald.

    Like


  45. on October 31, 2015 at 10:24 pm Charlie Foxtrot

    If Dissident Right speakers were well spoken with smarts and gravitas, NPR and other Leftoids wouldn’t let them come onto their shows.

    Like