Tag: Darkstream

The construction of rhetoric

In last night’s Darkstream, I noted that the most effective rhetoric tends to have something in common: it is based on mocking an aspect of the target’s self-identification.

For example, the reason Social Justice Warrior is effective rhetoric that triggers the emotions of SJWs while derogatory terms like Social Justice Bully and Social Justice Crybaby do not is because “warrior” is a term that the SJWs gave themselves, and more importantly, it is how they see themselves. To hear the term used contemptuously, as an open form of mockery, is what causes the emotional pain that triggers them.

Fake News, which is arguably the most effective rhetorical term ever deployed against the media, is almost exactly the same. It is a term originally coined by the media, but stolen and deployed against them, and one that strikes at the very heart of their self-value and self-identification as devotees of truth and accuracy.

So, as an exercise, let’s see if anyone can utilize this principle to come up with a rhetorical term for moderates that would serve as an alternative to Cuckservative, which is itself already an effective tag that is a play on a self-title rather than an actual one, but nevertheless strikes powerfully at the conservative’s self-image as loyal and moral.

Darkstream: Alt-Lite vs Alt White

In tonight’s Darkstream, I discussed the reason for the occasional conflict between Alt Lite and Alt-Right, and described the three types of Alt Lite. I also explained why one type will become Alt-Right, the second will, albeit with difficulty, and the third type will not.

Go ahead and pound on the third type. They’re not really on the side of Western civilization.

On the convergence of Breitbart

Once an organization starts celebrating diversity, cucking and convergence are soon to follow:

The full exchange shows McHugh stating the truth that all mainstream media establishments seem to dance around, and then reminding someone who is not English that his opinion is not necessarily on point. In return, the Breitbart kaffeeklatsch erupted:


A number of Breitbart colleagues, who chose to remain anonymous, also attacked Ms McHugh for her Islamophobic comments. Speaking to CNN anonymously on Sunday, one said they found them “appalling” while another branded them “terrible”.


…This is by no means the first time she has made inflammatory remarks about race. She once told her 19,000 Twitter followers: “Mexicans wrecked Mexico and think invading the USA will magically cure them of their retarded dysfunction. Lol.”


It is rare for Breitbart, a publication which has been accused of writing racist and misogynist articles, to dismiss its employees for their controversial views. Although one exception is the case of Milo Yiannopoulos. In February, the alt-right figurehead, who was one of the site’s most high-profile writers, was forced to resign from the publication after his apparently pro-paedophilia remarks resurfaced in an old podcast.

McHugh said nothing that Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan and any conservative before 1965 would have admitted was true, and her comments are especially on point regarding recent Muslim terror attacks in the UK and France. If diversity did not exist, the problems of diversity — including the actions of other groups who want to dominate or destroy us — would not afflict us.

Breitbart has succumbed to DR3, or the tendency by conservatives to attempt to “prove” they are non-racist by accusing others of racism, creating a circular firing squad:

Many on the Dissident Right mock cuckservatives for engaging in “DR3” or DemsRRealRacists i.e. incapable of defending their values on their merits, they concede the Left’s moral premises, but accuse them of being the “real racists”, homophobes, sexists etc.

DR3 afflicts the mainstream Right, which struggles for “respectability” or at least less censorship in a Left-leaning time. Big internet giants like Google and Twitter, major publications and big donors often will drop and ignore any publication which crosses the line on race, which in late Leftism means anything but foaming-at-the-mouth advocacy of diversity or having multiple ethnic and racial groups in the same society.

As an implicit endorsement of diversity, DR3 subscribes to the “Magic Dirt” idea that if we take people from the third world, bring them to our lands and instruct them in propaganda for our system and culture, they will take it up and suddenly become us. This both replaces us and replaces their own culture with ours as a dominant colonial power.

When conservatives take up “magic dirt,” it shows that they have been captured by the very group they claim to oppose, namely the Left, since they have adopted Leftist policies like diversity, equality and indoctrination.

As I said in the Darkstream last night, to prevent convergence, you must resist the urge to excitedly embrace rival identities who happen – or merely claim – to share your values. In most cases, you will learn that identity trumps values, and when they bring in more of their identities, your values, no longer shared, will be rapidly jettisoned in favor of social justice values.

Darkstream: hate is a Christian virtue

On tonight’s Darkstream, I explain why there is no contradiction between the famous injunction to love your enemies and the repeated commands to hate wickedness and evil. It’s more than a simple “hate the sin, love the sinner”, so do watch it before expressing an opinion.

I thought it was informative to see how this, more than any previous Darkstream, stirred up trolls and Churchians. It may serve you well to ask yourself this: why are they so opposed to hate? If they so readily accept so many other sins, why does hate so readily draw their angry attention?

National Review deserves to die

Kevin Williamson was out hustling for donors on behalf of National Review today. Apparently it has not made money since 1955. Strange, that a magazine should feature so many great defenders of capitalism who nevertheless cannot figure out what that means concerning the market for their product.

In any event, in tonight’s Darkstream I explain why National Review is both inappropriately named and why it deserves to be tossed into the dustbin of history.