The Importance of Language

While many in the alt right have mixed views on the manosphere, there are trenchant “red pill” adherents who frequently bless the internet with their edifying insights. One of these individuals is a Roosh V Forum poster who goes by the name Scorpion. In response to the left’s latest triumph – and the corresponding conservative pessimism – Scorpion makes an excellent argument about the need to change the terms of debate (emphasis mine):

This is why it’s so important to refuse to legitimize the language the left uses to sanitize their poisonous social agendas. Don’t use the word “gay”, for example, and don’t speak of “same-sex marriage”. When you do this you are buying into the leftist frame by utilizing their sanitized language. Instead, use language that is either objective or reactionary/right wing in nature, in order to combat their frame.

This is why I always use the word homosexual in place of “gay” or “same-sex”. When I speak of “transgendered” individuals I always use the person’s biological sex pronouns and pair the transgender label with “mentally ill”, “freak” or “sex pervert”.

Controlling language is controlling thought. By using the language of the left, you are unknowingly allowing them to control the debate, since everything is being talked about in their terms, which immediately makes them seem legitimate even if they are completely insane (i.e. referring to a man with female pronouns, or calling shameless homosexual perverts “gay” to soften their image and make them seem harmless).

I’ve previously written about the need to adopt a new conception of group conflict that occludes the left’s attempts to put whites and men on the defensive by branding them “oppressors.” That’s fine and all, but I feel that one of the problems with the right is that their arguments are not quick and catchy. By the time one has pontificated about the corrosive effects of multiculturalism and feminism, most regular people will have already tuned out. Americans by and large are intellectually lazy; they’re more likely to be swayed by pithy and clever bumper stickers than sophisticated articles by Pat Buchanan and Andy Nowicki.

I’ll admit, I have yet to create witty bumper stickers espousing cherished alt right beliefs. However, what we can do for now is become more cognizant of the language we use. Here is my own brief list of words that we should use in place of increasingly widespread leftist terms.

1. Majoritarianism. While leftists use the term “privilege” as a cudgel to attack myriad groups, whites are their favorite target. The idea that whites might enjoy certain perks not afforded to others represents a great crime against humanity. However, in Western nations, there is absolutely nothing wrong with whiteness being the norm; likewise, whites should dictate culture. Unfortunately, “privilege” has a negative connotation, as the word instantly conjures up spoiled people who enjoy easy, painless lives. Therefore, use the term “majoritarianism” in the place of “privilege.” After all, since whites are still the majority in Western nations – and were the architects of the US, Canada, and Australia – then such nations should have a white character. 

Some might wonder how I could promote such a term; after all, I live in a region where whites are the minority. Well, take it from someone on the front lines: whites around  America need to embrace an unapologetically majoritarian attitude before the rest of the country goes the way of California. 

2. Normal. Men and women who prefer to leave their natural organs intact are simply normal, which is how you should describe regular people when comparing them to transsexuals. The word “cisgender” out to inspire a combination of amusement and revulsion.

3. Non-whites. For starters, I hope that none of you ever say “people of color.” If there is any term that reinforces the leftist frame, this is it. Likewise, refrain from using the liberal euphemism “diversity.” Diversity has an exciting, flavorful connotation; by opposing diversity, you might as well refuse to eat out at a cool Thai restaurant. Who wants to convey an uncultured, close-minded attitude?

However, “diversity” – as used by the left – means greater numbers of non-whites. When describing recent demographic changes, our language should always blatantly highlight ongoing white displacement. If more whites clearly understood that “diversity” results in fewer of them and greater numbers of non-whites, then they might look at multiculturalism more askance. 

I’m sure there is much more to add, but the general point is that we must always be mindful of the words we use. If you’re conversing with people who employ pro-liberal language, then politely – but firmly – question and challenge them. Should you find yourself chatting with open-minded moderates, use subtle words that make them more receptive to alt right talking points. If we wish to make a comeback in the culture war, then we must find ways to control the conversation. Otherwise, the legalization of gay marriage will be a minor irritant compared to what lies beyond the horizon. 

This entry was posted in conservative values, Cultural Marxism, Homosexuals, Race, Subversion and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Importance of Language

  1. Absolutely agree about the use of language. Once the issue is framed it hard to reframe. So taking the initiative with language is vital to shaping the thought, if not of the interlocutor, at least of the witnesses to the discussion. So here are a few humble suggestions:
    fascist mind meld; social justice borg; collectivist thought police; socialist barbarian; leftist leech; monolithic diversity; elitist tolerance; self styled aristocrat; purveyor of failure; dispenser of poverty; inventor of faux facts; font of lies; hater of culture; cornucopia of misery; enemy of good (love, joy, truth, etc.); champion of the inane; whine privilege; envy elite; lover of slavery; architect of confusion; never saw an opportunity he didn’t rejoice to blame someone else for taking; and so on. In any discussion it would be important to make the accusation FIRST as any riposte comes off as weaker. So for example if you are pretty sure that white privilege will be thrown your way, circle inside their OODA loop and accuse them of white envy, or of hating whites. Hell, if they don’t like the fact that we broke quite a few eggs (mostly our own) to make Western Civ they can give us back our cars, air conditioners and washing machines and see how they get along without these symbols of phoney oppression. “Check your privilege!” I say, “Kiss my privilege.” Slaps his rump.

    And yes, paragraphs are our friends.

  2. euroglory says:

    Gay people can’t help being gay. It comes naturally to them. They didn’t choose to be gay and can’t will themselves to feel differently. Why make their lives miserable by victimising them, calling them perverts or not allowing them to have relationships?

    • Bay Area Guy says:

      Gay people can’t help being gay. It comes naturally to them. They didn’t choose to be gay and can’t will themselves to feel differently.

      My take on homosexuality is that it’s just one of humanity’s many quirks. I don’t really care much about the issue one way or another; I’m just sick of the homosexual agenda receiving so much attention – especially since they’re only 3-5% of the population. This goes for both leftists and conservatives. There are far more important issues to focus on.

      Why make their lives miserable by victimising them, calling them perverts or not allowing them to have relationships?

      I personally do not call them perverts or attempt to victimize them. I simply don’t endorse their agenda, and likewise refuse to legitimize their ideas.

      It should also be noted that even gay-friendly ancient Greece had no concept of “gay marriage.”

      • euroglory says:

        I think I made my comment because the comment you endorsed and described as excellent contained the words ‘shameless homosexual perverts’ and implied they are harmful to society.

        I know what you mean about the ‘homosexual agenda receiving so much attention’. However, I’m in favour of gay marriage….not that its an issue I care about much.

        I doubt that gay marriage will harm the institution of straight people marriage. That has already been weakened and dismantled to a large extent by straight people in the west and their cultural and legislative changes since the 60’s. The decline of Christianity, the ease of divorce and probably birth control have achieved that. Not gay people.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s