Archive for June, 2017
Trump Persuasion Techniques – intro
Posted by polydoros in Coaching Session on 06/30/2017
The rise of someone high-profile such as Donald Trump to attack Political Correctness has happened just as our model predicted.
Over years we’ve bombarded the battlefield so often with our devastating memes that the anti-white war words are backfiring.
Even so, Trump is a masterful persuader, so we can learn from his techniques.
Others have explained many of these, so I’ll mention some that I’ve not seen anyone else point out.
Most of Trump’s persuasion magic happens while speaking. This way there are more cues that he can work with: tone of voice, facial expression, gestures, etc.
One point to notice. Look at when an audience cheers what Trump is saying, Trump will often at that moment say the words:
“Believe me. Believe me.”
It is an anchor for when he says the words “believe me” in other contexts.
This is just one technique that I haven’t seen mentioned anywhere else.
More articles will follow. Believe me.
The Federal Surplus
Posted by Laura in Coaching Session, History, How Things Work, Politics on 06/25/2017
By Bob Whitaker:
And BUGSERS punch me with their elbows and whisper, “Bob, your senility is showing. You mean the Federal DEFICIT.”
But this time I’m right for a change.
Yes, Virginia, there was once a Federal SURPLUS.
Briefly.
To understand this, you have to know where Federal revenue came from back then.
About eighty percent of Federal revenue came from tariffs. (You’ll look it up)
And unlike any taxes today, tariffs were dearly loved in major parts of the United States. That is why they once collected too many of them.
Once.
Why was that tax popular? Tariffs were BELOVED in New England because they meant that all the tariffs were paid by Southerners.
Southerners had a choice: They paid the tariffs or they paid more for industrial goods produced in New England.
Tariffs were supposed “to protect American industry” by raising the prices of imported industrial goods.
It was a “very patriotic” tax.
But by 1833 the giant industries in New England didn’t need any “protection.” So a tariff hike just meant higher prices paid by the South to the East or Northeast for goods.
Instead of being a good Democrat and opposing tariff increases, Jackson backed a tariff that was out of sight.
It was supposed to be a Shrewd Move. It would get even New Englanders into opposing this incredible tariff rise.
Every time a politician decides to be Shrewd, it causes a disaster.
Jackson’s Shrewd Move in 1833 very nearly brought on civil war.
Jackson thought that “the Tariff of Abominations” was so high even New Englanders would go to the negotiating table. He didn’t realize that tariffs were so popular in New England that a congressman who voted against ANY tariff increase would have lost the next election.
The tariffs that were popular in New England were paid in Southern ports. They were an increase to the price of European goods arriving in Southern ports. That allowed New England goods to charge higher prices.
Faced with paying a Federal surplus AND payng more for industrial goods, the South did exactly what many American cities do today about immigration laws: They refused to allow them to be paid in Southern ports.
This was called Nullification, when the port at Charleston refused to enforce Federal law.
We have exactly the same policy today where cities that don’t like immigration laws simply refuse to enforce them.
The difference was that a President today doesn’t dare force local enforcement, while Jackson felt that the Union would fall apart if he allowed South Carolina not to collect the tariffs.
It came very close to a civil war, which we could have won in 1833.
Southern “leaders,” like all respectable conservatives backed down and New England magnanimously gave them all slightly lower increase in tariffs in 1834.
As in America today, the respectable approach destroyed those who allowed it. To repeat, had we fought in 1833 when the issues was clearly unfair tariffs, we would have won.
But moderates did not fight when the issue was clearly the robbery of one part of America by another.
The South waited, led by Moderation, until the issue was slavery.
The Trump win shows, as Anne Coulter said, that some Americans are finally throwing out the suicidal “moderates.”
The question today, just as it was with the South back then, will we have gone down the road of weakness until it is just plain too late.
Chain-Of-Yes… – follow-up
Posted by polydoros in Coaching Session, How Things Work on 06/23/2017
Regardless of theory, the real test for a message is how the audience responds to it.
After repeated testing while SWARMING, I noticed that one of the following posts was more effective than the other:
(Please note: regardless of how many times you’ve posted White geNOcide messages before, allow yourself the time to read through these:)
Post 1:
Nobody is saying that Africans in Africa will ever be a minority.
Nobody is saying that Asians in Asia will ever be a minority.
So why are they saying Whites will be a minority in Britain in 2036?
And Sweden in 2024?
That’s because there’s MASSIVE non-White immigration and FORCED assimilation in EVERY White country and ONLY White countries.
Because there’s a program of White geNOcide.
They say it’s “anti-racist” but it’s simply anti-white.
Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white.
Diversity is a codeword for white genocide.
Now compare:
Post 2:
Nobody demands Asians be chased down by “diversity”
Nobody demands Blacks be chased down by “diversity”
So why are they saying Whites will be a minority in Britain in 2036?
And Sweden in 2024?
That’s because there’s a campaign to force MASSIVE non-White immigration and FORCED assimilation in EVERY White country and ONLY White countries.
Because there’s a program of White geNOcide.
They say it’s “anti-racist” but it’s simply anti-white.
Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white.
Diversity is a codeword for white genocide.
…Now, which post do you think was more effective and why?
Think about it. It will be worth your time. 🙂
…
Spoiler below:
When testing while SWARMING, post 1 was doing better than post 2.
In its favor, post 2 has the “chasing down” meme in it, which seems to be a force-multiplier. But it is added at the very beginning of the post, so it’s too jarring. There isn’t a chain-of-yes. Therefore you can’t get the audience to come on the mental journey with you, beginning with the chain-of-yes.
Anyone who calls White Genocide a conspiracy does not speak English
Posted by Laura in Coaching Session, How Things Work on 06/11/2017
By Bob Whitaker:
“White Genocide is no conspiracy. A conspiracy is something which is secret. Those advocating White Genocide have made it clear that their goal is that there be no white race.
All the way back into the 20’s, back into the 1860’s, they have said the purpose of integration, immigration, intermarriage is to get rid of the White race. Now all of a sudden, now that their getting called on it, they’re saying, “what, what, what… goodness gracious??” but even in the 50’s they would always say that the idea was, either that there would be no more races, which was not meant because they were only integrating things in white countries or they would simply state flatly that their aim was that there would be no white race.
They talked about how wonderful this would be, how idealistic this would be but there was no conspiracy, there was no secrecy and I think we need to come down hard on that. That it is ridiculous to say that the people who were advocating white genocide ever advocated anything else, or that they were secretive about it. The end of the white race, which is called GENOCIDE as a goal, that’s the definition of the word, has always been out in the open. As usual when they make a ridiculous statement like that we don’t say a friggin word, we just sit there, mentally asleep, and let them do it. So if there is anybody awake, reading this or listening to this, PLEASE, PLEASE point out that White Genocide was never a conspiracy. White Genocide has been the stated goal of all the anti-whites all down through history. No one denied it, no one made it secret.
When I called it what it was they suddenly started acting like as if we were accusing them of as if they were conspiring, or something dramatic and silly like that, but the fact is that Genocide, meaning the end of the white race, has always been a stated goal of the anti-whites, all the way back to New England, and the 19th century.
There’s no conspiracy, and that is one of these lies you can get away with if you own the media. It’s about time we started challenging it and these other little tactics that they can use because they own the media. White genocide has nothing to do with conspiracy.
It is Genocide and it has been declared genocide from the word GO.
Anyone who calls White Genocide a conspiracy does not speak English
-
You are currently browsing the archives for June, 2017
Bob’s Books
Bob's first book - 1976
A Plague On Both Your HousesBob's second book - 1982
THE NEW RIGHT PAPERSBob's deadliest book - 2004
Why Johnny Can't Think:
America's Professor-PriesthoodWhy Johnny Can't Think ebook zip
pwrd: Phu=9Ad5
Recent Comments