[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

I have un-pinned Republican Code Words.

Why? Because leftists now understand the idea of dog-whistles and code-words, and they take the idea so far as to shoot themselves in the foot. Things have gotten to the point where simple statements like "crime is bad" are interpreted as racist dog-whistles by the left. If one goal of secrecy is to make your enemies paranoid, we can declare mission accomplished here.

So instead, let's start listing new terms that can greatly clarify and streamline today's political communication:

(I did not invent all of these terms myself.)

CTRL Left - pronounced "control-left". The ALT-Right is the other side of the same coin.

Baizuo - Chinese for “white left". Maoist tactics, in particular during the Cultural Revolution, are a huge influence on the tactics of the CTRL-Left, and the Chinese know all about this. Plus the CTRL-Left ARE very white, and they squirm when you point this out.

Physical Terrorist - previously known as "terrorists", these are people who exploit laws so they are treated as noncombatants even as they engage in physical violence. Related: ActualFa - Previously "AntiFa"

Social Terrorist - people who use terrorist tactics short of actual physical violence. They use Rhetorical Human Shields - "criticism of my ideas is an attack on all brown people". They do character assassination, not just on politicians, but on noncombatants/non-politicians/non-public figures. They demand pity privilege.

Pity Privilege - we have separate rules for helpless toddlers, and every terrorist, social or physical wants to exploit this. See also CryBully. By climbing the Victimhood Hierarchy, crybullies get the privilege of punching people without being punched back - in return for being condescended to by the Nanny Race.

The Nanny Race - If the ALT-Right believes whites are the Master Race, the CTRL-Left believes whites are the Nanny Race. Always coddling the protected classes, even when the poor babies inflicted their problems on themselves - after all, the poor babies can't be expected to do any better. Related to "The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations".

No coincidence that history's least fertile demographic of women is into this. Emotionally fueled by Empty-Nestism, why be a crazy cat lady when you can adopt [protected class]?

Contrary to their slogans about "the future is [protected class]", rich whites expect to be acting as middlemen in The Coming Utopia.

The Middleman State - previously known as the "welfare state". Ever wonder why the welfare state doesn't just hand cash to the poor?

Culture War Mercenaries - previously "social justice activists". Explained here.

Culture War Conscription - drafting innocent bystanders with mandatory corporate "training" and slogans like "White Silence is Violence" "White people have to choose a side" and "there's a special place in hell for women who don't help each other."

Outrage Archaeology - digging through someone's past in search of something to get offended by. One of the reasons new taboos are always being decreed, and innocent words being declared slurs. Very effective against poorer and less over-educated, who are last to get the memo.

WPKJ: Digging through history to get people angry and divided. White People Killed Jesus. Leftists got the idea for this from Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, Israel-Palestine, every other multi-generational genocide war where people get "justice" for centuries-old outrages by killing babies today. Every time a leftist says "Justice" they are actually saying "vengeance". (More on "justice": Part 1 and Part 2).

Historically oppressed - oppressed by historians.

Trojan Horse Term - previously Double-definition Game - previously "motte and bailey". Similar:

Rhetorical Gerrymandering - unilaterally changing the borders of a word's meaning in an argument. Original usage here. (Correction: first used here)

NonDebunking - arguing against a factual claim by attacking the speaker, declaring the idea problematic/heresy, or otherwise refusing to answer "well, is it true?"
.
Gated-Community Cosmopolitans - the notorious GCC. They may have had more contact with the outside world than eating a McBurrito, but they are not cosmopolitan enough to send expeditions deep into the jungles of NASCAR-land. A.K.A. Bigcity Bigot, overlapping with Rich-Supremacy.

Fainting-Couch Feminists and Smelling-Salts Socialists. They talk tough but turn out to be triggered-happy callout-cats.

The Klan With A Tan - take any piece of leftist propaganda, replacing the word "white" with "jew". Or "man" with "blacks". Here's a game where you have to guess if the author is a leftist or a Nazi, can YOU tell the difference?

The Red Holocaust - many millennials don't know that communism killed people, because the schools are run by red holocaust deniers.

The Red Swastika - previously known as "the hammer and sickle".

IslamoFactual - previously "Islamophobe".

Dine and Dash Economics - Today's voters order the lobster and then are outraged when the waiter delivers the bill. "Tax and Spend" is obsolete because "Borrow and Bomb" is more accurate (the term, not the bombs).

The anti-boy movement - previously known as "feminism".

Trophy Buying
.
UPDATE: Here's a serious Wokish-to-English dictionary that puts all my amateur work to shame.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

NonDebunking - arguing against a factual claim by attacking the speaker, declaring the idea problematic/heresy, or otherwise refusing to answer "well, is it true?"

Another way to nondebunk is to simply quote a factual claim while speaking in a silly voice, doing all but adding a laugh track. See most of the El Chapo Traphouse podcast, or this video:

Ricky Gervais nondebunked our article on the Ten Commandments:

(Hey Ricky, how has your career been going since you messed with us? I hear in Portal 3 you'll only have 2 or 3 lines. As a Companion Cube.

God hears the prayers of His chosen elect, not the snickering of mockers and scoffers! )

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

I'm in demand:

"...give them a vocabulary. I don't know if we should come up with some catchy terms...You're being a "caller-outer"" He's right, that's clunky.

Instead, let's make cute caricatures and give them names. Callout Carl and Callout Cathy. As in:

"The way you're sitting is misogynistic. You're oppressing women with your butt."

"Don't be a callout Cathy"

[Dennis Lukes]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

I'm in demand

In the parlance of the kids today, that makes you an "influencer." However, unlike 99.9% of influencers, you are spreading the holy word of God instead of sin.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

Instead, let's make cute caricatures and give them names. Callout Carl and Callout Cathy. As in:

"The way you're sitting is misogynistic. You're oppressing women with your butt."

"Don't be a callout Cathy"

Or, "Don't be a Callout Cat"

What callout cats sound like to normal people:

You're raciiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiist!" "You're sexiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiist!" "You're a transphoooooooooooooooooooooooobe!"

BTW, thanks to the above now nobody has to bother paying attention the democrat primaries. Just watch this instead, it's quicker, cuter (unless Ocasio-Cortez runs) and otherwise identical. You're welcome.








"Don't be trigger-happy". Or "triggered happy"?

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

Rhetorical Human Shields - "criticism of my ideas is an attack on all brown people".

Or "disagreement with me dehumanizes all [protected class]."

As postmodernists, they actually believe that reality is constructed by people saying magic words and thinking magic thoughts. If this sounds familiar, it should:

Next time someone says they've been dehumanized, say they've only been turned into a newt, and they'll get better.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

I think "victimhood aristocracy" might be more correct that "victimhood hierarchy".

In an aristocracy, most people are born into their position and stay there. In an argument between a Duke and a commoner, the Duke is always right and the commoner is not only wrong, but impudent for arguing at all. The commoner is "commoner-splaining".

Hierarchies, on the other hand, come in all types, some are informal, meritocratic, and fluid. That is completely contrary to the legalistic/lawyer-infested, race-based, calcified caste system that is currently under construction.

Think of the Southern Aristocracy/racial-pecking-order, only with the skin colors swapped.

TL;DR: the South has finally won the Civil War.

[MitzaLizalor]

I'd like to mention

"paradigm shift"

"journey" (such as my journey out of fiscal responsibility which no-one else is interested in at all, not even slightly)
so they make a two hour documentary about it anyway

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

"Not Your Minion"

Leftist revolutionaries tend to be the spoiled children of the bored upper-class. They are close to the top, and they want to be on top. A world where they are second-best is what they call "capitalism", a world with them on top they call "socialism/communism/justice", regardless of actual policy. This is why "communism has never been tried" - because the particular leftist saying it has never been on top. It's also why the left is so uninterested in what happens after the revolution - who cares? They are on top, their birthright is being respected (justice), that's all that matters.

Problem: The West is a meritocracy, and spoiled rich kids don't have enough merit to rise to the top. Solution: violence.

Deciding to solve their problems with violence, they become revolutionaries. Problem: As as the spoiled children of the bored upper-class, they are as white, fluffy and melt-able as the snowflakes they are compared to.

Revolutions, A.K.A. civil wars, are not ideal habitats for the fluffy and meltable. So what is a revolutionary to do?

Solution: get minions to do your fighting for you. This is why the left used to be all about the proletariat, despite knowing almost nothing about the working class, and hating what they did know. The need for cannon-fodder makes strange bedfellows.

By the 1960's it was obvious this plan had flopped, but Mao was a rising star. So the left gave up on recruiting Proletarian minions and instead tried to recruit third-world peasants as minions.

Overnight the left suddenly did 180 flips on a bunch of issues, becoming all about unregulated mass immigration, alliances with dark-age reactionaries, turning a blind eye to antisemitism, violent crime, etc.

This is why it never works to tell leftists that they are allied with terrorists, violent criminal cartels, and rapacious savages. That's the whole reason the left chose those allies: they need people to do the dirty work that they, as over-socialized softies, are unable to do!

"Diversity is our strength"

So now you know what the left means when they say diversity: they mean their coalition has both a future ruling class (themselves) and a cannon-fodder class (brown people). The leftists know they are too weak to fight, and believe that brown people are to dumb to do anything without white leadership. But put the two together and they are strong. "Diversity is our strength".

Brown people need to understand: leftists don't love you for your funky music and flavorful cooking. They like you because you have a reputation for violence. They need you to carry out violence when the revolutionary war comes. You will be the meat-shield, soaking up the bullets while your fearless leaders lead from behind...From a safe distance. So they can keep an eye on the big picture, of course.

So the next time a leftist tries to recruit you, tell them you are Not Their Minion.

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

I'd like to mention

"paradigm shift"

"journey" (such as my journey out of fiscal responsibility which no-one else is interested in at all, not even slightly)
so they make a two hour documentary about it anyway

Talking about how the CTRL Left uses language is worthy of a whole new thread, but let's start here anyway:

"White Jews"

Originally Posted by The Tablet

The campaign against “white Jews” on the progressive left is not an accident but a determined effort with several concrete ideological purposes. The first is to codify the position of Jews at the bottom of the social justice victim pyramid, as just another category of “whites.” This move is intended to downgrade or even erase anti-Semitism—a sin of which Farrakhanites, radical Islamists, and other important progressive allies are all guilty. “White Jews” erases that sin by stipulating that “Jews,” insofar as they are “white,” cannot actually be victims of hate–because they aren’t, functionally speaking, Jews at all. They are white people, and therefore, by definition, the oppressor and not the oppressed.

“White Jews” is therefore, first and foremost, an epithet—an attempt to make “Jews” synonymous with “white supremacy.” This move is especially invidious, since Jews—“white” or not—are themselves the primary victims of theories of racial supremacy, and anti-Semitism is central to white supremacist ideology, including in the U.S.

But the larger point of marking Jews as “white” is to render them political treif—unassimilable into the left’s virtuous coalition of the oppressed, which includes plenty of Third-Worldist groups and alignments that are rooted in a political discourse in which conspiratorial anti-Semitism is normal. The solution that progressives have apparently alighted on is not to educate their allies out of bigotry and ignorance, but to trim “Jewishness” of any traits that might set off wild, conspiratorial fulminations by the people they wish to position as innocent victims.

Notice how it is only Jews who are endowed with a racial descriptor; no one on the left is busy fingering “white Muslims.” This assault on reason and history puts Jews, or “White Jews,” in their place as inherently oppressive and vile, while gifting their valuable history of oppression to its “true” inheritors—namely progressives and their handpicked allies...

...intersectionality, not unlike anti-Semitism, is a conspiracy theory, one that hinges upon essentializing individuals into discrete and irrevocable racial, religious, or sexual-identity based groupings and ranking their virtue accordingly, in order to arrive at a more perfect form of justice, which will then rule the planet Earth. Intersectionality demands that the sectarian agendas and superstitions of a Palestinian-American woman in an arranged marriage, a Somali-born legislator who tweets about Israel “hypnotizing the world,” and a fellow traveler of a black nationalist cult take precedence over the universalist aims for which progressives used to stand.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Machete Pacifist

The idea that white people are to blame for all the world's wars because the people who fight wars (brown people) buy their weapons from white people. Was the world has a peaceful utopia before the founding of Boeing and General Dynamics? No, if we somehow left our little brown cousins with only spears, they would kill each other with spears. Or in the case of Rwanda, machetes.

Related: "Blood Diamond". As if it's the diamonds that are killing people. All these arms embargoes to warzones do is give the advantage to the aggressors, who have been planning and preparing for violence, and therefore arming themselves, from the start. In America, that means Republicans, so I guess I'll stop complaining now.

...

Someday I will make a guide to leftist code-words, but there's a lot of them so the project is daunting. Here's one that sprung to mind:

Exploitation

The heretical idea that instead of elites deciding for them, women, poor people, and so on are capable of assessing their options for themselves, and making what deals they can.

Examples:

"Sure, they're unemployed and starving, but at least they're not being exploited".

"Men are giving money to women, and all the women have to do is possess breasts? That's exploitation!" (of women? )

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

The Nanny Race

...the poor babies can't be expected to do any better. Related to "The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations".

Or, The Angel Race, because whites are held up to such high standards relative to other skin colors.

Related is the hatred of "Western Civilization" and/or "capitalism", also known as "the only culture and economic system to ever exist at this level of scale and advancement." Is there some other space-age globally-dominant-for-centuries paradigm that you are comparing us to?

David Wong on this tendency, when expanded to humanity as a whole:

Obviously, a thing can only be good or bad compared to another thing. "People are trash" makes no sense, because collectively, these are the only people who exist. So they're trash compared to what? What better version of humanity are you using as your standard?

All you're revealing about yourself with this worldview is that you've spent so little time around actual, flawed people that you've set a standard for behavior that makes sense only in your imagination. It's the equivalent of a guy getting upset that his real girlfriend doesn't live up to the anime girl on his body pillow.

No real woman is as perfect as this.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

.
Culture War Mercenaries - previously "social justice activists". Explained here.

...their pay and status depends on us always fighting, regardless of our actual goals. In fact, winning puts them out of a job. So they get us into fights we don't need to be in, prevent us from reaching agreements when we can, and make conflicts longer and costlier than they need to be. They are fear-mongers, always pointing at some far-off, irrelevant, powerless and near-impoverished bogeyman, and then declaring them to be the next Hitler. When someone's job depends on conflict, how can they be convinced that there is only one race, the human race?

I've been plagiarized by The New Republic, which now admits that democrats need to keep the race-war going, because democrats don't want the working class to unite:

...What would happen if, by a snap of the fingers, white racism in America were to disappear? It might be that the black and Latino working class would be voting for Trump, too. Then we Democrats would have no chance in 2020. We often tell ourselves: “Oh, we lost just the white working class because of race.” But the truth might be something closer to this: “It’s only because of race[ism] that we have any part of the working class turning out for us at all.”

Also:

For those of us cut off from the white working class, it is easy to think the answer to inequality is: Imitate us. Why can’t they be like we are?...explains why newly liberated ex-Communist countries turned away from liberal democracies to authoritarian or illiberal ones. Imitate us—be like we are—turns out to be one of the most grating forms of foreign policy on offer in a world of such great income inequality. But imitate us is also grating within a country...

Sounds like what I was writing about in: What was worse than Invading Iraq? Liberals invading America!

In another part of the forest, here's someone calling the media "Culture War Arms-Dealers", back in 2018:

When your entire job is to get clicks, and you’ll starve if you don’t get them, you get those damn clicks any way you can. Which means you find the culture war, wherever it’s happening, and you feed it. You feed it argument fodder. You feed it virtue signals. You feed it whatever it needs to keep warring. The modern media have abandoned measured, reasoned thought, and have shifted to a new job.

They are Culture War Arms Dealers.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

Physical Terrorist - previously known as "terrorists", these are people who exploit laws so they are treated as noncombatants even as they engage in physical violence. Related: ActualFa - Previously "AntiFa"

Social Terrorist - people who use terrorist tactics short of actual physical violence. They use Rhetorical Human Shields - "criticism of my ideas is an attack on all brown people". They do character assassination, not just on politicians, but on noncombatants/non-politicians/non-public figures. They demand pity privilege.

Here social terrorism is called "Reputational violence":

I don't like the idea of muddying the water re: definition of "violence". "Terrorism" on the other hand, obviously means the use of terror.

Does the left want terror? Let's ask Ezra Klein of Vox who says that men should "feel a cold spike of fear when they begin a sexual encounter." because of "a haze of fear and confusion over what counts as consent".

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Here's a serious Wokish-to-English dictionary that puts all my amateur work to shame.

This encyclopedia of Social Justice terminology exists for a simple purpose: to create in one place a first attempt to pierce the fog and expose the language used by the ideology of Social Justice in plain language so that people can better understand what it is, what it wants, and how it operates in practice.

Trojan Horse Terms

...in Social Justice’s usage, everyday terms have been redefined in specific, which is a strategic move that allows the common parlance understanding of the term to open the door and be a defensible point of retreat while the specific meaning of the term is allowed to do the real work desired of them by Social Justice activists. (We refer to such terms as “Trojan Horse” terms.)

[WWJDnow]

Liberal elites and Antifa terrorists always want to gussy up their language with euphemisms. Why can't they just call a spade a spade?

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by WWJDnow

Liberal elites and Antifa terrorists always want to gussy up their language with euphemisms.

This is another thing which puzzles me. Here are two pictures:



The euphemism would be cultural appropriation. Or would it?


When you adopt traditional clothing from a different culture:

.tick
.box
YES • I am a boorish Philistine pig dog

NO • I can wear whatever I want to

THAT'S RACIST • Philistine society was actually quite refined

If foreign gents adopt traditional clothing from your culture:

.tick
.box
NO • of course not don't be ridiculous

YES • they are trying to steal your identity

MARX • demands the proletariat be free from diktat by imperialist overlords

Can you see my puzzlement? On the one hand we hear about cultural appropriation everywhere, from a hairdo (such as dreadlocks) to footwear (moccasins?) yet when visiting tropical islands they're flogging you grass skirts and garlands while wearing the latest gear from western surf shops. Who is appropriating whom?

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

This is another thing which puzzles me.

It's only puzzling because we're overthinking it. The left also had a problem with overthinking, and with infighting, until they solved it with these simple rules:

Rule 1: If an gang member is in a dispute with a non-gang member, everybody beats up the non-gang member, no questions asked. (Buzzword: intersectionality).

Rule 2: To prevent infighting, keep the hierarchy. In any dispute, the higher-ranking gang member is always right and the lower-ranking one is always wrong, no questions asked. (Buzzword: punching up)

Rule 3: No questions asked. (Buzzword: lived experience, other ways of knowing)

And that's it. that's all you need to know about power, and therefore all you need to know about how the left functions.

So, let's apply the 3 commandments to a Chinese person wearing non-Chinese clothes. Rule 2 says keep the hierarchy with no questions asked. Chinese people outrank white people, therefore rules that apply to white people don't apply to them. Unless a mob of white people wants to burn down a Chinese restaurant in support of BLM. In that case, BLM outranks the Chinese person, and the restaurant burns.

And if the Chinese person asks how a mob of white people burning a Chinese restaurant is supposed to stop white supremacy, refer to rule 1. Gang members fight the outsider, no questions asked.

[MitzaLizalor]

In one of their topics they linked to Stanford, as follows:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory/ —Critical Theory has a narrow and a broad meaning in philosophy and in the history of the social sciences. “Critical Theory” in the narrow sense designates several generations of German philosophers and social theorists in the Western European Marxist tradition known as the Frankfurt School...

I've heard quite enough about "Marxism" for one lifetime and do wonder whether its proponents ever contemplated why such a bankrupt theory got off the ground in the first place. What combination of circumstances launched radicals to the forefront of movers & shakers? Why upon reading The Communist Manifesto in 1848 did anyone at all think “Mmmmmmm, nice..” (other than Marx himself) and then in Russia rather than London where the wretched pamphlet was published?

Exactly what you would expect to happen is precisely what did happen over the next century and a half with poverty and oppression directly proportional to the extent that Marxist theory was applied. Justice of any sort was eradicated and those who experienced its facsimile were themselves a manifestation of social injustice on a Herculean scale. Marxism is the last place to look for justice.

[Adam Fag]

Originally Posted by Jeb Stuart Thurmond

https://newdiscourses.com/translations-from-the-wokish/

What is BAME? I looked it up but it's not there.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

"Voices" as in "listen to black voices" = "spokespeople for rich white yuppies'' as in "listen to black spokespeople for rich white yuppies".

And by "spokespeople" I mean rhetorical human shields, (see the first post above.)

Ever wonder why the CTRL-Left says "listen to [identity] voices" instead of "listen to [identity] people"?

It's because [identity] people usually don't agree with the CTRL-Left. But the CTRL-left doesn't want to you listen to [identity] people.

They admit this. That's why they talk about "internalized oppression" and "false consciousness" and say "you ain't black" to people who obviously are.

Who gets to decide who has true consciousness? Who gets to decide who is black and who "ain't"? Rich white yuppies, of course.

When the CTRL-left looks at [identity] people, they don't see people - they see "voices": human shields and cannon fodder.

This is why black people riot: it's the only way they can get any sympathy from the white yuppie democrats who control the cities. Blacks are saying "look at me, I'm violent, I'm good cannon fodder for your revolution." And then the white democrats do nothing beyond gestures, knowing that they can direct the anger at country people who have nothing to do with how cities are run. Then white yuppies keep mismanaging the cities. They see blacks as attack dogs who get more vicious the more you abuse them.

This is why republican riots don't work. If violence had ever becomes a part of our plan, we will simply shoot all the democrats overnight. Your ability to dress like a shaman and steal the Senate podium provides nothing to our coalition.