Controlling the window of discussion

Email
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1426989066002.png (911.26 KB, 1234x552, 617:276, 1416584210218.png)

Controlling the window of discussion Anonymous 03/22/15 (Sun) 01:51:07 No.1171

So I'm sure many of you are familiar with the concept of the Overton window:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

I believe /pol/ has the potential to shift the Overton window to the right. There's a delicate balance between being so extreme no one listens, and being just entertaining enough to keep people coming back. I believe it's in our best interest to keep /pol/ as politically incorrect as possible, and exporting their irreverence to other sites. Normally I'm a relatively reasonable pragmatist, but on /pol/ I'm definitely an antisemitic NatSoc. It's not just a "character", it's something I enjoy venting with emotionally.

I see potential in keeping the "far right" as far right as possible so the less far right looks closer to acceptable in the public eye. Any watering down of the movement should be looked down upon, even if it means more mainstream acceptance. This also means continuously ridiculing the far left. Tumblrisms and related things are great for this. If "liberal" invokes the image of an oversensitive otherkin teenager, it'll shift the public's opinion in our favor.

Does anyone else see a way to exploit this? Feminism already jumped the shark last year, and it looks like this year will be the year the racial grievance industry jumps the shark.

Anonymous 03/22/15 (Sun) 04:59:13 No.1172

I disagree with your approach. I believe in aspects of paleoconservatism, traditionalism, christianity, neo-luddism, if you must put a label on things, and question aspects of the holocaust, etc, blah blah, but the idiot-tier race baiting, gender relations divide-and-conquer, and overall myopia of /pol/ completely turns me off to the point that I no longer even check in there. It comes across as a honeypot to create ineffective extremists, frankly. Some things in the weaponized irony thread come to mind here.

There are ways of shifting across the spectrum without going full retard and alienating those who are both intelligent and socially tuned in.

This board, for instance, doesn't overtly label itself "rightist" or "leftist", and is simply about discussing meta aspects of sociological and political shifts. Ultimately, spreading the truth is the best way to make people "understand". None of this insanely biased and cherrypicked "redpill" that /pol/ is so fixated on. In fact the redpill meme itself seems to be a paradigm of control from my point of view. "The redpill" insinuates that there is a open and shut explanation for all the world's ills, in /pol/'s view, "jews". I think anyone who has spent some time on this board and has interests parallel with the topics posted about here can see how this could be such a limiting and ignorant approach to changing hearts and minds to catalyze actual widespread awareness.

Anonymous 03/22/15 (Sun) 06:52:47 No.1173

I agree with above poster that vanguardism is idiotic and ultimately counter productive. The communist vanguard organizations aren't going to lead to a revolution and are really just a tool of the neoliberal establishment. /pol/, while it serves a useful purpose, is mostly a dead end, at least without viable moderate alternatives (Which, to be fair, do exist and are growing.).

For the short term at least I see libertarianism as the main possibility to shake up the stasis queue (At least in America.), even if your goals are more traditionalist or nationalist weakening the USG's grasp on power can only be a good thing.

https://www.traditionalright.com/tactical-libertarianism/

Anonymous 03/22/15 (Sun) 22:02:29 No.1175

I see the sides as useful for division, but I don't understand the larger picture, like whether that division can be indefinite or whether it eventually reunites or what. I've heard that sub-division of groups is something that naturally happens, but I don't know if that's related.
Even as I see the sides as undesirable, I still feel like I'm losing the battle because I discredit anyone promoting them as being illegitimate. Everyone is illegitimate. Everyone is non-person. The system has neutralized me.

Anonymous 03/23/15 (Mon) 00:25:24 No.1176

>>1173
It's interesting, I actually made a post on this myself recently on /pol/. Libertarianism as pseudo-nationalism:
>>>/pol/1521239

I support socialist policies for the most part, but not in a multicultural society where we just import strangers to work for the oligarchs and sustain them with our wages.

I spend a lot of time bashing "libertardians" just because they're often philosophically unsophisticated, but I'll have to rethink. Libertarianism is a lot easier to sell than any other right wing belief as well. Rand 2016?

Anonymous 03/23/15 (Mon) 05:05:07 No.1178

>>1176
You and others have to realize that there is no need to institute or argue over systems that are 100% libertarian, or socialist, or what have you. There are aspects of different ideologies that can be pulled together to create a workable system that makes sense in application. Consider, just for argument's sake, anarcho syndicalism, wherein there are trade groups/guilds and more localized bureaucratic structures.

Furthermore, under a libertarian system there is nothing preventing consumers/manufacturers from creating consortiums accountable to the consumers, for instance, a consortium that uses only non-toxic materials in production of end level consumer products. Consumers could choose to purchase goods from the manufacturers who are members in the consortiums that meets their own standards, or not.
Or, in the same "libertarian ish" paradigm, the existence of limited law enforcement accountable to local citizenry would be tasked with preventing abuse of minors. Just some examples of how a hybridized approach might be more feasible than the alternatives that get argued about ad infinitum.

Extremes are not necessary, or helpful. Not only are they divisive but they are unrealistic. We could all do with some more analytical thinking and less emotionally reactive team affiliating.

Anonymous 03/23/15 (Mon) 05:12:26 No.1179

>>1178
Considering I'm a "socialist" advocating for libertarianism, I think I'm about as pragmatic as is possible.

But yes, the system doesn't really matter. The people are what matter, first and foremost.

Anonymous 03/23/15 (Mon) 05:41:53 No.1180

>>1179
Sorry, was not so much meaning to direct that at you, more at the concept of /pol/ being some kind of great incubator for social change and why that's a load of bollocks because the masses can't into critical thinking there. And at "choosing sides" and embracing ideological labels in general.

Anonymous 03/24/15 (Tue) 01:34:37 No.1187

I don't think it's likely that one will be able to expand the window to reach their position from the outside. An overt effort to make something more acceptable generally causes alarm, while a controlled progression of existing policies can be expanded to include the target ideology.

Think of it like a hula-hoop laying on the floor: if you try to move it from the outside you can only push it away, but if you put a finger inside it you can pull it towards you.

Anonymous 03/24/15 (Tue) 03:15:15 No.1188

>>1180
The masses largely can't into critical thinking in general, so that's hardly suprising.

"Choosing sides" and adapting idealogical aren't necessary bad things, either. Trying to be above petty idealogical squabbling is good for intellectual clubs like this one but bad for getting polices enacting in the real world, ultimately you're going to need both.

Anonymous 04/15/15 (Wed) 21:54:46 No.1430

If the mainstream media cottoned onto /pol/, it would be disastrous for the right. Most of what could charitably be called their ideology is deep within 'unthinkable' territory. The entire point of the Overton window is that you promote stances which are mildly controversial, enough to provoke discussion without being instantly ridiculed. These enter the balance that is popular opinion and shift it in your chosen direction, bringing more radical concepts within controversial acceptability.

If you want to push society to the right, I would suggest finding/growing a mid-right movement. Crucially, it would have to be rooted in positivity. The most basic marketing tactic - almost too obvious to state, but nevertheless missed by most people - is that positive ideas are good and negatives ones bad. Everybody from TV advert designers to job interview preppers will stress this. Your ideology should be spun in a positive light ("I love my heritage", not "I fucking hate niggers"). Positivity makes the brain feel positive and more accepting, even if the exact same information is being conveyed as a negative message.

Anonymous 04/17/15 (Fri) 08:54:16 No.1457

>>1430

I think you're right within a prosperous, Western post-WW2 context. And I think the trade wisdom and supporting evidence you refer to comes from that context. But I don't think there's any use in promoting a mid-right movement at all.

I don't think there's hope for any kind of right /pol/ would recognise as right without serious economic hardship.

And I think, in the context of that hardship, radical ideas that reject gradualism have a tendency to suddenly gain credibility. See Weimar Germany, or how it's the lower class in the UK who are currently being drawn to UKIP. UKIP aren't extreme really, but they are by the standards of metropolitan elites.

If that's true, the proper task of extremists would be to preserve their ideology intact and in a form that could gain traction in a time of crisis. And to... hope for... crisis.

Few like the mainstream media now. By the point at which /pol/ has any relevance, being hated by them would be nothing but a recommendation.

That said, this is all irrelevant for the following reasons:

-Strategically, /pol/ means nothing and never will mean anything. It is not a place from which any successful action could be successfully conducted. It is wide open.
-Right now it only promotes fractiousness, dehumanisation, othering, authoritarianism, and the breakdown of post-enlightenment liberal values. SJWs do exactly the same. This is just divide and conquer which serves the increasing power of the executive and the war upon the power of potential opposition groups.

And, most importantly:

If you don't understand the situation with energy technology, scarcity, lies about them and lies about central banking and usury, then you're just adding to illusions which serve the owning class. You can go a bit right, far right, or far left. You can go Keynesian or Austrian. None of it matters. You're an idiot. You don't have the game figured out yet, and you will be played.

Anonymous 04/23/15 (Thu) 12:52:43 No.1563

>Does anyone else see a way to exploit this?

You already mentioned one yourself without realizing it

>If "liberal" invokes the image of an oversensitive otherkin teenager, it'll shift the public's opinion in our favor.

What you need is a meme, like the one of the hippy woman, who always gets portrayed as dump or a hypocrite.

You need a potentially viral image of a stupid looking, but associative close to tumblerism feeling teenager. This, you then make their official face and spread on pages like 9gog. Like the hippy-dreadlock-lady meme, you start with ridiculing statements that the broad public itself already condemns or a group of people like gamers, for example, already look down on. And then you let them spread it for you. To fasten this process you can either send it manually to Facebook sites with a lot of likes or you can buy 'shares' of that image on fiverr.com.

Example of what I mean:

Has never read more than 5 pages of a biology book

[insert image of extrem/retared/stupid looking tumblerite here]

Thinks mixing genes will make us all better

Doesn't know shit about economics

[insert image of extrem/retared/stupid looking tumblerite here]

"PAY EVERYONE EQUAL BECAUSE MUH FEELS"

You could do this with every group of people, whether it's tumblerites, communists or other cunts. The key is: The person who is supposed to share the image must feel like adding to his or her own value by doing so, otherwise the person will not share it. This is key, so I repeat it. The person must feel like it highers their status, their percieved intelligence/humor/sophistication, sense of reason, you name it. Therefore you must pick statements and positions that make this possible, not the ones you hate most.

After you've established the meme, you can bring in the one you really want to get out. But first you gotta establish it.

Book on the subjects:

Dawkins, The Selfish Gene

Anonymous 05/23/15 (Sat) 20:56:14 No.1713

>Feminism already jumped the shark last year, and it looks like this year will be the year the racial grievance industry jumps the shark.

Really? when did that happen? I don't know about you but in my time you wouldn't see an elected official of even the lowest level caught dead next to a radfem

But these days some in congress are lining up to get their pics taken next to some neon-haired landwhale with a borderline disorder

In any case this is the heyday of mainstream acceptance of feminism, any decade before this these bitches were hosed down

Anonymous 05/23/15 (Sat) 23:47:34 No.1714

>>1188

>petty idealogical squabbling is good for intellectual clubs like this one but bad for getting polices enacting in the real world, ultimately you're going to need both.

Indeed but it wasn't always like this, the MSM going full-business mode partly due to the collapse of the printed ad industry and the returns created by clickbait, that combined with social media giving a big megaphone to the very worst of society while rewarding manipulators with better results over moderates and those who put reason over mob rule has created an extremely harmful environment for true and serious discussion of politics

When even supposedly respectable have twitter fights like a couple of kids would, out in public for the entire world to witness and record forever you see that we're sinking to the deepest low

Anonymous 05/25/15 (Mon) 15:50:43 No.1721

>>1713

>But these days some in congress are lining up to get their pics taken next to some neon-haired landwhale with a borderline disorder

That's exactly my point.

It's a part of the establishment now. It's no longer countercultural, and average people ridicule it. It's something lame, out of touch politicians pay lip service to in order to prove they aren't "bigots".

Gamergate, Lena Dunham (rape hoax and sister molestation), Rolling Stone rape hoax, mattress girl, yes means yes laws, Walking in NYC parodies, pay gap myth beginning to be widely debunked. Just because feminism is a hot topic doesn't mean it's not dead. The only way I can see it reviving is as a sort of neo-traditionalism, celebrating the female role and restoring respect for females as a virtue.

Anonymous 05/26/15 (Tue) 00:41:59 No.1723

>>1171

> the Overton window

give me an example of an unthinkable idea. I'm not sure it exists.

Anonymous 05/26/15 (Tue) 03:24:21 No.1724

>>1723

Unthinkable or unspeakable?

At least in America, there aren't really any ideas the government will punish you for expressing, but there are plenty that will make you an official pariah among the educated upper class. For instance, there's been some mild drama recently in the "Effective Altruism" community over whether they should associate with people that are critical of the feminist movement (https://archive.is/cIsoa). Every group sets limits on what its members can say or do without being expelled from or losing status within the group, and the mainstream media/public discourse is not exempt from that rule.

Anonymous 11/28/15 (Sat) 10:28:35 No.2460

File: 1448706516481.jpg (44.93 KB, 630x411, 210:137, 1437366651116 21440549597.jpg)

>>1172

Agree with some of what youre saying--however:

>Ultimately, spreading the truth is the best way to make people "understand"

This is blatantly false. (It is true for the 10% of intelligent people in the world), but is clearly not true for the 90%. The 90% by and large are manipulated thru ostracizing (PC, shaming etc), repetitive brainwashing (simple telling them thru some authority 100 times). They are incapable of thinking and just go with the flow.

You can give them 100 truths they will blink and call you racist.

Anonymous 11/28/15 (Sat) 10:42:04 No.2461

>>1430

>Crucially, it would have to be rooted in positivity. The most basic marketing tactic - almost too obvious to state, but nevertheless missed by most people - is that positive ideas are good and negatives ones bad.

Never limit yourself. Stay flexible.

The Holocaust is a negatively rooted campaigner and look how powerful that tool has been for the jews. The normies cringe and shrivel up at the mere mention of it.

Negatives are also more powerfully capture peoples attentions (loss aversion). Black rape statistics are much more likely to kick people into action than "whites are cool because ... X"

Anonymous 11/28/15 (Sat) 10:59:45 No.2462

File: 1448708389753.jpg (202.24 KB, 1024x683, 1024:683, 1448400707551.jpg)

>>1171

My notes on Overton window:

*Its very dynamic (eg a terrorist attack or some happening can overnight shift the window drastically)

*There are ways around it (Mainly shilling/false flaging) eg:

-Pretending that you are criticizing an idea, but your argument "fails" and you have "accidentally" just proved the "opponents" idea, and then you pretend to be stupid. But the idea is planted.

Anonymous 11/30/15 (Mon) 11:06:44 No.2489

>>1171

Larping online as a NatSoc can be cathartic when everything you do could make you a racist.

>>1430

>>2461

If we wanted to apply this for instance to de-value the worth/status of diamonds, we would re-enforce other things as being more desirable than diamonds (puppies, children, a house) instead of attacking diamonds themselves?

The climate in western countries is white = racist, so how did an ongoing campaign of negativity become so successful against whites? Is it successful because white people have no experience with how racist other cultures are in comparison? #ISaluteWhitePeople seems to be the best example of a positive campaign run on twitter. Still, my impression was that it was a viewed as racist hashtag to normies. Is it just a media game? More talking heads + bigger yesman peanut gallery = dominant cultural paradime?

How does this apply to something like the immigration shitstorm? Just questioning the demographics of refugees after Paris has had people saying 'that could be considered racist' to me. They killed lots of defenseless people, rape, theft, and violence are rising. Invaders are fit men obviously exploiting the goodwill of certain European countries. Yet the atmosphere is still 'help the poor sad helpless refugees'... When something does give it will be a violent ugly backlash that will be used to further demonize europeans.