In any battle, you must have weapons and tactics that work against the enemy of the moment. If you use Marquis of Queensbury rules, and he brings three buddies with barbwire-wrapped baseball bats, you will lose. I.e., you don’t take a gun to a law-suit, and you don’t face a mob alone. The English longbow was effective against the mounted French knight because they were fighting by similar rules, against similarly-minded men, on a fair battleground. The longbow did not have any effect against Martin Luther’s 95 theses nailed to the Church door (a mixed metaphor, I realize; just go with it). No matter how distasteful it may be, you must choose the weapons that can hit your opponent’s “center of gravity,” where they have power.
We are in a war of ideas in this nation.
On one side, we have the globalists: people are interchangeable, borders are bad, what’s good for large donors is deemed good for everyone, laws are for the little people, America is a no better than any other nation, and wealth must be “spread around” rather than created and earned.
On the other side are the Americans: people who realize that people are not interchangeable, wealth must come from work and saving, the national elites must put the interests of the American people first if we are not to be drowned beneath a tidal wave of low-skill and entitled “cargo-cult” mentality, and diversity + proximity = war.
So even though the Alt-Right doesn’t *like* Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, we’d be foolish to ignore them because of how ruthlessly and effectively they have been used against the ideals of the American right and her people for the last ~50 years. So the question is, where exactly are the best points to attack?
Example: tolerance and being offended. The special snowflakes get offended at every little thing. Anything a white man says can be twisted to be deemed “racist” or “sexist” at any opportunity, because we’ve been conditioned to run away and apologize when there is even the faintest whiff of accusation of sexism or racism. If you say “men and women are the same,” clearly you are sexist because you are denying a woman’s ability to bear children is significant. If you say they are different because women can bear children you are sexist because you are reducing a woman to a uterus. If you say they are different because men are on average stronger/faster then you are sexist because equality! So men are controlled by the left through bullying and intimidation with the constant threat of accusation. There need be no actual evidence, or intent, or even coherence; the implied threat of being offended is enough. The men self-censor to keep their jobs.
So the question comes about: what wedges can be used to strike back on that battle-field? I think I know some on speech code things – learn to be offended even if you have a thick skin. Ask how “targeting programs at minorities and women” is any different than “discriminating against whites and men?”
But what else can be done? What other sacred cows of the statist Left can be easily wedge-issued by properly motivated and informed people who find themselves in the right place at the right time, and what’s the best way to exploit it? HR? Codes of conduct? Bumper-stickers in the parking lot? I’m looking for any sort vector where their own actions and ideals can be leveraged against them, sort of like a good ju-jitsu master. What sort of tactics you think of to get the left to shoot at its own as often as the right does?