7.2.1Salesman mentality vs Haka dancer mentality
First things first, stop preaching to the choir & start targeting NORMIES.
That means:
1. No retarded slurs against groups.
2. Stop edgelording/countersignaling
3. Be beautiful instead of UGLY AF DEHATI CODED in messaging
This “salesman mentality” comes naturally to Left-liberals/Islamists who falsely present (and honestly believe) themselves to be friendly to the target groups. While we are often faced with groups with whom we truly share common interests and the other side is too retarded to realize it, and instead of persuading them, we simply accept the retard’s frame and go
“yup, we’re taking your jobs and women”
or the reverse “you are colonialists!!”1
or, the more intellectual (but even worse) version: framing Trump’s tariffs or Biden’s regime-change attempts as some totally rational play from American self-interest POV.
... which is supposed to work, how, exactly?
The four methods of diplomacy are sāma-dāma-daṇḍa-bheda: persuasion, payment, punishment and deceit. There is no fifth upāya of “yell and seethe at your enemy and he will magically submit”.
I would call this “Salesman mentality vs Soldier mentality”, but a soldier actually inflicts material wounds on the adversary. This is “Salesman mentality vs Haka dancer mentality”.
7.2.2Remember that Kalpana was killed
Outside of very-online people like us, people need to constantly be reminded of what we’re fighting for and why.
It’s about tattooing “Kalpana was Killed” on our chests. We have suffered atrocities, and we will avenge them. Both must constantly be stressed.
All three are important:
māna/pride: ancient history, knowing +ve self-identity that is worth fighting for; avoiding subvertibleness
manyu/indignance: atrocity literature, knowing why we’re fighting
vīrya/will: inspiration from previous reconquistadors; will to power now.
Maurya, Mughal, Maratha. You must know all three. All successful mass-movements strike a balance between atrocity literature and victoriousness.
Communism, Left-liberalism, various Islamist movements, Zionism, Hindutva.
“We have been oppressed, but we are now rising up and will prevail” Every piece of propaganda must include both.
RWs forget so easily, man.
COVID was 4 years ago, and MAGAs have already slid the discourse into anti-vaxx nonsense rather than holding Libs accountable for their real crimes (lockdowns, brutally suppressing dissent, suppressing anyone who suggested variolation).
“Slid the discourse” is actually wrong because it implies agency on right wingers’ part. Right-wingers’ entire frame is reactive: they only discuss things when Libs bring them up, in their frame—so all libs need to do is focus on the weakest RW strawmen, and right-wingers will all metamorph into those strawmen.
(this is why I’m not a fan of the “we should just own it” meme. We should just own it if it’s really our beliefs—otherwise you are just letting your enemy define you.)
The more I grow up and witness events unfold, get memory-holed by RWs, and get rewritten by leftists in real-time—the open collaboration of UPA admin with literal terrorists, online censorship/cancel-culture, COVID authoritarianism, Delhi riots, the brazen totalitaranisms of the Obama and Biden administrations, the killing of Kanhaiya Lal, normalization of sunni extremism, rewriting of history to push the “Islamic golden age” narrative, Murshidabad—the more I realize:
RWs forget so easily, man.
After being defeated in a battle, they do not so much as record it—instead just breathe a sigh of relief (or worse, celebrate) that the battle is over.
All of these things are within recent memory, what to speak then of things from before my birth?
The Left on the other hand, are painstakingly counting every one of our “crimes”, compiling the charge sheet to read off at our Moscow Trials.
We need a tradition of Atrocity Literature—of recording the crimes of the Left-liberal Rāj—of tattooing “Kalpana was killed” and “Who is Ghajni?” on our chests—reminding ourselves everyday of who we are and why we’re fighting them.
7.2.3Toss out facts without emotional judgement
Indians need to learn the skill of just stating a fact, neutrally and without judgement.Say our guys want to drop a factoid that would “bait” the enemy—e.g. “Ambedkar was pro-British”. They will do so with such an adversarial posture, or with a smug epic-pwning attitude, that it is very obvious to the enemy that it is bait and they should just stay away.
Our guys are generally just very bad at stating facts without moral judgement. As a result they in fact end up falling for their own baits by being very explicit about their beliefs on it—exactly how they wanted to bait their enemies to behave!
(The masters of this on the other side—and in general absolute expert manipulators whom we should monitor and learn a lot from—are people like Zaid Jilani and Amjad Massad. They has in large part been responsible for courting the smarter U.S. conservatives toward Islamophilia in recent years—while Tate types did it for the dumb ones and Qatari money did it for the corruptible ones.
Even in India Muslims are quite good at this btw, compared to us. That’s why people have this stereotype of the honest muslim chacha who wants nothing but peace.)
This shortcoming also limits our credibility on other matters.
Take Indian RW historians (many of whom I have a lot of respect for), or people and media covering matters like the recent Boeing crash—they are simply unable to make their points without a lot of emotional coating.
Thus they come across as “biased” and “motivated” by politics/nationalism. Leftist historians or liberal media may be much more biased and ideologically motivated, but they present themselves as having come to their conclusions via purely factual pursuit of truth. They pass off their propaganda as facts, while our guys pass off their facts as propaganda.
7.2.4Your implicit assumptions are what people will believe
An important thing to realize about propaganda is that people (both enemies and neutral bystanders) won’t believe the explicit claim you’re making, but will (even subconsciously) believe the implicit assumptions you make.
For example, during the various “debates” between Javed Akhtar and religious Muslims, the latter would make arguments like “how can you criticize Islam when we are so oppressed in this country?” and the former’s supporters would say “Should atheists of minority community stop criticizing the religion they were born into just because their religious group is oppressed?”
The whole thing is Leftist kayfabe—the point of it is to have both sides accept a common premise that “Muslims are oppressed”, so as to reinforce that consensus. Other examples of kayfabe debates the Left has are “Are Just-Stop-Oil protests doing more harm than good to the cause?” (assuming a priori that the cause is just), “Is girlboss feminism bad because it normalizes capitalism?” (assuming a prior that capitalism is bad, feminism is good etc), “lack of representation in left-wing spaces” (assuming a priori that “representation” is a valuable goal).
You must learn to spot this trick when used against you—and simply attack the assumption itself—as well as use this trick yourself: assume the core principle you want to push as obvious, and restrict the debate to whether some particular thing follows from that principle.
The other consequence of this is that every time you use the enemy’s frameworks, you pay them an intellectual jizya (section 4.3.1). When you say “Why don’t you talk about Xinjiang?”, you legitimize Muslim supremacism (instead say “Why don’t you talk about Hindus in Pakladesh?”). When you say “Hinduism is the real environemntalism/feminism!” you legitimize Leftist beliefs as the ideal that all other ideologies must “prove” that they too believe in (section 4.3.6). If you do stupid big-braining like “actually, India is like Palestine and Pakistan is like Israel”—you will not win any approval from Leftists/Muslims, you will simply help legitimize their position that non-Muslims may not have a sovereign existence on “Muslim land” (which will be applied as much against Indians as against Israel).7.2.5Stop falling for izzat-baiting
Indians don’t operate on a friend-enemy, or my interest vs against my interest basis. They operate on a who is making me seethe more. Musk is making us seethe more so he is worse.
Our goal in life is to give people “burnol moments” and tell them to “sit down”, not winning.
Many Indians feel the need to clap back at any perceived slight to their honour, without picking their battles or any sense of proportion, which makes them trivial to “bait”—and not only that, they are *pompous* about this baitability, calling any Indian who doesn’t behave like a dehati coalposter a “coon” and a “sepoy”.
The most consequential example of this was how easily Islamists psy-oped a good chunk of the online Indian right-wing into becoming anti-semitic2. All they did was:
created a bunch of fake “Israeli” accounts shitting on Indians
kept confidently asserting “Israelis literally hate Indians lololol” (in reality data shows Israelis have a higher favourability of India than any other country does; but that’s not even the point)
repeatedly brought up isolated accidents like the UN peacekeeper killed in crossfire in Israel
Indians immediately felt obliged to clap back by saying “we hate Jews too!!!” or make memes showing an Indian Yes Chad saying “I hope you both die” to Jews and Muslims, and a bizarre image of Jews screaming “have mercy” as Paraśurāma kills them for some reason.
And now as a result the dumbest Indian right-wingers are a fertile audience for “26/11 was Israeli and RSS ki saazish” conspiracy theories literally straight out of Congress/Muslim league’s mouth. And the best part is nobody even gives you any “izzat” for this behaviour. You look just as pathetic as you are.
Compare this to Muslims responding to “why don’t you talk about Xinjiang?” Complete discipline and strategic silence, because they have a sense of proportion and know which battles to pick.
7.2.6Know why you believe what you believe
If you want to understand why Modi takes his slow methodical approach instead of going all out against our enemies, look no further than the bhōsaḍpillers sympathizing with Palestine and cuckseething at their fellow Hindus for supporting Israel.
Our e-shers will fold the moment the first drop of enemy blood hits the soil. The moment that they start feeling the heat from Western leftists and Muslim diaspora—international condemnations, Instagram bimbos seething at “Hindutvas”, posts on black twitter with 1 million likes—the moment they see a story about how some innocent kid was orphaned or some parents sobbing because their leftist kid got jailed, they will turn their ire toward Modi, seething at him for ruining their “PR” and “international image”. Not only will they demand an end to the tāṇḍav, they will turn their backs on Hindutva itself.
The fundamental problem is: while our e-shers love to fantasize about violence and post cauliflower memes, they do not truly understand why the brutality they call for is necessary.
(And, as is true in learning and in political beliefs—if you don’t understand why, your knowledge/beliefs will be flimsy and easy to change.)
Instead their entire ideology is motivated by insecurity. They want violence not because they realize it as a necessary step in achieving some positive vision, but because they are insecure about their incapacity to do it—and they hope that violence will earn them some international izzat.
And when it instead elicits kaḍi nindā, they will fold.
[Aside: This is also part of the reason why they do stupid things like equating Muslims and other religious minorities. They’ve been told that “Right-wing is about being based and brutalizing minorities”, and are just LARPing as that without understanding why. Of course, RW boomers do this as well, but only for Christians, and for a different reason—they have an outdated world model in which Muslims and Christians are both the Goliath (section 2.4).]
It is a 4.5 front war. “Internal enemies” (who are really Transnational rather than internal/external) were always the biggest front. The 0.5 front is the questionable reliability of our own validation-addicts. Until that is solved (via Nirṇaya-pilling and increasing their testosterone levels), there can be no tāṇḍav.
In general, discussion (or assumption) of policy/values needs to be more omnipresent in RW discourse, so it keeps getting instilled in both existing supporters and new converts. Otherwise you end up with the Rāytā problem, like MAGA: making the new converts your thought leaders because you have no thoughts of your own.
We cannot dream of replacing the Leftist Ideological Aether if we do not even fill our own spaces with a RW Ideological Aether. This is why I keep going after “bhōsaḍpilling”: we need ideological hardliners, and cannot cede them away to the bhōsaḍ-trap.The Svayambodha of Capitalism and Hindu sovereignty. Needs to be relentlessly reiterated, argued for, and reinforced by implicitly assuming them in discourse on every issue. With zero tolerance for anyone who tries to monkey-balance3 on these.