top of page
  • Writer's picture738

Know yr enemy

The user wants to communicate—signal, as economists say—something pretty common in male social groups: “I’m not some poofter who reads books. Pff. I’m a real man, I wipe my arse with bark torn from the log I chopped down for a fire. I don’t need no gay intellectuals. By the way, I’m hard as nails me—hear me, son, hard as nails. Feel that? What you want is a proper job down a coal mine…”. And so on and on—in this case it’s about countersignalling intellectuals, since someone intellectual is popular the status challenge goes up and it naturally takes an anti-intellectual form. And perhaps this article is a counter-counter-signal, since I say read Foucault etc…

The motivation is to boost the status of the person who tweets it, and that is what Twitter is for; the signal and countersignal build group cohesion and morale, stroke and counter-stroke—occasionally the stress gets too much and a gang splits up. In a purely intellectual environment the same person might say, “Oh, I see you read Nietzsche in translation…oh, in the Kaufmann translation—my, my…I think you’ll find a great difference auf Deutsch.” Burn.

You get the picture. To an extent, this is harmless—this is just what humans do all day and every day; and this is why they are so tedious, since all they do, mostly, is spend time telling lies to make themselves look good so other apes will groom them (figuratively, sometimes literally). However, if you think about it, the tweet matters. In the first place, just telling lies to groom status is pretty much what the left is—narcissistic irresponsible status-seeking. So to indulge in it yourself, beyond a reasonable degree to facilitate human life, puts you on the left too. The left is the way it is because all it is really is people saying: “I think we should have open borders.” “I’m totally in agreement with you, there…but have you considered that even the concept ‘open borders’ has its origins in a Eurocentric ‘rational’ worldview? Check out this neat article about consensual female-centred decision-making in Cameroon’s Ogabu tribe…” And so and so forth ad infinitum.

This becomes a problem because the tweet’s substance is wrong. The first principle in war is to know your enemy and his intentions. If you don’t know what someone wants and how he intends to achieve it, how can you possibly beat him? “That’s all right, mate. I’m hard as nails me, I’m going in stark-bullock naked, because I’m a man etc etc…”. Well, that’s social status signalling for you—yet in an actual war nobody would do it.

The same applies to politics: if you never engage with your enemy’s ideas, when they say, “Linda’s pronouns are they/them,” and you say, “That’s gay,” and they tell you why, scientifically, gender is on a spectrum and all you say is, “Well, it’s gay,” then you look like the transphobic bigot you are—someone who just opposes something because you don’t like it and don’t want to know about it, so you play into their trap because you play on their terrain. Ultimately, you will lose—a bit like Putin losing in the Ukraine—because you underestimated your enemy. Putin thought he knew what the Ukrainians were—he didn’t, he just remembered he beat them once about seven years ago and got arrogant. In the meantime, the Ukrainians learned the lessons—losers who survive the loss always learn the lessons very, very well; pain is the best teacher. Then they messed Putin up.

Now, it is possible that you might read your enemy’s ideas and then decide the best way to beat them is to tell everyone not to bother to read those ideas—since the left depends on intellectual status signals just shut them down. However, this is unlikely—the left likes to portray its enemies as “the stupid party”, as JS Mill put it, and to say “don’t read leftists” just plays into this rhetoric.

The problem is that to promote the view “don’t engage with your enemy’s ideas”, even just as a fun signal that you are the hardest ape on the block, does do damage. It will become common knowledge in your group, more impressionable people who do not see it as a boast will treat it as sincere advice—perhaps the original tweeter doesn’t even have enough introspection to realise he is engaged in a status boast, perhaps he has “drunk his own Kool-Aid” without even knowing it.

To tell people not to understand your enemy is to help your enemy—in this case, the woke. It is to weaken your side. People who appreciate this from the outside, who know it is an idle boast yet still promote it, are not sincere friends to their followers because they want the people who follow them to be weak and dependent; and this is a left-wing attitude, conceal things so that people remain weak and do not grow strong, keep people orientated to the lower through ignorance—build the mindless zombie cult, not free men. It also suggests that, deep down, they fear men like Foucault, Marcuse, and Adorno have a point and they will convert any rightist who reads them—they don’t; but, then again, I know that because…I read them.


Recent Posts

See All

Dream (VII)

I walk up a steep mountain path, very rocky, and eventually I come to the top—at the top I see two trees filled with blossoms, perhaps cherry blossoms, and the blossoms fall to the ground. I think, “C

Runic power

Yesterday, I posted the Gar rune to X as a video—surrounded by a playing card triangle. The video I uploaded spontaneously changed to the unedited version—and, even now, it refuses to play properly (o

Gods and men

There was once a man who was Odin—just like, in more recent times, there were men called Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha. The latter three, being better known to us, are clearly men—they face the dilemmas


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page