πŸ• Depacification #1: Principles πŸ•

Tyrone J. Trump, your God.

Tyrone J. Trump.

Niggas always asking me to expand on the concept of Multikult vs Subkult that I introduce previously, so here goes.

A four-part series on Tyrone’s Depacification Doctrine, starting with core principles.

The concept of Depacification can be explained as a three-step solution to the Multikult’s infestation of public consciousness.

1. Attack a Subkult (subculture) through the lens of multiculturalism/tolerance/diversity (= anti-Whiteness).
2. Provide the attacked with a pro-White verbal framework.
3. Insure that the pro-White framework is used in lieu of typical rebuttal to the points made by the accuser.

The goal is to have the members of the selected Subkult:

1. Turn on the Multikult through feeling attacked by it – achieved by (1).
2. Use the language of the Fourth Reich – achieved by (2).
3. Become conditioned to view the Multikult vs Subkult conflict, and all subsequent “anti-racism”, through a racial prism – achieved by (3).

There’s going to be a core set of principles in any Depacification campaign.

Since this series is about vulgarization, everything will be streamlined into the most condensed and accessible form possible.

We making dis shiet formulaic to the extreme nigga, we the McDonald’s of intellectual subversion.

Depacification Principles

As you might have noticed, these types of campaigns work best while controlling both (elements from) the attacking and defending parties. We’ll call the former “niggaz” and the latter “fams”.

Tyrone Trump, rule 63.

Tyrone Trump, rule 63.

Niggaz be like:

1. Identify a Subkult
2. Create a trigger
3. Attack via Multikult
4. Make Whiteness the focus
5. Downplay common rebuttals
6. Declare all Subkult guilty
7. Build anti-White rhetoric
8. Establish link with radicalism
9. Introduce the allegation of malice/intent
10. Follow with the accusation of hypocrisy
11. Personalize the attack

Fams be like:

1. Dramatize the scope of attacks
2. Mock the accusations
3. Typecast the accuser
4. Highlight anti-Whiteness
5. Counter-establish link with radicalism
6. Introduce JQ
7. Frame as attack against Whites
8. Anti-racist = Anti-White

Depacification Demonstration

Let’s use the case of #Metalgate to demonstrate the principles of Depacification.

First on the Niggaz side.

❗ Niggaz’ Offensive ❗

The best example I could find is also the one I used on the Multikult vs Subkult post. Not being very original in my research but it still demonstrates almost every principle.

Here’s the original: http://www.metalious.com/emperor/in-the-nightside-eclipse/racist.

1. Identify a Subkult

Pretty easy, as this was provided by anti-Whites themselves. Another example of the Fash being helped rather than hindered by anti-White hysteria.

Heavy metal music and the “metal community” were thus chosen a target of the Multikult’s wrath.

Anything too White is a prime target for Depacification.

2. Create a trigger

This is important as it gives both credibility to the offensive and the counter-offensive, where it could otherwise be dismissed as mere hysteria.

The trigger in this case are various racially intolerant comments made by some bands, and a few band names (“Zyklon-B”, etc). Doesn’t have to be very elaborate, as almost anything can justify being attacked as “racist”.

3. Attack via Multikult

The thesis is that the Subkult is guilty of wrong-think.

In our case, “metalheads” are guilty of racism, nazism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, and worst of all “anti-semitism”.

If you consider Multikulturalism as a coalition of various subcultures, it’s akin to saying SubKult #671 is revoked from being “on the right side of history” (= part of the coalition) because wrong-think (= because racism = because White).

That’s the rationale behind saying “X has a Nazi/Racism/Bigot Problem that Needs to be Addressed”.

4. Make Whiteness the focus

At the end of the day, the goal of the offensive is to say “X is irredeemably bad because racist because White”.

But first, niggaz must blur the line between the Whiteness and the trigger (why the Subkult is attacked) so that the defendants have to simultaneously deal with the “legitimate” charges of “hate” and the more fanatical White = Racist leitmotiv.

This can be done in a number of ways, the most basic being the one used in our example – only its done in reverse order.

The author starts by attacking Whites as such “just look at who shows up to attend black metal concerts: all racist white males” and blends that accusation with the more alarming murder of a fag.

Depacification is, in many ways, just the interplay between anecdotal events and ethnic hate against White people.

Members of the Subkult get confused and don’t know how to defend against both simultaneous attacks.

5. Downplay common rebuttals

In the original Multikult vs Subkult post, I identify five categories of responses, one of which being “we’re not racist”/”Dems r REAL racists”, subsequently labelled D. Either for Dickless or because the others are A, B, C and E.

What needs to be avoided at all cost is: “sure, X has a problem with racism/nazism/bigotry, but it’s just like everything else, and it’s unfair to label the whole community for the actions of a few“.

Not only does it deflect the accusations, it also reinforces the Multikult narrative.

Anticipating this type of answer, as well as other factual rebuttals, is primordial.

One way to do it is to label any factual and/or logical response as an attempt to “minimize” hate/racism/nazism, and go on with Holocaust hysteria. Cucks are conditions to STFU during Holocaust hysteria so use that to your advantage.

In our example, the author mocks the “a few bad apples” trope and even accuses those promoting it of being crypto-nazis themselves. Why else would they minimize racism?

6. Declare all Subkult guilty

The trigger introduces a specific event that serves as a moral justification for the offensive, but alone it won’t do much unless it’s the entire Subkult that gets dragged into the conflict.

“Star Wars is racist” vs “Star Wars and its fans are racist”.

In our example, “as I’ve proven time and time again that all black metal bands are racist” subtly does the job. The point is reiterated at the end of the review.

7. Build anti-White rhetoric

Now that the confusion is at its climax around whether the attacks are against the cause of the trigger, the Subkult itself or White people in general, it’s time to hammer the anti-White rhetoric.

At its core, it boils down to White = racist and racist = White.

The rest is just adornment.

8. Establish link with radicalism

If something is White, it is racist. And if it’s racist, it’s also nazi, skinhead, and probably engaged in paramilitary terrorism like they show in Hollywood.

Dylann Roof may not have been influenced by Taylor Swift’s music, but he could have been.

Mostly for sensationalism, but it also serves a more insidious and subversive purpose.

The reason for these exaggerations is to demonstrate to the Subkult that to play the Multikult’s game while being White is to live with a sword of Damocles above one’s head.

No matter how much you adhere to its values, if you’re White you’re still only one step away from the “radical extremist nazis”.

9. Introduce the allegation of malice/intent

Not only are the members of the Subkult part of a racist community (in addition to being racist themselves), they are also engaged in a conspiracy to hide that nauseating racism from public scrutiny.

As Tyrone Rubio said, “they know exactly what they are doing”.

It’s not that Taylor Swift is a racist while her fans are dupes. Her fans know exactly what kind of 1488 monster she is, that’s why they like her.

Case in point, “The evidence proving the racism, fascism and anti-semitism of these bands is so obvious that the only possible reason for metal fans to overlook them is not ignorance but intentional malice“.

10. Follow with the accusation of hypocrisy

Always accuse the opponent of what you are doing.

Doing so moves the accusation away from “X is racist” towards “those who deny X is racist aren’t mistaken, they are hypocrites“.

This is important because it preemptively attacks those who would seek to deny the facts related to the trigger, and forces them to confront the less factual ones dealing with Whiteness.

It’s near impossible to claim “X didn’t say/mean/imply Y” without fulfilling the hypocritical fan stereotype.

11. Personalize the attack

The nail in the coffin, and mostly a technique to force the target away from rational thought and into tribal reaction.

Also implies the notion that only those who are Y would ever consent to being part of community X. There’s no other explanation that doesn’t reek of hypocrisy.

You listen to Emperor? That means YOU, personally, are a racist, sexist, homophobic, misogynist white supremacist“.

❗ Fams’ Defense ❗

The comments on the review posted above are pretty good, but the simplest and most concise example would be the following: https://newblackmetal.wordpress.com/2018/10/06/who-hates-black-metal/.

1. Dramatize the scope of attacks

A lot of people react in a tribal fashion when their subculture is attacked, but some don’t. Usually those not seriously involved with said subculture.

Dramatizing the scope and extent of the attacks against the Subkult is a way to widen the net even further, for those who managed to evade being hooked on the first harvest.

In the example, they were labelled “attacks against the entire metal genre” and linked to prior “terrorist acts at black metal concerts”.

2. Mock the accusations

The goal of the “defense” is obviously not to defend anything, but to manipulate the audience into using Fourth Reich language (White, anti-White, White Genocide, etc).

With that stated, it would appear suspicious for a response not to address any of the points made by the accusation.

Which is why it’s a good practice to start by mocking the attacks, implying they – and by extend, any accusation of “racism” – are unworthy of answer.

3. Typecast the accuser

To make the attack/response dynamic relevant not just to specific subcultures but to the larger White Genocide project, the accuser must be cast as a proponent of said genocide.

See the second paragraph.

4. Highlight anti-Whiteness

“They hate White people”, etc.

Bring the anti-Whiteness to consciousness.

5. Counter-establish link with radicalism

who literally advocates for the genocide of Palestinians, as well as the murder of β€˜nazi’ black metal musicians“.

6. Introduce JQ

Self-explanatory, “a certain site run by two jews, including one openly zionist and anti-White specimen“.

7. Frame as attack against Whites

Reaffirm the attacks are directed towards Whites, as Whites, and not just against the Subkult or members thereof.

8. Anti-racist = Anti-White

The conclusion, which explains the attacks against the Subkult in context of anti-White politics.

As always, dicks out.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s