<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"

	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rules of Engagement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/</link>
	<description>Not Your Grandfather&#039;s Conservatism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2015 20:20:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.7</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: slumlord</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12437</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[slumlord]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2015 22:48:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12437</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very good post.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beefy Levinson</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12411</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beefy Levinson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2015 18:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12411</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you for the link, Mark Citadel.

If you&#039;re ever the target of a social justice witch hunt, he easiest - and most fun - way to fight back is to laugh in their faces.  Dare them to do something about it. In most cases, they&#039;ll back down and search for a more easily intimidated target. If they target your livelihood, whatever you do, don&#039;t quit. Make them fire you.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for the link, Mark Citadel.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re ever the target of a social justice witch hunt, he easiest &#8211; and most fun &#8211; way to fight back is to laugh in their faces.  Dare them to do something about it. In most cases, they&#8217;ll back down and search for a more easily intimidated target. If they target your livelihood, whatever you do, don&#8217;t quit. Make them fire you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vxxc2014</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12410</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[vxxc2014]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2015 17:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12410</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a great post, it&#039;s time to refer to and think of them with one word: enemy. 

They are the enemy and this is a war they chose.  

No other explanation is necessary or helpful, it suffices. 

================
On rules of engagement and positive target identification;  Actually you could be speaking of war itself now, these are the rules of engagement our troops labor under.

I don&#039;t think I&#039;d keep police and military on the list above even with qualifier of politically savvy careerists.   You&#039;ll go farther pointing out that Prog types use the chain of command to hang cops and soldiers, and marines.  

Unless you feel you need to add actually dangerous enemies to the melange of hags, fags and lawyers above.   

Ahem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great post, it&#8217;s time to refer to and think of them with one word: enemy. </p>
<p>They are the enemy and this is a war they chose.  </p>
<p>No other explanation is necessary or helpful, it suffices. </p>
<p>================<br />
On rules of engagement and positive target identification;  Actually you could be speaking of war itself now, these are the rules of engagement our troops labor under.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;d keep police and military on the list above even with qualifier of politically savvy careerists.   You&#8217;ll go farther pointing out that Prog types use the chain of command to hang cops and soldiers, and marines.  </p>
<p>Unless you feel you need to add actually dangerous enemies to the melange of hags, fags and lawyers above.   </p>
<p>Ahem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: disenchantedscholar</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12401</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[disenchantedscholar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12401</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you cut the Left off from the Right, they would die.
If you cut the Right off from the Left, they would thrive.
Who is the parasite in this equation?
How do you kill a parasite?
Therein lies our salvation.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you cut the Left off from the Right, they would die.<br />
If you cut the Right off from the Left, they would thrive.<br />
Who is the parasite in this equation?<br />
How do you kill a parasite?<br />
Therein lies our salvation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AntiDem</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12392</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AntiDem]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2015 22:49:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12392</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pretty much. I&#039;ve been saying for a while now that the left doesn&#039;t have principles, only ideology. It&#039;s useless debating them, because they&#039;re in thrall to a cult, and only interested in &quot;debate&quot; as a way to signal status to other cult members. Also, as Chobitcoin recently said, debating crazy ideas just legitimizes them by signaling that those ideas are debatable. Too many conservakin gets bogged down in endless debates with people who aren&#039;t coming into those debates in good faith to start with, and it can&#039;t help but hurt them in the end. 

Most conservakin are afraid to speak the truth for fear of turning off moderate voters, but the Republicans are so useless that their victories are effectively meaningless anyway, so why bother holding back anymore, other than cowering fear of Jon Stewart saying something nasty about you on Comedy Central? I know that humans are hardwired to seek social approval from in-groups, but come on - what is this, high school? Stand tall. Be an adult. Stop trying to debate fanatical cultists. Stop playing on their home turf. Develop your own ideas.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pretty much. I&#8217;ve been saying for a while now that the left doesn&#8217;t have principles, only ideology. It&#8217;s useless debating them, because they&#8217;re in thrall to a cult, and only interested in &#8220;debate&#8221; as a way to signal status to other cult members. Also, as Chobitcoin recently said, debating crazy ideas just legitimizes them by signaling that those ideas are debatable. Too many conservakin gets bogged down in endless debates with people who aren&#8217;t coming into those debates in good faith to start with, and it can&#8217;t help but hurt them in the end. </p>
<p>Most conservakin are afraid to speak the truth for fear of turning off moderate voters, but the Republicans are so useless that their victories are effectively meaningless anyway, so why bother holding back anymore, other than cowering fear of Jon Stewart saying something nasty about you on Comedy Central? I know that humans are hardwired to seek social approval from in-groups, but come on &#8211; what is this, high school? Stand tall. Be an adult. Stop trying to debate fanatical cultists. Stop playing on their home turf. Develop your own ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Citadel</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12391</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Citadel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2015 20:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12391</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Căpitanul on Tradition&#039;s enemies - 

&quot;To you, who have been struck, maligned or martyred, I can bring the news, which I wish to carry more than the frail value of a casual rhetorical phrase: soon we shall win. Before your columns, all our oppressors will fall. Forgive those who struck you for personal reasons. Those who have tortured you for your faith in the Romanian people, you will not forgive. Do not confuse the Christian right and duty of forgiving those who wronged you, with the right and duty of our people to punish those who have betrayed it and assumed for themselves the responsibility to oppose its destiny. Do not forget that the swords you have put on belong to the nation. You carry them in her name, In her name you will use them for punishment-unforgiving and unmerciful. Thus and only thus, will you be preparing a healthy future for this nation.&quot;

Hope you&#039;ll be back blogging soon, Mai La Dreapta.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Căpitanul on Tradition&#8217;s enemies &#8211; </p>
<p>&#8220;To you, who have been struck, maligned or martyred, I can bring the news, which I wish to carry more than the frail value of a casual rhetorical phrase: soon we shall win. Before your columns, all our oppressors will fall. Forgive those who struck you for personal reasons. Those who have tortured you for your faith in the Romanian people, you will not forgive. Do not confuse the Christian right and duty of forgiving those who wronged you, with the right and duty of our people to punish those who have betrayed it and assumed for themselves the responsibility to oppose its destiny. Do not forget that the swords you have put on belong to the nation. You carry them in her name, In her name you will use them for punishment-unforgiving and unmerciful. Thus and only thus, will you be preparing a healthy future for this nation.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hope you&#8217;ll be back blogging soon, Mai La Dreapta.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Citadel</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12390</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Citadel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2015 19:58:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12390</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems as if in response to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act fiasco, the takeaway by Reactionaries has been almost uniform across the board. Your to-the-point indictment of Conservatism&#039;s continued proven failure to stop an organized enemy is echoed by Beefy Levinson over at Lamentably Sane

http://lamentablysane.blogspot.com/2015/04/clutching-at-our-pearls-of-great-price.html#comment-form

And myself in a follow up article

http://citadelfoundations.blogspot.com/2015/04/reactionaries-say-what-conservatives.html

Our efforts to penetrate the Conservative bubble and finally collapse the impotent controlled opposition need to be accelerated. The never-ending failure of the clownish Republican Party and its even more clownish equivalents in Western European countries is inevitably going to lead to a dissolving in the foundational loyalties of their constituents. These are tomorrow&#039;s Reactionaries, the Modern World&#039;s bloodied victims, the disenfranchised white, Christian male who is so spat upon by the controlling elite.

The only time the left have been successfully squashed since their appearance in the Enlightenment, is when the radical right has spoken the truth, that they are the enemy. We do not seek mutual understanding or a diplomatic solution favorable to both parties. Such common ground does not exist. Nothing but the complete and final destruction of Liberalism will suffice. That is the only relevant rule of engagement. 

&quot;The average liberal couldn’t imagine a more irrelevant rejoinder. They aren’t making any such proposition at all. In their calculus, Christians (of the Not-fans-of-Pope-Francis type at least) are the bad guys and thus their interests are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. The KKK are bad guys and thus their actions are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. You attack bad guys. You don’t attack good guys. Whence the confusion?&quot;

I had no idea how to put this thought into words, but you captured it perfectly. Why is this so hard for rightists to understand? For crying out loud, stop dancing to their music! Don&#039;t bring your clever comeback to a gunfight.

(As a side note: I&#039;d encourage Reactionaries to take note of this incident in particular, and of the firebombing threats made against the tiny pizzeria that said they wouldn&#039;t cater to sodomites. Once the threats begin, the real thing is not far away. Remember Spain&#039;s Terror Rojo)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems as if in response to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act fiasco, the takeaway by Reactionaries has been almost uniform across the board. Your to-the-point indictment of Conservatism&#8217;s continued proven failure to stop an organized enemy is echoed by Beefy Levinson over at Lamentably Sane</p>
<p><a href="http://lamentablysane.blogspot.com/2015/04/clutching-at-our-pearls-of-great-price.html#comment-form" rel="nofollow">http://lamentablysane.blogspot.com/2015/04/clutching-at-our-pearls-of-great-price.html#comment-form</a></p>
<p>And myself in a follow up article</p>
<p><a href="http://citadelfoundations.blogspot.com/2015/04/reactionaries-say-what-conservatives.html" rel="nofollow">http://citadelfoundations.blogspot.com/2015/04/reactionaries-say-what-conservatives.html</a></p>
<p>Our efforts to penetrate the Conservative bubble and finally collapse the impotent controlled opposition need to be accelerated. The never-ending failure of the clownish Republican Party and its even more clownish equivalents in Western European countries is inevitably going to lead to a dissolving in the foundational loyalties of their constituents. These are tomorrow&#8217;s Reactionaries, the Modern World&#8217;s bloodied victims, the disenfranchised white, Christian male who is so spat upon by the controlling elite.</p>
<p>The only time the left have been successfully squashed since their appearance in the Enlightenment, is when the radical right has spoken the truth, that they are the enemy. We do not seek mutual understanding or a diplomatic solution favorable to both parties. Such common ground does not exist. Nothing but the complete and final destruction of Liberalism will suffice. That is the only relevant rule of engagement. </p>
<p>&#8220;The average liberal couldn’t imagine a more irrelevant rejoinder. They aren’t making any such proposition at all. In their calculus, Christians (of the Not-fans-of-Pope-Francis type at least) are the bad guys and thus their interests are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. The KKK are bad guys and thus their actions are hateful and invalid and must be opposed. You attack bad guys. You don’t attack good guys. Whence the confusion?&#8221;</p>
<p>I had no idea how to put this thought into words, but you captured it perfectly. Why is this so hard for rightists to understand? For crying out loud, stop dancing to their music! Don&#8217;t bring your clever comeback to a gunfight.</p>
<p>(As a side note: I&#8217;d encourage Reactionaries to take note of this incident in particular, and of the firebombing threats made against the tiny pizzeria that said they wouldn&#8217;t cater to sodomites. Once the threats begin, the real thing is not far away. Remember Spain&#8217;s Terror Rojo)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Tory</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12388</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Tory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Charles Jansen quoted this excerpt from Hume in a recent article he penned over at Radix Journal:

&quot;The [Tories] are commonly less assuming and dogmatical in conversation, more apt to make concessions; and tho&#039; not, perhaps, more susceptible of conviction, yet more able to bear contradiction than the [Whigs]; who are apt to fly out upon any opposition, and to regard one as a mercenary designing fellow, if he argues with any coolness and impartiality, or makes any concessions to their adversaries.&quot;

Being reasonable with unreasonable people means that you will lose. Daniel Defoe had the right idea:

&quot;And now, they find their Day is over! their power gone! and the throne of this nation possessed by a Royal, English, true, and ever constant member of, and friend to, the Church of England! Now, they find that they are in danger of the Church of England’s just resentments! Now, they cry out, “Peace!” “Union!” “Forbearance!” and “Charity!”: as if the Church had not too long harboured her enemies under her wing! and nourished the viperous blood, till they hiss and fly in the face of the Mother that cherished them!

No, Gentlemen! the time of mercy is past! your Day of Grace is over! you should have practised peace, and moderation, and charity, if you expected any yourselves!&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Charles Jansen quoted this excerpt from Hume in a recent article he penned over at Radix Journal:</p>
<p>&#8220;The [Tories] are commonly less assuming and dogmatical in conversation, more apt to make concessions; and tho&#8217; not, perhaps, more susceptible of conviction, yet more able to bear contradiction than the [Whigs]; who are apt to fly out upon any opposition, and to regard one as a mercenary designing fellow, if he argues with any coolness and impartiality, or makes any concessions to their adversaries.&#8221;</p>
<p>Being reasonable with unreasonable people means that you will lose. Daniel Defoe had the right idea:</p>
<p>&#8220;And now, they find their Day is over! their power gone! and the throne of this nation possessed by a Royal, English, true, and ever constant member of, and friend to, the Church of England! Now, they find that they are in danger of the Church of England’s just resentments! Now, they cry out, “Peace!” “Union!” “Forbearance!” and “Charity!”: as if the Church had not too long harboured her enemies under her wing! and nourished the viperous blood, till they hiss and fly in the face of the Mother that cherished them!</p>
<p>No, Gentlemen! the time of mercy is past! your Day of Grace is over! you should have practised peace, and moderation, and charity, if you expected any yourselves!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mai La Dreapta</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12387</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mai La Dreapta]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is why I get so perpetually annoyed with Rob Dreher. He &lt;i&gt;almost&lt;/i&gt; gets it. He comes right up to the edge and looks into the abyss, and then he says, &quot;If we could just have an open dialogue I&#039;m sure we can find a way to paper over this.&quot; This is why I have written off the mainstream Right. They will never win because they are ashamed of using the weapons that could possibly win. Worse than that, they aren&#039;t even good enough to make decent walled gardens, because they have believed the prog&#039;s lie that walls are evil. (Well, walls that keep out liberals are evil. Walls that keep out conservatives are just fine.)

The culture war, overall, is unwinnable. But islands of sanity can be preserved, so long as those who guard the islands are willing to put up walls and barbed wire and use guns to keep out the wolves. (These are metaphors. For now.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is why I get so perpetually annoyed with Rob Dreher. He <i>almost</i> gets it. He comes right up to the edge and looks into the abyss, and then he says, &#8220;If we could just have an open dialogue I&#8217;m sure we can find a way to paper over this.&#8221; This is why I have written off the mainstream Right. They will never win because they are ashamed of using the weapons that could possibly win. Worse than that, they aren&#8217;t even good enough to make decent walled gardens, because they have believed the prog&#8217;s lie that walls are evil. (Well, walls that keep out liberals are evil. Walls that keep out conservatives are just fine.)</p>
<p>The culture war, overall, is unwinnable. But islands of sanity can be preserved, so long as those who guard the islands are willing to put up walls and barbed wire and use guns to keep out the wolves. (These are metaphors. For now.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gordian</title>
		<link>http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/04/09/rules-of-engagement/#comment-12386</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gordian]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2015 15:18:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.socialmatter.net/?p=1969#comment-12386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In addition, we should mention that the red commanders despise their own troops and sympathize with the blues.  One of the great failures of the mainstream right is how the conservatives allows its leadership to come from the left rather than from their own ranks.  Stephen Tonsor is a great example in both ways: &quot;It&#039;s great when the village harlot finds religion.  Every once in a while, she makes a good choir director.  But when she begins to tell the preacher what to say, it&#039;s gone too far!&quot;  Then on the other hand, Tonsor himself spent a great deal of time disparaging Southerners, saying that he didn&#039;t want to allow &quot;rednecks and hicks&quot; into the conservative movement.  Even knowing the problem, he couldn&#039;t escape the inevitable conservative hatred of his own constituency (at least major parts of it).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In addition, we should mention that the red commanders despise their own troops and sympathize with the blues.  One of the great failures of the mainstream right is how the conservatives allows its leadership to come from the left rather than from their own ranks.  Stephen Tonsor is a great example in both ways: &#8220;It&#8217;s great when the village harlot finds religion.  Every once in a while, she makes a good choir director.  But when she begins to tell the preacher what to say, it&#8217;s gone too far!&#8221;  Then on the other hand, Tonsor himself spent a great deal of time disparaging Southerners, saying that he didn&#8217;t want to allow &#8220;rednecks and hicks&#8221; into the conservative movement.  Even knowing the problem, he couldn&#8217;t escape the inevitable conservative hatred of his own constituency (at least major parts of it).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
