Declining to Play the Game, Revisited

The essay below was originally published two and a half years ago as a response to months of unremitting demonization of the Counterjihad in the wake of the Breivik massacre in Norway. Everyone in this line of work came under severe pressure to repudiate the “extremists” in their midst who were alleged to have inspired the Butcher of Utøya in his bloody work. A considerable number of people gave in to this pressure, and some were forced to withdraw permanently from the field.

Since then Anders Behring Breivik has revealed that his affection for the Counterjihad was in fact a calculated feint, and bore no relation to his actual political inclinations. This revelation has made no difference to the media writers and government officials who demonized us back in the summer of 2011, nor do I expect it to. Mr. Breivik provided the media with exactly the “narrative” they longed for, and they are unlikely to abandon it in the face of something as trivial as the truth. They have their story, and they’re sticking to it.

I was prompted to resurrect this post by the widespread reaction to recent events in Ukraine, which bears a certain similarity to what happened after the terrorist attacks in Norway. Writers are expected to pronounce the prescribed shibboleths about Russia, or risk being demonized and dismissed as “Russophiles”. Expressing insufficient condemnation of Vladimir Putin or failing to focus on the brutality and barbarism of Russian behavior invite the shunning and shaming behavior we’ve all become so familiar with whenever Counterjihad topics are discussed.

The tacit demand to repudiate each other for adhering to incorrect doctrine remains as strong among “conservatives” as it is in progressive circles. There are some ideas that are doubleplus ungood, and must simply never be thought.

Declining to Play the Game

Main Premises:

1.   Media coverage of the Counterjihad is stacked against us.
2.   This overwhelming disadvantage can’t be significantly improved.

The organs of the Socialist Left have a stranglehold on all discourse about Islam, immigration, Multiculturalism, etc. This stranglehold is maintained through the iron grip of the Left on education, NGOs, large corporations, the media, and the permanent bureaucracy.

Each new generations is even more brainwashed than the previous one, guaranteeing that the demonization and marginalization of people like us will only intensify. We cannot improve our standing to any useful extent in the media without conceding the Left’s major arguments about immigration, Multiculturalism, and “racism”.

The New Mainstream

During the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Norway, one of our people expressed his despair over the situation. He said, “Now we’ve lost any chance of even partially winning over the mainstream.”

My response was, “Forget the mainstream. We never had a chance anyway. We will create our own mainstream.”

This may sound grandiose, but when “we” are thousands of people who follow the same program independently, we create a new common discourse that abandons any elements of the current mainstream. When enough people adhere to such a strategy, the “mainstream” becomes irrelevant, and eventually withers away.

In order to build a coherent set of values that reflects what the vast majority of Westerners support — the new mainstream, in other words — we must refuse to accept the basic premises that inform what now passes for “mainstream” thought. We do not accept the validity of those premises, so we must decline to enter any discourse based on them.

The Game is Rigged

The media game is rigged against people who believe what we believe.

The rules of the game state that it can only be won by someone who accepts the “mainstream” premises about immigration and Multiculturalism. Players are “racists” if they do not accept those premises.

1.   Immigration is a good thing; it enriches our culture.
2.   Our society has a history of racism and intolerance for which we must atone by becoming more open and inclusive to foreign cultures.
3.   To oppose the importation of foreigners from widely different (and often antagonistic) cultures is to be guilty of racism.
4.   No culture is inherently preferable over any other culture. They are just different. In fact, if anything our own culture is somewhat lacking. Therefore, by importing foreign cultures, we improve our own.

We cannot win this game.

According to the rules of the game, the only way to win is to acknowledge the truth of the above premises. If we do that, we have joined forces with our enemies. If we don’t, we lose the game.

There are two teams in the game, the “Islamophobes” and the “Multicults”. In effect, the only way for the Islamophobes to win the game is to defect to the other team and join the Multicults.

That’s not much of a “victory” in my book.

Forget About Partial Victory

Without realizing it, up until now we have been attempting to gain a partial victory in this absurd game.

By denying that we are “racists” (“We have a lot of Jews in our organization!”), repudiating “racist” groups (“We have nothing to do with the BNP or the KKK!”), and agreeing that we love foreign cultures, we hope to gain at least a few yards against our opponents.

However, these tactics only concede the field to the other team. We pull further and further back, and the inevitable result is an “own goal” against ourselves.

According to the terms of the mainstream, if we do not concede the inherent value of mass immigration, we are morally deficient racists and xenophobes. We cannot change this perception without conceding the game to the opposing team.

A partial victory is a chimera. It is simply not possible: the rules prohibit it.

The Alternative: Decline to Play the Game

Once we realize that we cannot possibly win the mainstream game and still remain Counterjihad activists, the only prudent course of action is to refuse to play the game.

Don’t accept the rules.

Don’t recognize the authority of the referee.

Don’t call the toss.

Don’t even go onto the field.

It’s very difficult to avoid being sucked into the game, because we’ve been playing it for so long. Virtually everyone else is playing it, too. No one else recognizes how screwy the rules are. Very few people realize that the game is rigged so that only the Multicults can win.

We need to reinforce our inner determination by reminding ourselves over and over again that the rules forced upon us for the past forty years are irrational, insane, and evil. They permit only one outcome: the destruction of our traditional Western culture.

Avoiding Intramural Versions of the Game

It’s crucial not to allow the rules of the mainstream game to enter our internal discourse. No one should fling the “racist” term at other members of the Counterjihad. Nobody that shares our goals should be described as a “neo-Nazi” or a “fascist”.

Such behavior is a sign that the game has been internalized by our own people. It displays an unconscious acceptance of the mainstream premises.

Declining to Play the Media Game

When dealing with the media, it’s important to refuse the interviewer’s implied rules of discourse. This is tough to manage, because the grooves of the old behaviors have been worn so deep over the decades. If we don’t engage the interviewer on his own terms and attempt to convince him that we’re not “racists”, we feel morally inferior.

Just remember: You can’t prove you’re not a racist unless you surrender your most important principles.

It’s disheartening to realize that there’s no point in going through the whole I’m-not-a-racist charade. It’s discouraging to discover that victory is absolutely impossible using the terms dictated by the mainstream.

So refuse to accept the terms dictated by the mainstream. Be steadfast, and repeat the same response over and over again, like a broken record:

“I don’t acknowledge the validity of the premises of any arguments based on ‘racism’

“If the premises of an arguments are false, the conclusions are meaningless.

“Therefore I will not discuss any issue using terms like ‘race’ and ‘racism’.

“That’s all I have to say on this topic.”

The same statements can be used for alternative terms, such as “xenophobia”, “Islamophobia”, etc. From the media’s point of view, they’re all interchangeable.

Interviewers will keep throwing the same old loaded questions at you, but if you stick to statements like these, after a while they’ll realize that it’s no use to continue. If they want any interesting footage for their program, they’ll have to discuss the issues on your terms. They’ll have to engage you on the importance of preserving the traditional customs and values of your own culture, and hear you describe how destructive immigration and Multiculturalism are to the fabric of Western society.

If they don’t, the interview will be short and pointless. But you will have avoided compromising your own principles.


Forging a new mainstream is a long, difficult, thankless process. It will take at least a generation to undo the indoctrination and propaganda that have spread throughout every institution in our society. Young people will have to be exposed to new games that have different rules, games that are more interesting and fulfilling to play.

We begin by declining to engage the mainstream on its own terms. There is no other way to accomplish our purposes, because playing the mainstream way is a mug’s game. We can’t help but lose it.

Islam is not the problem. The problem lies in the rules forced on us through more than a half-century of Leftist dominance. Islam would never have made such devastating inroads into our culture if the vast majority of Westerners had not unwittingly accepted those rules.

Decline the rules.

Refuse to play the game.

40 thoughts on “Declining to Play the Game, Revisited

  1. I want to be called racist, xenophobe and islamophobe. I am unable to prove that I am none of the above. So be it. Thanks for an excellent article.

  2. Always say, “If it be racism, make the most of it.” Even when you don’t accept their lies and definitions, you can still mock them with their own insanity. If they accuse you of being an Islamophobe, ask them, “Why ever do you think that is?” Put them on defense. Make them define their weird reality. Ask them why the tiny minority of extremists whose native language is Arabic have so hard a time understanding their religion, when they use the standard trope: Tiny Minority of Extremists who Misunderstand Islam. Ridicule those dimwitted clucks in the anchor’s chairs who tut-tut and poo-poo your ideas by actually using their terms as cudgels. Take this example:
    Islam is peaceful religion.
    Then describe, using the same words, how Islam has peacefully murdered, almost lovingly, whole cultures.
    There are glorious ways to wage a psychological war on them and not play their game. The ways are limitless.
    Be the happiest of happy warriors. We aren’t defeated.
    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
    ~Mahatma Gandhi

  3. A thought-provoking essay, Baron. As a resident of MC London, I have a reservation: while it is arguable that the contribution of many immigrant groups (non-Muslim south Asians, east Asians, Africans and Afro-Caribbeans, Latin Americans, recent arrivals from the EU) is not so great as the PC brigade might have us believe- apart from some nice restaurants, and in many cases a commitment to work hard and improve oneself (something Americans should relate to)- this phenomenon is not necessarily negative either, apart from the pressure on housing, school places etc: problems which government should have been able to anticipate and deal with, given the extra income from the tax contributions of such immigrants, who actually make fewer demands on social security/benefits than the native population.

    If I can make this point, so can the PCMC enablers (if they get their heads out of the sand), so it behoves us (behooves for American readers!) to concentrate on the principal threat, Islamofascism or whatever we choose to call it, so that a) immigrants who do not wish us ill do not feel threatened, and b) we cannot be accused of generalised xenophobia or racism.

    • The contribution of immigrants in the UK is surely negative. Similar for the vast majority of the Mexican immigrants in the USA as Jason Richwine documented before he was fired over a violation of pc-dogma. In the Netherlands the Freedom party also documented the contribution from non Western immigrants and quite clearly it is negative. In general, working to lower middle-class simply do not contribute more then what they take from the system.

    • I generally agree with you; however, the PC MC paradigm has long ago fused with seemingly indissoluble cement the general multiculturalist sentiment with the more specific Islamophilia — such that Islam (and Muslims) has become a tautly sensitive center of a spider web, so to speak which, if one merely touches it ever so lightly with one’s little finger in the most cautiously gingerly fashion possible yet ever so faintly hinting at the slightest negativity, the PC MC will instantly recoil and retaliate defensively against a perceived offense against the entire multiculturalist edifice.

      I.e., in the PC MC perspective which dominates our mainstream throughout the West, Muslims and their Islam have become the very crux and spearhead of the entire multiculturalist Weltanschauung; and any “attack” on them (again, the slightest slight is magnified as a “racist” and “bigoted” “attack”) is instantly and immediately and massively perceived to be an attack on it.

      • In light of this, it will be a complex and sensitive process to disentangle the two. In the decades ahead, I have confidence that Muslims themselves will help disengage this unfortunate (and irrational) bond between respect for them, and respect for the other Others — chiefly they will help us by continuing to metastasize around the world (and in the West) through their endemic fanaticism, violence and hatred. This can continue to increase only so long before something has gotta give, and even the Clueless Majority in the West will finally wake up to restore Common Sense to the Body Politic.

  4. I agree with every word. I will only add that interviews as a method are totally useless. The only time they can be used is in so called “Open interviews” where an honest person tries to get a picture of a problem.

  5. You are so right about us all (unconsciously ?) towing the msm line. I made a comment on an article a couple of days ago which ran something along the lines of Ukraine being trapped between two evils. In the course of the article the line ‘ We all know Putin is a ruthless corrupt tyrant , but…) And I thought ‘HOW do we know Putin is a ruthless corrupt tyrant’ ? In every speech that I have seen Putin make he comes across as reasonable, measured, and I find myself agreeing with just about everything he says.
    Look at the difference between the rhetoric of the likes of Obama, Kerry, McCain, Hague, – All threats and bluster, VERY belligerent. There are no such noises coming from Russia – If ANYONE in the Russian government had been threatening the west it would be all over our media (unless you count threatening to turn the gas off and dumping the dollar as a response to western sanctions as belligerence).
    Similarly Assad – every time I have seen him speak it is in calm, measured tones, he may well be no pussycat – I really don’t know, but compared with the ranting maniacs on the rebel side, were I Syrian I know who I would take my chances with, yet every time any article recognises that it HAS to begin with ‘We all know Assad is a murderous tyrant – but…… HOW do we know.?
    Sarah Palin, STORMS onto the scene, makes a REAL impression on the political scene impassions conservatives, is a REAL threat to the Democrat hegemony. Then the abuse started, attacks on her, her kids, her husband, ANYTHING, ANY little gaffe, mistake sensationalized played over and over again, (think Obama never does, says anything stupid, Kennedy or Churchill never did ?) A BARRAGE of criticism, character assassination in the media until anyone who wants to give her the slightest crumb of support feels obliged to preface their comments with ‘Well I’m no fan of Sarah Palin but…….
    And that’s how it works, Anyone who ‘they’ see as a threat have their character assassinated to such an extent that anyone who tries to even bring a bit of balance to the debate has to start with ‘ We all know this person is corrupt/an idiot/ tyrant, but ………..
    AND, I’m no racist but, they’ve got that debate sown up too.
    We know all these things because THEY tell us !

    • Phil, those are excellent examples of how we have been well-trained to play the game. The more examples the better.

      If we don’t catch ourselves doing it, how are we going to stop?

  6. All I say now, if anyone starts throwing the ‘r’ word about:

    If you really believe that, there’s something seriously wrong with you.

    I have found this to be effective.

  7. Putin maybe a strong enough character to breakthrough the media conditioning and typecasting, should that happen at such a high level of western public consciousness it could bring about the catastrophic failure of the progressive media propaganda machine, this in turn could make way for some real political discourse in the West.

    • Do you think that Putin would be up for having RT start putting out reports on actual Islamic doctrines and practices, telling the truth about Islam throughout history etc? Deliberately like, to undermine the narratives that our political elite have built their airy-fairy fantasies upon? It really would throw a spanner in the works.

      He already gave David Cameron a right scolding live on stage when he told him that if he carried out his proposals re. Syria he would be giving weapons to cannibals. That took the legs out from underneath Cameron – I really wouldn’t mind seeing more of the same, I have to say.

      • You really know you’re on shaky ground, morally speaking, if Vladimir Putin of all people has the moral high ground and he’s giving you a telling off live on TV and there’s nothing you can say in your defence.

        That was the beginning of the end of Cameron’s Syrian adventure.

  8. The Baron is right. That is why Wilders, our infamous islamophobe cum EU-critic has steadfastly refused to be grilled in news programs. This is quite hard and it takes great discipline as it gave jeering pundits and jornolists ample opportunity to attack him for refusing ‘debate’ and because it even puzzled sympathizers. It has been a great relief however not having to witness him -us! -being put on the defensive.
    Once you know people don’t really want to hear what you actually mean it’s best to cut the pretense and not bother.

  9. We must extend the bubble of sanity little by little and this is a victory none of us will experience in our lifetime… I’m paraphrasing O’Brien from “1984”, but the gist is similar.

    This is one for the Ages.

  10. An excellent article that I agree with 100%. Even with people who you think are your friends it is very difficult to get across one’s point before one feels that one’s arguments start being dismissed as “racist, xenophobic”.
    I do however also agree with “Mark H’s” closing in his comment that not all immigrants were always making demands on the host country but instead were genuinely contributing to the new country in often significant ways and were adopting the new country as their new and only home in all sincerity. (I can speak from experience being an immigrant to Canada myself and also being married for over 50 years to a “visible minority” person as a white woman.”).
    So I think Mark’s closing paragraph “so that a) immigrants who do not wish us ill do not feel threatened and b) we cannot be accused of generalized xenophobia or racism” is very worth remembering at all times.

  11. Our culture is not lost when a 14 year old writes a poem like this.

    (Be sure to read it through from top to bottom…and then from bottom to top).

    Our generation will be known for nothing.
    Never will anybody say,
    We were the peak of mankind.
    That is wrong, the truth is
    Our generation was a failure.
    Thinking that
    We actually succeeded
    Is a waste. And we know
    Living only for money and power
    Is the way to go.
    Being loving, respectful, and kind
    Is a dumb thing to do.
    Forgetting about that time,
    Will not be easy, but we will try.
    Changing our world for the better
    Is something we never did.
    Giving up
    Was how we handled our problems.
    Working hard
    Was a joke.
    We knew that
    People thought we couldn’t come back
    That might be true,
    Unless we turn things around
    (Read from bottom to top now)

    • Wow — a very clever poem.

      As to its substance, however, it doesn’t contain a sufficient antidote to the starry-eyed young person who believes in all the ideals in the poem — but thinks of them in terms of PC MC (you know, Obama’s “hope and change”, ridding the world of “racism” (where that necessarily means “Islamophobia”), heeding Al Gore’s apocalyptic warning about “climate change”; yadda yadda yadda.

  12. All good thoughts. In large part, this is a war of semantics and diversion. The left defines the terms, skewing them to make us look negative, and tries to deflect off target.

    Misuse of language:
    For instance ‘islamophobe’. I am not an islamophobe. I do not ‘fear’ islam. I abhor islam. It is a nasty business. islam is probably responsible for more deaths every day on the earth than automobile accidents. Governments of non-islamic countries that force their own people to accommodate muslims en mass are criminals against their country.

    Redefining terms:
    Progressive liberals are not good people, they are either ignorant or self-identified liars. They are not progressive; look at their ‘war on poverty’, no ‘progress’. They are not liberal; look at their continued support of the growth of governmental regulations that restrict liberty.

    Avoiding the truth:
    Amnesty and ‘immigration reform’ are not the problem. Massive, illegal immigration, un-enforced borders and immigration laws are the problem.

    When engaging the MSM or liberals, you must go in knowing where the real targets are, and not let the MSM or that doofy liberal throw off the scent. Especially if others (the low information folks) are listening in.


  13. “Anders Behring Breivik has revealed that his affection for the Counterjihad was in fact a calculated feint, and bore no relation to his actual political inclinations. ”

    This is inaccurate. Breivik’s analysis speculated that the Counter-Jihad was bifurcated into two “wings” — one a “liberal” wing beholden to “cultural Marxism” (and “Jewish” elements); the other more consonant with his own views. He was indeed manufacturing an elaborate deception to sabotage the former — but he was doing this in order to try to strengthen the latter.

    I find Breivik’s analysis of these two “wings” to be roughly accurate (though he rather ineptly failed to see an incoherent intermingling of the two which seems to be the norm); indeed, I see evidence of the latter wing rather often here at GOV, often incoherently mingled with the former (except occasionally when an intrepidly fanatical commenter reveals a slip of the mask and one sees a glimpse of a purism of which Breivik would likely approve).

    • If he was trying to accomplish what you say he was, then he did the opposite and is as stupid as they come.

  14. Putin? How do we know he’s corrupt and tyrannical. Oy. As far as Islam is concerned, just remember that he’s enabling Iran.

  15. I have another idea; we must take over the game. We need to start using the language of the Left against Islam. Whenever a Muslim or just an apologist to Islam take up the Nazi card, we point out that Hitler and other major Nazis loved Islam, and that even today Mein Kampf is bestseller in Muslim countries. Or immediately when Muslims accuse us of racism, we say that there is many racist texts in Koran and hadith and Muslims are very racist against non-Muslims.

    • No Game change. As soon as we start using their language, we have lost. On the contrary, a language without The Language of Violence is our best weapon – and a necessary weapon I would say. The enemies don’t have that weapon, and they fear it.

    • You’re right, of course; but it won’t be that easy. Leftists (and PC MCs, who are not necessarily Leftists) usually have a lot of obfuscatory tricks up their sleeve to throw up interference to that tack (and to pretty much any other tack one would try). We need a more concerted game plan, which would require an Anti-Islam Manual. The Counter-Jihad (someday hopefully to become the Anti-Islam Movement) desperately needs such a Manual; but none of its luminaries or civilian rank-and-file seem to notice or care.

      I’ve written several essays on my Hesperado blog discussing this:…139482.143571.0.144006.….0…1c.1.37.serp..12.15.1080.zZMduxNfGwQ

  16. This comment thread unfortunately started to mutate into one of those endless epic arguments about the JOOOOOOS.

    I’m not having another one like that. It stops right here. I’ve cauterized the affected tissue, and will euthanize the patient if need be.

    I’m so sick of this stuff.

    • Shame it cannot be discussed normally, hiding this problem will only make it worse in the long run in my opinion. The fear of a handful of neo Nazis is holding the Western world hostage.

      But.. reason will win in the long run, unless irrational antisemitism and ‘antigoyism’ get their first.

      • As has been said before, there are plenty of places on the web where they are only too happy to fantasize on blood libels, protocols and Jewish Bolsheviks. lets keep this counterjihad not counter Joo.

  17. My reply to the fascists is, if the truth, or speaking the truth is racist, then I’m a racist.
    As far as dealing with the abundance of anti-Semites goes, I can actually understand some of the disgust at the seemingly over represented number of Jews that circulate amongst the enemies of the truth, but it aslo can’t be denied that there are many Jews on our side fighting for the truth with us. However, I have found the real dividing line to be how one views Israel. It can’t be denied by any sane person that Israel is the good guy as far as the world struggle lining up against her goes. Despite her many faults, Israel is at least 20 times better than her Mohammedan enemies and I mean 20 times at least. When someone starts to rant on how evil Israel is , I am done with the fool.

    • In 1947 Israel was allowed into the poker game, but with a bum deal. It has had to play with that bum hand ever since.

      Whilst Israel has won all the wars (it had to), the casualty rate has been horrid for a small country with a small population, and Jews treasure their sons and daughters more than many.

      Someday I would love somebody to catalogue the ‘faults’ of Israel that I am always told about, it is a bit like the “I am not a racist but…” dialogue which this article is about, by talking about Israel’s many faults one is entering into the Islamofascist dialogue.

      Israel is the prime bastion against Jihad, it is the enclave in the middle of the enemy, it is the Khe Sanh of the Counter Jihad, it deserves unreserved support, not PC inspired crypto-criticism.

      • Lots of faults, to sum them up: Israel would probably be left of Sweden if it wasn’t surrounded by fiendish animals intent on it’s destruction.

        • I have often wondered if the Europeans who work for their own nations, for the now suspect patriotism for their own country, and whom we support whole-heartedly, would be lost in the translation to American policy. IOW, their belief in socialism would prevent me from ever voting for them.

          • There’s also a lot of Americans who are on our side only because they are smart enough to recognize the danger looming over us all. Desperate times produce strange bedfellows, but it’s still not as bad as say, unduly supporting the Soviet Union to defeat Nazi Germany.

          • that support of the Soviet Union was a cabal led by the Communists in our govt and the treacherous NY Times. See how we were betrayed in Diana West’s book. Even after the war when it was harder to hide Communism’s perfidy, the usual suspects that are still to this day intent on destroying us – politicians/lobbyists, academic mandarins, and jornolists – continue their project by other names.

            The traitors on the English side were as deeply committed as ours were. Did England ever outlaw the Communist Party??

            IOW, there is plenty of blame to go around for everyone. Back when being anti-Communist was very uncool in Europe and among the intelligentsia in this country, the claims of the Commie-hunters were ridiculed as populist, papist claptrap. But when the USSR fell and the KGB archives were permitted to be seen (at least some of them) lo and behold! All those square Red-baiters turned out to be right. Imagine that.

            Now the same group is in full throat against the Tea Party – the sons and daughters of those anti-Communists – proving that Europe and the American socialists haven’t learned much. Sad

            There isn’t much “only because” about being on the same “side” at all.

          • What I meant is that our taking people who are socialists at heart as allies in the struggle against the abject wickedness that Mohammedanism is, isn’t as bad as was the Allies taking on the USSR as an ally against the Nazis. I was using the Allied/USSR alliance as a comparative example only. I would argue that the vast majority of the socialists which people like myself see as allies in this existential struggle are no where’s near as evil and corrupt as the USSR and Uncle Joe were.
            As far as your comment goes concerning the actual situation goes, I agree.
            I would add that we see the same traitorous behavior occurring once again as concerns an even more insidious enemy today.

Comments are closed.