SWAG: Table of Contents

The structure of the Simple White Advocacy Guide is as shown below. Some of it is done, some of it is in progress, and some of it is eligible for adoption. If the chapter is [Not Started] and you think you know what you’re talking about, please get with me and offer up a draft. This is a collaborative project.

If you’re a Jew who’s sick and tired of being accused of being non-White despite having flowing blond hair and icy blue eyes, don’t settle for posting a hateful comment. Step up and write a Supplemental Guide called “White Advocacy for Jews” and I’ll include a link to it. The same goes for anti-Semites. One good idea might be “White Advocacy for Kinists”, which would provide arguments and strategies for persuading fellow Christians. Rather than tearing each other down, the various factions can compete to offer the best supplement.

The other two appendices can grow over time as suggestions pour in. The guide owes quite a bit to its inspiration, the Global Language Dictionary, but it’s deliberately more concise…a bit less Talmudic. Since it’s designed by a collaborative web community instead of by a sinister think tank, the structure of the document is more modular and participatory…but without the cool charts and graphics. Unless, of course, you would like to contribute cool charts and graphics.

Introduction
[SWAG: Introduction] [Complete]

Chapter 1 – The Art of Persuasion
[Be a Sherpa on the mountain of racial enlightenment] [In Progress]

Chapter 2 – Six Rules of Discourse
[SWAG: Six Rules of Discourse] [Complete]

Chapter 3 – Words and Phrases that Work
[Words, phrases, and themes that work for us] [In Progress…]

Chapter 4 – Media Matters
[How to talk to a reporter, how to propagandize effectively, etc…] [Not Started]

Chapter 5 – Safety Considerations
[Dealing with antifas, crowds, riots, informants, provocateurs] [Not Started]

Chapter 6 – Next Steps
[Encouraging activism, sustaining through support, group membership, etc…] [Not Started]

Appendix I – Challenge/Response
[Sample challenges and responses when discussing racial issues] [Not Started]

Appendix II – Conversation Starters
[Smart ways to begin constructive conversations about race] [Not Started]

Appendix III – Supplemental Guides
[Links to additional materials relating to specific issues] [Not Started]

7 Comments

  1. Wikitopian,
    I think you have made a great start on your manual. I am assuming that you mean this to be a guide for your average White Advocate to use when talking to persuadables. If this is correct, one suggestion I have is to separate your booklet into a “standard version” (Chapters 1, 2 and 3), and an “advanced” version that deals with events that the average person wont usually be faced with (Chapters 4, 5 and 6). In the interest of making the guide more accessible and using less paper (people are sometimes intimidated by long texts), a shorter pamphlet might be more effective (something people can print off and read quickly to get them started).

    Anyway, one introductory conversation that I find to be successful is as follows:
    Me: I read recently that Whites are scheduled to become a minority by 2050. Do you think thats a good thing?
    Him: Seems like no big deal.
    Me: The article said that Whites were about 90% of the population as recently as 1970. The immigration laws changed a few years before that, and the US has been taking in 1-2 million legal immigrants a year every since, mostly from the third world.
    Him: Great, we will have a multicultural society.
    Me: Do you think it would be a good thing for the Japanese if they took in millions of immigrants like we do?
    Him: Sure, why not.
    Me: Do you think that immigrants would value and respect their culture the way Japanese do?
    Him: I dont know.
    Me: Dont you think that the world is a better place with a unique nation of Japan, with its unique culture and people? Would the world be a better place if millions of Africans arrived there, who didnt value their culture?
    Him: Maybe not.
    Me: What about our US culture? Dont you think something special would be lost if the US became like Brazil?
    Him: Multiculturalism enriches us.
    Me: One of the problems with becoming a minority is that you lose all of your power. For example, the nation of Rhodesia was ruled by whites until the 70s, then became Zimbabwe. Since then, most whites have had their lands taken from them, and were brutalized if they didnt leave. Many are now refugees. When you are a minority like that, you are at the total mercy of other groups. Do you think Whites were better off being a minority in Zimbabwe?
    Him: I guess not.
    Me: A similar thing happened in South Africa. Whites were a minority, and gave blacks the right to vote in the 90s. Since then, over 1% of the Whites have been murdered, many horribly. South Africa, which used to have low rates of crime, now has the highest crime rates in the entire world. There are many stories of how Whites are oppressed by the majority blacks, and large numbers of them want to leave. The same thing is happening in Tibet, where the Tibetians are becoming a minority.
    Him: But in the US, we are protected by laws.
    Me: In my opinion, nations that have lots of different ethnic groups have lots of problems. They fight against each other all the time, and minority groups usually suffer the most. If you think about what happened in Bosnia, or with the Hutus and Tutsis in Africa, or to the Tibetians, it doesnt seem like its a good idea to be a minority, because you are always at the mercy of the majority (and the majority makes the laws).
    Him: But diversity is our strength.
    Me: [You stupid A-hole! No, just kidding, dont say that]. You could be right, but do you see any problems with diversity? Dont you think that European Americans have something special to offer, dont we have a long, proud history? Do you think the world would really be a better place if Whites were a shrinking minority in the US, where our heroes and culture are slowly forgotten?
    Him: But our immigrants assimilate, because we are a melting pot.
    Me: We have been described as a melting pot in the past, but now with multiculturalism, we are more of a salad bowl. We have lots of different groups, which are encouraged to keep their languages, cultures and religions. In major cities, you will see people from India, Somalian muslims and all kinds of different peoples these days. Do you think you would like to live in a mostly non-White neighborhood, with people who wear turbans next door?
    Him: Maybe.
    Me: Most of these mixed neighborhoods have high crime rates, and lots of social problems. Have you ever been there before?
    Him: No, but I have seen it on TV.
    Me: Do you really think the US will be better off in the future when this is the case in most places (hopefully the guy can imagine the hood, picturing it in his mind, and imagining it has expanded across the nation).
    Him: I dont know, Im not sure if this would be a good thing.

    [At this point, you have opened the door. The conversation ends for now, but can be continued at a later date. Forget about the topic at this point, talk about some other topic that is more positive. Realize that the persuadable needs to go through more stages before you are going to make real progress. Rome wasnt built in a day, and you dont want to belabor the subject too much].

  2. You’re not really approaching it from a position of strength there, Andrew.

    Compare and contrast.

    You: So whaddya think’s gonna happen with all this?
    Him: With what?
    You: You know, with all this “diversity” and shit. I mean, whatever it is, it’s not exactly the “strength” they advertise it as. How long can we keep kidding ourselves? I mean, seriously, how long do you think it’s gonna be before most of us figure it out? And what’s gonna happen then?
    Him: Well…it’s not that bad. And it’s here anyway, so what can you do?
    You: Well exactly, it’s here. And that’s why they’re so anxious to get us to “believe” in it; you know, that we’re better off with it and all that. But the point is if we believe that then we’re believing in something that just isn’t true. And come on, it’s obvious that we’re not better off; at best it’s just “tolerable” — for now. But that’s my point: how much longer is it going to stay “tolerable” for? How much longer until we figure out we’ve been basically tricked? And what’s going to happen then?
    Him: Well what can you do?
    You: Heh, exactly, what can you do? That’s what I mean, the whole thing’s just so unbelievable. Here you’ve got this process that’s bad for us in just about every single way and there isn’t the slightest political option for doing anything about it. Christ, neither of the two major parties will even let you say hey assholes, whites are people too, you know. Nope. As far as they’re concerned, you’re white so you’ll shut up and take your medicine. Well screw that. In fact that’s why I don’t even care if they call me “racist” anymore. What the hell does it even mean these days anyway?

    I’m sure you can see how you could take it from there.

  3. @Andrew
    I appreciate the support. As for your suggestion about brevity, I made it much shorter than the documents which inspired me. Moving a lot of the meat out into the appendices was an attempt to accomplish precisely what you’re suggesting. I’ll look for ways to keep it as lean as possible.

    I like your dialogue, but I prefer a style where the persuadable does almost all of the talking and I just ask them to explain their case. I prefer this for a few reasons:

    1. People would rather talk than listen.
    2. Questions are great for surreptitiously framing the discussion.
    3. Attempts to explain how this is all going to work sound so stupid that persuadables often persuade themselves while I stand back and look concerned.

    Additionally, I like to initiate the dialogue a little less directly. The best way for me is to just happen to make honest racial observations as you’re going about doing whatever you’re doing. Sooner or later, I get called out for it in one way or another. That way they think they’re controlling the dialogue and I’m the one on trial.

  4. In addition to one-on-one conversations and other techniques, perhaps you can consider the possibility of modeling authentic white conduct in the public sphere with the understanding that you are demonstrating a model of conduct that other white people may see as a way to act.

    There are innumerable ways to act in public that allow you to use your white voice and to frame issues in a white-centric way.

    The notion underlying this idea of modeling behavior is twofold: (1) modeling is how the dominant media culture and the corporate entertainment culture tell us what to think and feel and say; and (2) it corresponds directly to the needs of those of us who have been silenced, not guilted, in the past.

  5. Wikitopian,
    I agree that it can be very effective to have the other person do most of the talking and try to explain the case for multiculturalism, which is very difficult for someone who is honest and reasonable. There are a lot of different ways to go about persuading which can be effective, based on the persuader and the persuadable. My sample conversation includes what I consider to be some of the most effective talking points that can be included in the introductory conversation. The goal of this conversation is to drop important points about the issue of White displacement, encouraging the persuadable to imagine a US overrun with turd worlders and leaving the persuadable with the feeling that, “wow, my race is going to be a minority, this could be a problem”, but without resulting in the common “you are a racist!” response. The next conversation is related to the fact that races are different, I can send my talking points for that one too if it would be helpful.

    I see that you are working on Chapter 1. I am a fan of analogies, and the following analogy might be helpful for a White Advocate to read in that Chapter, so that he will better understand the task ahead of him. Im sure you can rewrite this in a better form if you think its useful.

    Imagine for a moment that somehow you were sent back in time to the Middle Ages. With you, you had brought numerous books on modern science and medicine, and your goal was to teach and enlighten Medieval Europe with this important information. Your job would not be an easy one. The people you are to persuade are steeped in primitive superstitions and their minds have been ingrained with beliefs that they will not easily part with. All of the evidence is on your side, but you will be fighting against beliefs that are reinforced by medieval society, with penalties for blasphemers. This is the position of a White Advocate in our modern world. Reason, IQ studies and logic are on our side, but we live in a world steeped in multicultural dogmas. In the Middle Ages, trying to convince people that earth was not in the center of the universe risked being accused of being a witch or worse; in our modern world, talking realistically about race risks being accused of some other negative epithet. In addition, the subject is a big one. It would take several sessions to teach a medieval person about important concepts of biology, physics and other sciences; likewise, it will take several sessions to teach a modern person about White displacement, racial differences and so forth. As a successful White Advocate, you will need to be patient and persistent, moving the persuadable through the education process while sympathetically understanding that he has probably been indoctrinated with a lifetime of multicultural superstition and nonsense. Be wary of pushing too hard in one sitting, as you may be challenging deeply held world-views. Choose your words and methods carefully and strategically, so that you maximize your effectiveness, and minimize the risk of the persuadable reacting defensively with an accusation of modern-day blasphemy, often the dreaded label “Nazi” or “Racist”, which can stymy your efforts. The work of persuasion is important. Good luck in your endeavors!

  6. @Andrew
    I will definitely be integrating some of your ideas into the work. I appreciate your input immensely.

  7. Okay, the conversation about differences in race is a touchy one, and it can make people really uncomfortable. What I found works best is if you dont talk about whites, but compare asians and blacks. Also affirm multiple times during the conversation that no race is “superior” than any other, even though there are differences, all races have a right to exist.
    Me: I was talking to a guy from Japan online, and he mentioned that he noticed that there are hardly any asians in the NBA. The players are all black, even though blacks are a small minority in the US. He thought it was because of genetics. Do you think that this is true?
    Him: I guess it could be. But African Americans might try harder at the game.
    Me: Thats possible. The guy I talked to thought that asians were born shorter and with less muscles than blacks, so it was mostly genetic. Do you think thats possible?
    Him: I guess so [the persuadable admits genetic differences].
    Me: You know what else he said? He thought that although Asians arent as athletic as blacks, they are born smarter. The average IQ in Japan is over 100, but the average IQ of blacks in the US is about 85. Thats a big difference!
    Him: Maybe this is due to cultural differences.
    Me: It could be, but they have measured the brains of asians and blacks. Asians have on the average 6 cubic inches of brains than blacks. And according to studies, smarter people usually have bigger brains [you need the evidence on hand if needed, the evidence is available online]. Do you think that Asians might be smarter, but blacks are more athletic?
    Him: The constitution tells us that all men are created equal [for the purpose of this conversation, you dont want to say that whites are smarter than blacks, if asked say you dont know or whatever].
    Me: Whats even more interesting is that Asians do a lot better on just about every test as blacks do. This includes not only IQ tests, but the SAT, standardized tests in school and so forth. Asians also do a lot better in society than blacks, they have higher incomes and so forth. Do you think this could be a sign of a different in brain power between the two groups?
    Him: This is probably explained by cultural differences.
    Me: Thats possible. Its important to know if intelligence is something we are born with or comes from our culture. [At this point you need to show that intelligence is strongly inherited. The most powerful evidence of this are the separated twins studies, where identical twins separated at birth score the same on an IQ test as a person taking the test two different times. Likewise, strong evidence is the high correlation between the IQs of parents and siblings. Also, the fact that IQs dont change much after age 3, before culture has much of an impact. The Bell Curve and similar books have mountains of evidence that you should have available].
    Him: I guess it seems that intelligence could be inherited [assuming he is reasonable, this is an inescapable conclusion].
    Me: Of course, just because there are differences between the races does not mean that one race is better than another. We all have equal rights, every group has a right to exist. Asians are not superior to anyone, even if they have special abilities and talents. Do you agree?
    Him: Yes, everyone has a right to exist and noone should be discriminated against.
    Me: My Japanese friend told me about a book called, “IQ and the Wealth of Nations”. This shows how the IQ of different countries correlates really strongly with how successful they are in most cases. [This can lead to a discussion of the IQ differences in different groups, over 100 for East Asians, 100 for Western Europeans, high 80s for Hispanics, about 70 for Africans, and how the success of nations is highly correlated with average IQ].

    At the end of this conversation, the persuadable should understand the genetic basis for intelligence, and have a general understanding of the IQs of various races. Hopefully the ice is broken with the subject of race. The next conversation has to do with the links between race and social problems/criminality.

Comments are closed.