How To Trump SJWs

by Manon Welles

  We saw in the Mizzou example that the chancellor and president both resigned just two days after the football players threatened to boycott their games. No doubt the imagination of school officials ran wild with lost money and endorsements. Who knows what would have happened if, instead of resigning the next day, the president had immediately suspended the athletes until they stopped the boycott. The counter-threat could have been intimidating enough to get them to play.

  The president and chancellor probably thought the threat was so ominous that their only option was to resign to save the school. To prove that giving into bullying tactics makes a bad situation worse, their refusal to stand up against the threats probably hurt the school: Heat Street and National Review reviewed 7,400 emails the school had received, revealing a loss of support from donors, alumni and sports fans. [77] After the protests, donations to the athletic department were down 68.7 percent from the previous year ($191,000 in December 2015 compared to $685,000 in December 2014). Also in December, new pledges and donations fell $6 million for that month alone. [78] And just six months after the controversies, it was reported that Mizzou freshman enrollment was down 25 percent, representing a $32 million funding gap that caused four dormitories to close. Mizzou even lost football coach Gary Pinkel, who said he supported his players’ boycott and claimed his resignation (just five days after he Tweeted his support) was due to his recent diagnosis of lymphoma. [79] Based on these numbers, and the many parents vowing to never send their kids to Mizzou, it certainly seems to be case where the threat was more terrifying than the thing itself.

  We see these kinds of threats in action all the time with SJWs. They’ve created a society — that’s thankfully now crumbling away — where the mere accusation of being “sexist” or “homophobe” causes people to worry their life is about to be ruined. If you stand your ground rather than running away, often you can overcome the charge. It’s typically the people who give in, apologize and grovel for SJWs’ approval who end up the worst. They resign or get fired, and their fear becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  We saw Trump masterfully handle this at the beginning of his campaign in 2015. The day he announced he was running for president, Trump said in his speech that some of the illegal immigrants from Mexico were bringing drugs and crime, some were rapists, and some were good people, adding, “I speak to border guards and they’re telling us what we’re getting.” His citation of border guards never seemed to make the mainstream media reports, and the Left twisted Trump’s words to “all Mexicans are rapists.”

  After his speech, Media Matters executive Angelo Carusone started a petition on MoveOn.org calling for Macy’s to stop selling Trump’s products. Soon after, Macy’s caved and announced it was phasing out the Donald J. Trump Signature Collection, which it had sold for 11 years. In a statement, Macy’s said: “We are disappointed and distressed by recent remarks about immigrants from Mexico. We do not believe the disparaging characterizations portray an accurate picture of the many Mexicans, Mexican Americans and Latinos who have made so many valuable contributions to the success of our nation.” [80] As you can see, even Macy’s fell for the twisting of Trump’s words from “some illegals” to “all Mexicans.”

  This was on July 1, 2015, just a few weeks into Trump’s campaign. Already, Univision Communications Inc. had announced it would cancel its telecast of the Miss USA pageant. And in June, NBC had said it would no longer air the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants. [81] ( The 2016 Miss USA was later picked up by Fox. ) A few months later, Trump announced he had purchased NBC Universal’s half of The Miss Universe Organization , just days before he sold it to the talent agency WME-IMG . [82] My guess that he made good deal.

  Trump never once apologized for his comments. To do so would have been disastrous because it would have cast him weak and wavering. Instead, he doubled down, posting a letter on Facebook (of all places) that read in part:

  “I have always said that if you are successful, it is very hard to run for office, especially the office of President. I have also continually stated that I am not beholden to anyone and this includes NBC and Macy’s. Clearly, NBC and Macy’s support illegal immigration, which is totally detrimental to the fabric of our once great country. Both Macy’s and NBC totally caved at the first sight of potential difficulty with special interest groups who are nothing more than professional agitators, who are not looking out for the people they purport to represent, but only for themselves. It is people like this that are actually running our country because our leaders are weak and ineffective.

  “If elected, I will greatly strengthen our border, making it impenetrable, putting a stop to illegal immigration once and for all. I will bring jobs back to the United States--- I will Make America Great Again!” [83]

  This is a great model to follow. Instead of apologizing or explaining, Trump went on the attack, saying Macy’s and NBC support illegal immigration and cave to special interest groups.

  As a testament to not giving in or apologizing, Trump’s poll numbers just got higher. I’m sure Macy’s wishes it still sold Trump’s menswear line and that NBC wishes it still had the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants. It really was a case where their threats were “more terrifying than the thing itself,” and Trump seemed to understand that.

  It’s a philosophy that seems to guide his life. “I fully think apologizing’s a great thing, but you have to be wrong,” Trump said in September 2015. He added, “ I will absolutely apologize sometime in the hopefully distant future if I'm ever wrong." [84] Of course, you want to apologize if you’ve actually done something wrong. But the type of apologies SJWs demand are for ridiculous things like having an opinion that’s not sanctioned by the mainstream media. Never show weakness by apologizing for that. An added benefit is that your hardline stance will freak out SJWs, who don’t understand that there are Americans who won’t back down to them. It’s completely demoralizing to them.

  The same thing applies when people threaten you. Perhaps your boss calls for you to resign or apologize for something you posted online. You have more power if you don’t give into pressure. Vox Day gives great advice in SJWs Always Lie : Insist on a written complaint signed by the person who made it. Say you won’t take the complaint seriously until then. And whatever you do, don’t resign. It can be hard to fire someone, and your company will pressure you to resign instead. [85] This gives you two possible ways out of the situation — the person making the complaint will likely want to stay anonymous, and your company may run into trouble if they try to fire you for spurious reasons.

  Making a threat can be harder, since ideally you’d have the numbers to follow through with it. Having one of your supporters leak the threat to the local news is a great way to get publicity. They’ll need to send cryptic emails asking for anonymity, refuse to give their phone numbers, or say in a panicked voice that they don’t consent to be recorded to make it sound legit. You can always pretend the plan was cancelled only after it was exposed. Then you could make the media look like fools by saying it was just a game all along, to expose how they lie and don’t bother checking their sources.

  Although SJWs resort to illegal tactics, like calling in bomb threats, there’s no reason to go that far and risk going to jail or being investigated as a potential terrorist. Simply threatening to vote for the Democrat might make a Republican running for local office fall back in line. Threats of boycotts can work the same way.

  Rule No. 10: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

  Without constant pressure, your attack will be just a blip on your opponent’s radar. Alinsky said it takes “unceasing pressure” to garner reactions essential to the success of your campaign.

  In other words, the whole reason to develop a tactic and act on it is to constantly apply pressure to your opposition. Note how this says nothing about picking the most logical target or the most common-sense issue to protest. It’s al
l about the most effective strategy, developed with the end in mind. Too often, people get hung up on the issue itself, rather than thinking about the long-term change they hope to create.

  SJWs don’t think long-term enough to understand this. But despite many college-age SJWs not thinking big picture, their tactics work because of their impulsive, illogical thinking. Take, for example, the controversy at Yale University in October 2015, which didn’t appear to be planned but now is influencing Halloween policies at schools across the nation. It started when the International Affairs Committee sent an email warning students against “cultural appropriation” — such as wearing a costume with a headdress or turban. Specifically, it called for students to be sensitive to Native American/Indigenous people, socio-economic strata, Asians, Hispanics/Latinos, women, Muslims and a vague “etc.” category. [86] Notice that white men and Christians aren’t included.

  In response, Erika Christakis sent an email to students in Silliman College where she and her husband, Nicholas, were faculty masters. Part of their job description was to help “foster and shap[e] the social, cultural, and educational life and character of the college.” [87] Her email read:

  “ As a former preschool teacher, for example, it is hard for me to give credence to a claim that there is something objectionably ‘appropriative’ about a blonde-haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day. Pretend play is the foundation of most cognitive tasks, and it seems to me that we want to be in the business of encouraging the exercise of imagination, not constraining it. I suppose we could agree that there is a difference between fantasizing about an individual character vs. appropriating a culture, wholesale, the latter of which could be seen as (tacky) (offensive) (jejeune) (hurtful), take your pick. But, then, I wonder what is the statute of limitations on dreaming of dressing as Tiana the Frog Princess if you aren’t a black girl from New Orleans? Is it okay if you are eight, but not 18? I don’t know the answer to these questions; they seem unanswerable. Or at the least, they put us on slippery terrain that I, for one, prefer not to cross.

  She noted that no one on campus was concerned about offending religious people by wearing skimpy costumes, adding:

  “ I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition.”

  And finally, she put another nail in her coffin by suggesting that students just look away if someone wears a costume they don’t like:

  “Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are offended. Talk to each other. Free speech and the ability to tolerate offense are the hallmarks of a free and open society.” [88]

  Soon after, Yale University’s William F. Buckley, Jr. Program held a forum about the future of free speech. A protester interrupted the meeting, and leading speaker Greg Lukianoff commented: “Looking at the reaction to Erika Christakis’ email, you would have thought someone wiped out an entire Indian village.” His remark got even more SJWs lining up outside to protest for nearly two hours. When Buckley Program President Zachary Young offered the protesters some cookies to be nice, he was called a “white colonizer” and told he should stick around to be “educated.” Attendees were called “traitors” and “racists” and at least one was spit upon. [89]

  Then SJWs gathered in front of Yale’s main library to draw in chalk (appropriate for their toddler mentality) about how Yale is inhospitable to black students, especially black women. Nicholas defended his wife’s email, and a week later he was confronted by a black student, Jerelyn Luther, who demanded he step down from his post as faculty master. The video of her screaming in his face and calling him “disgusting” went viral and showed the world the deep intolerance of SJWs. [90]

  In December 2015, Yale issued a statement saying Erika was resigning from her teaching position at Yale. [91] And in May 2016, almost seven months after the controversial email, Nicholas announced he was resigning from his role as the Head of Silliman College. [92]

  As Erika alluded to in her initial email, even preschoolers understand the playfulness of Halloween more than these SJWs. Yet, due to the variety of operations and pressures in the Yale Halloween scandal, both Erika and Nicholas folded on their own, without needing to be fired.

  Resigning and apologizing makes SJWs feel they have a precedent for this type of behavior and that future attempts to push for more extreme measures will be successful. Since mob rule won out at Yale, there have been even further restrictions on freedom of expression. For example, in addition to demanding that whites not wear costumes from other cultures due to “cultural appropriation,” SJWs now demand that European-Americans not wear costumes from their own culture, such as Viking costumes. Meanwhile, the University of Pennsylvania announced it was changing the title of its “faculty masters” to “faculty directors” [93] and Harvard announced that its “House masters” would be called “Faculty Deans.” [94]

  Alinsky said “the action is in the reaction.” When people cave like this, that’s exactly what SJWs want. Compare this to when Hillary supporter George Stephanopoulos (he gave $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation [95] ) asked Trump about people comparing him to Hitler for suggesting a temporary ban on Muslim immigration. Trump wasn’t fazed and he didn’t apologize or try to backtrack. “What I am doing is no different than what FDR did,” Trump said. “This is a president who is highly respected by all . . . he’s one of the most highly respected presidents . . . They named highways after him.” [96]

  Conservatives must learn to keep the pressure on, and to not give in when pressure is put on them.

  Rule No. 11: If you push a negative hard and enough, it will push through and become a positive.

  Alinsky said this rule is based on the fact that every positive has its negative, but even with that explanation it’s still enigmatic. He cites Mahatma Gandhi’s passive resistance as an example. Gandhi, and later Martin Luther King, Jr., used passivity — seen as a “negative” since protesters generally used force — and turned it into a positive that was successful. Alinsky cites an example of when his office was burglarized and the only records taken were those related to a corporation he was organizing against. Combined with a death threat against him, Alinsky was able to use this “negative” to gain sympathy and outrage.

  Whenever I see Leftist protesters do things like use vehicles to block the road so supporters can’t get to a Trump rally, chain themselves to those cars or smash windows of police cars — all which happened during the 2016 presidential race — I’m glad to see them arrested. But getting arrested is simply part of their plan. Alinsky outlined three ways time in jail can help a Leftist cause:

  1) it builds up the conflict between the two groups: Haves and Have-Nots in Alinksky’s case, or the rich and the 99% in Occupy Wall Street, blacks and the police in the Black Lives Matter movement, or women and men in the third-wave feminism;

  2) it surrounds leaders who are jailed with an aura of martyrdom;

  3) it helps the leaders be seen as just one of the people.

  Of course, conflict also stirs up feelings of injustice, which will lead more people to act. Alinsky credits the free time he had while in jail for giving him so much time to think that he conceptualized his first publication.

  SJWs use this by purposefully doing things that will get them into trouble and then playing the victim. It happened when a young female protester at a Trump rally in Wisconsin tried to punch a male Trump supporter after accusing him of groping her. Another person shot pepper spray in her face — a legitimate use since people are allowed to use self-defense on behalf of others. [97] But the mainstream, liberal media reported only the pepper spraying, not the fact that the woman had brought it on herself by assaulting s
omeone. The completely misleading USA Today headline for the story read: “Teen girl pepper-sprayed in fight outside Trump rally.” [98] The teen girl was recommended for disorderly conduct charges, according to police, and the man was completely cleared of any groping allegations after police reviewed numerous videos and interviewed witnesses. [99]

  SJWs have been using this tactic aggressively ever since Black Lives Matter got started. But playing the victim after being violent has started to backfire. After Black Lives Matter riots in Ferguson, Missouri, people started to view the protesters as street thugs rather than victims. Instead of a negative (i.e., the shooting of a black man by police) being turned into a positive, a negative was turned into even more of a negative.

  Then the Blue Lives Matter movement was formed as a way for conservatives (and others) to show support to the police. People who didn’t even like the police much — libertarian anti-statists, for example — started to sympathize with the cops after seeing so much violence from Black Lives Matter supporters. Further hurting BLM’s cause, people started researching statistics about African-Americans being killed by police — and found that more whites are killed each year by police than blacks, and that police are actually more reluctant to kill blacks than whites. [100] Instead of being a sympathetic underdog, the Black Lives Matter group pushed too far and instead was rightly viewed as the cause of much of the violence and racial discord that was spreading throughout the country. People started saying the movement could lead to Trump winning the presidency.