HHS Violates Free Speech Protections
Part 2: Establish dominance, bare your teeth, but always smile
Information warfare is an ugly game and you are a participant whether you know it or not. Even those that believe they have disconnected from the matrix and are ‘awake’ are still just playing a part. It is the next evolution in modern warfare and it is moving at quantum computing speed.
Enemy combatants, government officials, and innocent civilians can be defeated without ever putting on a uniform or pointing a rifle at another human being. Individuals may not know they have been attacked and others are unaware that they have been armed. The masses can be lulled to sleep or incited to violence when the cerebral realm of information operations needs a little blood to shock the draftees into reluctant action.
All games force contestants to compete for a prize. When not competing against each other, they often find themselves competing against themselves, constrained by a system contrived by the administrators of the game. Despite awards and accolades, no participant really comes out ahead; the point of the game is to keep players entertained enough to choose to be dealt in for another hand.
The game makers are the only winners.
Occasionally, we are given a glimpse into how one might transcend the artificial boundaries of the game. In December 2012, Spanish long distance runner Ivan Fernandez Anaya was trailing Kenyan Olympic bronze medallist Abel Mutai of Kenya in the the Burlada Cross race. Faced with a language barrier, Mutai was confused and mistakenly assumed he had crossed the finish line. Anaya could have sprinted past him for the win, but instead pointed him towards the top spot.
Our job is to flip the game board, not defeat the opponents the game makers selected as our current antagonists.
That doesn’t mean we should sit down together at a campfire, embrace enemies of truth and sing kumbaya. Useful idiots are the canon fodder, they were sent off to war without a weapon and they gladly obliged. Some of these people are fervent believers, and are no less dangerous than suicide bombers assured of their spiritual rewards.
I say sally forth and help them play their role. They are clowns and they are meant to entertain. They chose their fate and most are capable of seeking out another role, but they most likely won’t… Shakespeare said it best.
“Comedy is tragedy at a distance.”
I started this series of essays advising you to identify pronoun-embracing information combatants and HHS management as racists and homophobes. The basis for those claims will be discussed in detail in the third part of this series, but in terms of how one must address the complaint, it must begin with a kick to the jewels. Use their tactics against them.
The initial discomfort is more surprise that the opening salvo is (perceived to be) below the belt, but like any good kick to the nuts the real pain sinks in a second or two later when they realize that the Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) can has been opened…
Always trust that a bureaucrat will take the route which offers them the least amount of personal harm. The pronoun embracing DEI acolytes are more afraid of and susceptible to the threat EEO complaints than the defenders of freedom. The other HHS managers not currently subject to the claims of discriminatory action, but passively bearing witness to the inevitable barrage of complaints, will be far more willing to look for an easy means by which they can sidestep having to enforce pronoun policy.
Identifying them as homophobes and bigots is more than just a satisfying joke. It is malinformation.
To win this battle we don’t just need a mass awakening; we must expose the mechanics of the game and the motives of the game’s architects. Pronoun adherents won’t make a change until they see their tactics turned inward. The intellectual and philosophical underpinnings of their ideology is on life support; the vigor has been drained and is slowly killing the carrier of the message.
If we wish to advance our cause, we must chose the targets of our information war carefully, and wisely engage.
Establish dominance, bare your teeth, but always smile.
Never pick a fight with someone who doesn’t matter. You will look like a bully and no one cares when someone without influence is forced to defend their position. This is why you want to make sure the target of your malinformation operation has a wide audience.
There will always be a handful of sycophants willing to privately question an issue, even if they aren’t yet willing to speak out. So, establish dominance and bare your teeth, but always smile.
From a resource perspective, if you choose to begin your influence operation with those of pedestrian stature, even if it gains traction, you will have to work your way back up the status ladder to have an effect. For example, if you have a choice to question Dr. Fauci or one of his Battelle contractors handling lab safety procedures somewhere in Ohio… Your arguments will obviously get more visibility with the former.
When you argue pronoun policy, go as far up the chain of command as you can reach.
Strong arguments from a relatively unknown interlocutor allow you to take on the underdog role. Everyone wants to see an underdog win; especially those that privately agree but are too spineless to join the fray. If the topic is not yet ripe for polite, public discussions, and even if the your data are erroneously dismissed as irrelevant, your bravery will be noticed by the circle of people listening.
Once past the opening salvo, your arguments must be based in data, and said without ridicule or fervor. Sometimes an open ended question will linger far longer than any statement, and if their arguments provide no intellectual sustenance, it will be apparent.
Cowards don’t confront, they quietly conform.
The underlying objective of information warfare is to demoralize with out dictating outcomes. One must encourage change; once we move past the initial attack levying DEI accusations, we must be gray men and women, passing unnoticed, but leaving an indelible mark. If executed properly, even the supposition that their thought leaders are racist homophobes seeking to mutilate innocent men, women, and children can be posed as possibility vice a certainty.
Leaving room for a graceful retreat allows the teeming mass of automatons to slowly reprogram and quietly shift allegiances. The bravest of these cowards will privately signal support and may even start by removing pronouns from their personal email.
The goal is to strip leadership of support. This is a war of attrition. Once their trenches are empty, their words have no value. As the masses privately extricate themselves from their circles of influence, the echo chambers go silent. Progressives have managed to leverage fear to temporarily simulate this effect, but it never lasts.
Why?
Truth. There must be some truth to what is being said. The more truth that can be leveraged, the more likely the information campaign will have lasting effect. There is no truth in the statement, men can become women and women can become men. Alternate pronoun advocates are running a disinformation program, In contrast, Malinformation is truth.
Profit and tax dollars provide different indicators.
J.K. Rowling is the author of the Harry Potter series, the best selling science fantasy novel ever, and the best selling series in history. She faced a torrent of backlash after she liked a Tweet that referred to trans women as men in dresses.
Despite originally describing her support as an absent-minded mistake originally intended as a screenshot, over the course of the last five years, she has continued to demonstrate that she believes there are only two genders. She was pilloried by high-profile trans advocates, and even those from the Hollyweird community who benefitted greatly from her creative genius.
The Week provided a fairly complete timeline of events detailing Rowling’s continued harassment up until the February 2023 release of the Harry Potter video game, Hogwart’s Legacy. There were calls for the game to be boycotted because she believed (correctly) that validating trans women as actual women erased womanhood and subjected females to dangerous invasions of personal space.
Hogwart’s Legacy was the most popular game ahead of its official release. By May 2023, the game had over 15 million sales and had grossed over 1 billion dollars.
The money doesn’t lie. Even if some consumers disagree with Rowling’s factual opinion, it isn’t enough to sway their purchasing preferences. Consumers’ support for trans issues may include some feelings of sincerity or sympathy, but it isn’t enough to generate action.
Following the money is an important tool to gauge the impact of information operations; however, there are some qualifiers. Follow the profit and investments in the private sector. That will help you gauge public sentiment. If you are following government tax-dollar largess provided risk-free in public-private partnerships, that money trail provides a roadmap for your target deck.
Rowling is a key influencer, but was never part of the progressive establishment. Her views appear to have been rooted in a long-held, sincere desire to protect the achievements of women. Her feminism is a celebration of the unique nature of women’s struggles.
On rare occasions, you may find individuals deeply steeped in the liberal progressive ecosphere who begin to display errant views. These people are worth their weight in gold. It may seem cruel, but the best thing you can do for those people… unleash the woke mob and watch them eat their own.
It was mostly peaceful. -CNN
Sometimes you can even win over new convert, these people should be cherished.
Libertarians: losers in a larger group of losers…
A whole bunch of readers just hit unsubscribe… Just kidding… maybe three people.
I have often described myself as having Libertarian leanings. On occasion, in a fit of rage, I have switched my party affiliation to Libertarian when one of the other institutionalized losers with whom I had been aligned managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Even if I were fully on board with more than just the Mises wing of the Libertarian party’s economic policy, they will never accept me.
Let me list the reasons I will never be accepted by Libertarians.
I worked at the CIA.
Even though I like Matt Kibbe and agree we shouldn’t hurt people or take their stuff… Deep down… I really like the thrill of taking other people’s stuff. (See reason 1)
I can’t pass purity tests designed by basement-dwelling devotees of long dead French philosophers juiced up on red bull and mountain dew.
Libertarians don’t even accept other actual Libertarians.
In general, Libertarians make Republicans, conservatives, and constitutionalists look like the winners, and let’s be honest. Venn diagrams show overlapping cross sections between all of these institutionalized losers.
OK. Constitutionalists are the biggest losers, but it really screws with the joke, if I have to qualify earlier statements. Regardless and in relation to information operations, every once in a while Libertarians manage to show why they belong in the winner’s circle.
When Republicans or Democrats switch teams, rest assured it isn’t because someone realized AOC’s economic policy is a winning strategy, nor did a Democrat realize the sanctity of life begins long before the actual birth of a child. The reasons are political and self-interested.
Rectenwald PhD, was an avowed communist, former professor of Liberal and Global Studies at New York University. After questioning some of the social justice excesses at his university, the student body and the University administration turned against him, despite years of faithful devotion to liberal causes.
This is not a political endorsement, nor am I mentioning Rectenwald to recount his story of political and philosophical transformation. If you’re interested you can hear more about his story on the Tom Woods podcast.
Libertarians successfully pulled off one of the hardest information operations. They flipped a member of the opposite team, and turned him into one of the most effective spokesmen for freedom.
How did they do it?
Libertarianism has two huge strengths. It is intellectually consistent and maximizes personal choice. Even if Libertarians are more than willing to argue over their philosophical underpinnings, for the uninitiated the non-aggression principle is as simple as Kibbe’s book title: Don’t Hurt People and Don’t Take Their Stuff.
Inconsistency creates doubt in the motives of the speaker. One could argue that Libertarian policy sometimes buries their head in the sand. Countries break economic norms and appear to want more than to just engage in pure capitalism. When countries chant death to America, right or wrong I tend to believe them and won’t spend a lot of time trying to justify their actions. Regardless, Libertarians speak to aspirational truths about what we could become.
When the The Libertarian party and their thought leaders welcomed Rectenwald into the fold, they knew that they had a weapon. He had the liberal credentials needed to influence people who would normally never listen, and they elevated his voice so that it could be heard. He has done more to move the needle towards freedom, than 100 Matt Gaetz’s; he convinces the other side to consider a new way… the Republicans don’t.
If you stumble on a liberal who starts making statements that fall outside accepted progressive doctrine, best thing you can do is find your nearest liberal mob and alert them to the threat they face. The only thing a liberal hates more than a conservative: a liberal turncoat.
You might feel a little guilty ratting that person out, but in the long run … if they kept it up, they would have ended up in a liberal thought police lineup regardless. You’re just speeding the process.
When they get done with the traitor, Benedict will be looking for a friend and you can be there to help. These people can be powerful allies and if we are going to flip the game board, we need many hands.
I have spent a lot of time talking about how to go about managing your influence and information campaign. I want to arm you with the tools for success. The next two Substacks in this series will provide you with the specific information needed to fight pronoun usage in your place of work.
Sally forth and conquer!