Propagandists should first consider the environment in which they operate, some propaganda methods become outdated and stale or are particular to certain times and environments, other methods are classic and are always applicable to all situations. We must do all we can to understand and use appropriately all propaganda methods available in their optimal time and place.
I will discuss some classic rhetoric methods and propaganda techniques that the Foe employs in propaganda war either knowingly or not, and that Aryans should be aware of lest he/she falls into the same trap. The amount of fallacy arguments a Foe can conceive is endless, so I cannot list them all, but I can outline some of the ones that are most relevant to us today. I use the term “Foe” generally as it could apply to any Zionist Gentile, Jew or Goyim.
This is the favourite technique of the modern Zionist controlled Media to maintain control in debate or interview – change the subject, i.e. talk about something else. This technique will be applied by a Foe when information or debate is not flowing in the direction that the Foe would like. Remember as soon as you give up the right to ask the questions you give someone else the right to ask them, you put yourself in the weakest position, you submit. An interviewer can control the direction of information if they have the sole right to ask the questions, the modern Media instantly assume this right and then naturally assume the position of power.
Subject Switching can be used to disrupt the flow of information or constructive dialogue between Aryans in an uninvited manner. Where there is unity, and planning, and progressive discussion and collaboration, the Foe will attempt to disrupt the pattern, disrupt the flow, simply by changing the subject matter. An artful propagandist Foe will use a ‘contiguous comment’ first so as not to appear crude, a contiguous comment is offered to shift focus in a different direction by asking a seemingly innocent question, that will invite a response that will change the subject. By answering you are seen to be the one who is introducing the new subject matter. The matter may be related to Aryanism for example, and may be of importance, but the aim of the foe was simply to disrupt the original flow of dialogue. Once subject matter has been changed successfully by the Foe, then it is a Hijack.
A Hijacker may prevent final agreement or resolution on a subject, after successfully changing or switching the subject matter he/she will defend the motive for changing the subject with platitudes; “moving on”, “we have already discussed this”, blocking attempts to return to the original subject matter, humour may be used or inflammatory remarks, the aim of the Hijacker is always to prevent final agreement and/or resolution between Aryans.
Babel is the confusion of terminology and language, once Aryans have agreed upon certain terms and definitions of language the Foe will try to confuse them or render them redundant, by not applying them, for example: “we need to preserve what is left of the White Aryan Race or it will vanish” – Foe. This is a total confusion of our Glossary, our Terms and definitions that we have already agreed to. Whether the statement is accidental due to ignorance or designed as purposeful propaganda Babel by a Foe, is not as relevent as the need to prevent it from damaging or confusing any terms, definitions, glossary, language already agreed to, this must not be changed or confused by anyone!
The Foe will display interest in Aryanism, even seem willing to participate and be active, however the aim of the Dead Weight is simply to be just that – a dead weight! contiguous comments may first be employed or seemingly innocent questions, however the Foe is only concerned with wasting time, taking everything and returning nothing, this type of Foe is the hardest to identify of all propaganda artists, they may offer artful praise and seem knowledgeable on the subjects relating to Aryanism but their contribution is always circular, never progressive or constructive. The Aryan should watch for this type of behaviour, the Dead Weight may want to add foreign material to Aryanism as further baggage and weight, again the aim will always be to keep the direction circular and slow.
This will be the most common method of propaganda used against Aryanism, the Strawman is fallacy based upon misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. Example of a Strawman;
A. Statement. – “Aryans seek to re-create the ideals of the Aryan Race through unity and nobility” – Aryan
B. Reply. – “Aryans like Hitler want to breed a ‘Master Race’ based upon racial ideology” – Foe.
Again the Aryan should not commit to the fallacy, to the illusion of the Strawman whether it is intentional or due to misunderstanding. The Strawman misrepresents the statement of the Aryan. Another example of this method would be when Alfred Rosenberg referred to Russian Communists as “Untermensch” – “under-man”, quoting Lothrop Stoddard; “The Under-Man – the man who measures under the standards of capacity and adaptability imposed by the social order in which he lives.” The propaganda Foe misrepresents this as “The Nazi’s sought to eliminate sub-humans!”. This is a Strawman, it’s simply not true at all, “Untermensch” is not defined in racial terms but in social order, neither is it defined as being less than human or not human as ‘sub-human’ implies.
The Strawman is the invention of a fiction that is then applied to a person or persons as if it was their own creation. This can be in the form of words or actions that are falsely attributed to the Aryan. This is the most effective of propaganda methods in employment by the enemy presently! Aryans therefore must be aware of this method and how to counter it. The counter is related to all other previous methods I have mentioned i.e. strict adherence to correct terminology, good grasp of Aryan philosophy and the language of Aryanism used within our movement. The Propagandist, indeed any Aryan must be able to define his/her position, aim, philosophy and stick to it, and not be swayed by illusion and fallacy.
Non-sequitor is Latin for it does not follow, the conclusion does not follow the premise in Non-sequitor argument it is a logical fallacy or a jump in logic. The world is awash with this type of illogical thinking, but the defense of Israel’s Navy military attack on the civilian Freedom Flotilla give an excellent example;
A. Statement. – “It’s not acceptable for Israeli armed commandos to commit murder of unarmed civilian aid workers and peace activists in international waters.” – Aryan
B. Reply. – “The Israeli’s had paint-ball guns and only a side-arm for their own protection, they were soldiers protecting their country, getting beat to death with pipes and boards, and thrown overboard by a bunch of so-called “peace-niks”. The “Peace-niks” were obviously attacking and the Israelis defended themselves! Anyway the ships were carrying missiles to Gaza for Hamas to use.” – Foe.
So this is a reply argument that does not follow in logic to the premise of the first statement, the reply is a total non-sequitor from start to finish, you cannot respond to this argument because it is completely illogical, all one can do is point out that the argument used against the first statement is a non-sequitor and illogical. There is no point in addressing all the fallacies, once the Foe has displayed this kind our contempt for the first Statement and not followed the reason and logic but answered with a barrage of illogical unrelated babel, it’s pointless to respond any further, the Foe is already in error, there is nothing further to do, the Foe loses any right to further debate based upon his/her use of Non-sequitor argumentum.
By understanding and following these rhetorical arguments the Aryan Propagandist will clearly be more successful in the future not only against enemy propaganda but also any ‘friendly fire’ so to speak, or not make the same mistake accidentally themselves.