Public Shit Tests

https://twitter.com/BBCWorld/status/895237529192058881

Will he pass the test? What's the proper way to do it? Modern politics requires having public PUAs who can manage this sort of stuff.

[…] Public Shit Tests […]

Its very rare public officials who make these statements are PUA. In my experience they're usually stating the obvious but completely unaware the shit storm they're about to be engulfed in. The best response is doubling down, mansplain these bitches.

"best" is a tricky question. There are standard ways to pass shit-tests, like Agree and Amplify, Disagree and Amplify, Pressure Flip, Ignore, Ridicule. However all these methods are designed for local shit tests where the goal is sex (or at least attraction). The issue with politicians is votes, which are not the same as attraction. So though this test would be fairly easy to pass in person, it gets more difficult on a broad scale. How can he use Ridicule, when that will alienate the polite-old-people segment of his audience? The lowest risk is probably ignore. But low risk does not always equal best.

To make concrete: If he said: "You go girl, in fact, I think you should never sleep at all. Party till you drop! Don't let anyone tell you about danger or health." Then people can be (variously) upset by the fact that he is making fun of her, and that he is encouraging bad behavior, and that he is going back on his previous statement, and that he is making light of a "serious" situation, etc.. But if it were an offhand comment in a bar, then it would probably work fine.

One that I think has limited downside for him and potential upside is the Pseudo-Gaslight. If he says something like "What does Cinderella have to do with personal safety?" He can feign ignorance, which makes their whole campaign look insular (and therefore ineffective), while not actively attacking her, or changing his "stance" on anything.

What does Lalit think? I'm imagining the old, upper-class Sri Lankan adjunct in our group-office saying something like, "Young lady, your behavior is preposterous. Now stop this bloody nonsense immediately and conduct yourself in the proper manner!"

[…] Source: Bloody Shovel […]

Spandrell, here I try answering the question: "What specific policies do nationalists want?" I think the right isn't clear enough on specific policies we should be pursuing... https://nationalistperspective.wordpress.com/2017/08/10/what-specific-policies-do-nationalists-want/

Lalit thinx Hindu bitches be worthless whores, Muslim men be getting their dix wet with aforementioned worthless whores and Hindu males be limpdicked and jerking off to lesbian porn or inter-religious rape porn, probably the latter. Hindoos be freaking doomed. Damnit, we need a new religions more than the whites do!

Dude I understand the need to advertise your blog. And your blog is pretty good as far as I can see. But please try to be more creative and remain on the topic of my post. This comment of yours belongs on the Orban post, not here.

Understood, I'll remain on topic. My apologies.

Stay strong, bro. The Hindus have been in worse situations before and survived. Sooner enough the West is going to be finished, and we won't be able to keep dragging you into the grave with us.

There's always Bihar.

CS Lewis would say, "Wait, reverse that!" (Because, you know, he thought that there are only two religions -- Christianity and Hinduism, so it's Hinduism that's dragging the West down ... but he was really thinking of Mystery-religions, Theosophy, Stoicism, not anything necessarily Indian ...)

"No, these girls are correct, they are not ones to marry princes and live happily ever after."

I’ve got an answer to your question: None. Who gives a shit? Nobody cares about policy. Policy is politics. Politics is democracy. You would know this if you had read Moldbug. “Say the word democracy. Notice how good it sounds. Everything democratic is good. A democratic meeting, a democratic policy, a democratic giraffe… if the adjective fits the noun at all, anything you paint with it comes out shiny and bright. “Now say the word politics. Notice how bad it sounds. This person is a politician. She’s being so political. These dangerous proposals would politicize US foreign policy. Every use of the word is negative. Everything you paint with it comes out sordid and mean. “But… what is democracy without politics? Is there any such thing? If there is, doesn’t it sound like something North Korea would come up with? Our higher form of democracy has transcended mere politics. Uh huh. Sure. I know where you’re going with that. “As objective realities — structures of governance — aren’t democracy and politics in fact… synonyms? But if they’re the same word, how can they have opposite connotations? How can it be that everyone knows, obviously, of course, democracy is a good thing, but politics is a bad thing?” http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2016/04/coda.htmlhttp://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/07/democracy-as-adaptive-fiction.htmlhttp://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/true-election-practical-option-for-real.html But, then, with your name you pay tribute to the “nation”, a word most famously used by Martin Luther, and the “nation-state”, the product of his revolution. P.S. “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” — John Adams

The only way to win is not to play.

I would hazard a guess that you don't get out very much.

Bhatti's comments seem pretty noncontroversial and common sense. Seems like this fake "controversy" was conjured up by the opposition party to score some political points. There are two potentially right ways and one wrong way to handle this situation. The wrong way is to apologize -- never apologize, it shows weakness and blood in the water for liberal sharks to pounce, and it would hurt Bhatti's base of support. The right ways to handle it is either (1) be silent and wait for the media outrage storm to pass (and it will, quickly -- you remember that stupid "Nasty Women" campaign? Yeah, I barely do as well. Libs have no attention span); or (2) double down on your statements. The correct approach depends on the politician's personality, financial situation (will doubling down affect his ability to find future employment?), and political security (did the politician making the statements have a firm control over his district? Did his base approve of the comments? Was he a first term or multiterm politician?).

Russia handled its problem with QUANGO Cossacks flogging Pussy Riot members and by jailing a few. It worked pretty well