Monday, August 29, 2016

How to Battle Social Justice Warriors When They Attack

An extremely important book was published in the fall of 2015,  SJWs Always Lie.

This book is valuable for people in the corporate world and for those who do intellectual battle against social justice warriors.

SJWs are everywhere and in attack mode. Their attacks are vicious. This book is about how to counter their attacks.

I review it here.


  1. You should engage Vox in a discussion on your differences with him. You might find you can be persuaded that, as in any war, there is no one single (or long) battle that will finally vanquish the left. Every skirmish is important. Ignoring this important insight has been a key fault of the right (including libertarians) for decades.

    Think about it. Who would have thought that gamers (GAMERS!) would achieve the first significant victories against left in decades of cultural war? The victories are small, but are, and will be seen in the future, as extremely important symbolically.

    1. That's the problem you think gamers created a significant victory. there are leftist gamers, socialist gamers and alt-right gamers.

      They have a victory but it is not a libertarian victory.

    2. It's a victory for Western Civilization. As I've said many times, liberty and libertarian thought are the spawn of Western Civilization and not the other way around. In your desire for victory, you think it's possible to ignore this truth. It's not.

  2. I definitely love the “SJWs Always Lie” concept. As I endlessly point out, non-Austrians NEVER engage our arguments. Basically, THEY ALWAYS LIE. Thus……

    Keynesians always lie.

    Krugman always lies. Clinton supporters always lie. The media always lies and covers up the wars. They always lie and cover up the nature of central banking and fiat money. They always lie and cover up the nature of central banking, fiat money and war.

    All the lying and deflecting demonstrates that they know they are lying. Further, they have no response to us other than “fringe fringe fringe”, “racist racist racist”. I think it is a mistake to pretend that they are engaged in a serious debate with us.

  3. Bob, I agree with your long term approach but do see value in this work regarding keeping one's job in the midst of an attack etc.

    RE: Long term thinking... I am waiting for someone, perhaps Judge Nap or Tom Woods, to do a primer on "legal positivism vs. natural law". I see it as a major battle that will have fallout in all areas. As a matter of fact, I see it as THE battle. Is mankind subject to laws of justice in the universe or is man free to define justice as he sees fit? I solicit your thoughts?

    1. 1. Yes, of course, there is some value in some of the techniques Vox Day suggests. I try to make that point in my review.

      2. I am not a a fan of "natural law." I hold Henry Hazlitt's thinking with regard to it. But neither am I a legal positivist. Much more work needs to be done in this area.