Categories
#gamergate gross incompetence gullibility PUA reactionary bullshit red pill rhymes with roosh

Roosh V's game site Reaxxion tricked into publishing an old John Birch Society pamphlet as a #GamerGate manifesto

#GamerGate: Now taking inspirarion from the people who put up this billboard
#GamerGate: Now taking inspirarion from the people who put up this billboard

Reaxxion, Roosh Valizadeh’s embarrassment of a gaming site, recently published am apocalyptic GamerGate manifesto under the title “#Gamergate Is A Critical Battle In The War To Save Western Society.”

In the manifesto, posted by someone calling himself Allan Quatermain – presumably not his real name – defines GamerGate as

a grass roots consumer rights affiliation of people, men and women of good character, humane consciences, and principled beliefs [who] have voluntarily joined together to combat more effectively the evil forces which now threaten our freedoms, our hobby, our way of life and the civilization we love.

Quatermain described the enemies of #GamerGate in similarly vivid terms. The evil Social Justice Warriors, he wrote,

seek always and everywhere to bring about more interference, less individual responsibility and an amoral way of doing things. On the plain of action, until the SJW’s can be stopped from their subjugation of all western society, there will be no opportunity for us to move forward at all. …

They deceptively appeal to every motivation in human character, from sordid selfishness, to practical politics, to misguided idealism. They have gradually beguiled a lot of very good people into joining the attack on us, until the maligning of #gamergate has probably exceeded in intensiveness and extensiveness that faced by any other organization in all of western history.

I was all set to write an essay describing how the rhetoric in Quatermain’s manifesto resembles the rhetoric of other reactionary, conspiracy-minded movements in American history, drawing upon historian Richard Hofstader’s famous essay The Paranoid Style of American Politics.

But then I started getting a little paranoid myself. While many GamerGaters see their, er, “struggle” in similarly apocalyptic, some of the language in Quatermain’s post seemed weirdly old-fashioned, almost as if he were cribbing from some old John Birch pamphlet on the “communist menace” from half a century ago.

That’s because he was. I pasted a few sentences from Quatermain’s essay into Google and discovered that they did in fact come straight from an old John Birch newspaper ad from the 1960s.

In fact, the whole essay is essentially a verbatim copy of a giant chunk of that John Birch society newspaper ad, with the words “John Birch society” replaced by “GamerGate” and “Communist” replaced by “SJW,” and a few other references changed here and there.

That bit from Quatermain’s essay I quoted above describing how SJW’s allegedly “seek always and everywhere to bring about more interference, less individual responsibility and an amoral way of doing things?”

Well, here’s the original paragraph as published by the John Birch Society in a newspaper called the Reading Eagle in January of 1966.

johnbirch1

You can see the entire John Birch ad here.

Roosh, you’ve been trolled, and trolled hard. And none of those commenting on his site suspected a thing.

To the troll behind this, kudos on some masterful work.

Slow clap.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

231 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Plaatsvervangende Schaamte

@leftwingfox

Myself, I would track the death of the debate as a viable method of persuasion to very second Dinesh D’Souza stepped onto a dais. I don’t think there’s a more infuriating man alive.

Plaatsvervangende Schaamte

*the very second

See? I can’t even think straight when I see that bargle-lord’s name in print.

Falconer
6 years ago

@Emmy Rae: Actually, I have two out of control eyebrow hairs, one in each eyebrow. Sorry for the confusion.

About debates: I think the Bill Nye – Ken Ham debate last year put the nail in the debate coffin. Both sides came away claiming victory from that.

Falconer
6 years ago

*put the nail in the coffin for me, that is.

Plaatsvervangende Schaamte

@Falconer

That one came to mind, but I remember most people I talked to thinking the debate would be a disaster well before it even took place… I think debate as an art form was 6 feet under long before that point.

But I do have to admit getting Ken Ham on record saying nothing would possibly change his mind is some pretty beautiful evidence to trot out for anyone who ever considers debating with him again.

Newt
Newt
6 years ago

nth-ing the wish that debates would just go away.

If the aim is to convince the audience, rather than the opponent, have a full discussion with citations. It’s on record, it needn’t be forced to conclude in a few hours, and rebuttals can be explored and challenged exhaustively.

A direct, real-time discussion can be a way for a few people to come to an agreement and understand each other’s views, but it’s dishonest to pretend that’s what’s going on in a debate. It quickly becomes about personality and technique rather than the actual issues under discussion.

Sorry, this was something that has wound me up since I was a student, and reared its head again today. In the UK, there’s now a fuss about which party leaders get to be in televised debates before the election.

lith
lith
6 years ago

@Emmy Rae:

I also have several so far.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

I enjoy watching Republicans get embarrassed in debates. Rick Perry not being able to name the government agencies he wants to close down and Sarah Palin repeatedly calling Joe Biden “O’Biden” were delicious. But my favorite was when Romney parroted the apocryphal right wing talking point and the moderator had to correct him. The best part was that Obama saw it coming. You could see it on his face and hear it in his voice. When he told Romney to go on or continue, however it was worded, it was obvious he was gleefully giving Romney rope to hang himself with.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Oops. I forgot to say what the talking point was. It was that Obama wouldn’t call Benghazi a terrorist attack.

Bina
Bina
6 years ago

Debates? Only between political candidates, with a moderator, on TV. So I can turn it off when I start to get bored.

And with Karen “Girl Writes Shit” Straughan, that is guaranteed to happen within five seconds.

Lea
Lea
6 years ago

Why do the reactionaries (and new atheists) love the idea of debating? They seem to think that winning a debate can prove a factual claim.

It’s weird.

Whats weird is that juxtaposition. I’m feeling less and less comfortable here.

freemage
6 years ago

A formal, structured debate can have some use, but the moderator has to be prepared to do their job. This includes both preventing violations of the rules (such as talking during the other person’s interval) and calling out blatant falsehoods where necessary. In addition, the debate needs to somehow be formatted to at least diminish the effectiveness of the worst abuses–in particular, the Gish Gallop.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Yeah, I know that comment was referring to Dawkins type atheists and not all atheists, but why call out atheists specifically at all? Ken Ham was eager to debate too as someone mentioned. Ass hats in general like to sea lion. I don’t see it as a specifically atheist trait.

lith
lith
6 years ago

Lea:

I’d not heard the term but apparently “new atheist” is the term for those that feel the need to force everyone else to believe in atheism (e.g. Dawkins). It’s not a dig at atheists in general.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism

It seems to be atheism with preachers. Which I have to admit I don’t get.
Most of my friends are atheists – it’s not the atheism that’s the problem, it’s the “thou shalt believe” when – as you say – we all have a right to our own beliefs (assuming they don’t hurt others, of course).

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

There’s nothing wrong with criticizing the influence of religion on culture. Particularly it’s influence on government. Lots of political atheists are fighting for the separation of church and state. It’s a big issue in the US right now with schools teaching creationism as a credible alternative to evolution. There are plenty of movement atheists who are insufferable but that doesn’t mean that movement atheism is inherently bad. Nor does it mean they’re trying to force people to deconvert. Even the insufferable faction of atheists aren’t generally doing that. I’m not sure why atheists are the only group expected to keep quiet about our opinions.

isidore13
isidore13
6 years ago

WWTH – I think it’s similar to the thing people have about vegans. There’s just this stereotype of the self-righteous, oh-I’m-so-much-smarter-than-you-religious-types atheist. It’s not fair or right, at all, I’m not trying to excuse it, this is just the best explanation I can think of.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

WWTH – That was a brilliant moment – you could see it on Obama’s face, he knew Romney had just shot himself in the foot. Romney’s “binders full of women” was also something to savor.

I feel like Presidential debates aren’t about persuading people so much as a public demonstration of their ability to appear “presidential” – decisive, confident, cool under pressure. Most people watching them have already made up their minds. Anybody who’s still on the fence isn’t paying much attention to policy and tends to be swayed by things like zingers, gotchas, tie color, number of blinks per minute, etc. Maybe that’s why those things get more attention.

NonServiam
6 years ago

I’m not in Paris but I knew some of the victims through media friends there. It’s been a rough week.

maistrechat
6 years ago

re:my mention of new atheists

I’m assuming that my interactions must be different than other people’s, but I see adherents of the Dawkins/Hitchens/etc. school constantly attempting to organize debates on the existence of god. It has nothing to do with keeping quiet about opinions, it’s all about the veneration of structured debate. I’m thinking of that photo floating around of the guy in a t-shirt and trilby wearing a shirt that says “I’m an atheist, debate me”.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

Sadly, the militant new atheists seem to be presented as the poster child for atheism more and more, like annoying-as-fuck religious fundies get held up as representatives for religious people. Meanwhile the moderates on both sides understand #notallatheists and #notalltheists and why can’t we just get along? While the loud minorities sling mud at each other and rant about each other to everyone who’ll listen.

Which is why I get pissed at both sides for spreading untruths about the other. Atheism =/= immorality and religion =/= stupidity. Gaaah.

NonServiam
6 years ago

Oh, my comment was answering weirwoodtreehugger’s post a further up the thread! Seems a bit non-sequiter otherwise. My brain is a bit fuzzy, not enough sleep!

lith
lith
6 years ago

@wwth and Lea:

I say the same about anyone trying to force beliefs on others, regardless of what the belief is – and by force I mean Dawkins level, “You’re WRONG! and I’m going to keep annoying you until you admit it!” type of thing.
From the little I understand it’s a far more sensitive issue in the US so I can appreciate that what I’m saying might come across differently than I’m meaning it. There really is no malice or offence intended and I’m sorry if any was given.
I actually agree with separation of church and state, and strongly disagree with teaching creationism as a science with equal time given to evolution. The ACEs also wind me up – as does any system that discourages critical thinking.
Again, apologies for any offence caused.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
6 years ago

These days, the “New/Militant Atheists” (who are called that, but don’t adopt the title themselves, which in fact includes Dawkins as well as people like PZ Myers) don’t push for debates. They’ve realized long ago that debates are only useful if everyone is participating in good faith, and it’s common knowledge that debates are worthless as proof of a belief.

And again, yes that includes Dawkins, who has famously stated he will never debate a creationist.

I just don’t see any evidence that its the “militant atheists/new atheists” that are hyper-interested in debate. More often than not I see the fundamentalists pushing for debates, and that’s mainly because their particular brand of religion isn’t getting air time anywhere else.

Now in terms of individual people who try to debate everyone around them? That’s more of a real thing in the atheist community. To me, it seems to be more a result of that special blend of assholery and self-appointed hyper-rationality that is frustratingly common.

Anyone who’s using the term “New Atheist”/”Militant Atheist” non-ironically should know that those terms have been labels foisted on Atheists that have been outspoken in any capacity against the general religiosity of culture, like the assumption that the US is a Christian nation. They’re basically pejoratives against atheism that doesn’t stay in the background and give deference to culturally-mandated religion.

Plenty of “New/Militant Atheists” are assholes in some capacity (again, Richard Dawkins), but simply being an asshole about your atheism is not what those labels have come to mean. Probably best not to use them.

kittehserf - MOD
6 years ago

I have one eyebrow hair in each brow that grows out really long and coarse compared to the rest of my eyebrow hair. It scoffs at my wee eyebrow hair trimmer.

::high fives Falconer::

I have one Grandfather Eyebrow Hair that grows grey and coarser and longer than the rest. Nothing but pulling it out with tweezers works.

Lea – surely you know by now this site has no more use for Asshole Atheists (TM) than it does for religious extemists. This isn’t FTB any more than it’s a religous site. For what it’s worth, I’m pretty bloody uncomfortable on Pharyngula, even though I remind myself it’s not about me.

sunnysombrera, well said and QFT:

Sadly, the militant new atheists seem to be presented as the poster child for atheism more and more, like annoying-as-fuck religious fundies get held up as representatives for religious people. Meanwhile the moderates on both sides understand #notallatheists and #notalltheists and why can’t we just get along? While the loud minorities sling mud at each other and rant about each other to everyone who’ll listen.

Which is why I get pissed at both sides for spreading untruths about the other. Atheism =/= immorality and religion =/= stupidity. Gaaah.

M. the Social Justice Ranger
M. the Social Justice Ranger
6 years ago

I usually use “Fundamentalist atheist” for the Dawkins types, just for lack of a better term for them (because they act exactly the same as religious fundamentalists, it’s just the same self-righteous, egotistical, hateful outlook with a different belief behind it), but if anybody happens to know a better one that’s less likely to annoy the massive majority of non-asshole atheists, please tell me.

Which is why I get pissed at both sides for spreading untruths about the other. Atheism =/= immorality and religion =/= stupidity. Gaaah

THIS A THOUSAND TIMES OVER.

M. the Social Justice Ranger
M. the Social Justice Ranger
6 years ago

… Also, how come so many recent threads have devolved into religious arguments? I know we have a huge representation of different religions and beliefs here, everything from atheism to Mormonism to Buddhism to paganism, and it’s usually really quiet on that front. o.O

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

I’m an atheist (not the “movement” kind) and frankly I’m tired of this conversation. This is clearly not the place for it, so I’m not sure why people are so determined to have this be the space in which we reenact the atheist vs theist war of every year so far this century.

If everyone on all sides could just drop it that would be lovely, but there seems to be about as much chance of that as of all the governments of the world suddenly taking climate change seriously.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

@M.

I don’t know how this one emerged, but the post where Vox Day equalled feminism to Satanism was a religious debate waiting to happen.

contrapangloss
6 years ago

I don’t know what’s up with the religion argumenting, so I’m just going to stick to the things I do know what’s up with.

Namely, I’ve never inspected my eyebrows so closely in my life, until this thread.

I have no long hairs, but my eyebrows start a little amorphously. And I found three little short hairs trying desperately to escape the boundaries of the proper eyelash zone into the unibrow zone.

They’re trying so hard, these three little hairs.

It’s almost adorable, but I also kind of want to kill them now that I am aware of them, but they’re just trying so hard!

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

I don’t get any hairs in the unibrow zone, but I do get the occasional hair trying to grow below the rest of my eyebrow in a way that looks messy, so I pluck those.

Does anyone else have brows that are naturally pointy at the outside corner? People occasionally ask me if I pluck them that way and lol no, plucking the occasional stray below the main part of my brow is as much effort as I’m willing to put into things.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

I stand with cassandrakitty on changing the subject. As much as I like genuine debates where people share and learn about each other’s belief systems, it’s starting to get stale now.

So…We should do a build-a-story on…something. Roosh applying for a job?

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
6 years ago

This one started because of a passing reference to “militant atheists,” which is a sore point in the atheist community (at least, the one I’m part of).

But whatever. I usually bolt when thread arguments start, but this one I thought I had something worthwhile to contribute to. Since it’s argument itself that’s annoying folks, I guess that was a bad move.

Sorry about that.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

Also, to whoever referred to their eyebrows as caterpillars, I immediately imagined two bushy brows slinking off of someone’s face. Thanks for the giggle.

davidknewton
davidknewton
6 years ago

Roosh applying for a job?

*Shuffles out of the office men’s room with his trousers around his ankles* Whose job is it to wipe bottoms around here?

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

Seriously, folks, whenever this argument breaks out everyone just ends up angry with each other, and no new resolution is ever reached, it just goes dormant until the next time the argument starts up again. Eyebrows, dammit!

alaisvex
alaisvex
6 years ago

Karen Straughan….ugh. While watching a video of hers I was struck by how many times she cited the example of “women and children first into life boats” as an example of the “disposable male”. Yeah, like I’m getting ahead of men in life boats every day.

You mean that you don’t regularly go on cruises on ships that you suspect will sink just so that you can make men more disposable? Tut tut tut. You need to misander better!

But in all seriousness, historians have thoroughly de-bunked the women and children first myth, as David wrote about here: https://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2012/04/15/a-titanic-mistake-new-research-sinks-the-women-and-children-first-myth/. And even if we assume that this was once standard practice on ships, we have to acknowledge that it hasn’t been in recent years. Hell, I’ve seen traditionalists complaining about the MV Bulgaria sinking in 2011 and how it proves that feminism is bad for women because the movement has stopped men from being chivalrous. So, if we’re following their logic, shouldn’t Karen be thanking feminism for making men less disposable, in ship disasters?

Emmy Rae
Emmy Rae
6 years ago

@sunnysombrera That was me. I imagine their lil caterpillar heads looking this way and that while I’m trying to make an expression.

I also have a unibrow… and not the three hair kind. A true unibrow. I don’t let it grow out, though. When I was in my early teens my hairdresser aunt made me wax my eyebrows, much to my dismay. The change was so intense my friend’s dad asked if I had gotten contacts – I’ve never had glasses.

proxieme
proxieme
6 years ago

Re: eyebrows:

Oh, no, I’m not talking a stray hair here or there. My Mr has grand, Peter-Capaldi-esque brows, though rather than being uniformly dark they have dark brown, light brown, blonde, red, and (recently) grey interspersed (he’s a calico person) – about half of which want to strike off on their own and start a facial hair revolution and have to be brought back into civilized society via regular trimming.

They’re bloody magnificent.

Buuuut I’ll freely admit that that may be a fairly idiosyncratic opinion.

proxieme
proxieme
6 years ago

(No unibrow, though. The two are almost violently independent from one another.)

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
6 years ago

@alaisvex:

Yes, but the problem is that Karen has her own logic she’s following. Anything that has at least one benefit to women must be caused and wanted by feminists, so therefore feminists must want chivalry and “women and children first” to be policy, and therefore they want to kill all men. Or something.

Thing is, when one person has power over another, they are expected to use that power for good. If a situation comes up where a choice has to be made between lives, the person in power generally gets the choice and is expected to sacrifice themselves before others. So parents would be expected to want their kids to get on the lifeboats before them, if a choice had to be made. Pretty sure this concept is far older than any sort of feminism.

When men were assumed to have the power in society, that means they would also have been expected to be last on the life boats. This would be considered the noble choice. In an equitable society, though, the choice won’t be between men and women, but along some other power dynamic. It would be acceptable for a woman to decide her husband should get the last seat, and the husband wouldn’t be shamed for not filling his role as a man.

So yeah… chalk this up to yet another thing that MRAs blame feminists for while feminists actively work against it.

proxieme
proxieme
6 years ago

Re: religious debates:

This is up for another two weeks or so:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04knt4h/episodes/guide

So at least there’s that.

freemage
6 years ago

I get bugged about ‘militant atheists’ for the same reason I get bugged about ‘militant feminists’. It’s a hyperbolic tag used to delegitimize the labelled group. Are there plenty of arrogant and asshat atheists? Yup, and I don’t associate with them for that reason.

proxieme
proxieme
6 years ago

Also what Kirby said.

Given the example of the lifeboats, if only one of the adults could get on but all of the children could I’d insist that it be my husband – he’s the better swimmer and is stronger overall. He, and therefore the kids, would have a better chance of surviving if something (else) went wrong.
(Re: Children getting priority: I’ll hold that the powerful/powerless dynamic should still apply…plus, adults have had more of a chance to do things.)

But since I hate boats, we’re probably ok on that front (though I have told him that in the case of the zombie apocalypse, he should take the children and run if I can’t keep up).

chaltab
chaltab
6 years ago

GamerGate is already ideologically aligned with John Birchers as it is. It’s a lot easier for me to believe a lazy plagiarist Gater re-purposed an old anti-communist essay than it is someone infiltrated Reaxxion and tricked Roosh.

Also why does Reaxxion have two Xs in it, two Xs is the female chromosomal pattern.

Falconer
6 years ago

Man, I don’t know what happened to Matt Smith’s eyebrows. He had some in his premier episode:

http://bowjamesbow.ca/assets_c/2010/04/matt-smith-eleventh-hor-thumb-542×301-126.png

But at some point his caterpillars must have crawled off for greener pastures:

http://imageserver.moviepilot.com/matt-smithv2-matt-smith-rexjpg-4nnunzp0-matt-smith-as-the-riddler-is-an-inspired-piece-of-casting.jpeg?width=2048&height=1536

After four or five years of No Eyebrows, Capaldi’s eyebrows loom over my television screen like the Diamond Cliffs of Planet One.

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100621192840/tardis/images/5/54/Planet_One.jpg

proxieme
proxieme
6 years ago

I think to get the “sh” sound.

And also BECAUSE IT’S EXXTREME!!!!
/late 90s

Falconer
6 years ago

Dangit, the second image only made a link.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

If we’re changing the subject can I just ask why I got a sudden intense craving for cigarettes? I quit more than six years ago!

Nicotine is evil 🙁

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
6 years ago

See, one X would look like a misspelling, three Xs would look like porn, more Xs would look silly, so it has to be two! I’m sure it’s misandry somehow.

freemage
6 years ago

Sorry, I should’ve reloaded before posting–convo had already moved on. Just ignore my prior post.