Psychological Warfare Weapons

About immigration.
I think that question should decided by local communities. By principles of direct democracy, not by state or corporations.

this is a good point in my opinion, since the effect is felt by local communities who pay taxes they should by rights have the final say at least.

It's effective way to inspire masses to do something. To do something right, from your point of view.
Like if you win debats about correlation about crime, IQ and race, many people can change their opinion about mass emigration.
But debate is not laboratory or thinktank, they're do nof producing solutions.

You raise very interesting and valid points but debates are so last century. Violence is never the answer though; this is a board of peace. :^)

Human
Demi-boy
Of the goddess
American non-white
Borderless
No except for sometimes

Of course
IQ is a tool of the patriarchy
Open borders end your bigotry
Diversity is good and not even a question
You need to atone
Yes and so many others
Of course
Maybe

>Should psychological warfare experts pride themselves on winning an argument if it yields no solution?
who cares
>Is a solution the result of a high IQ if it produces violence?
it can be, violence is a means to an end
>Should immigration policy be based on race, or cultural compatibility and sustainability?
assimilation to new culture
>Is the diversity meme counter-productive to unity?
it's counter-productive to reality
>Should people who fail to cooperate with attempts at solutions be held accountable for the violence that ensues?
why not? all parties should be
>Is Jow Forums responsible for indoctrinating young people into racism, class and gender warfare, destructive patriotism and religious discrimination?
Jow Forums is responsible for lifting the veil of comfortable, self-censored speech
>What role has the internet played in threats to national security because of all above?
national security is a meme
>Is the promotion of financial wealth smart?
no, the currency is nothing but debt calling itself value
>Is psychological warfare a practical way of solving any problem?
it's an avenue

>they're do nof producing solutions

i guess not, very interesting area though ; who can think the most correctly or persuade with the greatest force by appealing to intellect, emotion, fear, virtue etc ... complicated stuff i can see why it's extremely rare for competitive open debate to offer much more than a defensive opinion.

>Open borders end your bigotry
>Diversity is good and not even a question
>You need to atone

thank you for your opinions.

>i can see why it's extremely rare for competitive open debate to offer much more than a defensive opinion.
depends on the individual's investment in their opinion

>assimilation to new culture
interesting point thank you. i suppose that is what is expected of us if we go elsewhere.

>Jow Forums is responsible for lifting the veil of comfortable, self-censored speech

for young people who dont know the difference between abuse and discussion?

>national security is a meme
>it's an avenue

hmm. psychological warfare "might" produce a solution?

than you for your replies.

>depends on the individual's investment in their opinion

do you mean an emotional investment?

>for young people who dont know the difference between abuse and discussion?
I'm not their nanny, they can choose to believe what they will.
>national security is a meme
It is, like "homeland security" that somehow isn't allowed to protect our own borders yet surveils the law abiding citizenry.
"National security" is a guise to protect geopolitical assets with a fiscal impact. Nothing more.
>hmm. psychological warfare "might" produce a solution?
It's what produced the problem you're trying to tackle.
Conditioning is but one form.

>do you mean an emotional investment?
Generally.

Jesus Christ this is brutal.

>they can choose to believe what they will
do they though? or do they feel pressured to comply or be abused?

>"National security" is a guise to protect geopolitical assets with a fiscal impact. Nothing more.
>psychological warfare
>produced the problem

i was wondering if another way of saying psychological warfare would be 'competitive no-holds barred debate' : verbal battlefields seem to have another driving force behind them that is counter-productive to discussion for the purpose of solutions...

>Generally.

thank you.

>Jesus Christ this is brutal.

apologies in advance. do you think the data miners are mainly interested in our opinions so they can manipulate us better?

>do they though? or do they feel pressured to comply or be abused?
If you shift because of an insult, you were never capable of choosing your own path anyway.
>verbal battlefields seem to have another driving force behind them that is counter-productive to discussion for the purpose of solutions..
Stuff with language is always like that, people have subconscious relationships to the words themselves. Manipulation is possible merely if you use the right word to the right person at the right time.

>If you shift because of an insult, you were never capable of choosing your own path anyway

do you think younger people are emotionally mature enough to not be negatively affected?

>subconscious relationships to the words

thank you. i'm thinking of the majority of 'reactions' from people on social media, and here, in context with what you just said.

there seems to be an important difference between reacting, and responding.

>do you think younger people are emotionally mature enough to not be negatively affected?
I was. But who is the judge of "negative affect". Can you say this "negative affect" doesn't bring them to a furthered understanding?
>there seems to be an important difference between reacting, and responding.
Reaction requires zero self-reflection, and is generally just a continuation of an already established wave.

>Is a solution the result of a high IQ if it produces violence?
Yes if it unavoidable or even practically unavoidable
Yes i know this post is a poor and vague answer but that is a poor and vague question

>Can you say this "negative affect" doesn't bring them to a furthered understanding?

what i'm not sure about is if abuse and peer pressure leads to understanding, or forced compliance through trauma-based tactics.

soldiers are trained this way to varying degrees and that's usually because they are required to kill the enemy, for someone else.

>Reaction requires zero self-reflection

thank you.

>Yes i know this post is a poor and vague answer but that is a poor and vague question

my apologies. i asked it in context with psychological warfare producing violence and if that is smart or not, when there are alternatives that yield better outcomes for everyone.

sometimes i check the board to see who is next to us :

Attached: 4613.jpg (323x158, 14K)

Attached: 4614.jpg (305x161, 9K)

>what i'm not sure about is if abuse and peer pressure leads to understanding, or forced compliance through trauma-based tactics
It can, but it can also lead to a contrarian response.
>soldiers are trained this way to varying degrees
They get basic desensitizing, and aren't allowed to question. Nor are they allowed freedom of schedule (I'd argue this is actually their biggest backbreaker). user gets balls to the wall desensitizing, is made to question everything, and participation is entirely at user's leisure.

Attached: 4615.jpg (306x164, 11K)

>It can, but it can also lead to a contrarian response.

i havent seen that. is there someone here who is in their teens who can rationally explain their position on the questions asked, for example, and how long do you think it would take to pull their argument apart ?

>They get basic desensitizing, and aren't allowed to question
>user gets balls to the wall desensitizing, is made to question everything

i dont understand why the goal posts shift for Jow Forums? I see them not being allowed to question anything because they get abused if they do. soldier training tactics etc

>i dont understand why the goal posts shift for Jow Forums?
Because on other "social media" sites, your comment gets entirely removed from existence if you even step out of comfortable language.
>I see them not being allowed to question anything because they get abused if they do
Like what, and what do you define as "abuse"?
Calling someone a nigger?

>Like what, and what do you define as "abuse"?
>Calling someone a nigger?

if we cant tell what someone's subsconscious interpretation of words is, and we agree that trauma-based tactics are used to train soldiers to comply with orders and murder, i think ultimately whatever these young people end up thinking is a product of those two....

having "debated' with many of them, they have no real argument because all they've learned is how to call someone names and post violent pictures.

i dont see them engaging in rational mature debate at all.

>Is Jow Forums responsible for indoctrinating young people into racism, class and gender warfare

Attached: 4616.jpg (177x232, 12K)

>having "debated' with many of them, they have no real argument because all they've learned is how to call someone names and post violent pictures.
See I wouldn't take that as "abuse", I'd take it as an admission that they have no logical response.
>i dont see them engaging in rational mature debate at all.
How prevalent is that anywhere, now? People aren't even taught logic in schools anymore. One side sees it as racist/sexist/bigoted/whatever, the opposite side sees it as an ineffectual self-handicap. Civility in general is a dying thing, as people feel walls closing in.

maybe the trauma-based abuse tactics affect adults too, i cant say for sure, we all have different responses to brutality, but that it affects young people to the extent that they have logical response tells me that abuse tactics dont lead to understanding.

>Should psychological warfare experts pride themselves on winning an argument if it yields no solution?
Yes. Most of time those wins avoid people from executing retarded "solutions" that will only make matter worse. Take pride because not creating a problem is better than solving one. Remember the jewish doctors who poured gasoline in the well to get patients
>Should immigration policy be based on race, or cultural compatibility and sustainability?
Yes but as an complement to the existing regulations
>Is the diversity meme counter-productive to unity?
Yes, in diverse areas there's no "philia". People dont trust eachother. Diferent costumes call for different laws. Distrust erodes the society which is present.
>I'd like it noted
Nobody cares. Theres no internet points to be won here and you cant prove what yoy said without doxxing yourself
>Should people who fail to cooperate with attempts at solutions be held accountable for the violence that ensues?
Too vague but if you're eefering too
"If you dont do what i want ill shoot you". That's a no for me
>Is Jow Forums responsible for indoctrinating young people into racism, class and gender warfare, destructive patriotism and religious discrimination?
Society did it, this is a place where we can search for solutions away from the difficulties that would be caused by piblic scrutiny from the slaves of the zog
>What role has the internet played in threats to national security because of all above?
National security strengthened as now you have citizens being aware of when they taxpayer money gets misused, like agencies spying them
>Is the promotion of financial wealth smart?
Yes but not as an end, rather as means to an end. Id rather have a large property than a stash of cash, but first i need the cash to get it. Even gold can be crafted into something more valuable for humanity than its raw materials, not jewels but conductors and oxi resistant alloys
>Is psychological warfare a practical way of solving any problem?
Yes

>it affects young people to the extent that they have logical response
typo correction **no logical response** apologies.

>tells me that abuse tactics dont lead to understanding.
If you can't get past the face value, I suppose.
>maybe the trauma-based abuse tactics affect adults too
It definitely does, look at how much media is predicated on shock-based marketing.
>drumpf is going to kill us all
>liberals are going to kill us all
I think you're reading too deeply into the efficacy of the tactic, though.

>not creating a problem is better than solving one
>People dont trust eachother
>Distrust erodes
>Nobody cares.

why not?

>Too vague but if you're eefering too
>"If you dont do what i want ill shoot you". That's a no for me

i think its called being complicit by inaction

>Society
>agencies spying them

>Yes

why?

thank you very much for your replies.

Remember anons...
The ends do not justify the means. One can argue that the shilling of filth and degeneracy is the right move from a tactical perspective against your enemies, but it is morally and spiritually wrong. Be careful Jow Forums do not become that which you despise! Maybe there is another way to win???

Attached: pepe-ascetic.jpg (98x124, 2K)

>I think you're reading too deeply into the efficacy of the tactic, though

i might be i suppose, i'm going by the end result which overall doesnt appear to be positive.

>i'm going by the end result which overall doesnt appear to be positive.
Yeah, probably not.
Problem is: can you know if these aren't just provocateurs that have no investment in legitimate response?

>One can argue that the shilling of filth and degeneracy is the right move from a tactical perspective against your enemies, but it is morally and spiritually wrong. Be careful Jow Forums do not become that which you despise! Maybe there is another way to win???

i asked a lot of questions and have tried not to let my own views dominate the subsequent discussion, which i feel has been evenly tempered and respectful so far, but would like to agree here with your comments.

Attached: 4617.jpg (281x327, 13K)

>just provocateurs that have no investment in legitimate response

what do you think they are trying to do? do you think they're bored or maybe looking for something else?

>what do you think they are trying to do?
derail discussion
>do you think they're bored or maybe looking for something else?
could be

>sometimes i check the board to see who is next to us :

one more..

Attached: 4618.jpg (314x160, 10K)

>derail discussion

why?

depends on the reason, innit?
depends if they're employed/acting under the umbrella of a group (which then generates more questions)
depends if they're just a bored autist bombing out of a losing argument, etc.

>employed/acting under the umbrella of a group

could some of them have been indoctrinated to behave this way?

>just a bored autist bombing out of a losing argument

do you think they should be restrained?

>I look forward to your replies.

Attached: fu2.jpg (1280x720, 205K)

>the difference between abuse and discussion
The bantz are part of Jow Forums culture and what keeps people coming back. You can’t preach to us if you don’t understand us. Nobody understands this place. They think it’s some kind of hotbed when it’s more like a cheap pub in the empty part of town

>could some of them have been indoctrinated to behave this way?
>could
Sure, could be a lot of things. I hate that word, same with should/would. They're floaty words that remove responsibility of a concrete stance.
>do you think they should be restrained?
No.

>like a cheap pub in the empty part of town

>No.

why not?

>why not?
I don't believe in censoring people because I don't like what they're saying.

if they're derailing threads as we spoke about, arent they interfering, and in worst case scenarios, preventing sensible, rational, open debate?

is this positive? to be abused by mindless trolls for talking openly about important things?

what would the consequences be in the "real world" where the arena is not merely a bucket for the bored to cry in?

>I don't believe in censoring people because I don't like what they're saying.

sorry one more thought : they obviously do believe in that if their intention is to shut down open inquiry?

>if they're derailing threads as we spoke about, arent they interfering, and in worst case scenarios, preventing sensible, rational, open debate?
If you censor them for that, they will just adapt.
You must do the same, as effectively, that's what they're doing to you.
By censoring anyone who derails a conversation, you'd be attacking a machination, a symptom.
>is this positive? to be abused by mindless trolls for talking openly about important things?
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. The history of this site is rife with the evolution of thread derailers.
Do you believe you somehow have more of a right to piss in the ocean of piss than they do?
They might view you under the same lens, it depends on their reasons for doing what they do (as yours apply to your perspective)

Wolfie was a an 18th century rock star

youtu.be/wYvSEHZe340

Attached: My Face When.png (811x480, 144K)

>what would the consequences be in the "real world" where the arena is not merely a bucket for the bored to cry in?
I take it you've only been here since this board went to a "post twitter opinion, receive responses" formula of the past few years.

i honestly feel that people who try to censor and shut down debate through abuse are a non-productive additive to an internet that was here before them, so i'm not sure, if we go as far as talking about territory, who's territory have they invaded, and if they were immigrants, would you let them in?

>Jewish hivemind posting
You people are so boring

i've seen before and after, and i'm still wondering what the consequences in the real world are?

>who's territory have they invaded
international waters
>and if they were immigrants, would you let them in?
sure, they'll drown eventually

>and i'm still wondering what the consequences in the real world are?
increasingly cloistered groupings

i just noticed that facebook has banned Jow Forums links because of the behaviours we're talking about, which makes me wonder if these trolls are also within their right to get the rest of us censored?

>sure

do you mind if i tell you i dont believe you? if an abusive man was at your door threatening to kill you as they do online, and he was an immigrant, what would your course of action be?

Humans aren’t rational, communism is dumb, life is a simulation, morality doesn’t make sense under materialism, stop trying to control people, ‘the world might end up being alright, if only people would stop trying to save it all the time.’

Facebook is propaganda thought control for npcs

I'd tell him to do it, faggot.
I've already been shot and stabbed, threats don't really shake me.
Now if he actually tried; I'd probably dismember him, bag his parts, and dump them in an abandoned apartment building.

>trying to control people

honestly i think they might be, seems to be their main intention.. ?

>the world might end up being alright, if only

i think we'd agree it isnt alright? over th eyears i've seen a pattern of solutions being thrown out because of abuse and psychological warfare...

the climate argument for example / environment issues, began decades ago in France. it doesnt take much to conclude that it isnt good to pollute the air, the water, the food, and the sea, for example .... unfortunately, the people we are talking about, and have agreed upon, dont care, are either shills or just bored or whatever, and they gang up together in groups to shut down and thwart positive progress.

i guess the main question still remains, is psychological warfare smart.

Psychological warfare (also known as acting like a bitch) has a foundation based on:
- Huge lies
- Gaslighting
- Censorship
- Endless repetition
- Peer pressure
- Social acceptance
- Making truth sound ridicule
- Fragmenting truth into subcults and escalate their animosity
...

I think it's too homosexual to be a valid tactic when dealing with actual people, but you can ease things during conflicts with complete retards (guerilla niggers, inbred arabs, jews, latinos and other human shits).

>Facebook is propaganda thought contro
>these trolls are also within their right to get the rest of us censored?

what do you think?

well i guess at that point you'd have no other option if it meant saving your own life.

>dump them

thread derailers and abusive indoctrinators using trauma-based tactics to censor and shut down rational open discussion...

is the parallel i make.

>Psychological warfare (also known as acting like a bitch) has a foundation based on:
>- Huge lies
>- Gaslighting
>- Censorship
>- Endless repetition
>- Peer pressure
>- Social acceptance
>- Making truth sound ridicule
>- Fragmenting truth into subcults and escalate their animosity

thank you for your reply.

I understand the analogy you're trying to bridge, I don't see it that way.
It's not immediate danger, to me. You sound like you need to laugh more.

>I understand the analogy

I'm glad because I think it's a good one. They serve no positive purpose here and only make things worse for everyone.

Check out the leftist

Fuck your faggy survey

I’m a black fTm tranny that hates you

>They serve no positive purpose here and only make things worse for everyone.

Bump

first off, learn to code

second off
>be me
>white
>male
>Christian (actual, not a christkike)
>check flag
>relatively

1. No. The pride should be in a positive solution, not sanctimonious bloviating.
2. Violent acts can be considered "high IQ" depends on the goal
3. Race is the default structure. Humans are inherently tribalistic.
4. Of course
5. Depends on how valiant the attempt. History doesn't exactly consist of attempts
6. No, Jow Forums is a platform. Unlike Twitter and YT who are becoming content curators.
7. The internet is a utility. What role has electricity played in residential fires since the industrial revolution?
8. It can be as it depends on the problem. Doesn't matter, people are still using psychological warfare tactics.

>fTm
RARE

The ethnos:
The likelihood any two people who communicate ideas effectively will share common ancestry supports the theory that people self organize by shared identity that evolves by natural selection

In the minds of people, identity (x) is defined by (x) power where it is possible for (x) identity to not be represented at all given that it has no power to be represented, or fir a fkase identity ti be substituted. example: slave or serf

Population control:
See Deterritorialization. When people become divided money and profit become god. Diversity implies local homogeneity, but controlling a population requires creating or forcing together opposites that cannot be unified allowing the acceleration and concentration of capital to displace human progress. This is conducted anthropologically through Bioleninism initiated through a specific spiritual movement within psychology designed to normalize impressions upon people’s synthetic judgments as a method of stabilizing power in the form of tyranny

Question:
Can freedom of Will be expressed without the unfree Will of others, or is the idea of total freedom just the the domesticated unfree Will of everyone

you don't have to pick the post when you reply to each line
you use the greentext to quote the individual
then in regular text following directly after is understood to be your response

for example this:
>not creating a problem is better than solving one
>People dont trust eachother
>Distrust erodes
>Nobody cares.

why not?

should look like:
>not creating a problem is better than solving one
>People dont trust eachother
>Distrust erodes
>Nobody cares.
why not?

If you were to respond to someone else in the same post, you would then use that post number in a following line

like this
you're a fucking idiot

you're a fucking idiot

the thing about these kinds of tactics is that they are not that difficult to recognize. the truth has a way of coming to light with or without tactics, and if it needs tactics, then it probably isn't the complete truth. Why else would manipulative tactics be employed?