I recently stumbled upon “Tactics for Effective Conservative Blogging”, reputedly written by Karl Rove the evil Republican mastermind.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-karl-rove-write-tactics-conservative-blogging/
It boils down to “baffle them with bullshit”. Forewarned is forearmed. Now that you know what to expect you will know how to react. Let them know you will not stand for delay of game and will not rise to other bait. Tell them to do their own (expletive deleted) homework.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but according to Snopes, it is highly unlikely (albeit unproven) that was actually written by Rove, and much more likely that it was someone closer to the opposite side of the political spectrum:
The tone of that “list” hardly sounds like it was written by a conservative; it has a tone that is very disparaging to conservatives and it unlikely that someone would write about their own side that way.
I agree that this is a false-flag operation:
"Dismiss their narrative as rubbish immediately. Do not even read it".
It sounds like it took inspiration from Newt Gingrich’s GOPAC memo on recommended language, which was real.
Did the OP actually read the linked material?
From Snopes:
“As such, it appears likely that Tactics for Effective Conservative Blogging was not an original work of Karl Rove’s but was instead authored as a criticism of conservative commenters on social media. As is commonly the case, tethering it to the name of a widely recognized Republican operative lent the item legitimacy and spurred its subsequent popularity.”
Emphasis mine.
John Oliver listed some of Trump’s tactics which are also widely used by Conservatives. (The delegitimizing the Media by the Conservative Media is particularly ironic.)
That a lot of these methods are straight out of Stalin’s propaganda manual is very scary.
I didn’t say it was definitely written by Karl Rove.
Who wrote it doesn’t really matter. I know a really annoying guy in real life whose communications faithfully reflect the tactics it espouses. On this message board I see our resident conservatives following it. Calling mass shooting survivors “crisis actors” is a prime example. Attack the source.
I don’t think your perception that this approach is primarily or solely the one taken by conservatives on the SDMB is accurate.
It does not appear that this article was written by Karl Rove, nor by a Republican at all. It looks more like an attempt to poison the well.
If you believe attacking the source is the province only of conservatives, try posting a cite from the Heritage Foundation or FoxNews and see if you still think so.
Regards,
Shodan
It is especially evil that this Protocols of the Elders of Conservatism called upon its flock to “engage” by demanding facts and evidence. This goes heavily against the spirit of free and honest debate. The nerve!
As for dismissing an event or opinion out of hand due to its source, well, no one on this board ever does that. :dubious:
Here we have “whataboutism”. Do similar acts in the past by others excuse the acts currently under discussion?
NO.
That’s absurd. What would be the significance of an scathing assessment of left leaning debating tactics dressed up as a fake tutorial by a person of the left? Or are you really contending that it would be impossible to put common ideas and tactics of some people on the left in a bad light?
Are you saying that a “scathing assessment of left leaning debating tactics dressed up as a fake tutorial by a person of the left” would excuse a similar act by someone on the right? LOL.
Seriously, I’d like to see an example.
That response makes no sense.
Back to the actual point, the only significance of a link like yours would be if it was actually written by someone important on the right saying ‘this is how we do and should debate’. Once you lose that aspect by it being pointed out the slim to zero possibility Rove or any other notable conservative wrote it, it’s of no significance. Just like it would be of no significance to find a link purportedly written by David Axelrod laying out a bunch of despicable tactics the left should use…that wasn’t actually written by Axelrod but more likely written by somebody on the right.
Once you accept that it wasn’t written by a prominent person on one side of the spectrum putting their own side in a bad light, all you’re left with is ‘well no matter who wrote it, that is how they debate’. But that’s just back to opinions and assholes, everybody has one.
Linking a disproven article to bolster a ridiculous argument is no a very effective tactic, I’m afraid. The strategy of “baffle them with bullshit” is common to all political parties and persuasions and has been pretty much since the inception of politics. And if the author doesn’t matter, why submarine your own point by mentioning someone who clearly didn’t write it?
Sorry, epic fail.
Show me a list of liberals using shady debate tactics and I’ll loathe them as well. It’s my opinion that conservatives are by far the most flagrant and frequent violators. That’s how it’s been in my experience.
I believe I have fought ignorance.
If you want to understand Conservative tactics I’d start with the “Gish Gallop.” This tactic is entirely responsible for the fact that there is STILL a debate in the USA as to whether or not evolution is real.
Another excellent source is Scott Adam’s “Master Persuader” series. This interests me because Adams is an unabashed Trump supporter, and yet he openly stands over Trump’s shoulder reading off his cards to the table. That’s because he knows it doesn’t matter. The tactics work, and will continue to work even against people who know about them.
http://blog.dilbert.com/2016/02/18/the-trump-master-persuader-index-and-reading-list/
I was with you until I saw your name. Fake news!
What you are saying may be true, but the way you arrived at it, or presented it (using quotes attributed to Karl Rove that aren’t by Karl Rove) was faulty.
It’s like saying, “Nazi Germans were evil because they bombed Pearl Harbor.”
Hmm.
Regards,
Shodan
LOL, you may believe that, but most of the rest of us believe you’ve promoted it.