Guerilla Blog Tactics

My Dear Wormwood,

So you have taken to guerilla tactics on conservative blogs? Good, this has proven to be a very effective tool in the propaganda war. However, it must be done strategically for the best results. You must take great care or the propaganda cause will be harmed. The goal is to discredit as many conservative bloggers as you can in the eyes of as many as you can. This means you must not have a blog of your own. There must not be a centralized source of your statements to compare against your attacks. It provides too much ammunition to your subject.

- When attacking with comments, remember that your subject likes to debate you in a very tight space: one item at a time with clearly laid out supporting facts and quotes. If you fight on these terms, you will find yourself in trouble very quickly.

- Never directly address the points he posts about. Take the narrow idea being addressed and immediately broaden it into several points scattered in several directions. When he responds, keep adding more scattered points. At first he will attempt to answer several of these dispersed targets. When he begins to catch on, he will try very hard to narrow down the scope of the debate. Fight him as long as you can. Remember, this is guerilla warfare and your goal is to wear him down.

There are several ways to do this.

- The Rabbit Trail: Go off on rabbit trails (such as Israel, the impending doom of the US economy or world opinion)instead of arguing any points in the post you are attacking.

- Bloviation: Never argue on points with brevity or clarity. Once you begin this you are doomed. Conservative points always win in the black and white arena. Instead make outrageous unsupported claims as if everyone but your subject knows they are true. Paint your subject as in denial over the truth.

- Name Calling: For best results, use name calling in a way that you can deny what you are doing. When your subject lists the names you are calling him, simply state that they are descriptions of his points, not name calling. Some names to try might be racist, pathetic, dishonest, nationalist and others.

If your subject succeeds in getting the scope of the debate back down to a managable set, there are new tactics to try.

- Refuse to support your claims by claiming your subject does not want an honest debate.

- Next give your subject links instead of succinct supporting quotes. He will click around and around and waste a lot of time trying to figure out what you are countering his points with. When your subject objects, tell him it is all there and take the opportunity to question his reading ability.

- When links no longer work, dump the "mountain" on him. Take reams of long quotes from the links you gave him. Make sure they do not clearly address his points, but only add to frustration. When your subject again objects, accuse him of moving the goal posts.

Whether your subject succeeds in pinning you down to a point where you must respond correctly or not, it is now time to move on. End the interchange with more name calling and accusations against his intelligence and tactics. Make a huge grandstanding exit that it is not worth writing any more against somebody so stupid or so bias.

May we soon see your efforts begin to bear fruit by swaying the masses to our side.

Your affectionate Uncle,
Screwtape