Some of you may have noticed that there were only two articles yesterday. This is because I had quite a lot of real life events to attend this past Saturday, and stepping away from the keyboard brought clarity to a few things my mind had been mulling over. To start with, there is a difference between what is popular on the internet, what is popular in real life, and what is politically relevant.

Wallace Wong, child (abusing) psychologist.

I consider some of my most politically relevant work to be documenting the systemic abuse of children by the British Columbia government. You can see some of this in my coverage of the Rob Hoogland trial. Any serious populist political party would make the abuse of children a front and center issue. After all, that’s why these child abusers are going to such great lengths to cover this up. They know what they are doing is wrong and unpopular, and our job is simply infrastructural. We need to get out in front of as large of an audience as possible, with as well organized a party as possible.

This is easier said than done. One little acknowledged aspect of the modern internet is how astroturfed it all is. In the old days of YouTube, from about 2005-2010, the people who were popular were just weirdos. It wasn’t common for normal people to care about who was big on YouTube, because those people were so weird. I remember one of the early YouTuber meetups, and it was the biggest collection of goofballs you have ever seen. Unfortunately I can’t find any pictures of that stuff, so you’ll just have to trust me on this.

Having said that, there was a steady progression, where the people on YouTube got more and more normal as time went on. Even to this day, while it’s not my cup of tea, I can watch a PewDiePie video and not want to gouge my eyes out, something I couldn’t say for the original crop of losers who made it big on that site.

This all hit a nadir sometime around 2015-17, especially for political content. In those years, if you were big on YouTube, you could reasonably assume that you had some natural audience in real life. That wasn’t entirely the case, I think we can all remember Sargon of Assad’s disastrous real life electoral performance as a counterexample, but the point remains that there were normal and entertaining people on various platforms that organically grew their audience from the ground up. And they could take their audience and turn this into real world events, because they spoke to a certain cross section of society, not just people who are constantly online. 

 

The combination of massive censorship and Blormph being a potato mean that most normal people have checked out. I don’t mean that as an insult to the lovely audience of the Daily Rake, but the people on the internet paying attention to politics are far more different from the average person in 2022, than in 2016. I use Poast quite a bit, but most people have never heard of that site. Most people don’t have a telegram account. And most people don’t bother watching political YouTube videos, so even if we were suddenly uncensored, there wouldn’t be that much of a point.

The most popular articles on this site are breaking news, after big news stories. Waukesha is the classic example, with one of my articles on that getting over 11k views. The Rittenhouse work is in the same category, as is a few things here or there. But those events are largely out of my control. If I want consistent views, felting the e-boys is where it’s at.

Waukesha stuff would be at the top, but the switch from site themes wiped out those views.

These numbers are born out even when said piece doesn’t go particularly viral. Some Canada specific content, which will be very useful for a political party, barely cracks 100 views after a day. In contrast, anytime I write about the manlet cult, I get 300+ views as a matter of course, and occasionally over one thousand.

Many people here are probably familiar with me saying that I have never been a big internet person, and that’s true. I don’t watch any streamers except for when I am on Randbot. I don’t care for true e-drama, and consider my work attacking these creatures to be politically relevant work that happens to take place online. I don’t know who’s big on YouTube, especially in 2022. I don’t follow up much pop culture trash more broadly. I just don’t care, and I think not caring actually makes my articles on those fags better, because sometimes the most crushing chirp is “imagine knowing much about Ethan Ralph.”

The real life event I attended was a choir performance, and in its own way it really hammered home the difference between what Ethan Ralph is doing, and actually politically relevant work. The audience is entitled to entertainment, and you’re entitled to tell me if I’m boring you, but there’s only so much of my life I can spend even chirping these queers. Nick Fuentes is a mexican fag, Andrew Anglin and weev are tiny, increasingly irrelevant e-losers, and Ethan Ralph is the purest of LOLcows, having absolutely no redeeming features.

As if to further hammer this point home, I got a message from the mother I’ve written about who has had her daughter get wrapped up in this tranny groomer shit right here in British Columbia. She’s meeting with some other concerned parents, and trying to get something going. I can’t give you much more information than that, but I’ll be having a meeting with them next Saturday, June 4th, at around 4PM in the Lower Mainland, and everyone who reads this is welcome to show up, although you’ll need to contact me if you want the actual location.

The point is that the difference between real political action and what happens on the internet is quite stark, , especially with so much censorship of actual populism in 2022. And beyond that, a lot of politically relevant stuff isn’t that much fun to read. It’s kind of like the difference between watching a Hollywood legal procedural, and being an associate doing hundreds of paperwork hours on the case. What is boring is often politically useful, what is entertaining is often politically useless.

A balance needs to be struck between entertaining the crowd, and doing real politics, all of which ties in to something that I’m going to stress over and over, and which ties into the next chapter of the In His Own Words review I’m working on. There is no point to generic redpilling of people, without a political party. With no vehicle for political expression, it doesn’t matter if 99% of the population is for something, you aren’t getting it. 

Felting these e-boys was politically relevant, and I’m not quite done yet, but there simply has to be a time when I’ve put these people in the rear view mirror, and am writing articles to directly help the party win elections. The juxtaposition between a group of parents trying to save their children from HIV positive freaks using the power of every institution to mutilate and sterilize their children and Ethan Ralph being a big fag is gettign to be a bit much. 

Although I have to admit, it is good and easy content.

Who knows, there’s something to be said for making people laugh and running for office being the only two things you do.

I’ll keep you posted.

You may also like

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.

More in PSA