Reflections of an “Anonymous Coward”

golgo-13-top-secret-episode

If an HR department at any publicly traded corporation discovered that, under your real name, you had written(or merely even faved) tweets critical of Jews, blacks, immigrants, women, gays, trans etc. you’d be fired in two seconds. One of the problems with unchecked, transnational capitalism is that desire for money literally trumps everything. Big companies will sell out their own local communities, their people’s culture and even the security of the nation for a few bucks. Corporations care more about dollars than anything. Even when companies engage in diversity initiatives and philanthropic endeavors, these too are ultimately driven by profits. Though some people in the company may genuinely care about said causes on some level, the gestures themselves are still essentially just shrewd public relations stunts, designed to give the company a positive image and act as a force field to deflect any SJW criticism. A company will not knowingly associate their brand with anything or anyone that could even potentially be controversial. I myself was once denied a job at a solid ad agency on the basis of a few mild tweets(on my real account) that were uncovered in the final stages of the hiring/interview process. Lately I’ve been inclined to stick with more entry level positions where my visibility would not be high enough in a company to draw attention to any of my political activism. The current company I work for enforces a policy that “an employee should not take public political stands.” Note: they’re talking about any public political stands(ie “Obamacare sucks!”) to say nothing of the the controversial HBD and anti-democracy stuff we advocate for.

Anissimov argues that the problem the Right faces right now is anonymity:

The main problem that the neoreactionary Right faces right now is anonymity. Three years ago it was not enough people. Now, many, many new people are joining, but the vast majority are doing so under the cover of anonymity.

It is somewhat strange that he would be advocating these 1000s of people should boldly shed their anonymity, given that just recently he declared NRx to only be about 8 people, with the rest being merely fans. Why would anyone risk their job, just to publicly be part of a “fan club” or something which has declared itself not even seeking to be a popular movement. If it’s just a secret, small group of intellectuals engaged in a school of thought…why not just keep it a secret, who cares? What’s in it for the rest of us, “the fans?”

In my view, the problem with the new right isn’t that too many of us are anonymous. If 5000 reactionaries went public with their real names, then those people would be fired from their jobs the moment any one of their employers made the connection. All it takes is one SJW to locate your Linkedin account and fire off an email to your employer, and bam! you’re toast. No corporation will stick their neck out for a racialist. Let us not forget people like John Derbyshire were even fired from “conservative” publications, because they felt his(mild by comparison to some of ours) opinions were damaging to National Review’s image. We’ve even seen the likes of Roosh V get in on the PC thought policing act when it comes to protecting his profitable e-book brand.

Rather, the real issue is that we lack our own institutions.

This is where my friends and I work now. Be sure and let our bosses know how offended you are by our politically incorrect opinions.

This is where my friends and I work now. Be sure and let our bosses know how offended you are by our politically incorrect opinions.

Imagine if the entire company you worked for was run by and staffed throughout with “neo-nazis”, secessionists, monarchists, daughters of the confederacy, ethnonationalists or whomever. In such a scenario, if the SJW mob came after you, your bosses ideally would laugh their asses off. Again though, this brings us back to the issue of capitalism and it’s associated PC pressures(just look at all the problems SeaWorld has had.) Would such an organization survive all the bad crimethink PR in the present US environment? Would they stand by you? Maybe, maybe not.

So when should one go public? Financial independence should be the condition for using your real name. If you need to work for a company to pay your rent or support your family, you probably have to stay anon. It should be the goal of every new rightist to be able to reach a state of financial security when he can say whatever we wants and remain largely unscathed by any attacks from the outrage brigade. Anonymity, like other covert operations can be incredibly effective. One of the things that so frustrates SJWs is that they can’t stop anonymous people from commenting on current events, which is why they’re trying to force companies like Google, Yahoo etc to make people use their real name in comment sections.

Would the Vietcong have been successful had they come out and told everyone who they were before the Tet Offensive? And don’t say “but The Tet Offensive was actually a military failure.” Yes, I’m aware of that. From a propaganda standpoint it was an important psychological victory, though. I like the concept of our own metaphorical “Tet offensive” where we pick a date two or three years from now, a day of the rabbit so to speak, when out of nowhere thousands upon thousands of us come out using our real names, sending shock waves throughout the media. In the meantime we would slowly prepare and work toward being financially independent by that date.

Most of us would like to use our real names. It would be beneficial to me for sure. We just need to buy a little time. If for some reason we get doxxed and outed before we’re ready, the only thing to do at that point is just to “rock it” and charge full speed ahead.

Advertisements

11 comments

  1. Pingback: Selected Writings of B.W. Rabbit | B.W. Rabbit
  2. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/04/10) | The Reactivity Place
  3. Simon · April 12, 2015

    All very fair points. Not having to be beholden to any other man or to have to kowtow to the prevailing ideology were the primary motivations behind my quitting the corporate world almost 18 months ago.

    I can only strongly recommend – look into day trading. It can be immensely profitable, all you need is an Internet connection and a computer, and all the information on how to become extremely adept is freely available on the Internet – if you know where to find it. Separating the wheat from the chaff can be the hardest part.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Was Enlightened · April 12, 2015

    “Big companies will sell out their own local communities, their people’s culture and even the security of the nation for a few bucks. Corporations care more about dollars than anything. Even when companies engage in diversity initiatives and philanthropic endeavors, these too are ultimately driven by profits”

    Sorry, don’t agree.

    Large corporations do not adopt progressivism for monetary reasons. Left-wing boycotts are generally failures. Getting the government equality police off your back has some merit, but did Intel really need to spend $300 million to do so?

    Large corporations adopt progressivism because it *is* “their people’s culture”. “America is a communist country.” Many employees are progs and they are activist and vocal. If Joe is fired because he retweeted too many @jokeocracy barbs, it’s not because Human Resources investigated him. It’s because Joe’s coworkers said to Human Resources, “Can you believe this guy? What a racist! I shouldn’t have to work with a racist!”

    Branden Eich was purged because his own employees at Mozilla complained about him.

    Liked by 1 person

    • B.W. Rabbit · April 13, 2015

      I disagree with you. They absolutely adopt progressivism for monetary reasons. It’s about PR and brand image whether the boycotts are effective or not. Large media companies don’t want to offend groups as they will risk losing advertisers. Big companies want to be able to sell their product to as many people as possible. We also see it in other areas. Companies move their production to China and suddenly become willing to implement Chinese style speech restrictions. They no longer maintain loyalty to their own nation. Would a company that is making a large amount of money in China risk siding with the United States on a political issue? I doubt it. Big companies support immigration from ragtag third world countries at the expense of their own communities…because it makes the CEOs money.

      Yes, Eich’s own employees complained about him, but ultimately he was fired because the company wanted to maintain a PC image so as not to be a distraction from their primary goal….making money.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. armenia4ever · April 13, 2015

    Alot of companies automatically assume that questionable publicity is immediately bad for the company. What surprises me is that companies who succumb to twitter lynch mobs still haven’t fully realized that said mobs won’t and never did buy any of their products in the first place.

    The more niche a company is, the more I would suggest this to be the case, though the opposite could be true for a corporation like Walmart.

    People are still going to buy from them enmasse, regardless of whatever controversial stances they hold – or large minimum wage hikes they refuse to initiate.

    Liked by 1 person

    • B.W. Rabbit · April 14, 2015

      Yes, absolutely. It almost doesn’t seem to matter whether boycotts and bad publicity will actually affect sales. Even just the possibility of any negative effect is something companies will not even take a chance on. These intimidation mobs have been successful in getting advertisers to pull out(in industries where advertising is involved.)

      Like

  6. icareviews · April 14, 2015

    It’s true what you say about the neoreactionaries thinking themselves above populism – in other words, happier to be ineffectual self-styled elitists than men of actual achievement or relevance to their fellows. Bryce LaLiberte (aka AnarchoPapist), before he deleted his Twitter account, actually stated this with unintentional humor:

    “Whoever isn’t NRx shouldn’t be able to understand NRx. That’s how it works.”

    Like

  7. Paladin Justice · May 9, 2015

    Reblogged this on saboteur365.

    Like

  8. Father Paul Lemmen · May 9, 2015

    Reblogged this on A Conservative Christian Man.

    Like

  9. Father Paul Lemmen · May 9, 2015

    Thanks be to God, He doesn’t fire any believer for telling truth!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s