A winning strategy for social justice warriors



In New Zealand we have plenty of “social justice” warriors. The most recent one to make headlines was Dildo Baggins aka Josie Butler. Her strategy of assaulting a politician with a dildo earned her headlines and media attention but achieved zero, zip, zilch, nada, nought and diddly-squat if her purpose was to persuade, influence or convince people of the rightness of her anti-TPPA argument.

Milo Yiannopoulos, who reminds me so much of a gay, fashionable, fabulous version of Cameron (he doesn’t have a Whale army but he talks about the Milo army), has come up with a winning strategy for social justice warriors like Dildo Baggins. In his usual, hilariously blunt style, he spells it out for them, confident in the knowledge that they would rather lose, than listen.

One of the most unusual things about my success is that my critics are often the drivers of my good fortune. The progressive Left’s attempts to beat me resemble a man standing in a bucket trying to lift himself up by the handle, as the old saying goes.

They don’t realize what a Herculean task it would be to defeat me. In fact, if the thirteenth Labour of Hercules after defeating Cerberus was “Get Milo to Shut Up” he probably would have failed miserably.

…If you read the headlines, you’ll know that I always win. Media coverage of my Dangerous Faggot Tour around university campuses has exposed social justice warriors’ collective inability to remain calm in the same room as me.

My tour has revealed their irrationality and their blatant intolerance for new ideas. They hate me so much that if I were to give a blueprint on how to beat me, they’d reject the offer.

You can’t really blame them — such a blueprint could only involve cloning me so I’d have a genuinely challenging debate partner. And even then, they’d just complain it was “debate rape.”

Still, I don’t like fighting the handicapped (everyone who isn’t me), so, in the interests of fairness, I’m going to give you some tips

…I win because I understand my opponents better than they understand themselves. Most of those who challenge me end up frustrated because I force them — without affirmative consent — to think beyond their Women’s Studies talking points. It’s the lack of understanding of their own positions that has made my job so easy.

Because of my success, I have accumulated a large audience. I have over 181,000 Twitter followers, 54,000 fans on Facebook and nearly 75,000 subscribers on YouTube, which I barely even pay attention to. It’s not unusual for me to receive more than 50 million impressions on Twitter in a month, which is more impressions than some big news sites. It’s gone as high as 75 million.

These numbers are climbing more quickly every day. I’m the next big thing and everyone’s super excited about it!

Of course, much of this rapidly-acquired fame can be attributed to my transcendent hair, amazing voice (I sing too, by the way — look out for my debut single later this year), Adonis-like good looks and astonishing fashion sense.

But I begrudgingly admit that some credit also goes to more substantial qualities: namely, the fearless stances I take against an increasingly regressive Left and the hard work I put in to preparing my public appearances.

Or at least the hard work my researchers, assistants and make-up artists put into making me look good. (Did I mention I have more money than God?)

There’s also my army of supporters, of course: educated, well-adjusted, and equipped to handle any tactic that a social justice warrior might throw their way. Alinsky? They’ve read him. Bell Hooks? Read it — and laughed. Feminist Frequency? Watched, disliked, downvoted.

When engaged in debate, my fans never resort to childish emotional outbursts, because they know that would be the point at which they lost. How often do you hear about one of my supporters disrupting a campus event?

If you want to beat me, you’ll have to start acting more like these fine young men and women.

So. Here comes my guide to winning — a strategy I know you won’t follow. But when the Milo army inevitably wipes social justice warriors off the face of the planet, I’ll at least be able to say I gave you a fighting chance.

1) Don’t act like a rabid animal 

If you’re going to rush into the event venue with red paint dripping down your face, making shrieking noises in an attempt to drown me out, I will win. Thanks to your bizarre antics at Rutgers, the attention of the world’s media was drawn to me and my message. Much like violence at Trump rallies (probably committed by the same people), your wild-eyed exploits only grows my army and gives me attention.

2) Do your homework 

The most significant handicap for progressives is that they often don’t understand their own positions. If you’re going to challenge me, make sure you understand your own argument. I have no problem making you look foolish for being unprepared.

I sympathise with the fact that nothing triggers Gender Studies activists more than actually studying, but reading and understanding data is critical, regardless of what your Marxist professor taught you.

Emotionally-charged positions are usually the easiest for me to dismantle, so leave your emotions at the door. You need to challenge me with substantive and rational arguments if you want a chance to come out on top. Your emotions serve you no purpose in our debate. (Apart from amusing me — which shouldn’t be discounted.)

Basically, I don’t care about your feelings and neither does anyone else.

3) Stump me in the Q&A, not during my speech 

Because I like to dedicate the largest portion of my events to questions from the audience, refrain from disruptions during my speech. The airhorns, chanting and yelling aren’t helping your cause as much as they are helping mine. If you want to challenge my positions, wait your turn like everyone else.

As Teddy Roosevelt almost said, speak softly but carry a big glittery stick of Truth wrapped in bitchy one-liners. I know quietly listening goes against every feminist bone in your body and big stick is a horrifically gauche anatomical analogy for a strong question, but… like I said, fuck your feelings.

4) Whichever side resorts to violence, intimidation or aggression, loses 

My army never does this. They may be high-testosterone alphas, but they aren’t going to waste their energy on you.

5) Your University’s reputation is in your hands. Remember that 

Remember that it’s not just you and your mates who acquire a negative reputation for your loony behaviour: it’s your university too. I’m sure some of your peers won’t be happy when you devalue their diplomas with infantile behaviour that only serves to increase the size of my army.

Alumni who pay for your Women’s Studies courses with their donations are going to think twice after seeing their alma mater mentioned as the locus of your anti-free speech antics. I mean, do you really want your dad asking you about me over Thanksgiving dinner?

I could go on, but that’s enough for you to work on. I’ve realised that if we are going to have anything approaching a fair chess match, I might have to move both sets of pieces. If you follow these simple suggestions, you may get closer to beating me than you thought possible.



THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • EvoDriver

    Good article. I think though that “Dildo Baggins” was Steven Joyce’s nickname, not Butler’s, at least that’s what I got from John Oliver’s hilarious report on the incident!

    • sheppy

      John Oliver’s report was funny? I must have an odd sense of humour as after watching it I thought he was just another try hard, screaming lefty, unfunny “comedian”

      • EvoDriver

        I don’t agree with everything he says but I do find him entertaining.

  • Eiselmann

    Love it , I’d respectfully add one more rule,(similar to understand your own point of view) Understand my side of things, know why I think the way I do , that way you can see the strength of my point of view and its weakness, so you know where to attack..

    For me its why liberal elites who once read a book on proverty can’t deal with me because my childhood should mean I’mI a poster child for far left politics but my upbringing didn’t produce that and they can’t understand why.

  • Boondecker

    As Milo intimates, the ‘Streisand (now Trump?) Effect’ comes into play in these events.

    Most normal people wishing to be informed want to know and get both sides of a story, but if others attempt to starve them of getting that by making a lot of noise and / or other means, the opposite effect is usually the outcome.

  • cows4me

    Hell women’s studies have changed since we went to school, we weren’t very good at it then either.

    • kereru

      Wimmin’s studies didn’t even exist when I was at school! No teaching about your tender ‘ego’, or school counsellors telling you that you were special and needed your own safe space. Teachers weren’t mates you addressed by their first name. It was ‘stand up, sit down, shut up, and pay attention’. Any talking and you were sent to the Principal. Somehow it worked fine and I don’t remember anyone resenting it. We knew the boundaries – the ultimate ‘safe space’ for children and adolescents alike.

      • cows4me

        There were no wimmin studies when I was at school either Kereu, didn’t stop us from trying to study wimmin, if you know what I mean.

  • andrewo

    Brilliant piece! :-)

  • Dave

    One of the main flaws in all of the above, is it requires thought, and a bit of strategy, and the lefty losers tend not to think about reactions, consequences or indeed responsibility much before they act or speak. The act of consequences or ownership of the action does not occur to them.

  • cassandra

    True fact: john Campbell did woman’s /feminist studies at university. Surprised?

  • Whitey

    Homework and reasoned debate are to social justice warriors what salt is to slugs.

  • Karl

    The last point about alumni donations is an interesting side-effect. On a slightly related note I remember Canterbury University calling me a while back when I happened to be in the mood to donate. They encouraged untagged donations but you could choose which project to support if you wanted. When I looked at the options there was not one single project that I could support. PC nonsense. In the end I had to turn them down. It still annoys me now how the process has ben captured by the left-wing …. as is they were ever going to be major donors!