Embrace Your Inner Wrecker

Submitted by Chet Rollins

So the big red wave didn't happen.  You watched in dismay as indifferent voters from the inner city filled out a form with the help of a progressive canvasser and put it in the mail a month before election day.  You're finally looking to take that step to admit, yes, this is not going to be solved in the ballot box.  You've come to the realization that you're going to have to find different ways to win, ways that go against the civic culture you grew up in.  You realize you need throw wrenches in the system, trip them up, force them to waste valuable resources, and destroy their morale.  But what can one person do against an adversary that have essentially locked down all of our institutions to their cause?  How can you fight the system where there are draconian punishments of something as simple as posting an edgy flyer on a college campus?

We should first take a look at the Soviets when they captured complete institutional control.  One of the most fascinating aspects of looking at the early Soviet revolution was the paranoia shown for behaviors.  Once they quashed overt resistance to their rule, they had to fear a more subtle, and perhaps more dangerous type of people.  When progress was not made properly, they would search for someone to blame, people who either didn't work hard enough in support of the revolution or were actively sabotaging it.  Those people were called Wreckers.

One could argue that these accusations were cynical ploys to point the finger at individuals to deflect blame from themselves, and this certainly happened, but one can also read a deep paranoia that understood a mass of people who subtly make Soviet projects linger and fail was a major threat to their rule, as they would not be able to even have the infrastructure to enforce their edicts. 

If enough people passively work to damage an organization from within, soon will make it as inept that it might as well not exist at all.  There are also extensive ways to make hostile organizations waste an enormous amount of time and money by making arduous and painful interactions with them.  In Soviet times, one could easily be charged, be forced into a confession, and shipped out to the gulag.  This is the nature of hard power. In our soft power world, this is far more difficult and time consuming, and so the strategy is much harder to root out and discourage.  This is an advantage the right needs to embrace.

The mindset of great battles with heroic figures saving the country is a fantasy in a world of passive backbiting and enemy propaganda control.  Anyone brazen enough to overtly challenge the system, especially with a weak to non-existent counter-elite, only serves his ego as he gets pointlessly shot down.  Instead of focusing on great decisive battles, the right needs its focus on giving their enemy a thousand papercuts.

So what would be a good wrecking campaign for a dissident right-winger look like?  The key questions to ask are:

1.  Does this bring pain to my enemy at a low cost and risk to myself?

2.  Does this bring little to no attention to myself?

3.  Do I have plausible deniability?

4.  If I'm a part of a larger wrecking campaign, are there covert allies in power who I can trust and will bend the rules to help me stay out of trouble?

For the first point, a good example of causing pain to an enemy at low risk would be strolling over to your local library, taking a few degenerate books from their display like you're going to check them out, go to a secluded part of the library, and put them where no one will ever find them. This is something that can be done at an individual level to good effect, and becomes even more demoralizing and devastating with each person who does the same thing, culminating when library administrators either give up or spend all their time trailing patrons who take the books.  Either way, pain for them, low inconvenience or risk to you.

The second point goes against the mindset of your average right winger, who loves to publicly own the libs for a temporary dopamine hit than actually doing real damage to them.  For a wrecker it's all about creating frustration for your foes that makes it feel like they're punching air. This is especially useful with an ombudsman who have confidential/anonymous lines (though you need to ensure they are actually truly anonymous).  Making a complaint about your annoying leftist co-worker making racially charged comments, while omitting the fact it was against whites, or complaining about microaggressions directed against you from your snotty H.R. manager is a solid way to waste resources and give your enemies grief.  Creating an aura of paranoia in an organization destroys cohesiveness, a feeling of shared mission, and murders productivity.  Make them scared.   It's unglamorous you'll maybe never see your victim getting decisively owned, but future generations smile on your work.  

The third point is key, especially for larger operations.  For those who wonder how this works, the pilot's strike was a textbook example.  To protest the vaccine mandate, the pilots all called in sick on the same day and brought airlines to their knees.  There was little to do in retaliation, as it is very hard to prove that they all actually didn't get sick, and they won.  If one wants to look at a failure using opposite tactics, look at the Canada truckers who made a massive show and got their bank accounts frozen for their troubles.

The fourth point is important when an organization is well on its way to full infiltration, and you need some cover when you are taking actions that are clearly detrimental to the people who are actually trying to make the organization effective. Effectively, if you are being intentionally incompetent or actively trying to make life miserable for your enemies in the organization, you'll need a boss who knows the game and has your back.How far you go in your wrecking operation completely depends on your assessment of risk. All of these carry the risk of getting fired, banned from places, or even physical violence. A family guy with five kids who lives paycheck to paycheck is very different than a single man in his 20's who already has massive savings and can move to another part of the country in a weekend. Rest assured also, being a wrecker means hurting and demoralizing your enemies, and may require massive deception of an enemy for a long time before backstabbing him. One can argue the morals of such action, but one can't argue that such tactics ineffective.