April 16, 2010
The Double Demon Maneouvre
One of my favourite internet smears is The Double Demon Maneouvre (consciously stealing the term from this excellent review by Simon Blackburn).
The DDM is a favourite of internet warriors who want to smear their opponents in a sly and covert way. And it just so happens that yesterday a classic example was provided by Bella Gerens, proud apologist for Internet-nasty/Real-world-wuss Chris Mounsey (aka Devil’s Kitchen). Gerens seems to be afflicted by both gender and historical confusions – comparing me to a Victorian Lady no less – but I want to focus on something else she said yesterday.
Over at Stumbling and Mumbling, Sunny Hundal left the following sensible comment:
“Is it not legitimate to ask why should voters take someone seriously who wishes death on his political opponents?
Otherwise, why not have the goons from the BNP or National Front on there regularly inciting violence? They could represent the voices of the ‘silent majority’.”
To which Gerens responded with a classic DDM:
“Oh, Sunny, I was sure it was only a matter of time before you popped up equating libertarians with racists because you can apply the word ‘violent’ to both. I made a bet last night that it would take you less than a day to get round to it – and well done, you! I’m off to collect my winnings.”
But what – I hear you cry – is the DDM!? It’s very simple, and goes like this. First there’s The Simple Demon Maneouvre, which works by tarring your opponent with a nasty brush. For example, calling them a racist when you know they are not one. The aim is to smear, and the smear is attempted in a straightforward manner.
But the DDM is altogether more crafty.
Bella can’t, for example, call Sunny a racist. Partly because he’s not one (he’s one of dem left-librul darkies, dontchya know), but also because it wouldn’t make sense in this context. So instead Bella accuses Sunny of accusing others of being racist – and then pointing out that those others are not racist! In sum: the DDM works by accusing your opponent of playing The Simple Demon Maneouvre, when you know they’re not. Ingenious!
The beauty of the DDM is that the impact is two-fold. It smears your opponent – e.g. by implying that they smear non-racists as racists and are therefore horrible liars – but without any of the overt nastiness, or clear dishonesty, of straightforward ordinary smearing. Secondly, the DDM distracts attention from the topic originally under discussion. Witness how Sunny was promptly deflected into defending his position.
Doubly demonic, I’m sure you’ll agree.
At base the DDM is a nasty smear tactic. Look at Sunny’s original comment again. He is clearly making a very straightforward (and also correct) conceptual point. Only an idiot could fail to see that. Or somebody out to smear him, deliberately distorting his views, by deploying the DDM.
Given that the DDM is a subtle form of smear but a smear nonetheless, and that Bella Gerens is happy to use it, this leaves us with a question. As well as Giles’ queery about why Chris Mounsey’s violent pornographic slanders are so popular, the question contained in Peter’s insightful post pushes through: why is it that so many people associated with the LPUK are apparently nasty and mendacious gits?
Peter said,
April 16, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Just so you know, Bella Gerens is DK’s real life wife. So it’s not surprising she rides to his aid.
Also, did you link to the correct post at my place? I don’t understand the link. Am I being thick?
Paul Sagar said,
April 16, 2010 at 9:00 pm
Oh, didn’t know that was the case with BG and DK. How sweet. Perhaps they write violent pornographic libel together.
And yes, i’d linked to the wrong post. corrected now.
p.s. didn’t that post used to have a quote from somebody else who commented along the lines of “fuck of you moaning bastard”?
Peter said,
April 16, 2010 at 9:08 pm
Nah, not at my place. Though the responses to the question I posed on LPUK’s blog (linked to at my place) were basically like that. That’s probably what you were thinking of.
bellagerens said,
April 16, 2010 at 10:51 pm
We do, in fact, write pornographic libel together, just to cool down after a typical S&M Friday evening. Then we eat a baby.
Paul Sagar said,
April 16, 2010 at 11:04 pm
I’ll give you credit, at least you can have a laugh.
Sunny H said,
April 16, 2010 at 11:15 pm
Heh.
leftoutside said,
April 16, 2010 at 11:28 pm
For the record, Bella Gerens is genuinely lovely from my (fairly limited) experience with her online. I think there might even be some posts on her blog you’d enjoy, she’s something of a more reflective libertarian than a lot of the web bores about.
I’ve never really had a problem with DK’s blog, or the style it is written in. I’ve even engaged with him on Climate Change (although it is difficult to get anywhere with someone like him). I never realised I was meant to take any of it seriously, some of it, like septicisle says, is almost poetic in its grandiose violence. He’s totally unfit to lead a party given his baggage, some sort of vangaurd maybe, but then that’s not his style so I hear.
But then, DK is such a political extremist that it is difficult for people to defend him.
The DDM move is unsurprisingly popular online and quite effective too. If you’re not the first to answer and someone starts defending you on the terms set by the DDMer then its impossible to get back on track.
Paul Sagar said,
April 16, 2010 at 11:30 pm
I’m sure Bella is lovely.
But you call me a Victorian Lady, you get Handbags At Dawn.
As for the DDM: yes, it’s unbelievably effective. That’s one of the reasons it’s so…demonic.
leftoutside said,
April 16, 2010 at 11:31 pm
Oh Paul, Bella Geren’s nightmarish journey through the UK’s byzantine immigration system is something you’ll enjoy.
http://bellagerens.com/2009/12/08/that-immigration-story-in-full/
leftoutside said,
April 16, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Victorian Lady – Funnily enough Victorian Ladies weren’t even that coy. There’s hardly been a society more obsessed with sex and obscenities than the Victorians.
Likewise, they liked a good seeing to.
Liberal Conspiracy » Saturday 17th April said,
April 17, 2010 at 8:21 am
[...] Paul Sagar: The Double Demon Maneouvre [...]
blanco said,
April 17, 2010 at 8:31 am
Frequently used in Israel-Palestine debates online. The DDM often takes the form of frequent whataboutery.
Desperate to feel censored « Though Cowards Flinch said,
April 18, 2010 at 11:14 am
[...] I think that may be what Paul S calls a demon manoeuvre. [...]
bella gerens said,
April 18, 2010 at 11:18 am
For what it’s worth, though, I wasn’t trying to accuse Sunny of accusing libertarians of being racists. I was accusing him of drawing an dubious equivalence between libertarians and racists on the grounds of ‘violence.’ You can’t seriously suggest that’s somehow a neutral observation, given the enormous number of other political actors associated with violence. He could have compared libertarians to Che Guevara or Robespierre, but he chose the BNP and the National Front. A lot of nuance is conveyed by such choice of comparison.
The connotation I inferred from Sunny’s comment was that he thinks libertarians like DK are as odious as racists, though not necessarily racists themselves. I find that attitude rather extreme.
Pickled Politics » How Iain Dale plays the identity politics card said,
May 29, 2010 at 4:21 pm
[...] That was Iain Dale. I said on Twitter that while Dale, bizarrely, never showed that level of “understanding” on race issues, to which Dale quickly tried to turn it around by asking if I was accusing him of racism. Paul Sagar has earlier called this the Double-Demon maneouvre. [...]
How Iain Dale plays the identity politics card | Liberal Conspiracy said,
May 29, 2010 at 4:23 pm
[...] That was Iain Dale. I said on Twitter that while Dale, bizarrely, never showed that level of “understanding” on race issues, to which Dale quickly tried to turn it around by asking if I was accusing him of racism. Paul Sagar has earlier called this the Double-Demon maneouvre. [...]