This.
Discernment up to 11, Anons
Shills use Alinsky tactics all the time on this board (as MSM does in meatspace). The goyim are naturally sensitive to guilt & shame, whereas (((psychopaths))) don't have it. Many Alinsky strategies are designed to leverage that shame, to define the terms of battle in ways that weaken us and leave (((them))) unscathed. If we're focused on blaming each other or ourselves, we don't mount a spirited and confident defense against outside attack, forfeiting the race before it's even run, which is the only way (((they))) can win. Their strategy is one of the parasite that has to trick the host's immune system into dormancy in order to avoid expulsion.
Attacking named individuals is one way to manufacture consensus of blame, another is to sow doubt & confusion over fear of hypocrisy, to force our side to self-referee a scrupulous set of restrictions while their side can lie, cheat and steal with impunity. The Alinsky rule for this is: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
Shills are currently running a campaign to confuse us on when and how to require sauce. They know that we are stronger when we uphold high standards, to teach norms to be the citizen journalists Gen Flynn called for, bc being logical truth-seekers is how to break the MSM sleep spell. So shills are lately demanding sauce/ridiculing for lack of it in inapplicable circumstances to create confusion/infighting and baker abuse around this issue. The solution is not to surrender all standards, but to define them clearly so the trick fails.
Like this attempt last bread:
>>4013957 (indirect ridicule over no-sauce)
>>4013979 (response–IDEN as shill slide)
>>4013992 (admits was a "sauce" slide)
And this attempt last night:
>>4011401 shill attack ("thems the rules")
>>4011654 response (clearly defined standards)