About Pseudonyms and Asymmetric Warfare

By Rebel of Oz

A bitter battle of words has erupted in recent weeks within the ranks of the global resistance against the New World Order.  Valued members of our community have publicly accused fellow dissidents of dishonesty and cowardice, because they publish their writings under a pseudonym.

The use of pseudonyms is a time-honored tradition that can be traced back to early 16^th century England and France. Some of its best-known practitioners were the French writers Molière, Voltaire, Émile Zola, George Sand, Marquis de Sade and Pauline Réage. England had the Brontë sisters, Charles Dickens, George Eliot, George Orwell, and Walter Scott. Denmark had Kierkegaard, and the United States Mark Twain, O. Henry, and Nathanael West.

Pseudonyms cannot only be found in the literary realm, but in journalism, politics and science, where they are often a function of pragmatism rather than belletristic sensibilities, more nom de guerre than nom de plume.

Before taking on the establishment, dissidents must think very carefully whether to write under their own name or a pseudonym. There is no real freedom of expression; anyone who says otherwise is either a liar or a fool. While it might be ‘guaranteed’ on paper in most countries, in practice it is only respected to the extent that it makes no difference, at best. Once people start listening to you and agree with what you are saying, Satan’s little helpers will quickly come after you. There might be no law preventing you from what you are doing, in compliance with the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but the establishment doesn’t need to throw you into a dungeon to destroy and silence you.

Not every aspiring dissident writer is in a position to commit career suicide. Even a professor with life-long full tenure or a financially independent retiree must think twice whether he can afford the possible financial consequences of writing under his own name. Tenures and pensions can be cancelled under some pretext, savings and inheritances can be zapped with libel suits.

Those of us with spouses and children have to be even more careful. How well will they cope if their living standard suddenly drops because of loss of income? How will they react if bosses, colleagues and friends suddenly treat them like social lepers, when they find out what you do? How often will they be prepared to move town and change company or school when the social isolation is becoming too much? Not everyone copes well when their friends no longer dare to be seen friendly with you, for fear of being suspected of harboring similar thoughts. Using a pseudonym does not only protect your family, it also protects your family friends.

One fellow activist argued that writing under a pseudonym and not telling your friends about it was like cheating on your spouse. I beg to differ. A dissident writer is exercising his freedom of expression; someone who is cheating on his spouse is violating a commitment to lifelong fidelity. And who said that if you are using a pseudonym you cannot tell your trusted friends about it? You just need to make sure they deserve that trust.

Another argument raised against the use of pseudonyms was that the government knows anyhow who is hiding behind a pseudonym or has the means to find out. I also disagree on that one. Most oppression of freedom of expression in Western style democracy is not performed by the government. It is performed by special interest groups abusing their power. One of the most important rules in asymmetrical warfare is ‘Don’t moon the giant!’ Writing under our own name makes it easier for our enemies to destroy us. Our bosses are more likely to be told by a rival colleague or outside hasbara agent about our ‘hobby’ and forced to fire us under some flimsy pretext. Recruitment companies are more likely to blacklist us. Prospective employers who google our name are less likely to invite us for an interview. Publishing companies are less likely to publish our professional writings and event organisers won’t dare to invite us as a public speaker.

I also disagree with the notion that using a pseudonym was sending out the wrong message to people. Not daring to use our own names would, so the argument, make our readers less likely to come forward and speak out. Personally, I find what happened to Edgar Steele, Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zündel and Fredrick Töben far more intimidating than the writings of a “Dr. Lasha Darkmoon”.

Everybody’s circumstances are different. What might be true for one country might be wrong somewhere else. What is more, circumstances can change, both for individuals and entire countries. Every week that goes by, oppression and tyranny are getting worse, not only in the United States. Our fight is too important for the future of humanity to take any unnecessary risks. Political dissidents are well advised to put vanity and false pride aside and hide behind a pseudonym. We owe this to our families, our friends and our cause.

Rebel of Oz is the editor/publisher of the Rebel Media Group. You can find more of his writings on https://therebel.org/editorial.

Source: The Rebel