Cool idea. I'm always a big fan of the metamemetics linguistics angles. If we could reframe things like Antifa to be, like you say, "radical socialist militias", it could be potent.
It might be wise to include a humor bend though: Radical Soycialist Militias.
Cool idea. I'm always a big fan of the metamemetics linguistics angles.
If we could reframe things like Antifa to be, like you say, "radical socialist militias", it could be potent.
It might be wise to include a humor bend though:
Radical Soycialist Militias.
> "radical socialist militias"
Actually its a win on all sides.
Antifa wants to be seen as legitimate. Being considered a militia, despite a huge negative for them, at least baits them with the idea of legitimacy.
Second if the trend were to take off, they may see it as an opportunity to undermine the idea of militias.
More importantly the act of them taking up under the label of "militia" makes anything the government does to suppress or aid them, a constitutional issue. The right is then forced into a position of siding with the idea of militias, or siding with the federal government.
This leaves room for all of us that have left the GOP tent. The moderates, the conservatives, will play hands off.
Those dissatisfied ith the GOPs master-dog relationship to the DNC, will see, like the proud boys did, the lefts new actions as a challenge.
So we'll get right wing militias forming and in the street too.
The federal government, the occupation, will be forced, either to keep the peace, because all sides will be armed, and thus alienate the last of its supporters. Or it will be forced to suppress the right, and alienate it further, destabilizing the moderate and conservatives sentiments, and driving the public to further polarization.
The opposing sides will escalate or rip each other to pieces if the government mismanages the issue. And they will, because they need the distraction. Thats on the occupation anyway, because sooner or later they'll bait the public into doing just that. We're only accelerating the process. Acceleration doesn't demand violence or lawlessness at all. Follow the law, stay peaceful, and bait the occupation into accelerating and making mistakes that lead to loss of control over the national narrative and sentiment.
At that point both the left and the occupation will double down and cement the (correct) belief among the alienated moderates and the demonized conservatives, that the occupation is at war with them and now no longer *represents or responds to them at all*.
It's lose lose no matter what the occupation does.
Conservatives, moderates, libertarians, all need to understand and feel like they have been backed into a corner, and that none of the channels for petition or redress of grievances work anymore. This is less of a propaganda move and more of making them realize this is *already* the case.
Once they're hopeless, there is two possible outcomes that emerge:
1. normalization, and we lose this one.
2. radicalization and coalescing into groups and coalitions.
Understand I am not referring to lawlessness or violence, nor even encouraging others to resort to those things.
*Radicalization* here means the complete tuning out of any further propaganda from the occupation, a state of mind or
national sentiment, however scattered, that out of a great deal of resentment, wrongs unrectified, and a general pattern of behavior by the government, evince a future that the occupation will never change by ordinary means, that issues of two-tiered justice will never be corrected, and that any attempts at compromise will merely be exploited before the occupation goes right back to what it has always done. Which is push marxism and totalitarianism. Thats what the public needs to understand and believe wholeheartedly. Radicalization is the attitude that nothing whatsoever the occupation does can ever be right, and a state of mind where nothing it does will ever again be able to deescalate the public from that point on. It is a state of being uncompromising of anything short of complete surrender, capitulation by the people in the occupation who have wronged Americans and other westerners. It is the opposite of demoralization. It is *hypermoralization*.
Demoralization is the *atomization* of a people, so commisars, or other filth, can rule by decree.
Hypermoralization is the collectivization of people through an idealogy-of-utter-contempt for an enemy.
Demoralization creates slaves.
Hypermoralization creates zealots.
Slaves are created through fear.
Zealots are created through abandonment.
A zealot is the equivalent of a political child. You know those memes? "The childs guide to politics? Everything I dont like is xyz"?
Well, a zealot is politically equivalent to a child. Not exactly.
They're a political *child soldier*.
They're angry. They don't exactly know why. Maybe they have a few clear grievances they can name, but theres a broader theme to all of the outrages if you look at them collectively, they just can't articulate it clearly. And like the one man who once shouted "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it", they don't know which authority to be mad at, but they are willing, to the point of imprisonment and bodily harm to stand in front of them and spit in that authorities eye.
You create zealots through making them understand they have been abandoned. Just like child soldiers.
You make them understand they've been abandoned. And then you point them at the people responsible.
Radical Soycialist Militias.
Possibly. Humor spreads and goes mainstream.
On the otherhand it might just be reduced to another us-vs-them get-back-into-the-DNC-GOP-circus-tent.
Nah, actually, mockery is pretty powerful.
Don't know if the "lets go brandon" was a net gain, or simply a distortion that eventually killed the momentum of "fuck joe biden!"
> Radical Soycialist Militias.
Possibly. Humor spreads and goes mainstream.
On the otherhand it might just be reduced to another us-vs-them get-back-into-the-DNC-GOP-circus-tent.
Nah, actually, mockery is pretty powerful.
Don't know if the "lets go brandon" was a net gain, or simply a distortion that eventually killed the momentum of "fuck joe biden!"
I think taking the Streisand angle was smart. It feels like LGB was a catalyst to us doing the nod and being in silent agreement while the faggots, fatties and retards REEEEEEEEEEEE'd themselves in circles until they got dizzy.
I think taking the Streisand angle was smart.
It feels like LGB was a catalyst to us doing the nod and being in silent agreement while the faggots, fatties and retards REEEEEEEEEEEE'd themselves in circles until they got dizzy.
> I think taking the Streisand angle was smart.
Yeah but streissand being "unintentional" is just the proto-meme of "gone viral".
If you're seeing it spread, you have to ask if the spread is organic or not.
And also more generally you have to ask, if the slogan/trend is just a holding action we were *given* by the state, an empty-feel good measure, or ushering us back onto the left-right plantation.
If you can accurately answer yes to the first, and no to the others, then it helps us. But if we *don't* know the answer, the question remains: who benefits?
Everything that happens in politics is bumper sticker idealogy, sure. But most of what happens is also astroturf, and if we don't see that in any specific example right from the get go, its because ultimately it either sets us back or is accomplishing something at our expense.
What we *should* asking then is *not* "is *lets go brandon/lgb/etc* worth amplifying?"
Again, because theres always either the redirection, or momentum-kill.
Instead we should be asking what comes *after* that? Whats the next thing that grows, or keeps the momentum? Or *much better*, what is the *next thing*, the next idea, slogan, or meme, that *builds* on the lasts focus and momentum?
The "fuck joe biden!" attitude, like all FUs, worked because a fuck-you attitude, when *all else fails*, is a decent gambit that cuts through rampant bullshit like a hot knife. When nothing else works, "fuck you!" says what needs to be said. And instead we've been elided into mockery, which is good, but from there just slides into the left-right-gotcha game of politics-as-usual. Thats polarization, but its also winning the battle and losing the war, which is the opposite of polarization. And the more we return to that cycle, the more existing circumstances will normalize instead of accelerating.
Remember government power is a one way ratchet, so you can't stop it, slow it, and just return to normal. Thats not gonna happen. So the only way to undo the ratchet is to break it. How? By forcing the regime to overdo it as fast as possible and provoke the public noncompliance. We're about 10-15% there, in terms of numbers and the right attitude. It'll accelerate from here if everything stays the same and only gets worse.
Edit: Underestimating-through-mockery is also good, because it tends to provoke the other side. And when they're acting on impulse, they're making mistakes.
(post is archived)