how about you give me a word that describes a country with a single party, ruling in perpetuity?
You’re still trying to construct the thing we’re saying is nonsense. Typically attributed to Julius Nyerere: The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.
The US has has been ruled by the bourgeoisie since the 1776 bourgeois revolution. The wealthy, white, male land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers intentionally constructed a bourgeois democracy, which was never meant to represent us, and never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (who aren’t disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy
In socialist states, the “one party” is the party of the working class. The two major parties today in the US are parties of the capitalist class, as were the Federalist, Democratic-Republican, and Whig parties before them.
Excellent, the US is also one party. I don’t disagree. Now have you noticed that things are actually getting worse there now that all discourse is in meme format?
pure idealism. what kind of brainworms do do you have in order to attribute the determination of material conditions in the us to fucking memes of all things instead of the decline of the empire, as well as the sharpening contradictions of capitalism? clown shit
I would say that political discourse has become shorter, more emotional, and less informed and complex, and this very visible in the use of memes rather than arguments in modern politics. As a theory heavy person I would have thought you would agree that this is contributing to worsening conditions all around.
Our theories are materialist ones, not idealist ones. We believe that ideas fundamentally arise from material conditions. Those ideas do affect the material in turn, dialectically, but the material conditions are still the prime mover. Dialectical materialism (and historical materialism) are fundamental to all Marxist theory.
We reject the popular liberal theory that, if one presents one’s case well enough in the “marketplace of ideas”, that those ideas will win the day. That doesn’t mean ideas shouldn’t be presented—because that’s clearly what I’m doing here—only that it’s not sufficient. The capitalist class spends billions each year pushing their propaganda and suppressing any that oppose it. They know very well what works. Just having a good idea and presenting it cogently won’t cut it.
Memes aren’t even a new thing. 18th century memes don’t look alien to us. And we’re not spending all of our time in the meme mines.
I would say that political discourse has become shorter, more emotional, and less informed and complex
I’m not sure how I’d go about trying to prove or disprove this. Online social media ain’t everything. I think most people are abysmally uninformed/disinformed and disengaged, but I don’t know how I’d measure these or compare them to the past. In 1993 Noam Chomsky wrote, ”the general population doesn’t know what’s happening, and it doesn’t even know that it doesn’t know.”
That is not why things are getting worse in the US. I could go on at great length on why things are getting worse, but I don’t think this is the time or place for that.
This post is actually a great example of how memes can be effective. The meme is the hook. The conversation that’s being had around the meme is the meat & potatoes (apologies for the mixed metaphor).
Going back to an earlier comment of yours:
Memes are short, contextless appeals to emotion and thus the perfect format for propaganda
By “context,” I think you mean something different from what I’m about to say, but memes are densely packed with context: our shared cultural context. They are effective at communicating so much out of seemingly so little by leveraging our shared context. The a-ha moment of perceiving the meme through recognition of the implicit context is the hook.
You’re right that that is not at all what I mean by context. I mean the kind of context that can make what appears to be a simple question much more complex.
I would say this thread supports my position more than yours, in that the only engaging discussion happening here is a result of attacking memes as propaganda. The actual content of the meme （socialism and memes are both about sharing) has been almost entirely ignored, probably because it is so shallow and meaningless (as are all memes) that there really isn’t much to say about it.
One has to have more brain worms than RFK Jr. to think that democracy is measured by the number of parties. What actually matters is whose interests the parties represent.
You’re still trying to construct the thing we’re saying is nonsense. Typically attributed to Julius Nyerere: The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.
The US has has been ruled by the bourgeoisie since the 1776 bourgeois revolution. The wealthy, white, male land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers intentionally constructed a bourgeois democracy, which was never meant to represent us, and never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (who aren’t disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy
In socialist states, the “one party” is the party of the working class. The two major parties today in the US are parties of the capitalist class, as were the Federalist, Democratic-Republican, and Whig parties before them.
Excellent, the US is also one party. I don’t disagree. Now have you noticed that things are actually getting worse there now that all discourse is in meme format?
pure idealism. what kind of brainworms do do you have in order to attribute the determination of material conditions in the us to fucking memes of all things instead of the decline of the empire, as well as the sharpening contradictions of capitalism? clown shit
I would say that political discourse has become shorter, more emotional, and less informed and complex, and this very visible in the use of memes rather than arguments in modern politics. As a theory heavy person I would have thought you would agree that this is contributing to worsening conditions all around.
Our theories are materialist ones, not idealist ones. We believe that ideas fundamentally arise from material conditions. Those ideas do affect the material in turn, dialectically, but the material conditions are still the prime mover. Dialectical materialism (and historical materialism) are fundamental to all Marxist theory.
We reject the popular liberal theory that, if one presents one’s case well enough in the “marketplace of ideas”, that those ideas will win the day. That doesn’t mean ideas shouldn’t be presented—because that’s clearly what I’m doing here—only that it’s not sufficient. The capitalist class spends billions each year pushing their propaganda and suppressing any that oppose it. They know very well what works. Just having a good idea and presenting it cogently won’t cut it.
Memes aren’t even a new thing. 18th century memes don’t look alien to us. And we’re not spending all of our time in the meme mines.
I’m not sure how I’d go about trying to prove or disprove this. Online social media ain’t everything. I think most people are abysmally uninformed/disinformed and disengaged, but I don’t know how I’d measure these or compare them to the past. In 1993 Noam Chomsky wrote, ”the general population doesn’t know what’s happening, and it doesn’t even know that it doesn’t know.”
That is not why things are getting worse in the US. I could go on at great length on why things are getting worse, but I don’t think this is the time or place for that.
This post is actually a great example of how memes can be effective. The meme is the hook. The conversation that’s being had around the meme is the meat & potatoes (apologies for the mixed metaphor).
Going back to an earlier comment of yours:
By “context,” I think you mean something different from what I’m about to say, but memes are densely packed with context: our shared cultural context. They are effective at communicating so much out of seemingly so little by leveraging our shared context. The a-ha moment of perceiving the meme through recognition of the implicit context is the hook.
You’re right that that is not at all what I mean by context. I mean the kind of context that can make what appears to be a simple question much more complex.
I would say this thread supports my position more than yours, in that the only engaging discussion happening here is a result of attacking memes as propaganda. The actual content of the meme （socialism and memes are both about sharing) has been almost entirely ignored, probably because it is so shallow and meaningless (as are all memes) that there really isn’t much to say about it.
dEmOcRaCy have only one pArRtY
But sEvErAl.1!1!
Lol
The force of democracy isn’t having 100 parties but the ability to Kick the ruling one out.
There, for you all wondering why so many people prefer democracy over some autocracy.
One has to have more brain worms than RFK Jr. to think that democracy is measured by the number of parties. What actually matters is whose interests the parties represent.
We’re knee-deep in a thread about totalitarianism being nonsense, and now you trot out its synonym?
Authoritarianism is whatever the Council on Foreign Relations says it is this week.
“democracy is when you have two parties with the exact same policies”