Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > PJ's Authoritarian thread: C-SPAM edition
 
  • Post
  • Reply
BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy
now is a good time for this thread

* # ¿ Oct 23, 2018 04:23
  • Quote
Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 14, 2024 21:22
  • Quote
BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy
like i was saying two days ago

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

now is a good time for this thread
also

Baloogan posted:

holy gently caress this is prolix as gently caress
prester jane is good and is my friend and D&D are a bunch of chumps

* # ¿ Oct 24, 2018 21:53
  • Quote
BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

Prester Jane posted:

The thing about Narrativists is that they do not conceptualize conflict in terms of a control or exchange of resources. Narrativists conceptualize as conflict in terms of big dramatic gestures that change the dominant narratives within a society. This conceptualization of conflict strikes the structuralists cooperator mindset as being exceedingly stupid and easy to manipulate- and they are half right. In terms of armed or economic conflict between State actors, the Narrativist group will almost assuredly lose. They simply I'm not very good at the kinds of large-scale organization or marshaling of resources that such conflict requires. However within a given society Narrativism does not need to achieve victory through Superior management of resources, all they need to do is change how that population is talking about itself and precedes itself. That's why despite Hillary Clinton being a Greek god in terms of resource management-, the Trump campaign still won out because they altered our dominant social narratives. They didn't need to win conflicts over resources cam they could lose as many times as it took as long as they got people talking about them and what they were doing.

Now mind you, this disparity in access to resources also has a strong tendency to fuel the development of some sort of progressive movement within a given Society. (Often partially as a reaction to a growing Narrativist movement) This progressive movement conceptualizes conflicts in the same terms as Structuralist Cooperators- conflict is decided by whomever best controls the most resources. And it is this difference that I feel is the primary reason why Structuralist Cooperators will often side with Narrativists over an energized progressive movement.

Structuralist Cooperators see the Narrativist preoccupation with grand gestures that garner attention as childish and inevitably futile; whereas they perceive an energized progressive movements focus on marshaling resources I'm controlling the levers of power as a much more visceral and real threat to their authority. As such a group of established elites will perceive a rising Narrativist movement as a bunch of useful idiots that can be manipulated into stopping the greater threat of an energized progressive movement- before being eventually discarded.
Just gonna say I was re-reading this today because of the bomber. And it's really good.

I also want to combine this with Marx who wrote about the lumpenproletariat as the foot soldiers of reaction -- a class which he said did not have class consciousness and was made up of various vagabonds. Well, the bomber was a male stripper.

* # ¿ Oct 27, 2018 00:47
  • Quote
BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

R. Dieovich posted:

no, i definitely think this theory is a dead end and moves people away from truly liberatory frames of thinking. but that has nothing to do with probations given for kale-style narcissism and we've discussed this ad nauseum over pms.
In our eyes, individual terror is inadmissible precisely because it belittles the role of the masses in their own consciousness, reconciles them to their powerlessness, and turns their eyes and hopes towards a great avenger and liberator who some day will come and accomplish his mission. The anarchist prophets of the ‘propaganda of the deed’ can argue all they want about the elevating and stimulating influence of terrorist acts on the masses. Theoretical considerations and political experience prove otherwise. The more ‘effective’ the terrorist acts, the greater their impact, the more they reduce the interest of the masses in self-organisation and self-education. But the smoke from the confusion clears away, the panic disappears, the successor of the murdered minister makes his appearance, life again settles into the old rut, the wheel of capitalist exploitation turns as before; only the police repression grows more savage and brazen. And as a result, in place of the kindled hopes and artificially aroused excitement comes disillusionment and apathy.

-- Trotsky

* # ¿ Nov 1, 2018 04:06
  • Quote
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > PJ's Authoritarian thread: C-SPAM edition