Answered by Matthew Bates on Oct 16th, 2019

Contemporary American liberal thought is dominated by race, gender, religion, sexuality, and socio-economic class issues. Conservatives call this “identity politics,” but lately liberals have begun to push back against that label. Whatever you want to call it, it is the lens through which liberals see the world.

And there’s no getting around it when it comes to the Founding Fathers:

They were rich, white men, most of whom were Christian, and many of whom owned slaves. Presumably, they were also all straight. If any of them weren’t straight, they kept it to themselves.

And, for many liberals these days, those facts about their identities must be considered before any discussion of their actions can take place.

Here’s an op-ed piece from the New York Times from earlier this year about the Founding Fathers:

Opinion | Why We Still Care About America’s Founders

It’s behind a paywall, but here are the opening two paragraphs:

That sort of “beginning with the negative identity politics” caveat is omnipresent in contemporary liberal thought when it comes to discussing anyone from history, including the Founding Fathers. They struggle to say anything positive without first pointing out the negative.

Identity politics is, for them, what government bureaucratic waste and ineptitude is for conservatives.

“Before I say anything positive about this government bureaucracy,” the conservative says, “I just want to point out how wasteful it is, and how it often fails in its mission….”

Switch the political perspective of the person speaking, and the order in which facts appear also switch. That is, if a conservative were writing about the Founding Fathers, they likely wouldn’t begin with the identity politics negatives. They’d know about them, they just wouldn’t think it relevant enough to lead off with. Those would go near the end, or be excluded completely.

And if a liberal were to talk about some government bureaucracy, they’d be more likely to lead off with the positives, and save the negatives for the end, if included at all.

Neither person would be wrong. They’re just both giving priority to the facts that they think are important.

If you enjoyed this article, please visit the original link https://qr.ae/pTfGQq and give an upvote!

Answered by Dima Vorobiev on March 10th, 2019

Ripples. Or, as we in the 21st century call it, “meme propagation”.

How it works

In the USSR, enemies of Soviet rule excelled in the production of political jokes. The jokes traversed the country in a matter of weeks, even in the darkest era of Stalinist purges. Everyone told them to each other, including the secret police executives—because they were funny. The jokes presented the rulers as stupid, unimaginative, or selfish simpletons—a far cry from the idealistic warriors for social justice the rulers insisted they were.

It also worked the other way. One of the most famous examples of rippling directed against stupid Capitalists was the story of a space pen: Is the story true that the US spent millions developing a space pen while the Russians used a simple pencil? Everyone found the story so hilarious that it has survived until our day.

Leverage is king

Some people have propaganda as their job to flog the message to the rest of humanity. They get paid for that. They are the stone that disturbs the surface.

And then there are true believers and fanboys. They do the work totally free, because they find something incredibly appealing about the message. They almost never have the same motivation that drives the owners of the propaganda machine. But they find a million reasons to love it. They not only translate the propaganda, they enhance and amplify it with their own words and passion.

They are the ripples.

Enemy ground

An important element of rippling are “useful idiots”. Rumors ascribe the expression to Lenin, who allegedly applied it to left-leaning and pacifist-minded Westerners. But these are to be found on both sides of every divide.

These are people who willingly spread propaganda from sources who objectively are their enemies. Consider alt-righters in the US who pour admiration on Putin, the man who keeps thousands of warheads trained on their homes. Or leftists and anti-Imperialists who admire Putin for his anti-Americanism, even though he espouses exactly the same values of imperial power and oligarchic Capitalism they claim to be fighting.

Funny how the KGB secret operatives who spread around political jokes in the USSR, joined the category of useful idiots. Of course, it was their job that required them to blend with the scene and charm the marks. This is why they told them, not because they were stupid. However, the example illustrates why good memes are golden: they make your enemies your influence agents.

Carrying elements

Useful idiots are a lucky bonus for meme masters. However, the main carrying element of rippling is people who are friendly or neutral to the message. And it’s not easy to tell them from useful idiots. In many cases, it’s your political sympathies that ultimately decide how to tell them apart.

Below, a cartoon from the Russian government propaganda channel. The hand of an American police officer holds a smoking gun. His dead victims’ bodies form the word “democracy” in Russian letters. Putinist propaganda views the idea of accountable government and rotation of power as a hostile meme that serves the selfish agenda of American self-assertion. Russians who criticize President Putin from the point of view of democracy and freedoms are considered “useful idiots” or concious agents of enemy powers.

Image credit: Google Images

If you enjoyed this article, please visit the original link https://qr.ae/TJUbD8 and give an upvote!

Answered by Habib Fanny on April 16th 2018

What’s wrong with this?

No, I’m not talking about Trump being president.

Let’s zoom out a bit.

No, I’m not talking about Mitch McConnell’s face. Let’s try another year.

See it? Not yet?

Okay, let’s keep going then.

Why are so many people wearing overcoats?

Because it’s cold. Why?

Because it’s January and people are outdoors.

Why?

Because it’s the tradition to hold the inauguration ceremony on the steps of the Capitol.

Why?

Because of the War of 1812.

During this war, American troops plundered and set fire to the buildings of the Legislative Assembly of Upper Canada in York (Modern-day Toronto).

In retaliation, in 1814, after defeating the US troops in the disastrous Battle of Bladensburg, the Brits set fire to Washington D.C.

The Presidential Mansion (it wasn’t known as the White House yet) was burned, and so was the Capitol.

When James Monroe was inaugurated in 1817, there weren’t any buildings left in D.C. that could host the inauguration. So, the decision was made to hold it on the steps of the Capitol.

And that became a tradition. Of course, it wasn’t nearly as cold then, because presidents used to be inaugurated in March. In 1937, people started holding the inauguration on January 20th, but they kept it outdoors, because… tradition.

And that, kids, is why you shouldn’t invade Canada and burn their buildings. It will lead to a cascade of events that will culminate in the absurd scenario where you have to freeze your ass off every 4 years when your president is being sworn in.

If you enjoyed this article, please visit the original link https://qr.ae/TDx7vC and give an upvote!