3 ms·

One example might help reinforce my case. Note to commenters, I am not making any judgements on these communities, these are just my observations. A hard left

by alva 10y ago

One example might help reinforce my case. Note to commenters, I am not making any judgements on these communities, these are just my observations. A hard left community which is heavily invested in identity politics is inherently vulnerable to this type of destruction. It is in the DNA of the movement. I have witnessed this in many groups. Group starts building large number of members for a cause, lets call it "Womans March". Initially all unified behind a common cause. Exploit identity politics to break it. "Wow, I can't believe ALL the admins are white woman" "smh, these people need to stay in their lane and lets POC take charge" "my trans* friend was just messaged by an admin telling them "men" aren't allowed" "some of the people on this page are too ghetto" As long as the culture is focused on grievance and division, they will divide and divide with a miniscule amount of pushing. Resentment and infighting grow almost exponentially. A group of 5 co-ordinated trolls using these tactics collapse massive communities over and over again. You would not believe how effective it is. These are all old CIA tactics, unclassified manuals are studied and disseminated.

breatheoften 10y ago
I think the actual explanatory power from your example comes from the fact that these are communities whose purpose is to grow over time. The coordinated trolling is a means to attack that growth by destroying the means of legitimate discourse (particularly around any form of disagreement) and by recruiting more trolls (who aren't part of the original 5 coordinators but who might share the goal of the coordinators). The efficacy of this tactic has nothing to do with the properties of the community being attacked (other than that it's a community that exists to grow) and everything to do with the properties and volume of the attackers. Additionally -- I think the women's march example undermines your claim. Despite significant coordinated deployment of these tactics, the group became quite large indeed. The only people who now subscribe to your view that it has collapsed are those who oppose the agenda of the women's march. There is nothing objective to substantiate your claim that it has collapsed.
- Mikeb85 10y ago
  What did the women's march accomplish? Any policy changes? Any social reform? Frankly, it was rather absurd seeing posters of a woman in a hijab as a poster for freedom and equality considering the hijab is a tool of social oppression. In the Middle East women's rights groups protest against the hijab, not for it. Not to mention it did get hijacked by groups with disparate agendas. At the end of the day, it's already been forgotten and accomplished nothing.
  - breatheoften 10y ago
    If it has been forgotten than why are we talking about it? I challenge you to support the argument that your perception that the movement accomplished nothing is unbiased. The reality is that the movement hasn't ended yet. It was the largest protest in American history and there will be fruits born from that. The opposition party is without any official power in government at the moment so if your expectation was an immediate sea change in policy that seems an unrealistically high standard. Other areas (that carry real effects) are already affected however -- that kind of political expression has many soft power effects. Companies are marketing to that demographic (rather than sticking to non-political messaging), government officials who disagree with illegal policy orders presented to them are seeing and feeling support from a large segment of the population to oppose and resist. Many local governments are seeing sharp increases in community participation at local events. Congress critters are being stalked by opposition supporters, cancelling public speaking events sometimes, their call centers are overwhelmed with dissenting opinions. This stuff is going to matter despite your promises of non-effect. You frame an ongoing movement as entirely impotent and by doing so you very much ignore the important reality of soft power in government and politics.
    - Mikeb85 10y ago
      Occupy Wall Street was also a big movement. What did it accomplish? Bernie's rise in the primaries was a movement, he brought out big crowds, what good did that do? Let's face it, the Republicans winning all 3 branches of power and a majority of state institutions is far more of a statement than a large turnout for a protest.

by alva 10y ago

breatheoften 10y ago

I think the actual explanatory power from your example comes from the fact that these are communities whose purpose is to grow over time. The coordinated trolling is a means to attack that growth by destroying the means of legitimate discourse (particularly around any form of disagreement) and by recruiting more trolls (who aren't part of the original 5 coordinators but who might share the goal of the coordinators). The efficacy of this tactic has nothing to do with the properties of the community being attacked (other than that it's a community that exists to grow) and everything to do with the properties and volume of the attackers. Additionally -- I think the women's march example undermines your claim. Despite significant coordinated deployment of these tactics, the group became quite large indeed. The only people who now subscribe to your view that it has collapsed are those who oppose the agenda of the women's march. There is nothing objective to substantiate your claim that it has collapsed.

Mikeb85 10y ago
What did the women's march accomplish? Any policy changes? Any social reform? Frankly, it was rather absurd seeing posters of a woman in a hijab as a poster for freedom and equality considering the hijab is a tool of social oppression. In the Middle East women's rights groups protest against the hijab, not for it. Not to mention it did get hijacked by groups with disparate agendas. At the end of the day, it's already been forgotten and accomplished nothing.
- breatheoften 10y ago
  If it has been forgotten than why are we talking about it? I challenge you to support the argument that your perception that the movement accomplished nothing is unbiased. The reality is that the movement hasn't ended yet. It was the largest protest in American history and there will be fruits born from that. The opposition party is without any official power in government at the moment so if your expectation was an immediate sea change in policy that seems an unrealistically high standard. Other areas (that carry real effects) are already affected however -- that kind of political expression has many soft power effects. Companies are marketing to that demographic (rather than sticking to non-political messaging), government officials who disagree with illegal policy orders presented to them are seeing and feeling support from a large segment of the population to oppose and resist. Many local governments are seeing sharp increases in community participation at local events. Congress critters are being stalked by opposition supporters, cancelling public speaking events sometimes, their call centers are overwhelmed with dissenting opinions. This stuff is going to matter despite your promises of non-effect. You frame an ongoing movement as entirely impotent and by doing so you very much ignore the important reality of soft power in government and politics.
  - Mikeb85 10y ago
    Occupy Wall Street was also a big movement. What did it accomplish? Bernie's rise in the primaries was a movement, he brought out big crowds, what good did that do? Let's face it, the Republicans winning all 3 branches of power and a majority of state institutions is far more of a statement than a large turnout for a protest.