6 ms·

Gulag? Forced psychiatric internment?

by dhoe 6y ago

TeMPOraL 6y ago
Advancing in society by demonstrating your commitment to the proclaimed values, through ratting out your less committed neighbors, or even falsely accusing them of being less committed.
- strogonoff 6y ago
  Do you think it makes a difference, though, if in one case the system was installed and enforced by a minority in a top-down fashion without general population having a say in it, whereas in the other it appears to be organically arising in society?
  - JasonFruit 6y ago
    It may appear to you to be organically arising in society, but to many people, it seems to be actively encouraged by propaganda efforts — "anti-extremism training", "diversity training", and the like — and the embrace of those in power, whether governmental or private, even extending to asymmetrical enforcement of laws based on the wokeness of the violators.
    - Kye 6y ago
      These are mostly coming from the same demographics that imposed the systems of power in the first place. Don't confuse well-meaning but misguided efforts by people trying to do better than people they share identities with for efforts from the people they're trying to be better for.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    What I recall from my history lessons is that the top-down system you refer to was the end stage of a revolution that arose organically across the population just a few decades earlier. Well, "organically". As all such things go, there were real problems affecting a lot of people, but once the movement to fix those problems gained steam, it got quickly leveraged and taken over by various political and economic groups around the world. In the turmoil that followed, one of the groups that co-opted the banner of the initial movement managed to take over Russia, and give birth to USSR. The point being, USSR did not come out of the blue. What you want to compare the current social trends to is what Russia looked like in the decade prior to the October Revolution.
    - strogonoff 6y ago
      I believe, while the general population’s suffering has clearly contributed to the original cause of the revolution, it did not in case of the subsequent forced top-down censorship system, which was established purely by and for the new elites to maintain power. I like to think that distinguishes it from the current “woke” culture, but maybe I’m mistaken and not able to notice a coordinated manipulation of public opinion by some hidden force. It smells of a conspiracy theory, though.
      - TeMPOraL 6y ago
        > while the general population’s suffering has clearly contributed to the original cause of the revolution, it did not in case of the subsequent forced top-down censorship system, which was established purely by and for the new elites to maintain power. Agreed. We're not there yet, and perhaps (hopefully) we'll never be - that's why I alluded to the times before October Revolution, back when USSR itself didn't exist yet, but the culture that gave rise to it did. > but maybe I’m mistaken and not able to notice a coordinated manipulation of public opinion by some hidden force. It smells of a conspiracy theory, though. I'm not claiming that either. You're right - it would be a conspiracy theory. I don't believe there's any large-scale coordination at play. But I do believe in lots of small-scale coordination in fierce competition - another similarity to pre-revolution Russia. Much like back then (and always, in general), people aspiring for power and/or money try to get ahead on the platform of whatever is the most heated social issue. They co-opt the movement, adopt the banners, and compete against both the establishment / countermovers and other upstarts ostensibly on the same side. I think we can see this today, with how politicians, media and corporations get involved. It's not because they want to achieve the original goals of the movement - they want to use it to gain power and/or money. I think the above is somewhat obvious and universal point - politics and economy seems to always work like this. The banners change; the behavior, not so much. Thinking more about it, I see one similarity between current "culture war" and the USSR, which may be why 'Andrew_nenakhov compared the current situation to USSR, and not to Russia at the turn of XX century. Even in USSR, the censorship and behavior policing wasn't binary - either you're a Good Commie or on a train to a gulag. More commonly, if you weren't red enough, you would find yourself denied opportunities and dignity. Not in the Party? Your kid won't get into the university. Someone said you're not fully committed to the Fatherland? That job in the factory is not for you anymore. Oh, and your neighbors don't want to talk with you now - mostly because they're afraid to be tarnished by association. Yes, there was a lot of violence and torture and death involved in policing the citizens, but also a lot of such softer pressure. Perhaps even more of it in the Soviet satellite states. Where it connects to the modern "culture war" is that the same social policing seems to be using the market instead of top-down state control. In the USSR, your foreman would kick you out because they're afraid of the head of local Party branch, who was afraid of their political officer, and so on, all the way to Stalin, in a top-down hierarchy of threat. Today, people fall in line because they're afraid of getting fired because of a Twitter mob; their employers are afraid of the Twitter mob causing the company to lose investors or market share. This is a new factor. A distributed, stochastic, persistent threat. Arguably not possible before social media. There's no central coordination required, but the effects are as predictable as if there was an actual dictator on top of things.
  - PicassoCTs 6y ago
    Also interrogating offenders without a honest wish for discourse and more to get them to step on one of thousands "bells&whistles" in the minefields and thus condemn them in public for some "thought"-crime and silence them forever with the chill factor. Not everyone has the time and dedication to be a full time culture warriors. Lots of people will vote to whoever promises to end this madness.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
    Is it organic if there now appears to be a growing push back?
    - strogonoff 6y ago
      To me, the nature of originating from and being enforced top-down by a single source (a tiny minority) in order for itself to stay in power is what made the censorship system in the USSR “inorganic”, and so far it seems to me not to be the case with the “woke” culture.
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
I wouldn't rule out the possibility.
neartheplain 6y ago
Remember the PBS lawyer who said Republican voters should have their children put in re-education camps? https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-entertainment-coronavirus-pandemic-8f586d687ab332777a7a059457ff818e https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-entertainment-corona...
- toiletfuneral 6y ago
  I grew up in an extremely conservative family and they watch tucker Carlson and openly fantasize about shooing black protestors. So I dunno man, be as mad at a shitty lib PBS lawyer as you want I guess, but only 1 side is gearing up
- dhoe 6y ago
  I agree that this guy losing his job over something he says at a bar is a prime example of right wing cancel culture.
  - neartheplain 6y ago
    “This is Wesley Yang’s “Dexter rule,” named for the TV serial killer who kills only other killers: Cancel only the cancelers.” https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/america-has-lost-ability-forgive/618336/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/america-ha...
  - rufus_foreman 6y ago
    He lost his job at PBS. PBS is right wing now?

Gulag? Forced psychiatric internment?

by dhoe 6y ago

Gulag? Forced psychiatric internment?

Advancing in society by demonstrating your commitment to the proclaimed values, through ratting out your less committed neighbors, or even falsely accusing them of being less committed.

strogonoff 6y ago
Do you think it makes a difference, though, if in one case the system was installed and enforced by a minority in a top-down fashion without general population having a say in it, whereas in the other it appears to be organically arising in society?
- JasonFruit 6y ago
  It may appear to you to be organically arising in society, but to many people, it seems to be actively encouraged by propaganda efforts — "anti-extremism training", "diversity training", and the like — and the embrace of those in power, whether governmental or private, even extending to asymmetrical enforcement of laws based on the wokeness of the violators.
  - Kye 6y ago
    These are mostly coming from the same demographics that imposed the systems of power in the first place. Don't confuse well-meaning but misguided efforts by people trying to do better than people they share identities with for efforts from the people they're trying to be better for.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  What I recall from my history lessons is that the top-down system you refer to was the end stage of a revolution that arose organically across the population just a few decades earlier. Well, "organically". As all such things go, there were real problems affecting a lot of people, but once the movement to fix those problems gained steam, it got quickly leveraged and taken over by various political and economic groups around the world. In the turmoil that followed, one of the groups that co-opted the banner of the initial movement managed to take over Russia, and give birth to USSR. The point being, USSR did not come out of the blue. What you want to compare the current social trends to is what Russia looked like in the decade prior to the October Revolution.
  - strogonoff 6y ago
    I believe, while the general population’s suffering has clearly contributed to the original cause of the revolution, it did not in case of the subsequent forced top-down censorship system, which was established purely by and for the new elites to maintain power. I like to think that distinguishes it from the current “woke” culture, but maybe I’m mistaken and not able to notice a coordinated manipulation of public opinion by some hidden force. It smells of a conspiracy theory, though.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      > while the general population’s suffering has clearly contributed to the original cause of the revolution, it did not in case of the subsequent forced top-down censorship system, which was established purely by and for the new elites to maintain power. Agreed. We're not there yet, and perhaps (hopefully) we'll never be - that's why I alluded to the times before October Revolution, back when USSR itself didn't exist yet, but the culture that gave rise to it did. > but maybe I’m mistaken and not able to notice a coordinated manipulation of public opinion by some hidden force. It smells of a conspiracy theory, though. I'm not claiming that either. You're right - it would be a conspiracy theory. I don't believe there's any large-scale coordination at play. But I do believe in lots of small-scale coordination in fierce competition - another similarity to pre-revolution Russia. Much like back then (and always, in general), people aspiring for power and/or money try to get ahead on the platform of whatever is the most heated social issue. They co-opt the movement, adopt the banners, and compete against both the establishment / countermovers and other upstarts ostensibly on the same side. I think we can see this today, with how politicians, media and corporations get involved. It's not because they want to achieve the original goals of the movement - they want to use it to gain power and/or money. I think the above is somewhat obvious and universal point - politics and economy seems to always work like this. The banners change; the behavior, not so much. Thinking more about it, I see one similarity between current "culture war" and the USSR, which may be why 'Andrew_nenakhov compared the current situation to USSR, and not to Russia at the turn of XX century. Even in USSR, the censorship and behavior policing wasn't binary - either you're a Good Commie or on a train to a gulag. More commonly, if you weren't red enough, you would find yourself denied opportunities and dignity. Not in the Party? Your kid won't get into the university. Someone said you're not fully committed to the Fatherland? That job in the factory is not for you anymore. Oh, and your neighbors don't want to talk with you now - mostly because they're afraid to be tarnished by association. Yes, there was a lot of violence and torture and death involved in policing the citizens, but also a lot of such softer pressure. Perhaps even more of it in the Soviet satellite states. Where it connects to the modern "culture war" is that the same social policing seems to be using the market instead of top-down state control. In the USSR, your foreman would kick you out because they're afraid of the head of local Party branch, who was afraid of their political officer, and so on, all the way to Stalin, in a top-down hierarchy of threat. Today, people fall in line because they're afraid of getting fired because of a Twitter mob; their employers are afraid of the Twitter mob causing the company to lose investors or market share. This is a new factor. A distributed, stochastic, persistent threat. Arguably not possible before social media. There's no central coordination required, but the effects are as predictable as if there was an actual dictator on top of things.
- PicassoCTs 6y ago
  Also interrogating offenders without a honest wish for discourse and more to get them to step on one of thousands "bells&whistles" in the minefields and thus condemn them in public for some "thought"-crime and silence them forever with the chill factor. Not everyone has the time and dedication to be a full time culture warriors. Lots of people will vote to whoever promises to end this madness.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  Is it organic if there now appears to be a growing push back?
  - strogonoff 6y ago
    To me, the nature of originating from and being enforced top-down by a single source (a tiny minority) in order for itself to stay in power is what made the censorship system in the USSR “inorganic”, and so far it seems to me not to be the case with the “woke” culture.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago

I wouldn't rule out the possibility.

neartheplain 6y ago

Remember the PBS lawyer who said Republican voters should have their children put in re-education camps? https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-entertainment-coronavirus-pandemic-8f586d687ab332777a7a059457ff818e https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-entertainment-corona...

toiletfuneral 6y ago
I grew up in an extremely conservative family and they watch tucker Carlson and openly fantasize about shooing black protestors. So I dunno man, be as mad at a shitty lib PBS lawyer as you want I guess, but only 1 side is gearing up
dhoe 6y ago
I agree that this guy losing his job over something he says at a bar is a prime example of right wing cancel culture.
- neartheplain 6y ago
  “This is Wesley Yang’s “Dexter rule,” named for the TV serial killer who kills only other killers: Cancel only the cancelers.” https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/america-has-lost-ability-forgive/618336/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/america-ha...
- rufus_foreman 6y ago
  He lost his job at PBS. PBS is right wing now?