6 ms·

While I do personally believe this, society having anonymous dissent is quite a new concept.

ok_dad 4y ago
"Publius" [0] might have something to say about that. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers
cal5k 4y ago
Not that it was "dissent", per se, but The Federalist Papers were published under the pseudonym "Publius", and I'd say there has been a long tradition of anonymous or pseudonymous dissent.
- swader999 4y ago
  I meant ideas that diverge from the norm. If you fear cancelling, lowering your social credit score, risking employment you probably won't publish ideas that stray.
collegeburner 4y ago
Anonymous pamphlets and the like were a tool in motivating support for the Revolutionary War.
anigbrowl 4y ago
Are you sure about that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_graffiti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_graffiti
gadflyinyoureye 4y ago
Depends on how you define new. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist were anonymous. Rosicrucianism And other such philosophies come from anonymous sources (they dissented to the religious norms of their time). Basically since the printing press Western societies have had anonymous dissent.
seti0Cha 4y ago
Not really. Publishing anonymously goes way back. Thomas Paine's Common Sense was published anonymously.
BitwiseFool 4y ago
I'm not sure about that, I think the main difference is that in the past the concept of identity was not as rigid and well-documented as it is today. Additionally there were way fewer ways to identify someone, either in real life or through their writing. I don't quite want to say 'security through obscurity', though.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pessimizer 4y ago
> society having anonymous dissent is quite a new concept. Quite the opposite. Most dissent since the time of print has been anonymous, and plenty before then. Society feeling that every utterance or bit of expression has to be assigned to a specific identity is quite a new concept, especially because it's only begun to become technically feasible.

"Publius" [0] might have something to say about that. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers

cal5k 4y ago

Not that it was "dissent", per se, but The Federalist Papers were published under the pseudonym "Publius", and I'd say there has been a long tradition of anonymous or pseudonymous dissent.

swader999 4y ago
I meant ideas that diverge from the norm. If you fear cancelling, lowering your social credit score, risking employment you probably won't publish ideas that stray.

collegeburner 4y ago

Anonymous pamphlets and the like were a tool in motivating support for the Revolutionary War.

anigbrowl 4y ago

Are you sure about that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_graffiti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_graffiti

gadflyinyoureye 4y ago

Depends on how you define new. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist were anonymous. Rosicrucianism And other such philosophies come from anonymous sources (they dissented to the religious norms of their time). Basically since the printing press Western societies have had anonymous dissent.

seti0Cha 4y ago

Not really. Publishing anonymously goes way back. Thomas Paine's Common Sense was published anonymously.

BitwiseFool 4y ago

I'm not sure about that, I think the main difference is that in the past the concept of identity was not as rigid and well-documented as it is today. Additionally there were way fewer ways to identify someone, either in real life or through their writing. I don't quite want to say 'security through obscurity', though.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

pessimizer 4y ago

> society having anonymous dissent is quite a new concept. Quite the opposite. Most dissent since the time of print has been anonymous, and plenty before then. Society feeling that every utterance or bit of expression has to be assigned to a specific identity is quite a new concept, especially because it's only begun to become technically feasible.