Oh jeez I just started this book and it’s terrible. The author seems like they front-loaded the real reason they’re interested in Antimemes, which is cause they

Oh jeez I just started this book and it’s terrible. The author seems like they front-loaded the real reason they’re interested in Antimemes, which is cause they have political opinions that they want to avoid the consequences of having to publicly admit, and then they go about molding the idea of Antimemes to formalize bad politics as a philosophy rather than actually explore the idea. The big schism in their thinking happens when they refuse to label legal contracts or math as Antimemes, which of course ruins the whole idea in the first place. In this authors eyes Antimemes are just normal memes that no one wants to admit to, which means they’re not functionally different from memes in any way besides the fact that the person engaging with them is a coward. In fact, this entire book just seems like a philosophical formalization of being a little scaredy cat, and it’s not even an interesting one like The Americanization Of Emily. You know how people are a product of their culture? Have you ever read a book from someone whose culture is so overpowering and yet so limiting? Thank god I never moved to San Francisco. I’m certainly not reading a book by someone who’s discovered a secret arcane truth underlying communication. I’m reading a book by someone who’s so deep in their safe space secret chat rooms that they’ve never had their ideas challenged or elaborated on once.