Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
MisterSwig

How Nazis Recruit Normie Conservatives For Meme Wars

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Craig24 said:

If a nefarious political group started the meme "profits are good" should we stop saying it?

Yes, absolutely, if saying it (in the particular fashion of a meme, like the one we're discussing) helped to further the agenda of that nefarious political group and/or suggested that we were affiliated with it or endorsed it.

Can we continue to make a reasoned case that "profits are good" (in context; given liberty; as opposed to a group promoting "profits are good" for the purpose of supporting corporate subsidies, or etc.)? Of course, just as we can continue to argue against anti-white racism (and in that sense, that "it is okay to be white").

But it would be wrong to participate in the nefarious group's "profits are good" meme campaign, and it would be intellectually irresponsible to pretend like the specific context does not exist or does not matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DonAthos said:

Yes, absolutely, if saying it (in the particular fashion of a meme, like the one we're discussing) helped to further the agenda of that nefarious political group and/or suggested that we were affiliated with it or endorsed it.

Self-induced doublethink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DonAthos said:

Of course, just as we can continue to argue against anti-white racism (and in that sense, that "it is okay to be white").

Would you argue against "anti-fascist" memes by saying "it's okay to be a fascist"? I mean, it's legal to be a fascist, right?

And in response to "anti-Kantian" memes, is it "okay to be a Kantian"? He never physically hurt anyone.

How are you arguing against anti-white racism by saying "it's okay to be white"? That's not an argument. It's an arbitrary assertion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JASKN said:

Self-induced doublethink?

There's no doublethink involved, JASKN. It's not doublethink to understand that "it's okay to be white" (in the proper context) and to believe that one should simultaneously not participate in a neo-Nazi meme. Understanding that the meaning changes in different contexts is not doublethink -- just regular old think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes absolutely. Especially if someone comes out with a trivially true statement like that, it would be doltish to not go "hmm, who started this, what's their agenda," and indeed if there was an "air is good" campaign and it turned out to be a Clinton cap and trade scheme, they themselves admit they would look into the context of the group. Can we imagine them going "but air is good! Don't doublethink! Don't question the agenda! Genetic fallacy!" 

Who knew there'd be objectivists against contextual, nuanced thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t give a crap what Neonazis think or do to further whatever goals they may have, and likewise I don’t give a crap about people who believe those ideas or help to further those goals. Why would I accept or care about some idiotic new meaning given to normal English phrases by this group? What is the standard for accepting their “context”/meaning over common understanding? Is it a majority group of the US population? Isn’t this implicitly siding with “groupthink”?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, JASKN said:

I don’t give a crap what Neonazis think or do to further whatever goals they may have...

"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." -- J.R.R. Tolkien and not Ayn Rand, of course, though I should mention that I believe I've also seen this quote from time to time on the site front page.

It's not somehow better or more moral to leave things out, to ignore context, to pretend that we don't know something, or act as though something weren't true. "Full context" is just that -- full context. And you may not give a crap about the neo-Nazis, but it might well be the case that they have plans for you; given what I know about them, probably best not to support their efforts, if you can help it.

40 minutes ago, JASKN said:

Why would I accept or care about some idiotic new meaning given to normal English phrases by this group?

Because this is how language and communication works. If someone invites you to "Netflix and chill," you're better off knowing what they mean, in context, rather than taking it literally on some principle and intentionally blinding yourself to their actual communication. All communication exists in some context, and that context is vital for understanding the meaning.

If someone invites you to an "it's okay to be white" rally, probably you should pack a tiki torch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JASKN said:

I don’t give a crap what Neonazis think or do to further whatever goals they may have, and likewise I don’t give a crap about people who believe those ideas or help to further those goals. Why would I accept or care about some idiotic new meaning given to normal English phrases by this group? What is the standard for accepting their “context”/meaning over common understanding? Is it a majority group of the US population? Isn’t this implicitly siding with “groupthink”?

Because there is no such thing as reality without context, and being ignorant of reality is just dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Craig24 said:

Is selfishness good because I say so or because it is so?

Because it benefits your life. What is good about the IOTBW meme?

It pisses off Leftists? Why not embrace all of the memes that piss off Leftists, if that's your standard?

It's not a racist statement? Why not embrace all of the non-racist memes?

It literally recognizes a universal truth about reality? What truth is that: that you shouldn't judge people by their skin color? That's not what the words literally mean. It's a figurative meaning you've drawn from your own subjective context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 2046 said:

Because there is no such thing as reality without context, and being ignorant of reality is just dumb.

 

2 hours ago, DonAthos said:

If someone invites you to an "it's okay to be white" rally, probably you should pack a tiki torch.

 

So, there’s nothing we can do. A nazi decides “its ok to be white” means one thing to him, and we’re obligated to accept that meaning into our own brains. This really makes life so much easier... Now, I don’t have to figure anything out myself. I can just use some guy’s hateful screams instead.

Edited by JASKN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

Because it benefits your life. What is good about the IOTBW meme?

It's up to me to decide that.  It benefits me to remind a racist that it's ok to be (insert the color he doesn't like) anytime he tries to push his view.  Otherwise I will not say a word.  I'm not campaigning.  I'm communicating.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Craig24 said:

It's up to me to decide that.  It benefits me to remind a racist that it's ok to be (insert the color he doesn't like) anytime he tries to push his view.  Otherwise I will not say a word.  I'm not campaigning.  I'm communicating.   

That's the thing: it doesn't benefit you to campaign with white nationalists. And that's what you are doing: campaigning, sloganizing. We don't need alt-right sloganizing to beat the SJWs, we need concise argumentation and confrontation of their theories, all of which this fails to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Craig24 said:

It benefits me to remind a racist that it's ok to be (insert the color he doesn't like) anytime he tries to push his view.

When a racist accuses you of having white privilege or inherent bias, you say that it's okay to be white? I think it's better to call a spade a spade. I tell them they are being racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 2046 said:

That's the thing: it doesn't benefit you to campaign with white nationalists.

You aren't paying attention.  I'm NOT campaigning with anyone.  I'm communicating and only if someone pushes their racism.  Otherwise there is nothing to say.   

 

1 hour ago, MisterSwig said:

When a racist accuses you of having white privilege or inherent bias, you say that it's okay to be white?

It's an option.  I'm not going to ask anyone for permission to say it if I do.  If I decide to say it then I will say it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Craig24 said:

I'm NOT campaigning with anyone.  I'm communicating and only if someone pushes their racism.  Otherwise there is nothing to say.   

You might not intend to, but when you use a bromide, you would implicitly support the people who really intend a propaganda message. It's not like saying "it's okay to be black, it's okay to be white, it's okay to be Korean, because none of these things matter a whole lot at all." We aren't talking about snipping quotes that drops all context of a phrase. A meme has no context - if it had one, neo-Nazis know no one like to hear "it's okay to be white because people are defined by their race, it's okay to see my race as superior to me, and your race superior for you."  So they drop the context and hope that the literal blank-out isn't filled in.

How do you know why an individual says "IOTBW"? There is no way to know, there is nothing to the empty phrase shouted out as a slogan! Us around here wouldn't mean the tribalist phrasing and would say something about the irrationality of tribal identity. That wouldn't really be a meme though if you add context. I'd be glad you confronted the discussion and the irrational ideas. If you don't add context, you allow the neo-Nazi intent to grow. If you plaster it around to offend liberals as a matter of political strategy, you may get laughs, but you allow the neo-Nazi and the racist end of the alt-right to enter the zeitgeist.

A neo-Nazi would be glad you campaigned for them even if you didn't realize you did and never wanted to. If you just said "it's okay to be white, because I don't give a damn what your race is", that's fine to me and stands against any racist message. Or if someone refers to your race as if it matters, say "Who cares?" Just don't go using IOTBW as an image or as a meme without context.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, JASKN said:

So, there’s nothing we can do. A nazi decides “its ok to be white” means one thing to him, and we’re obligated to accept that meaning into our own brains. This really makes life so much easier... Now, I don’t have to figure anything out myself. I can just use some guy’s hateful screams instead.

I really don't know what you mean by "obligated to accept that meaning into our own brains," unless you're trying to describe the process of "understanding"? If so, then yes: to understand what another person means, you are obligated to accept that meaning (i.e. what they intend), with reference to relevant context, into your own brain. That's how you are able to understand another human being.

Look, I'm sure you get this with respect to other things... it's like... take "Black Lives Matter." Is it a true statement that "black lives matter"? I'd guess (or hope) that we can all agree that it is. Yet in 2017, in our society, when someone says "black lives matter," they mean more than the simple identification of a true statement. And participating by, say, having a sign on your lawn which reads "black lives matter" is a political act which goes beyond the mere utterance of a true statement.

It's not that you have to "use some guy's hateful screams" or have the idea that "black lives matter" redefined for yourself, or whatnot, it's just that you have to... you know, be aware of what's going on around you, and be aware of what you're communicating to others. If you're naive and ignorant, and wear a "Black Lives Matter" shirt because you say to yourself, "well, it's true enough that black lives matter... no harm in saying something true," then that's fine as far as it goes. You'll suffer the consequences you were ignorant of, as you lend support to that movement (even unawares) and as other people (in reason) group you together with that movement.

But it is another thing altogether to be aware of what "black lives matter" means in context, and yet argue that the context doesn't matter. That you should be able to wear the shirt, or post the sign, and not care about the real world consequences of your action. That's arguing for the intentional dropping of context, and it is a very bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2017 at 2:08 PM, MisterSwig said:

If your context allows the idea that it's okay to be white or non-white, then what are you talking about when you emphasize one over the other? Your one-sided assertion is completely arbitrary. Why emphasize white over non-white? What's the point? Most likely you embrace it because your context is actually a biased one, and you implicitly accept the premise that white is preferential to non-white. After all, it is your skin color. Why shouldn't you prefer it?

Again, the point of emphasizing white over non-white is precisely to create cognitive dissonance.   There are anti-white racists for whom it is most definitely true that it is NOT okay to be white.  Those people are everywhere these days, on campus and on corporate boards and in politics. 

Apple's Black Diversity Chief Steps Down After Saying White Men Are Diverse, Will Be Replaced By A White Woman

It's okay to be male.

edit: or perhaps it is more triggering to write "It's okay to be a man."

Edited by Grames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canvas the neighborhood with your Nazi pals! It's a great way to stick it to those libtards, yeah really doing individualism a favor there.

Also I'm not sure if you understand how cognitive dissonance works. CD isn't just being exposed to any old disagreement whenever. CD is when two contradictory beleifs are exposed within the same person. People who think it's not okay to be a race aren't being exposed to contradictory seld-held beliefs by viewing your posters. You know... cause they're racists already.

People who already don't care about skin color aren't being exposed to contradictory self-held beliefs either. They're more likely to just be suspicious at the motivations of your campaign, and lo and behold, when they research the founding group's white nationalist ideology, they're gonna be repulsed. Good job.

Edited by 2046

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Grames said:

Again, the point of emphasizing white over non-white is precisely to create cognitive dissonance.

I don't understand, why is this a good thing? Wouldn't it be better to show a person rationality rather than get them to purposely feel frustrated and self-conflicted? Dissonance is good only if you promote it in an environment of truth-seeking. Memes are not a form of truth-seeking.

I don't think anyone disagreed that some people really do think it's not okay to be a certain race. No need to say so, we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Eiuol said:

I don't understand, why is this a good thing? Wouldn't it be better to show a person rationality rather than get them to purposely feel frustrated and self-conflicted? Dissonance is good only if you promote it in an environment of truth-seeking. Memes are not a form of truth-seeking.

I don't think anyone disagreed that some people really do think it's not okay to be a certain race. No need to say so, we know.

Thinking is hard.   People won't do it without motivation.  Awareness of a problem creates motivation.  A meme can provoke the cognitive dissonance that leads to awareness of a problem rather than obliviousness.  Reasoning would be the last thing to happen, not the first. 

This reminds me of passage from the Declaration of Independence: " ..and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Grames said:

Again, the point of emphasizing white over non-white is precisely to create cognitive dissonance.

I get that. But I'm looking for some rationale as to why cognitive dissonance? Why is that a value to you? If a Leftists says that you should be ashamed of being white, why not reply that it's okay to have pride in being white? Or if they say white people are the worst race, why not respond by saying white people are the best race? At what point do you hop off the troll's cognitive dissonance bandwagon? 

Edited by MisterSwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Grames said:

This reminds me of passage from the Declaration of Independence: " ..and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

And Objectivists are not immune from this.  Quite the opposite.  We're all too prone to think that, because the current situation doesn't make survival impossible, it can be tolerated...no matter how many rights are trampled, no matter how much of our lives are taxed and regulated away...what we have left is still better than doing the nasty, dirty,and dangerous work of putting an end to the anti-human society we live in.

Of course, one day we'll wake up and find that the situation can't be tolerated. But by then, the only choice  -- aside from simply giving up -- will be violence, either dishing it our or taking it or both.  A lot of people, including -- and especially -- Objectivists will die.

 

But that's for tomorrow, and we are Objectivists.  If we can survive today, we don't need to concern ourselves with surviving tomorrow.

(In case there's an idiot out there: that's bitterness and sarcasm.  Adjust your response accordingly.)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Invictus2017 said:

And Objectivists are not immune from this.  Quite the opposite.  We're all too prone to think that, because the current situation doesn't make survival impossible, it can be tolerated...no matter how many rights are trampled, no matter how much of our lives are taxed and regulated away...what we have left is still better than doing the nasty, dirty,and dangerous work of putting an end to the anti-human society we live in.

Of course, one day we'll wake up and find that the situation can't be tolerated. But by then, the only choice  -- aside from simply giving up -- will be violence, either dishing it our or taking it or both.  A lot of people, including -- and especially -- Objectivists will die.

Your participation in this thread has been interesting -- the things you choose to respond to, or comment on (and the things that you do not) -- and I still don't quite know what you intend, overall.

I agree with what you've written above. Many Objectivists are far too blase regarding the injustices (especially) of modern America, and I've had several arguments on this site with people who say, essentially, that "things aren't so bad." Well, to that I say it depends on who you are, and how directly you suffer from those injustices.

But how do I take this observation together with the thread topic? Does this mean that it's appropriate to participate in a neo-Nazi campaign, to shake things up? I don't believe so. I think that lends support to the wrong people, and it increases the likelihood of things not only not getting better, but potentially getting far worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Grames said:

Thinking is hard.   People won't do it without motivation.  Awareness of a problem creates motivation.  A meme can provoke the cognitive dissonance that leads to awareness of a problem rather than obliviousness.  Reasoning would be the last thing to happen, not the first.

I don't think that's anywhere near sufficient. For sure, awareness is necessary, but the trouble is, awareness also opens up the possibility someone will resist a change even more. So we'd need to ask: what forms of media or persuasion will bring awareness to a problem while promoting the positive change you desire? A meme with neo-Nazi roots is not one of the forms that would do any good. Even without analyzing the intent of IOTBW, taken as only a meme, it won't do any good. A meme is contextless so it won't bring about some rational realization. It can't. It doesn't lead anywhere. A Socratic method might produce dissonance that leads to rejecting the bad idea after a while. A meme method would lead to people being angry, or amusing people who agree with you.

I don't disagree about dissonance in general. I disagree that memes would get anyone to change their mind. The "target" would probably only get angry and resist change even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DonAthos said:

Your participation in this thread has been interesting -- the things you choose to respond to, or comment on (and the things that you do not) -- and I still don't quite know what you intend, overall.

My silence is largely due to disinterest -- I don't think memes much matter.  People who are unthinking accepters of ideas are no more than force multipliers, and they'll serve whoever happens to catch their unthinking fancy.  They won't serve reason, that's for sure.  If they're not spreading Nazi memes, they'll be spreading Christian memes, or Antifa memes, or whatever. So why worry about whether saying "White lives matter" helps the Nazis?  It only helps them against the equally evil, and abstaining from saying "White lives matter" will in no way serve  rationality.  Whether one does or does not say "White lives matter" should be decided based on the needs of your own life, and not on whether it serves the ends of one gang of thugs as they battle another gang of thugs for the alleged minds of sheeple.

As to what I respond to, I wouldn't look for an agenda there.  I don't really have one in this thread; it's whatever happens to trigger a thought I want to share.

You might recall that I titled my intro post "Living on the edge of a volcano".  I assumed that people understood that I was not merely referring to myself, but to all of us -- that we're all within range of an unthinking violence that could destroy our lives at any moment, that it is sheer luck that others here haven't experienced what happened to me or something equally awful. (Or worse.  I'm still alive and in command of my faculties. Others have not been so lucky.) But I've seen little sign of it.  Instead, we're beating up one another for the sin of saying/not saying "White lives matter".  Sheesh.
 

It may be true that ARI and company will save the day, that America will come to its collective senses and reject the irrationality that infects it today.  But it is insane to act as if that will happen, to take no thought for the possibility -- I would say the near certainty -- that any rationality will appear only after a period of violence and destruction.

I, of course, am acutely aware of that possibility, and so I'm easily provoked to say that we need to wake up and smell the coffee.... Hence, my reaction to the quote from the Declaration of Independence.

Edited by Invictus2017

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×