Well, yes, but does the same apply outside the 3% when it comes to the weird infighting? Most Republicans I know hate Joe Biden, not Bill Kristol; most not-extremely-online Democrats are annoyed at Joe Manchin but loathe Donald Trump.
Well, yes, but does the same apply outside the 3% when it comes to the weird infighting? Most Republicans I know hate Joe Biden, not Bill Kristol; most not-extremely-online Democrats are annoyed at Joe Manchin but loathe Donald Trump.
Hyperbole is the coin of the realm these days. Possibly connected to the popular acceptance of Richard Dawkins' "meme" concept, as if "memes" held some profound science-based insight with overarching power over human cognition and critical assessment of verbal language.
"Memes" are adspeak, about selling the sizzle and not the steak (to resort to an archaic but nonetheless appropriate simile.) Memes aren't an insight objectively drawn from principles of Evolutionary Biology; they're superficial linguistic features exploited by those peerless professionals of applied social psychology, the propagandists of advertising. The focus of study of Edward Bernays, Ivan Pavlov, Josef Goebbels, and the crafters of ad campaigns, not R. Dawkins and E. O. Wilson.
As such, Hyperbole is a key tool in the toolbox of language manipulators. As is offering Name-checks of Heroes and Villains, based on public familiarity with them and intended to link that familiarity for propaganda advantage. It has to be admitted that many readers don't read for content or context; they skim. Their thoughts are prompted by the emotional triggering of labels; that isn't about "the power of the meme", it's the result of eliciting a conditioned response.
It's a good idea for anyone in the business of political "messaging" to understand the principles of advertising to aid their appeal to their audience- especially in democracies, which implicitly rely on persuasion rather than badgering or coercion in order to draw allegiance from their voters. But without ethics or concern for integrity in the message content, shit has a way of getting dumb fast. Especially when one side is adept at slick demagoguery, and the other is inept at the keeping the common touch. Or, worse, if both positions in a given issue debate resort to unethical means. When both sides jettison their ethics, that most often indicates that the value of the respective positions of both sides is exhausted, either because they've been asking the wrong questions for too long or seeking private ends at the expense of productive results for the common good. The sort of cynicism that one hears expressed as "fighting fire with fire", etc.
I agree. I see cars sometimes with Fuck Joe Biden stickers (not "Let's Go Brandon" childish nonsense, but actual FJB), and I think two things: 1) How tacky. No matter how much I hate W or Trump, I would never put something like that on my car; and 2) What do you hate him so much for? What has he done that is SO antithetical to your belief system? I'm sure not a single one of them could tell me anything coherent beyond they think he stole the election or whatever.
Well, thatтАЩs my real point: they hate the other party way more than they hate the dissidents in their own party. Biden is simply the synecdoche for the Democrats as a whole.
Well, no. My comments may make more sense in the context it was intended: replying to the question of whether this is really an effect we are seeing in the 97% of partisans who are not Extremely Online. My assertion is that it is not: liberal political hobbyists may hate Joe Manchin or Matt Yglesias, but your average everyday Democrat simply hates Trump and doesnтАЩt give a rip about these internecine battles.
Well then it may be that only 3% of the Democratic Party who loathes Manchin or Yglesias. But who's the corresponding population in the GOP? There's no 3% in the Republicans who direct their wrath at Cheney or Romney.
To the same extent as the internecine warfare in the Democratic camp? No. The closest comparison is anti-Trump Republicans and the venom that they spew towards their old party.
I think the reason why is pretty simple if you think about it for a second: the civil war in the Democratic Party is still ongoing and the centrists and the left wing are at each other's throats.
In the GOP on the other hand Trump won. He killed off all his opponents years ago (and it was never a civil war in the Republican Party by the way, it was an invasion). Look at Cheney. Nobody likes her but they don't have any particular venom for her because in a few months she's going to be gone.
Well, yes, but does the same apply outside the 3% when it comes to the weird infighting? Most Republicans I know hate Joe Biden, not Bill Kristol; most not-extremely-online Democrats are annoyed at Joe Manchin but loathe Donald Trump.
Hate Joe Biden? They certainly donтАЩt hate him like they hated Hillary.
No one has ever hated anyone the way the GOP hated Hillary Clinton. Clinton was sui generis. We will never see her like again.
But the hatred for Biden is awesomely disproportionate to anything that he has been actually able to accomplish.
Hyperbole is the coin of the realm these days. Possibly connected to the popular acceptance of Richard Dawkins' "meme" concept, as if "memes" held some profound science-based insight with overarching power over human cognition and critical assessment of verbal language.
"Memes" are adspeak, about selling the sizzle and not the steak (to resort to an archaic but nonetheless appropriate simile.) Memes aren't an insight objectively drawn from principles of Evolutionary Biology; they're superficial linguistic features exploited by those peerless professionals of applied social psychology, the propagandists of advertising. The focus of study of Edward Bernays, Ivan Pavlov, Josef Goebbels, and the crafters of ad campaigns, not R. Dawkins and E. O. Wilson.
As such, Hyperbole is a key tool in the toolbox of language manipulators. As is offering Name-checks of Heroes and Villains, based on public familiarity with them and intended to link that familiarity for propaganda advantage. It has to be admitted that many readers don't read for content or context; they skim. Their thoughts are prompted by the emotional triggering of labels; that isn't about "the power of the meme", it's the result of eliciting a conditioned response.
It's a good idea for anyone in the business of political "messaging" to understand the principles of advertising to aid their appeal to their audience- especially in democracies, which implicitly rely on persuasion rather than badgering or coercion in order to draw allegiance from their voters. But without ethics or concern for integrity in the message content, shit has a way of getting dumb fast. Especially when one side is adept at slick demagoguery, and the other is inept at the keeping the common touch. Or, worse, if both positions in a given issue debate resort to unethical means. When both sides jettison their ethics, that most often indicates that the value of the respective positions of both sides is exhausted, either because they've been asking the wrong questions for too long or seeking private ends at the expense of productive results for the common good. The sort of cynicism that one hears expressed as "fighting fire with fire", etc.
I agree. I see cars sometimes with Fuck Joe Biden stickers (not "Let's Go Brandon" childish nonsense, but actual FJB), and I think two things: 1) How tacky. No matter how much I hate W or Trump, I would never put something like that on my car; and 2) What do you hate him so much for? What has he done that is SO antithetical to your belief system? I'm sure not a single one of them could tell me anything coherent beyond they think he stole the election or whatever.
I'm not sure those bumper stickers are an expression of personal antipathy to Biden so much as a declaration of animus towards the other party.
Well, thatтАЩs my real point: they hate the other party way more than they hate the dissidents in their own party. Biden is simply the synecdoche for the Democrats as a whole.
But that is kind of the opposite of the Democratic left who save their true bile for wayward liberals.
Well, no. My comments may make more sense in the context it was intended: replying to the question of whether this is really an effect we are seeing in the 97% of partisans who are not Extremely Online. My assertion is that it is not: liberal political hobbyists may hate Joe Manchin or Matt Yglesias, but your average everyday Democrat simply hates Trump and doesnтАЩt give a rip about these internecine battles.
Well then it may be that only 3% of the Democratic Party who loathes Manchin or Yglesias. But who's the corresponding population in the GOP? There's no 3% in the Republicans who direct their wrath at Cheney or Romney.
You donтАЩt think so? You donтАЩt think there are Trumpian conservatives who loathe Cheney or--God forbid, MIKE PENCE--with a passion?
I donтАЩt think I agree with your assessment.
To the same extent as the internecine warfare in the Democratic camp? No. The closest comparison is anti-Trump Republicans and the venom that they spew towards their old party.
I think the reason why is pretty simple if you think about it for a second: the civil war in the Democratic Party is still ongoing and the centrists and the left wing are at each other's throats.
In the GOP on the other hand Trump won. He killed off all his opponents years ago (and it was never a civil war in the Republican Party by the way, it was an invasion). Look at Cheney. Nobody likes her but they don't have any particular venom for her because in a few months she's going to be gone.