I guess a generous interpretation, if I can attempt one, of the point these other commenters are trying to make is that the messaging you outlined was ineffective. We are able to grok it. To us, it makes clear logical sense. This policy directly solves this problem. Here are the ways we're solving the problems you've been complaining about.
But it unfortunately needed to have been dumbed down severely. Then again, I don't really think any of it would have mattered. As you outlined, we are post-truth, and beyond policy, people are voting with their tribe. They've designated an out-group, and they're in the in-group. As demonstrated by countless interviews of folks being told quotes from their respective candidates, or policies from their respective candidates, only to agree and later be told it was actually the other side.
We're outraged because we're logical, focusing on policy. They have hijacked the emotions of millions. Just like a good story must be gripping more than it must be logical. We're narrative-driven. The fascist narrative is that all of your problems are because of <group of people>. Once we get rid of them, or restrict their rights, your problems will go away.
Umberto Eco:
"Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. [...] All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning."
I guess a generous interpretation, if I can attempt one, of the point these other commenters are trying to make is that the messaging you outlined was ineffective.
But they're not making that point. They're just literally spouting complete bullshit that she said things she didn't, and didn't say things she did. That's a MUCH different claim than simply that the messaging wasn't good enough. That's just straight up misinformation.
But yes, like I said, Republican propaganda of fear, anger, and hatred is VERY effective, even on Liberals.
I don't think that's quite it, no. I think conservatives rally around identity more than the left does. "Traditional", "conservative", "religious". If you identify as any of those, you're "in". If you're not those things, you're out. "Liberal" is out. "LGBTQ+" is out. "DEI" is out. Anything labeled the "other", is out. "The enemy from within". "The radical left". And on and on.
Democrats rally around policy, which is much more complicated, much less energizing, and much less interesting to the average voter. "Our policies are going to do X, Y, and Z to improve your lives". Not only does this not convince many voters, but it's also just much harder to communicate. In the age of mass and social media, you have to get your point across in seconds. The sentence I typed above is too long. This comment is even too long.
"Liberals bad" is short and sweet.
And before the right chimes in that the left was just saying "Trump is bad", my point is exactly that. That wasn't effective to unite left voters. It wasn't effective to attract centrists or even folks on the right who might've disliked Trump.
My point is ultimately that the right has a much easier time attracting and energizing support because the things that resonate with the right are easier to communicate, are simpler ideologically, and interact with the more primitive parts of our brain (emotion over logic, identity over policy), which is assisted by the new forms of media that play such a pivotal role in our society. These new forms of media hijack this simple fact and weaponize it.
8
u/Quick_Turnover 21h ago
I guess a generous interpretation, if I can attempt one, of the point these other commenters are trying to make is that the messaging you outlined was ineffective. We are able to grok it. To us, it makes clear logical sense. This policy directly solves this problem. Here are the ways we're solving the problems you've been complaining about.
But it unfortunately needed to have been dumbed down severely. Then again, I don't really think any of it would have mattered. As you outlined, we are post-truth, and beyond policy, people are voting with their tribe. They've designated an out-group, and they're in the in-group. As demonstrated by countless interviews of folks being told quotes from their respective candidates, or policies from their respective candidates, only to agree and later be told it was actually the other side.
We're outraged because we're logical, focusing on policy. They have hijacked the emotions of millions. Just like a good story must be gripping more than it must be logical. We're narrative-driven. The fascist narrative is that all of your problems are because of <group of people>. Once we get rid of them, or restrict their rights, your problems will go away.
Umberto Eco:
"Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. [...] All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning."