Billionaires - Pearls Before Swine
Billionaires - Pearls Before Swine
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/24985888
I honestly believe Stephan Pastis is a better and more insightful satirist than anything you would see on (for example) The Daily Show.
Why do people on the left believe that reactionaries would agree with them if they just had access to the correct information?
I think this mistake rests in the left assumptions that "The People" are noble and good; that education leads to good politics; and noble people with good education will make a wise democracy. It's good ethics, too bad none of those ideas can survive an encounter with reality.
This is a classic conservative line of thinking. It's not true. It's simplistic. It makes people who believe it feel like they are smart and hard-core. And the rich want them to believe it, so they pay people to say it loudly and often.
People are not all good or all bad. They have some good views and some bad views, and they can change. They are regularly swayed by the constant stream of propaganda being pumped out. Even so, most everyone wants the world to be a better place, and they are mad it's not.
Thoughts like this are what push people further right. "People are bad. Therefore, if the world is to be better, we should punish those people." Convservatives basically become masochistic and sadistic through these lines of thinking. Punish me, father, I'm a sinner. It's a very effective mechanism for control.
The reason that the left thinks reactionaries would agree with them is because in many instances they already do. Reactionaries are just reacting to the constant stream if propaganda being pushed their way. But often, in spite of that, many of them do agree with what the left stands for they just don't know the left stands for it. Most of the policies the left pushes have broad public support. People just don't know the left is the side fighting for things they agree with. Or they're convinced that the left is fighting for it in a way that is incorrect. They are too "extreme."
These all have broad public support
-
Universal Health Care
-
Higher taxes on the rich
-
Expanding social security
-
Investing in public infrastructure
-
Faster and cheaper internet for all
-
Legalizing weed
-
Paid family and sick leave
-
Cheaper college and student loan relief
-
Worker's rights and union support
-
Criminal justice reform
-
Universal background checks
-
Reproductive rights
-
Lgbtq rights
-
Environmental protections
-
Climate change action
-
Green energy investment
These are the things the left is fighting for.
These all have broad public support
That is a big assumption.
Many Americans are climate skeptics or "agnostic," even more are environmentalism agnostic. People who don't have to personally deal with social security, slow internet, paying for college, weed, unions, personally going through the criminal justice system and such are often not very supportive of those issues. Reproductive and lgbtq rights are extremely partisan and framed entirely differently for different groups.
Most probably know healthcare is screwed up. But even then, many young people have not experienced serious issues (for themselves or others), and many still have a bad image of universal healthcare. And I know small business owners that are rightly concerned about tax increases.
It's not that these ideas wouldn't have appeal if conveyed, but the message is just not getting though.
-
through the ages it's the best way we've found. hateful ideologies originate from a place of false consciousness supported by hegemonic propaganda. our best bet is anti-hegemonic counter programming to dislodge as many people from the death cult as we can. it's not simply access to those information, but also verbal confirmation from a flesh and blood human
I wouldn't call attending a prestigious university for just the name and daddy paying someone to complete all the assignments an education, and that's gotta be the higher end of what any of the people in question got.