Outrage culture - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Language, bias, ownership, influence; all media related topics.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Pants-of-dog
#14842026
SolarCross wrote:You know the left is this x1000 right?


I had no idea that we were in a pissing contest.

Does it matter if the left does it as well?

Ask a leftist about capitalism and endure a full ten minutes of being sprayed in spittle as they rave, bug eyed, about stuff normal people consider well... normal.

The right is literally nothing in itself but simply all those who are not left, so mostly its just ordinary non-ideological people.


Thank you for providing an example of exactly what I was talking about. :)
User avatar
By SolarCross
#14842040
foxdemon wrote:Regarding the article about Cultural Marxism and political correctness. Yes it is true that PC derives it's ideas from that school of thought. But the article attributes far too much agency to the Cultural Marxists. As the article mentions, but doesn't elaborate on, the 1960's students needed a system of belief to legitimate their actions. And what better than a vacuous system of belief that offers no solutions and thus doesn't present an alternative to established power.

Those students, which include the Clintons, were America's young elites, mostly WASPs. The Cultural Marxists couldn't have gotten anywhere if their services weren't in demand. And that is the thing about Cultural Marxism, it is basically a bunch of Marxists who gave up on the class struggle and sold out to the liberal bourgeois by providing the liberal elite with tools to aid that class in consolidating wealth and power.

Apart from student radicalism in the '60's, there was a need to justify or obscure the rise in socio-economic inequality from the '70's through to the present. It is not that Cultural Marxists, or indeed Jews, control society like some puppet master, but rather that Cultural Marxists and market dominate minorities are useful to the dominate elite. Which is mainly WASP in America. PC is a system of ideological control that the establishment use to preserve their status (which is of course the aim of any form of PC in history). As to the Cultural Marxists, well they are basically a bunch of sell outs. Overrated by conservatives in my opinion.

I commend @SolarCross for posting it as it is more interesting than his usual outrage posts. I am eagerly awaiting the opportunity to read his own opinions on the article presented.


Actually I tend to agree that the cultural marxists got lucky in that the 60s gen were already receptive to a hedonistic message. The default morals for europeans is actually pretty loose but for a thousand years of Christianity. Christianity has been in decline for a hundred years of more already though, a decline that resulted from the loss of credibility that was caused by the rise of science, so the cultural marxists were in some sense riding a wave not of their own making.

I tend to disagree though where you imply, by my reading, there is a monolithic "liberal elite" rubbing their hands and pulling strings. The world is a mess of a million interests and even at the highest echelons there is no unity of purpose just a bunch of people riding waves out of their perceived self-interest. There are no puppet masters no dominant elite and no one is really in control of anything.
#14842061
We're all side-effects of something else. Individuality is an abstraction. Humans invent the purpose and meaning of life.

"If we can really understand the problem, the answer will come out of it, because the answer is not separate from the problem." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
SolarCross wrote:I tend to disagree though where you imply, by my reading, there is a monolithic "liberal elite" rubbing their hands and pulling strings. The world is a mess of a million interests and even at the highest echelons there is no unity of purpose just a bunch of people riding waves out of their perceived self-interest. There are no puppet masters no dominant elite and no one is really in control of anything.
Bahaha! :lol: Fallacia... we can manufacture interest, nudge ideological puppets, pin the tail on the pulpit, and control many 'things.' You know, stuff like kool-sauce cults, organized sport, kamikaze pilots, PokemonGO, Capitalism, scientology, Communism, emotional contagions on biometricbook.com, demonstrate that you're being a silly-sour-solarsack. What do you think war is? It's a group of elites/tribal chiefs ordering sleepwalkers/resources to fight for group-resources. The mobility of self-interest is an illusion because most people exercise free-will within the parameters of a psycho-social blueprint, a blueprint built/maintained by 'other' ketheric kinfolk in society. The Law is group-interest created by word magick/intellectual convention (WMIC, you down with WMIC, yeah you know me!). Religion is group-interest created by WMIC. Government is group-interest created by WMIC. So no, SolarCross, life isn't anarchy :rockon:. Most people sleepwalk through life, and they need dreams to dream :tired: . Sure, we're riding a wave we call 'reality,' but we will never know 'the truth' beyond 'being' here/now and that is why 'elites' invent truth. Civilization is (in most cases) benevolent :up: slavery :down:, deal with it.

Shape/structure the media consciousness must pass through, and you can control or at least influence the expression or characteristics of consciousness. The medium is the mass(age), my friend. How many words-sentences-paragraphs can you create with 26 letters? A-Z = media, the alphabet is a filter for consciousness. (Y)our consciousnesses is far more complex than 26 letters, I shall reiterate- finite sensibility vs infinite potentiality.

Lastly- I'm not suggesting one group rules everything. GameofThrones.borg. :borg:
There are no puppet masters no dominant elite and no one is really in control of anything.

This is what the hyperanthropos concludes. Knowing truth is human myth, the hyperanthropos may decide to design her/his own truth and guard truth's knowledge. Right now we allow different orders of supermen to control 'knowledge,' and since knowledge is about knowing the ledge (proverbial ledger, edge of NOW, seat of power), it's tradition for a wise dome (wisdom in the flesh, ॐ, discernment and royal loyalty) to guard its secrets (noospheric secretions). The material or physical world is a three-dimensional truth (side-effect of polydimensional synæsthesia, trans-D geoacoustic inversion), we may 'read' and discover its complex knowledge by studying (art of seeing sound) the ancient and accepted order of Nature (Nature/environment as primordial guru/emanation. Humans didn't invent nature, nature invented humanity), Earth as a wise dome doesn't guard its secrets, because all things inside Earth are living secrets of the one eternal present (trinity of shadows, past~present~future, in an infinite naught∞shell). Humans keep secrets from other humans because they want to own Earth and its secrets. The secret being- nothing is secret (nothing will remain obscure), all things are present. Perpetual (r)evolution will lead to telepathy, telepathy will unveil the truth, and the truth will set humanity free from illusion.

Riddle me this- If my sense of self includes you~him~her~they~we~it~within a perceived wave of existence, can I alone be motivated by myself?

-One Love
:rainbow:
User avatar
By The Sabbaticus
#14842082
Another component of the current 'outrage culture' that is sweeping the States is the late night television segment:

Once the undisputed juggernaut of the late-night category, Mr. Fallon’s “Tonight Show,” a celebrity-friendly cavalcade of games and gags, has seen its ratings decline in recent months. Meanwhile, his politically pointed competitor Stephen Colbert, who hosts CBS’s “The Late Show,” has closed what was once a formidable gap of nearly one million viewers.

(...)

The resurgent interest in left-leaning programming hasn’t helped Mr. Fallon, a former star of “Saturday Night Live” who has built his brand on his all-around entertainer’s skills and down-the-middle tastes. And as Mr. Fallon is well aware, viewers haven’t seen him in quite the same light since an interview he conducted with Mr. Trump in September, which was widely criticized for its fawning, forgiving tone. In a gesture that has come to haunt the host, he concluded the segment by playfully running his fingers through Mr. Trump’s hair.

NYTimes


Basically Fallon got hit in the ratings when his show stayed clear of any overt anti-Trumpism, whereas other shows increased their ratings by doing the opposite. And it doesn't just end with the late night circuit, it's also the various Daily Show incarnations and the talkshow circuit with Ellen, The View and that Bee lady.

The entire corporate media-sphere is whipping up constant outrage over Trump.
#14842084
I can't believe people who watch nightly shows with topical comedy prefer the shows that actually talk about shit they hear in the news. This must be some kind of conspiracy.

I can't imagine how lame your ideology is if you're angry that late night shows aren't a safe enough space for your opinions.
User avatar
By MB.
#14842218
The issue of bias is one I've heard many times before and do not accept. There is no legal requirement for comedians or pundits to present measured responses, indeed, comedy thrives off of "extreme" viewpoints and punditry requires, almost by definition, an uncritical dogmatism. I agree with Special Olympian that it is more telling about the critics of these TV and Radio shows, and their perceived status as marginal actors.

That said, I don't watch TV comedians precisely because they are TV comedians. Why would anyone think they are a reliable source of news information? Likewise, CNN or Fox news etc are mainly useful for "breaking" news because they have imbedded reporters around the world. These news sources are mainly useful for quick updates on rapidly developing situations. I don't think anyone should expect deep insight or analysis from such sources. If you're getting your analysis from CNN or Fox this seems to suggest a failure of imagination regarding useful analytical sources.
By foxdemon
#14842231
SolarCross wrote:Actually I tend to agree that the cultural marxists got lucky in that the 60s gen were already receptive to a hedonistic message. The default morals for europeans is actually pretty loose but for a thousand years of Christianity. Christianity has been in decline for a hundred years of more already though, a decline that resulted from the loss of credibility that was caused by the rise of science, so the cultural marxists were in some sense riding a wave not of their own making.

I tend to disagree though where you imply, by my reading, there is a monolithic "liberal elite" rubbing their hands and pulling strings. The world is a mess of a million interests and even at the highest echelons there is no unity of purpose just a bunch of people riding waves out of their perceived self-interest. There are no puppet masters no dominant elite and no one is really in control of anything.


I am no implying the Western elite is a monolithic entity. I agree with you that their are competing interests within the elite. In fact much of the behaviour is about competing amongst themselves. A billionaire with $5 billion has a neighbour who just got their wealth to $6 billion, so the first now tries to get $7 billion. Or one of them gets some status for a moral stand so their fellow elite needs to go one up with an even more impressive moral stand. But the resources have to be taken from the masses and any negative effects of status seeking morality on the masses need to be hidden.

This isn't a conspiracy. Elites throughout history co-opt resources and use thr aspirational ideas of the society they rule. Much of European Christian history was about elites using Christianity to control the population and they competed amongst themselves as to who could be more pious. Today, it is Modernity, humanism and liberalism, in the place of Christianity that is the source of widely accepted moral aspirations. A general theme in this system of belief is emancipation. Most people would find subjugation of women or minorities unacceptable as it contradicts their basic worldview. All people are equal. So these forces of emancipation are what the elites will appropriate to gain moral superiority over the lower classes, and as you point out, each other. Hence political correctness. Cultural Marxism is just a suitable body of ideas to base it on.
By RhetoricThug
#14842348
foxdemon wrote:I am no implying the Western elite is a monolithic entity. I agree with you that their are competing interests within the elite. In fact much of the behaviour is about competing amongst themselves. A billionaire with $5 billion has a neighbour who just got their wealth to $6 billion, so the first now tries to get $7 billion. Or one of them gets some status for a moral stand so their fellow elite needs to go one up with an even more impressive moral stand. But the resources have to be taken from the masses and any negative effects of status seeking morality on the masses need to be hidden.
Really Foxdemon, do you know any billionaires, are you friends with elites... Or do you just take second-hand history lessons (accumulated throughout your short lifetime in order to frame a limited/fixed perspective) and create an image in your mind (granting you temporary intellectual comfort, until the next biochemical happening)? Perhaps billionaires are nice people struggling with an addiction (what if they're are victims too?). Nonetheless, enjoy a few verses from Sinflation.

"Wealth intimidates poor people more than violence
So they hide it, I’ve been on both sides of the fence"


"Money is just the poor man's credit card." McLuhan.

See, money as a medium channels the poor man's energy. Money is not real wealth- money is a side-effect or extension of real wealth. If you have assets, knowledge, and 'truth,' you can start influencing the flow of money and therefore you can influence the flow of popular perception. Everything is a system, or body of movement, construct/control the 'four causes' (Aristotle) and you can build an operating system around the masses. Of course, sometimes different operating systems collide... The point being- studying the history/changing forms of social engineering will not lead you to a better understanding of social engineering. Think of it this way, if you're playing a computer game- perhaps some kind of RPG- do you study what the NPCs (metaphor for people outside of your control) are doing, or do you study the program/code responsible for the NPCs behavior? The program is the operating system, and the behavior is an expression of the program. Luckily, we co-create/program the operating system, so change starts with the SELF and ripples through the information matrix. Complaining about other people and their actions will not change the operating system- infact, outrage culture will perpetuate outrage culture, because violence begets violence, and we all know violence is a search for identity. :)

This isn't a conspiracy.
It's a logical necessity.

Elites throughout history co-opt resources and use thr aspirational ideas of the society they rule. Much of European Christian history was about elites using Christianity to control the population and they competed amongst themselves as to who could be more pious. Today, it is Modernity, humanism and liberalism, in the place of Christianity that is the source of widely accepted moral aspirations.
Labels, labels, labels. It doesn't matter what you call the operating system, operating systems use 'noosphere' dynamics to control 'sleepwalkers.' Why dwell on the surface symptoms, when all forms of 'control' follow the same general blueprint. I think I made it clear when I said- "People didn't do this, capitalism did this!" or "People didn't do this, Christianity did this!" The 'art' of social engineering is ancient, and capitalism-Christianity be one of its many shape-shifting functions, since the end justifies the means. Culture is theater and we are role-players.

"Yes, because historically & statistically power shapes knowledge and knowledge shapes power. We don't have enough data (by design) to make educated comments, that is why we resort to personal levels of propaganda/politicking. In order to have civilization, we need to be structured hierarchically, with some kind of priest class at the top. The priest class can be described as 'noosphere magicians,' since they weave the spells which motivate the masses. Capitalism is an idea that channels human energy, but capitalism is just an implicit method or approach to the ongoing group equation. At any moment, one individual may decide to stop participating in the blueprint (equation), and create ripple effects (implicit differentiation/active application/real-time chain rule) which may send shock waves through the group, because you would have to recalculate derivatives that appear after each shock wave. Unfortunately, computers now automate the equation and efficiently manage the group, making it very difficult for individuals to become outliers or unformulated variables. The elite use science to socially engineer the human population. "

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=166025

A general theme in this system of belief is emancipation.
Yep, Cloud Atlas.

Most people would find subjugation of women or minorities unacceptable as it contradicts their basic worldview. All people are equal. So these forces of emancipation are what the elites will appropriate to gain moral superiority over the lower classes, and as you point out, each other. Hence political correctness. Cultural Marxism is just a suitable body of ideas to base it on.


"The common man changed to behave as a slave
Reading Elliott waves in a daze on a Forex page
When Braveheart was brought to King’s Court he was shackled in chains
I heard him say “that was an unwinnable game”


MB. wrote:The issue of bias is one I've heard many times before and do not accept. There is no legal requirement for comedians or pundits to present measured responses, indeed, comedy thrives off of "extreme" viewpoints and punditry requires, almost by definition, an uncritical dogmatism. I agree with Special Olympian that it is more telling about the critics of these TV and Radio shows, and their perceived status as marginal actors.

That said, I don't watch TV comedians precisely because they are TV comedians. Why would anyone think they are a reliable source of news information? Likewise, CNN or Fox news etc are mainly useful for "breaking" news because they have imbedded reporters around the world. These news sources are mainly useful for quick updates on rapidly developing situations. I don't think anyone should expect deep insight or analysis from such sources. If you're getting your analysis from CNN or Fox this seems to suggest a failure of imagination regarding useful analytical sources.
This boils down to educated introspection. Outrage culture is a symptom of a closed system of ignorance. If you understand yourSELF and your place in space-time, little jokes and television programs will not upset you. If we need to curtail free expression, its says more about the people whining than 'offensive' expressionism. Of course, we protect children from free expression because they're ignorant and underdeveloped. I guess outrage culture is the culture of overgrown children... Children lacking imagination... so noosphere geriatrics, essentially. You must analyze yourSELF and where you are in the great system of 'things,' before making accusations/claiming victimhood. We're the ones participating/perpetuating outrage culture.
By RhetoricThug
#14842585
The Sabbaticus wrote:Another component of the current 'outrage culture' that is sweeping the States is the late night television segment:



Basically Fallon got hit in the ratings when his show stayed clear of any overt anti-Trumpism, whereas other shows increased their ratings by doing the opposite. And it doesn't just end with the late night circuit, it's also the various Daily Show incarnations and the talkshow circuit with Ellen, The View and that Bee lady.

The entire corporate media-sphere is whipping up constant outrage over Trump.

What's your point, Sabbaticus? This is not a new component of popular entertainment. Comedy is the externalization of a grievance. Remember, more than half of the vote in the United States is going through the grieving process. Eventually political amnesia will set in and we'll reset the press-loop in 2020, again in 2024, 2028, etc. Of course, by that time, you'll be quoting articles created by the wireless AI-AP, while the hive-mind consumes common-sense. Do you enjoy foraging for simula-crums, because popular entertainment is culture starved? Outrage culture is a byproduct of the post-industrial hivemind, its plastic culture accumulates in the mindfill, and folks dig it up for examination. Next time you're on anti-social media, you should add data-dumpster-diving to your list of extracurricular hobbies. One man's indignation is another man's consolation.

It would in the UK's interest for Europe to sink i[…]

If you import right wing conservative religious ty[…]

This is literally insane. Are you talking about[…]

I happy to hear that you managed to stay safe in t[…]