Leo, do you think that Democrats should support right-wing economic policies?

[Hardkill]

4 minutes ago, Emerald said:

That's an incorrect assumption. And it's a total misunderstand of how power and influence works.

You can always shape and form people's viewpoints regardless of where they are Spiral Dynamics-wise. People don't need to be on the same level of development as a political movement to get on board with a political movement.

You just need to frame things in a way that normies will respond to and inch them closer to your position over time.

It's just like how the far right has gotten a lot of Stage Green hippie folks to go Fascist by posing the right wing as the rebellious contrarian anti-establishment position and the left wing as the establishment position. 

Of course Fascists aren't Stage Green. But the creators of the propaganda machine that's tasked with normalizing Fascism understands Stage Green enough to know how to rope them into their movement.

So, you just have to use language that fits within the prevailing paradigm of society and that will resonate with most normies (which is mostly Orange with a bit of Blue)... and you can get people on board with just about anything. 

And this should be obvious at this point... given all the outlandish extreme stuff that's been normalized over the past decade.

Now, most people won't resonate with a deeper Green message about where trans identities come from and bla bla bla. But that wasn't going to carry any rhetorical weight anyway, as it's too complex.

The narratives and slogans themselves have to avoid being too complex, ideological, or wonky. 

Instead, you have to appeal to the value of freedom... and to the idea of minding your own business... which are already normalized in society and are situated smack in the middle of the Overton Window.

And you have to frame people who get hung up about trans people as weird and neurotic and anti-freedom... because they genuinely are weird and neurotic and anti-freedom.

You have to make it a taboo where people will try to avoid having that social stench on them because it's associated with creepy guys who never bathe or go outside and who post on 4-chan everyday.

And you do it just the same way as the right wing did with blue-haired SJWs back in 2015-2016.

They took a mainstream viewpoint of "accept people's differences"... and they found a group of screeching weirdos that held that viewpoint. 

And they used these same images of screeching weirdos to stigmatize the idea "accept people's differences" to the point where some would want to run away from association with that value because they didn't want to be seen as belonging to the group of screeching weirdos.

The left needs to learn to do our own version of that to re-normalize the "accept people's difference" viewpoint after 10 years of heavy right wing propagandizing and re-affirm it as the norm.

We on the left may be developed enough to understand Green values. But we need to be smart enough to figure out how to wield power well enough to re-normalize this value through the current societal lens.

And you need to show crazy creepy weirdos obsessing about trans people and transvestigating everyone in the same light as those blue-haired SJWs... and put it out there as a popular meme.

Then, have the progressive politicians be like "Duh. In our party we're pro-freedom and we mind our own business... and we focus on the real issues (insert economic populist vision here) instead of getting hung up on neurotically fearing people like the other side does."

 

Why can't we just hold off on fighting for more civil rights for another decade or so, while focusing on fixing the economic problems first?

[Leo Gura]

11 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

So, then why don't run on socially moderate to conservative stances while running on economic populism from now on?

That's sorta my position.

Not conversative in the regressive sense, but in the grounded, pragmatic, realistic sense. Stop wasting energy on silly utopian ideas like chicks with dicks being equal in sports to women, or socialism, or endless immigration, or endless deficit spending.

That shit is killing the Dems. These are impractical positions that will never succeed.

Edited May 7 by Leo Gura

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

If the prevailing narrative is that it's normal to hate trans people and be Nazis... people will hate trans people and be Nazis. And you can notice how so much extreme outlandish stuff has been normalized just because the right keeps insisting all the extreme outlandish stuff is normal. 

But if the prevailing narrative is that it's normal to live and let live and mind your own business... and that only weird people are hung up on what's in other people's pants... then people will avoid getting caught up in these neurotic anti-trans panic movements.

But how did the current narrative become dominant? A massive coalition self-organized in rejection of the counter-narrative because they despised it. Their cups are already full, and I don’t think it'll be easy to empty them.

You're not just talking about creating new, appealing narratives, you're talking about dismantling deeply entrenched structures and replacing them entirely.

So, what pathway do the Dems have to create a more dominant narrative?

Edited May 7 by Joshe

[Breathe]

I agree that the dems need to focus solely on economic policy. The situation we face now is very different when Kamala was running. She may have tried to avoid discussing social issues, but the economy hadn't tanked on the same level that we are facing now. That's why I don't think we can really say that a populist strategy will not work going forward.

These are different times and everyone is going to feel a financial hit and know they have no-one to blame but the current administration.

The challenge dems will face is disinformation and propaganda from all directions.

Let's say we do find a populist candidate that is palatable to both sides of the aisle. Who's going to cover this person in  a way that will reach the people that need to see it?

Social media right now is a complete shit show. Nobody knows the difference between fact and fiction. Forget about Fox news.

My biggest concern is mainstream media and how much control the administration will have over it. Maybe I'm jumping the gun here, but media outlets are going to be attacked, it's just a matter of how much damage will be done before the next election.

Voter suppression is another problem we are going to face.

[Emerald]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

You can do some of that. But you cannot talk man out of his level of development.

I never said that you could talk a person out of their level of development. People are where they are.

But people are VERY influenceable and malleable.

You can get a Stage Green person to join the Nazis... and you can get a Stage Blue person to get on board with Social Democracy if you know how to influence people.

And you can utilize your awareness of their level of development to loop them into your movement... not by conceding the content of your paradigm, but by framing the content of your paradigm within the structure of their paradigm.

You're not going to get anywhere with conceding to the right wing framing that accepting trans people is weird.

Instead, you have to make it clear that their lack of acceptance and desire to control is weird... and you must not concede as it just add more normalcy and power to their POV when it's anything but normal.

Consider this...

As a child, I was a very absolutist thinker that had a Stage Blue mentality. I can recognize that I was in this phase until I was about 13 or 14 or so when I started to become aware of social constructs.

But I was taught as a Stage Blue child to be against racism and prejudice by parents, teachers, and pop culture.

And I believed it as an absolute in a very Stage Blue dogmatic kind of way, where there was an absolute value of "Those with lighter skin shouldn't be mean to those with darker skin."

It was the content of Stage Green views framed in the structure of a Stage Blue absolute dogma. And I believed it like someone believes a scripture of a holy book.

And I didn't perfectly understand why the rule only applied in one direction (only from white to black... and not from black to white)... and I didn't even question that until I entered Stage Orange as a teenager. And I didn't even understand the answer to that question until I opened up to a more Stage Green perspective in my early 20s.

So, you can load the content of any stage into the structure of any stage if you frame it the way that that stage thinks of things.

The Left unnecessarily ties its hands and accepts the right wing framing so often. And it's one of the major reasons why we have such little power compared to the right wing. 

[Hardkill]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

That's sorta my position.

Not conversative in the regressive sense, but in the grounded, pragmatic, realistic sense.

Right! I would mean that we fight another day so to speak on trans rights and other social justice issues.

Also, have them talk about how corporate greed, Elon Musk, and Trump are the real Devils who are destroying the Judeo-Christian roots of our country. 

The Democrats have to really talk A LOT more on masculinity and how there's nothing inherently wrong with male sexuality of men and men being good strong leaders of society. They should also say that while they respect women's right to work any kind of job and earn as much money as she wants, many women these days are not behaving as feminine as women in older generations did and don't have the right kind of men who can guide them guide them properly and protect them.

[Breathe]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

But people are VERY influenceable and malleable.

I don't agree with this. It can take years for people to change their minds or see things from a different lens. Conversations aren't usually open or productive. People shut down and don't listen to new ideas. Disagreements devolve into insults and arguing rather than asking questions and trying to understand where another person is coming from.

In my experience and in what I have observed in others, it usually takes some big life change to see a person change their minds.

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, Emerald said:

But people are VERY influenceable and malleable.

Yes. Hence stop freaking them out with woke socialist crap.

Edited May 7 by Leo Gura

[Emerald]

14 minutes ago, Joshe said:

But how did the current narrative become dominant? A massive coalition self-organized in rejection of the counter-narrative because they despised it. Their cups are already full, and I don’t think it’ll be easy to empty them.

You're not just talking about creating new, appealing narratives, you're talking about dismantling deeply entrenched structures and replacing them entirely.

So, what pathway do the Dems have to create a more dominant narrative?

That's just not correct.

The current right-wing narrative became so dominant because there is a billionaire-funded and multi-layered right-wing propaganda machine tasked with creating slogans and narratives and normalizing increasingly more and more extreme viewpoints.

And because social media has become a lot more sophisticated in the past decade, it's been the perfect conduit for this well-funded propaganda machine to have more and more influence.

People will get mad at who and what they're conditioned to get mad at. 

I've seen this in people that I know who were very accepting of gay people 10 years ago... but now believe that gay people are groomers who want to abuse children because they've been conditioned to think that way.

And I've heard people's values get brainwashed out of them in favor of rote right wing narratives.

If there were no such apparatus of power, we would not be in this position. 

Edited May 7 by Emerald

[Emerald]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Hence stop freaking them out with woke socialist crap.

It all depends on how your frame things.

If you frame things as woke socialist crap, they'll run away. And the more you call the lefty position woke socialist crap, the more you scare people away and they go to the right (who you've already foolishly conceded are more normal for being anti-woke and ceded power to).

But if you frame it as freedom, the Golden Rule, and mind your own business... and let's work together for a more economically fair system, they'll eat it up.

The same thing is true that people will run away if you come right out the gate wearing Swastika armbands.

But if you drip feed people false but believable ideas like "more immigration equals more crime" then you can get the normies on board. And in a few short years, they'll be goose-stepping with the worst of 'em.

Edited May 7 by Emerald

[aurum]

32 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

So, then why don't run on socially moderate to conservative stances while running on economic populism from now on?

Conservative, I'd say no.

Moderate, yes.

[Hardkill]

10 minutes ago, Breathe said:

I don't agree with this. It can take years for people to change their minds or see things from a different lens. Conversations aren't usually open or productive. People shut down and don't listen to new ideas. Disagreements devolve into insults and arguing rather than asking questions and trying to understand where another person is coming from.

In my experience and in what I have observed in others, it usually takes some big life change to see a person change their minds.

Yeah, I’ve tried convincing conservatives to be more open-minded about abortion, diversity, civil rights, and immigration rights, and they’ve responded with things like, “No! It’s murder! It’s murder!!!” or “I’m not going to argue with you about this. Obviously, we’re not going to agree, so leave me alone!” or “I’m sorry, but I just can’t get there… it’s so un-American!”—or they simply refuse to engage at all.

Edited May 7 by Hardkill

[Emerald]

10 minutes ago, Breathe said:

I don't agree with this. It can take years for people to change their minds or see things from a different lens. Conversations aren't usually open or productive. People shut down and don't listen to new ideas. Disagreements devolve into insults and arguing rather than asking questions and trying to understand where another person is coming from.

In my experience and in what I have observed in others, it usually takes some big life change to see a person change their minds.

When you have a very sophisticated and well-funded propaganda machine at your disposal, you can change people's views very quickly.

[Joshe]

39 minutes ago, Emerald said:

That's just not correct.

The current right-wing narrative became so dominant because there is a billionaire-funded and multi-layered right-wing propaganda machine tasked with creating slogans and narratives and normalizing increasingly more and more extreme viewpoints.

And because social media has become a lot more sophisticated in the past decade, it's been the perfect conduit for this well-funded propaganda machine to have more and more influence.

People will get mad at who and what they're conditioned to get mad at. 

I've seen this in people that I know who were very accepting of gay people 10 years ago... but now believe that gay people are groomers who want to abuse children because they've been conditioned to think that way.

And I've heard people's values get brainwashed out of them in favor of rote right wing narratives.

If there were not such apparatus of power, we would not be in this position. 

That's all true. 100% agree.

But the narrative they latched onto resonated with them precisely because it was either that one or the other one. It was a binary choice. They chose a side, then the billionaires and algorithms reinforced their decision as well as prompted many to join out of memetic desire, tribalism, etc. 

I had a friend whose young girlfriend asked him "What are we, Democrats or Republicans?". lol. See, people want to know which side they're on. They choose whichever team aligns best with their identity, as I'm sure you know. Once they choose a team, they do not switch easily. 

This is why I think your strategy will not work. I agree with you on how malleable the psyche is, but the point I'm making is, once the psyche builds its identity around a tribe or ideology, undoing that is not as simple as you make it sound. Messaging alone, even if consistently, perfectly delivered, would not be enough. 

Edited May 7 by Joshe

[Nivsch]

41 minutes ago, Emerald said:

But if you frame it as freedom, the Golden Rule, and mind your own business... and let's work together for a more economically fair system, they'll eat it up.

They will only listen to someone who belongs to their political camp.

Edited May 7 by Nivsch

[Emerald]

1 minute ago, Nivsch said:

They will only listen to someone who they know he belongs to their political camp.

This again, negates the power that we have to work together to impose a political narrative and paradigm... including what the political camps actually are and how we understand them.

We get too locked into working with and around what is and making concessions where we shouldn't be making concessions... that we forget that we also have influence to assume the dominant frame and redefine the whole game.

Have you not seen the right wing do just that over the past 10 years?

[aurum]

Propaganda and media manipulation favors the right-wing.

Progressives will not win at that game.

[Leo Gura]

Socialism and weird gender stuff IS bad framing. But it's more than that. It's bad framing because it is also bad utopian policy.

People don't want utopian dreams. They want practical survival stuff.

Again this goes back to the simple principle of: read the room.

Leave the goofy shit at the door. Drag shows for kids, or men having periods, or defund the police are examples of goofy shit.

People don't like weird and goofy, they like classic Coke. Leftists are like New Coke with pumpkin spice.

Edited May 7 by Leo Gura

[Emerald]

37 minutes ago, Joshe said:

That's all true. 100% agree.

But the narrative they latched onto resonated with them precisely because it was either that one or the other one. It was a binary choice. They chose a side, then the billionaires and algorithms reinforced their decision as well as prompted many to join out of memetic desire, tribalism, etc. 

I had a friend whose young girlfriend asked him "What are we, Democrats or Republicans?". lol. See, people want to know which side they're on. Like choosing a team. They choose whichever team aligns best with their identity, as I'm sure you know. Once they choose a team, they do not switch easily. 

This is why I think your strategy will not work. I agree with you on how malleable the psyche is, but the point I'm making is, once the psyche builds its identity around a tribe or ideology, undoing that is not as simple as you make it sound. Messaging alone, even if consistently, perfectly delivered, would not be enough. 

That mindset is just a way of submitting to the right wing and losing by default before you've actually lost.

First off, you're not trying to get dyed in the wool conservatives who strongly hold onto some principled traditional values. That's a minority group anyway.

You're trying to get the majority of people who are deeply influenceable and are changing their views based off of what is considered normal and moderate in the eyes of society.

And if you go conceding that being anti-trans is the normal thing, those "moderate" people will moderate themselves right into the clutches of the far right.

Remember that the Nazis were moderate and "normal" for their era and location... as whatever is normalized will be considered normal.

Plus, the tides are always shifting... and the time is ripe for people to start getting increasingly agitated at the right wing status quo, especially with the upcoming economic recession that's about to happen.

People are on the look out for the "other side" of the binary to propose something very different and better than what is now. 

[Emerald]

8 minutes ago, aurum said:

Propaganda and media manipulation favors the right-wing.

Progressives will not win at that game.

The way to have political influence is to be able to create and put out simple narratives and visions that people can understand and get on board with... and to assert your paradigm onto the world in a way that dovetails off of how people already think.

And nothing needs to be nefarious or untrue about the narratives. They just need to be simple and give people a sense that they belong within that story and that that story is leading them to deeper levels of connection and movement towards a vision.

Right wingers understand power a lot more than left wingers do. And they have a very well-funded apparatus for influencing people. So, they tend to be better at these things and less ideologically opposed to them.

But the only way to avoid ceding power to the right and adding to their propaganda is to avoid conceding to their ideological framing... and to assert the normalcy of our own frame.