Nobody is willing to even entertain the idea that West isn't Best. Suggesting that whitey shouldn't rule the world is received as if you'd advocated cannibalism, and you will be condescended to and treated like an ignorant child even as they make it clear they know much less than you do about the subject at hand, if not outright ejected from the community. It's not just bots and manufacturing consent, either - it happens to me in real life just as easily as it happens online.
Anyone who isn't unconditionally anti-NATO and anti-American hegemony is a white supremacist. No exceptions.
Love this place, though. I think I'd go crazy if it wasn't for you guys. Glad I have somewhere to get this off my chest :soviet-heart:
deleted by creator
What use is being right if you can't convince anyone else to agree with you?
Yeah you gotta read the audience. If you fly in waving the 'd2a kill all cops' flag people are gonna fuckin ignore you. I my experience majority of non hogs are some degree of reachable, depending on their class position.
It's not a slogan you yell from the streets.
The prevalence of white supremacist capitalism led by US hegemony is an academic, historic, and empirical truth; the problem with this system is that, aside from the misery it imposes on humanity, is that this system will lead to social disintegration and ecological collapse as its conclusion. The point of realizing this expression isn't to moralize with white supremacists, but to convince enough of the population that the system inherently and necessarily must express itself in this way and in order to avoid ruination and misery the system has to be replaced with a social configuration that values and venerates human life and the sustainability of ecological life, in that order.
The point of propaganda and dissemination of this message - US and Western hegemony is white supremacist and should end because it is inherently self destructive on a global scale - is meant to provoke and make the listener uncomfortable. It is meant to guide the listener/reader to reassess their values and avalanche their cognitive dissonance into a resolution; it is meant for the listener to ask themselves "If this is true, what is to be done?.
You're not supposed to convince everyone, a majority, or even a plurality all at once. It is supposed to be attrition over time, to show everyone the idol for what it is. It has eyes that does not see, a nose that does not smell, ears that do not hear, a mouth that does not speak. The idol is bronze painted gold, and it will rust and corrode and must be torn down because it is a man made monstrosity that keeps demanding human sacrifice.
That is why propaganda was so prevalent and potent during the Cold War, and why it is so desperate now. Make people uncomfortable; make them reassess their values. It's OK. You don't change minds in that instance of conversation or overnight, but it is a :brainworms: that will challenge and transform their worldview, especially with declining material expectations and living standards as society continues to destabilize.
I am mostly talking about the context the op is discussing, more interpersonal work and friend group conversations. I realize with a rereading my use of the word audience is a bit confusing, I meant it more colloquially as any and individual or group you are talking to, not strictly a crowd. Political sloganeering is a different context that you can often be more open in. If you walk up to a coworker and go "hello fellow laborer have you considered seizing the means of production today? Death to amerikkka!" You are going to immediately hit a stone wall; or you have found a secret comrade. Like its not a respectability thing, it's just getting people to listen to you. Once you get your foot in the door with some more low level convos, I find most of the coworkers I talk to are pretty amenable to the more radical stuff in reasonable doses.