I'm seeing some dumb-ass takes about how "online isn't real" and how it's "a drop in the bucket." But seriously, how did you all become aware of leftist ideas? How does anyone in nations such as the US become politically literate? How many of you were former atheist edgelords or shitposters on reddit?
Seriously, online does matter. It wasn't Fox News that created the alt-right Charlottesville rally. It was the fucking Sargon/skeptic/manosphere pipeline, which was primarily a youtube phenomenon. Or how about the comrades that listened to Chapo, and were inspired to travel to Iowa to help Bernie win the Iowa caucus? For Christ's sake just look at how much of an influence Facebook has had on the CHUDs. To ignore that we live in a neoliberal hellscape where the vast majority of us only find some kind of solace or connection in the online world is to ironically ignore material conditions. Something can be "not real" but still have a HUGE affect on the "real world" (e.g. money, gender). Have the recent voices of trans comrades and POC comrades about their issues here not taught anyone anything? Doesn't take a genius to see this.
For those that scream "rEaD tHeOry" take a step back and think, what the hell were many those "classic Marxist texts?" A lot of them were political pamplets or, as others have pointed out before, literally debate-bro replies to others. How is that any different than online shit now? Honestly, if Marx et. al were alive today, wouldn't they use podcasts, tweets, and youtube vids to spread their messages?
TL;DR: online does matter. Seriously, how did any of you become politically aware, be honest.
The point isn't that you can't look up stuff online or organize events online. The point is that you can't do politics online. If you want to unionize your workplace you can discuss things online and stuff but you need to actually get offline to go to actually do it. If you're trying to organize tons of people and are new at it, you can use the internet to read on how to do it. But actually doing it happens offline. You have to go talk to people face to face and hold events and do things that aren't posting. If you're trying to conduct community defense because you're worried fash are coming to town, you can plan online but you need to show up to face them. The Charlottesville rally didn't happen online. Heyer didn't die because she posted some stuff. They were in the streets facing off.
You have a misunderstanding if you think people are suggesting you must literally go without the internet. Using these online spaces as a reprise to talk and relax and joke isn't doing activism. The problem is when people think posting gritty memes and doing raids on reddit is doing something. Listening to podcasts isn't activism. Even reading theory isn't activism. You have to go do things. If you absolutely can't go do things because you're in danger or just don't want to but won't admit that online, that's fine. Not everyone has to do stuff. But we also don't have to pretend the not doing stuff is doing stuff.
I agree that politics requires offline action. I'm mainly responding to the notion that online influence is just a "drop in the bucket" when it clearly isn't. And nowadays I can't think of any offline action that wasn't directly the result of something that happened online, or vice-versa. So I would push back on the notion that you can't do politics online.
Pretty much. Online is a part of reality that, unsurprisingly, is affected by and influences the rest of reality (i.e. everything offline). Ignoring either aspect is one-sided and prone to ineffective action.
I think we're going to talk past each other here because it's not clear what we're talking about. Okay so back to the union example. You can talk about forming a union online, you can research how to do it online, you can share meeting dates online, you can chat with other organizers about it online, you can even video conference meetings during a pandemic online. But in that example online is just a meeting space. 30 years ago the same thing was accomplished by renting a recreation center. Nobody would argue that renting a room to hold a meeting is central to organizing.
Can you name a couple of examples?
Charlottesville, like I said before. I'd wager that almost everyone but the top-brass there were dudes who got radicalized online and decided that this was their day to finally go out in the real world.
Also, like I said, the chapos that were inspired to volunteer for the Bernie campaign by traveling to Iowa and other places.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that meeting is not central to organizing?
No I'm saying the meeting place isn't central. A chat room, a break room, a field, can all be meeting places.
Charlottesville would have happened if the internet didn't exist. It's not the first time nazis had a rally in the US. Nothing about it is uniquely online. Other than it was covered heavily online. Which is just media attention.
This I would definitely push back on. Almost everything about it was uniquely online, from the demographics of participants to the leaders to the symbolism (i.e. pepe shit). Sure there was some old school elements in there but it was the youth that really energized it.
Pepe shit is aesthetics. Nazis aren't nazis because of frog memes. People don't change the entire ideology because of frog pictures. How were the demographics uniquely online? You mean because the people who showed up had an online presences it means they only would have showed up if the internet existed? Again Nazis don't need the internet to show up to places. Nazis having facebook profiles doesn't mean having a facebook profile makes you a Nazi. Perpetually online Nazis showing up to a rally doesn't mean being perpetually online causes you to be a Nazi. Case in point: us. If the internet didn't exist those people would likely still be nazis. Or if not specifically them, some other percentage of young white conservatives. And you said it yourself, youth. Youth are more likely to use the internet (though with some pushback because the online boomer is a thing), and they're more like to game too. Would you suggest that the gaming scene is central to the leftist project? Afterall gamergate was a thing. Chuds did things online and people in the "real" world reacted to it. So should we be focusing on creating a leftist gaming league? Or is it just that the people involved in all that were already heavily online and so that's where it played out?
It's a pipeline, and online shit is what funnels people in one direction or another. You're right that politics would exist without the internet, and that people would find these ideologies without the internet, but the internet makes that growth process faster and easier to manipulate.
I don't know if all of them would have found the ideologies without the internet tbh, but like you said, the pipeline definitely gives them that extra acceleration. And that just might be enough to cross some kind of tipping-point.
Listen, I don't wanna get debate-broey here (which btw you started by quote-replying me above), but the demographics were a bunch of young, white males who were radicalized through some sort of Sargon/atheist/libertarian/manosphere pipeline. Their ideologies were changed through online stuff.
I think this ignores the fact of online radicalization, which I've talked about already. It's also kind of essentialist, tbh.
I think you're just proving my point here. Like I said, I don't wanna get debate-broey with you, but what you and I are doing here is basically a political exchange, and it's bound to affect the readers of our exchange.
I didn't accuse you of being debate-broey. You're fine to argue with me. If I don't want to talk I'll just stop replying.
And they are not in charge of anything. Joe Biden is still president. The neolibs are still in charge. The material conditions between Obama and Trump and Biden have not changed except for declining precipitously. They will continue to decline under Biden. Politics isn't people changing their minds about stuff or deciding to kill their senator because of a cartoon frog. Politics is exerting power and will to get something you want or to change things. For all that's happened under Trump what has all this online organizing and radicalization accomplished, politically, for the far right? The Capitol Hill thing didn't do anything. It's not for a lack of trying, I'm not trying to downplay the threat of fascism. But all this pepe pee poo and donald.win stuff didn't accomplish anything for them. They're all having a mental breakdown right now because for all their supposedly political action nothing fundamentally changed. Their lives are still shit and getting worse. They don't have any real political power as all the valiant leaders have retreated because of PR.
I'm not talking about right wing politics in general losing. Neoliberalism is right wing and it's doing just fine. I'm talking about the "execute everyone and make Trump lifetime king" coalition. The ones who actually stormed the capitol. In term of accomplishing their political goals, nothing. Hillary isn't in jail. Epstein escaped justice. Trump is done. There were no executions. The pedophile ring is still going. Hollywood still exists. They got nothing from Trump despite them thinking that they literally got him elected by posting pepe memes on 4chan.
Yes they're online. Yes they're talking about politics and what they would do if they had power. Yes they're making meetings and plans on what to do when they show up to a rally. Yes they share memes and shit. But no real political action has come from that. Killing leftists at protests are just unfocused acts of violence. It's not a step towards any political goal. It just lets them brag on the internet for a bit and piss off leftist who are similarly online. Making people mad online isn't politics.
It's pushed the Republican party further right. If that isn't a tangible result of online politics I don't know what is. The leaders that are now retreating because of bad PR may very well be primaried by Q-anon freaks. It's the next step since the Tea Party phenomenon, which was also significantly influenced through online avenues.
Q people getting elected is a result of them going out and doing the work of getting elected. That is doing politics. If you go do the work of convincing a district to elect you, that's wholly different than just being an epic online person. I'm not arguing that getting yourself elected isn't politics.
But ask yourself, how do they accomplish this? I'll tell you: online.
They accomplish this by doing paper work and campaigning. No that's not all online. Using the internet as a media outlet is not the same thing as posters causing political change.
Q-anon is pretty much an online phenomenon. I think that pretty much says it all. I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree here.
Yes but Q inserting itself in political reality happened offline. You're saying correct things it's just that at some point you make a leap. Q anon is online. There are young online people who show up to protests. You can use the internet to spread ideas and discuss things with people. You can use the internet to advertise your campaign and get people to make phone calls for you.
But a chronically online leftist who is too scared to do stuff outside (ie go talk to people face to face, go door to door, make phone calls, join an org, go to events, etc) or unwilling shouldn't mistake their being online with doing politics. You're not changing anything by going over to cumtown.org and saying they're being racist. You're not doing anything by having an inclusive profile picture. You're not fighting fascism by banning trolls and fascists. And this isn't a means of gatekeeping or judgement. Not everyone has to do stuff. Some people cant' because it's too dangerous or they're disabled. That's fine. It's just a problem when enough chronically online leftists confuse posting with doing politics and they think that's where the movement is. If you think the right has pipelines that change people's minds, then so do we. And it's possible to have a "podcast to shitpost" pipeline. My main pushback on this discussion is not to encourage people who think that posting online is going to cause all the ghouls in government to give us socialism.
If you can cyberbully someone online to the point where it affects their real life, then you can do politics online. Just look at what an online space has done for this comrade: https://hexbear.net/post/70815