160
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
160 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13964 readers
628 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean if you're a Marxist then I'd expect you to think other Marxists have a better understanding of politics and propaganda than the average layperson, liberal judgements about virtue aside.
There's a plethora of false consciousnesses and libidinal traps people can find themselves in, cultural hegemony is a powerful superstructural reinforcement of base dynamics.
I know too many people who embrace ignorant escapism rather than examine the system they find themselves in, so aggressively complacent in their incuriosity that they never develop any sort of coherent epistemological method. They're the people who find themselves caught up in hedonistic nihilism or fascist co-optations.
I'm confident in my opinion that the average Marxist is "better" than the average Joe Rogan listener. Someone who's read 10,000 books has undoubtedly expressed and developed a degree of wisdom/knowledge/virtue that people who've read two Wikipedia pages don't possess. Innate or otherwise is immaterial as far as I'm concerned, the result is a different way of engaging with information and the world, a better ability to identify propaganda (a developed "immunity" to it).
That's just semantics, in which case the word better can signify either concept and anything in between.
That's fair, my prior response didn't fully take into account the context of the discussion, sorry
But I disagree, because the top comment (my interpretation of it at least) seems to be making the common vulgar determinist reduction of all choices and actions to simple results of material circumstances. I don't think this is a particularly useful or accurate reduction, especially in the context of this post.
If the comment is more pushing back on a general trend of liberal exceptionalism I don't have as much of a problem. But the post itself isn't an example of this exceptionalism, nor are value judgements as to a given person's ability to critically engage with things.
I really don't think that's the concept the OP is invoking-- consider the choice of the word develop rather than something like innately possess
I don't disagree with your criticism of the concept itself, that sort of exceptionalism as well as the view of oneself as a static, immutable essence (or defined by static, immutable characteristics) are both dangerous