Had a little thought. We tend to characterize ideologies in internal (“subjective”) or external (“objective”) terms, but in practice work with them in intersubjective ways, where the first class citizen is the directed ideology pair like (capitalism, communism).
-
-
Note what happens in such discourses. Specific problems are plausibly everybody’s fault and therefore nobody’s fault. Nobody has to change behavior, everybody gets to preach at everybody else, recommending specific moral evolutions to them from vice to virtue.
Show this thread -
Trick to breaking out of these patterns is to ignore analyses that do not center specific behaviors of named people. When you do that, it will turn into a game of no-true-Scotsman. Pick 2 of 3: a name, an ideology, responsibility for a problem
Show this thread -
If you ditch ideology, you’ll at least find someone to hold accountable within your means. Not vote for them, not work with them, not buy their stuff etc. This is what cancel culture clumsily tries to do, except via mob judgment contagion rather than actual distributed judgment.
Show this thread -
Everybody was all bullish on ideologies a few years back, and many people wanted to work on them, innovate on them, etc. Now everybody is sick of them, and tries or pretends to be above them. But they aren’t going anywhere. Good time to invest actually.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.