"In the absence of real organizations, listener funded counter hegemonic narrators are thriving. The alt-political influencer doesn’t report — they just interpret the news for you."
That's why I exclusively read Joshua Citarella's Newsletter - the alt-political influencer and counter hegemonic narrator in the business of discussing the counter hegemonic narration of alt-political influencers.
Jokes aside, thank you for this piece and your work, Josh!
Yep, that quote stuck out for me like an "Eureka, we're fucked!" moment too.
Wraps up the entire social media and big-tech hosted alt-politi-commentary #MisDisMal-noosphere succintly, and with a rueful realism missing from the usual dialectical side-choosing polemical posturing online.
It's a goal of mine to be such a ribald outcast that both sides (whatever those sides are; i don't know, and I don't care) hate me in equal measure.
Think of that! Bringing both sides of the political opposition diametric together over their shared antipathy for me!
Fuck yeah! This is how we Re-Situationalize Internationull
"Radicalization is a process of clarifying ideological inconsistencies and it requires that viewers are slowly acculturated to extreme ideas over time."
Really on point. Radicalizing is about embracing the new narrative, but in order to do that (seeming) inconsistencies must be addressed. People don't roll into a narrative as a blank slate. They come into a new narrative with a whole lot of baggage. Particularly if the society has made a strong effort to immunize the person against another narrative (for example, anti-communist propaganda in the US). Whether these inconsistencies are real or fabricated depends on the flavor of extremism (or who you ask).
Only thing I would add, is that besides the pressure points suppressing certain parts of the funnels, there is also a release of places where pressure used to exist that has dissipated, inducing radicalization. Like lacking community or atomization causing a lack of narrative pull towards the mainstream.
Historically, many people have gone through tough times without radically changing their narrative. In part because there were no alternative narratives readily available, but also because there was still a strong ideological pull from the tight, very local, communities people belonged to.
The baggage is predicted via mass data modelling of online behaviours. The baggage is inserted through an individual's perception of their environments. They see shite, they think about what they've perceived as shite, they then feel shite.. PCT 101
I guess 'radicalization' then factors into how the final step manifests: they feel shite enough to finally behave, or act out on those shite feelings that built up over and over again from continuously perceiving the state of their environment as shite.
Look at how little positive, or indeed, helpful content is created in our contemporaneously conspiratorialized computer connected lives...
If this is University, then when do we finally graduate and go live in the real fucking world?
Could you help give us a definition of “radicalization”? I dont think you’re horseshoe theorying but I wonder if there are wildly different outcomes to becoming really into various political cultures online based on what they get into? Also wondering if this is maybe just a way to say “people who seem to be hysterical or histrionic or otherwise taking maximalist stances online”? Is there an analysis between the ways the messages appear (as radical) and actions taken (as in doing politics not posting about it)? I feel like this whole projects is all a way to say “be normal”? (In which case is that reactionary?) thanks
Read any academic paper on this topic since, say around Gamergate era and I believe the radicalization alluded to in those papers is the same definition he's appropriated here.
If you can’t tell, my questions poke holes in what “everybody knows” about “radicalization.” Simply referring to I don’t know, Angela Nagel’s work, and saying “this uncontested idea” is not sufficient.
The definition of radicalization used by Mr. Doom Scroll, is the one readily adopted & repeated ad nauseaum as THE existential threat facing the freedom-loving democratic and fair systems of political governance we all know and love.
XRW's (eXtreme Right Wing) insipid spread has taken root in the fetid fecundity offered through the online targeting of another new generation of young (usually) white men online,
Radicalization must be stopped before those bleedin' POMs produce another bigoted, anti-masculine guilt and shame fest, for debut on Netfuxx.
What do you reckon? Is my above definition / deepity a fair approximation for the generally accepted definition of radicoolization? https://i.ibb.co/VWhbDXBn/image.png
Brilliant analysis Josh! Thank you for sharing. Have you read Max Fisher's "The Chaos Machine", about the rise of precisely these content networks and recommendation algorithms? Profound book - the problem is way worse and more systemic than even I (a depressed cynic) considered. Anyone who has /ever/ used social media should read it. The author would no doubt be a great interview.
Do you remember when Facebook announced in 2014 that they ran a massive social media experiment on their platform, targeting a selected portion of Facebook users' News Feeds by algorithmically adding a bias towards negativity? Negative, anger-inducing emotive content (aka. ragebait content https://ragebaiting.com/)
Very good, high quality work and your exploration of the neglected causative factors which are blindingly obvious throughout all of human history (degradation of living standards, increased levels of poverty etc), is valid to the utmost radically extreme degrees!
And the observation on how alt-political commentators don't offer much beyond a regurgitation of current news to their viewers illustrates the power of the STAND-DOWN PSY-OP in effect.
> Please listen and keep in mind Mark Passio’s STAND-DOWN PSY-OPS presentation clip. Timestamp on the STAND-DOWN PSY-OPs starts at 50m 39s
"In the absence of real organizations, listener funded counter hegemonic narrators are thriving. The alt-political influencer doesn’t report — they just interpret the news for you."
That's why I exclusively read Joshua Citarella's Newsletter - the alt-political influencer and counter hegemonic narrator in the business of discussing the counter hegemonic narration of alt-political influencers.
Jokes aside, thank you for this piece and your work, Josh!
Yep, that quote stuck out for me like an "Eureka, we're fucked!" moment too.
Wraps up the entire social media and big-tech hosted alt-politi-commentary #MisDisMal-noosphere succintly, and with a rueful realism missing from the usual dialectical side-choosing polemical posturing online.
It's a goal of mine to be such a ribald outcast that both sides (whatever those sides are; i don't know, and I don't care) hate me in equal measure.
Think of that! Bringing both sides of the political opposition diametric together over their shared antipathy for me!
Fuck yeah! This is how we Re-Situationalize Internationull
"Radicalization is a process of clarifying ideological inconsistencies and it requires that viewers are slowly acculturated to extreme ideas over time."
Really on point. Radicalizing is about embracing the new narrative, but in order to do that (seeming) inconsistencies must be addressed. People don't roll into a narrative as a blank slate. They come into a new narrative with a whole lot of baggage. Particularly if the society has made a strong effort to immunize the person against another narrative (for example, anti-communist propaganda in the US). Whether these inconsistencies are real or fabricated depends on the flavor of extremism (or who you ask).
Only thing I would add, is that besides the pressure points suppressing certain parts of the funnels, there is also a release of places where pressure used to exist that has dissipated, inducing radicalization. Like lacking community or atomization causing a lack of narrative pull towards the mainstream.
Historically, many people have gone through tough times without radically changing their narrative. In part because there were no alternative narratives readily available, but also because there was still a strong ideological pull from the tight, very local, communities people belonged to.
The baggage is predicted via mass data modelling of online behaviours. The baggage is inserted through an individual's perception of their environments. They see shite, they think about what they've perceived as shite, they then feel shite.. PCT 101
I guess 'radicalization' then factors into how the final step manifests: they feel shite enough to finally behave, or act out on those shite feelings that built up over and over again from continuously perceiving the state of their environment as shite.
Look at how little positive, or indeed, helpful content is created in our contemporaneously conspiratorialized computer connected lives...
If this is University, then when do we finally graduate and go live in the real fucking world?
Where can I find the political compass in which post-theorycel obscure ideological zoomer terror is highlighted?
Anywhere you like, that's the beauty of this game.
Put on a blindfold and pin the tail on the Chicken Jockey.
Take off the blindfold and be like W0W, much pinning, very stab. Oof
Could you help give us a definition of “radicalization”? I dont think you’re horseshoe theorying but I wonder if there are wildly different outcomes to becoming really into various political cultures online based on what they get into? Also wondering if this is maybe just a way to say “people who seem to be hysterical or histrionic or otherwise taking maximalist stances online”? Is there an analysis between the ways the messages appear (as radical) and actions taken (as in doing politics not posting about it)? I feel like this whole projects is all a way to say “be normal”? (In which case is that reactionary?) thanks
Read any academic paper on this topic since, say around Gamergate era and I believe the radicalization alluded to in those papers is the same definition he's appropriated here.
If you can’t tell, my questions poke holes in what “everybody knows” about “radicalization.” Simply referring to I don’t know, Angela Nagel’s work, and saying “this uncontested idea” is not sufficient.
Yes I know, and i'm being irreverent :-)
How about this, though?
The definition of radicalization used by Mr. Doom Scroll, is the one readily adopted & repeated ad nauseaum as THE existential threat facing the freedom-loving democratic and fair systems of political governance we all know and love.
XRW's (eXtreme Right Wing) insipid spread has taken root in the fetid fecundity offered through the online targeting of another new generation of young (usually) white men online,
Radicalization must be stopped before those bleedin' POMs produce another bigoted, anti-masculine guilt and shame fest, for debut on Netfuxx.
https://archive.md/5WAMG
What do you reckon? Is my above definition / deepity a fair approximation for the generally accepted definition of radicoolization? https://i.ibb.co/VWhbDXBn/image.png
And just to follow up, do you read Fred Jameson or Jodi Dean? Might help with whatever’s going on here
Brilliant analysis Josh! Thank you for sharing. Have you read Max Fisher's "The Chaos Machine", about the rise of precisely these content networks and recommendation algorithms? Profound book - the problem is way worse and more systemic than even I (a depressed cynic) considered. Anyone who has /ever/ used social media should read it. The author would no doubt be a great interview.
Do you remember when Facebook announced in 2014 that they ran a massive social media experiment on their platform, targeting a selected portion of Facebook users' News Feeds by algorithmically adding a bias towards negativity? Negative, anger-inducing emotive content (aka. ragebait content https://ragebaiting.com/)
It's a fascinating read too and helps elucidate just how seriously powerful Big Tech Soc Med is. https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2014/06/28/facebook-manipulated-user-news-feeds-to-create-emotional-contagion/
Here is the Facebook paper I mentioned. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1320040111
Thanks!
Very good, high quality work and your exploration of the neglected causative factors which are blindingly obvious throughout all of human history (degradation of living standards, increased levels of poverty etc), is valid to the utmost radically extreme degrees!
And the observation on how alt-political commentators don't offer much beyond a regurgitation of current news to their viewers illustrates the power of the STAND-DOWN PSY-OP in effect.
> Please listen and keep in mind Mark Passio’s STAND-DOWN PSY-OPS presentation clip. Timestamp on the STAND-DOWN PSY-OPs starts at 50m 39s
https://www.bitchute.com/video/KV4smsMcsaCw/
Que loco
He’s applying the precession of simulacra to ideologies
“It’s not a pyramid scheme. It’s a reverse tunnel system”