[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.18839091 [View]
File: 62 KB, 1024x768, Chuck's_Fuck_&_Suck.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>18837723
You will never, ever be a real woman. I would say that to your face too if I could.

>> No.17189110 [View]
File: 62 KB, 1024x768, the past....jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17189110

What is even the epistemic difference between propagating something and simply arguing for a position? Is it a matter of transparency in your intentions? Is it a matter of bilateral engagement as opposed to soapboxing? By making a thread, OP clearly has not rejected all outside input, or at least wants to have an effect on others via whining.

A major fraction of people hate propaganda however it is defined. But they don't advertise that fact for the very reason that in rejecting propaganda, they reject the very means by which ideas spreads. Combined with the existential crisis of not being able to change the collective system, nothing improves. But the desire to change the system is to cause propaganda in the first place. You wind up taking on a philosophy of "if you can't beat em, join em" and root for or create the version of propaganda which most benefits you. Candor erodes and the cycle continues.
The best way to rebel might be to never comply with anything, but no matter what the solution, it has to spring organically from your own will rather than being learned. But the issue in this thread is there is no possibility of organic thought as propaganda evolves and invades, so no matter what, you're giving in and thereby not attacking the core. At a certain point, I always circle back to having faith in my own ability to appraise the bullshit factor of an idea on grounds of objective moral or tribal standards. Also, reforming the advertising industry to be less psychologically manipulative and more plain would go a long way. But the more I advise, the more it can be taken for propaganda!

tl;dr "Propaganda" must be delegated to connote exclusively that which is deceptive rather than referring to influential factors in ALL of discourse, or of course there will be no escape. Grassroots discussion can be regarded as distinct from it, and protected for a time from subversion the more each participant values honor.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]