Essarr LoreBook

Trying to go against the current

User Tools

Site Tools

lb:socjus

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
lb:socjus [2025-09-05 14:19:58] – [What is it?] ninjasrlb:socjus [2025-11-17 09:14:19] (current) – [Post-Modern Piracy] ninjasr
Line 1: Line 1:
-= SocJus +====== SocJus ====== 
-> My point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So, my position leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic activism. I think that the ethico-political choice we have to make every day is to determine which is the main danger.\\ +<blockquote> 
- --- //Michel Foucault//((:ref:>Reproduced from //[[libth>24335173|Cynical Theories]]// by Helen Pluckrose & James Lindsay, who got it from ‘“On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in+My point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So, my position leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic activism. I think that the ethico-political choice we have to make every day is to determine which is the main danger.\\ 
 +<cite> 
 +Michel Foucault((:ref:>Reproduced from //[[libth>24335173|Cynical Theories]]// by Helen Pluckrose & James Lindsay, who got it from ‘“On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in
 Progress,” afterword to Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, Progress,” afterword to Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics,
 2nd ed., by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow (Chicago: University of 2nd ed., by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow (Chicago: University of
 Chicago Press, 1983).’ according to their footnote.)) Chicago Press, 1983).’ according to their footnote.))
 +</cite> 
 +</blockquote>
 **Social Justice**, or SocJus, is a collection of post-modernist ideologies and, like post-modernism, they can all comfortably be described as evil. **Social Justice**, or SocJus, is a collection of post-modernist ideologies and, like post-modernism, they can all comfortably be described as evil.
  
Line 13: Line 16:
  
 An additional purpose is to bring to light several related ideologies that people don't realize are Post-Modern: even those who are actively fighting against so-called ‘wokeism’/‘leftism’/‘progressivism’. Since these are also Post-Modern and, consequently, I hate them...I believe it would benefit everyone to be aware of the fact they're Post-Modern so they, in addition to SocJus, can be comfortably eliminated. An additional purpose is to bring to light several related ideologies that people don't realize are Post-Modern: even those who are actively fighting against so-called ‘wokeism’/‘leftism’/‘progressivism’. Since these are also Post-Modern and, consequently, I hate them...I believe it would benefit everyone to be aware of the fact they're Post-Modern so they, in addition to SocJus, can be comfortably eliminated.
-== Notes+===== Notes =====
 **Just to be clear!** You don't //have// to read these if you don't want to. Though, technically, you don't have to read the whole article.\\ **Just to be clear!** You don't //have// to read these if you don't want to. Though, technically, you don't have to read the whole article.\\
 A-anyway, what I mean is that this section (notes) contains supplementary information and explanations of some smaller things which make the article as a whole clearer but I don't consider them necessary information. A-anyway, what I mean is that this section (notes) contains supplementary information and explanations of some smaller things which make the article as a whole clearer but I don't consider them necessary information.
  
 I //do// realize that this article is **long**. I //do// realize that this article is **long**.
-=== Where I get my information+==== Where I get my information ====
 I almost forgot to write this, but it is important to note. I almost forgot to write this, but it is important to note.
  
Line 62: Line 65:
     * Why: SocJus is basically the same thing except that there isn't really a grand conspiracy. Their beliefs just happen to support ideas and strategies that line up with globalism as a concept.     * Why: SocJus is basically the same thing except that there isn't really a grand conspiracy. Their beliefs just happen to support ideas and strategies that line up with globalism as a concept.
   * Leftism   * Leftism
-    * Used by: Themselves, right-wingers, Whatifalthist, Ubersoy, Carl Benjamin (Sargon of Akkad)+    * Used by: Themselves, right-wingers, [[lb:Whatifalthist]], Ubersoy, Carl Benjamin (Sargon of Akkad)
     * Why: SocJus deliberately positioned itself in opposition to conservatism (which is on the political right), which is itself completely antithetical to Post-Modern thought. As a result, they've become heavily associated with the political left.     * Why: SocJus deliberately positioned itself in opposition to conservatism (which is on the political right), which is itself completely antithetical to Post-Modern thought. As a result, they've become heavily associated with the political left.
   * Liberal   * Liberal
Line 125: Line 128:
 Currently, in 2025, SocJus is on the decline but remains quite influential. Post-Modernism itself seems to be partially but not fully affected. Hence the need for an article like this. Currently, in 2025, SocJus is on the decline but remains quite influential. Post-Modernism itself seems to be partially but not fully affected. Hence the need for an article like this.
 ==== What is it? ===== ==== What is it? =====
-**Note:** I discovered that I actually did a bad job of explaining what post-modernism is which is obviously a grave error. I'll fix this issue at some point, hopefully in the near future. 
- 
 SocJus is a Post-Modern ideology. I should note that I previously made the error of assuming it //was// Post-Modernism, which I realized was an error because there are //other// Post-Modern ideologies. But let's ignore those for now.\\ SocJus is a Post-Modern ideology. I should note that I previously made the error of assuming it //was// Post-Modernism, which I realized was an error because there are //other// Post-Modern ideologies. But let's ignore those for now.\\
 That said, SocJus is //probably// the purest Post-Modern ideology due to it being the closest to its originating roots. Plus it's the most radical. That said, SocJus is //probably// the purest Post-Modern ideology due to it being the closest to its originating roots. Plus it's the most radical.
Line 136: Line 137:
 The other other reason comes down to post-hoc rationalization. Don't let their justifications distract from the fact they've already decided on all of their positions before they ever wrote or said a single word. The other other reason comes down to post-hoc rationalization. Don't let their justifications distract from the fact they've already decided on all of their positions before they ever wrote or said a single word.
  
-All of this applies to SocJus and many other Post-Modern ideologies, though not all of them are quite as complicated as SocJus. And yes, we can move onto SocJus now.+Now that I've explained that Post-Modernism is simple, it's time to explain **what it actually is**. Per the book //Cynical Theories//, Post-Modernism can be reduced to two ‘**principles**’ and four ‘**themes**’.((:ref:cythe))\\ 
 +Those are: 
 +  * Principles 
 +    * **The post-modern knowledge principle**((:ref:cythe)) 
 +      * The belief that objective truth is unobtainable and, consequently, the belief that all ‘truth’ is actually culturally constructed. 
 +      * In practice, this manifests as a denial of reality, the belief that objectivity of any kind cannot exist and an acceptance of fact only when convenient. 
 +    * **The post-modern political principle**((:ref:cythe)) 
 +      * The belief that society is constructed of systems of power and hierarchy that determine what can be known and how. 
 +      * These systems of power (oppression), by determining what is ‘true’ also determine what is ‘good’. These systems also perpetuate themselves via things like common sense, education and the market.((:fn:>This looks very much like a conspiracy theory because it //is// a conspiracy theory. However, //Cynical Theories// points out that it's a conspiracy theory without conspirators because essentially //everyone is a participant in the perpetuation of these systems of oppression//.)) 
 +      * In practice, this means that any ‘oppressive force’ (can be as benign as a father figure) is automatically and unequivocally bad, while the ‘subjugated’ are always good especially if they actively rebel. 
 +  * Themes 
 +    * **The blurring of boundaries**((:ref:cythe)) 
 +      * Post-Modernism actively seeks to eliminate boundaries between anything and everything as a means of denying them legitimacy as anything objective. 
 +      * This includes but is not limited to objectivity/subjectivity, truth/belief, science/art, natural/artificial, humans/animals, man/woman and health/sickness.((:ref:cythe)) 
 +    * **The power of language**((:ref:cythe)) 
 +      * Post-Modernism believes that language is a means of controlling what can be believed and how. Thus language is a dangerous tool with which you can control all of society...meaning words are inherently dangerous. 
 +      * In practice this allows words to be interpreted however the Post-Modernist desires, ignoring the intentions of the author. This is due to an adaptation of the concept of [[lb:Death of the Author]].((:fn:>To sum up what this might be for those interested. ‘Death of the Author’ is an idea in literary analysis which posits that the author cannot be asked about the meaning of a work. It is entirely up to the observer to determine what that meaning is, regardless of the author's intentions. In practice, this just means that observers (literary critics/analysts) choose to project anything they want onto a work. Which is how something like Toy Story can be interpreted as fascist propaganda. Even pointing out that this is ridiculous is considered invalid, because Death of the Author also suggests that no one interpretation is better than another.)) 
 +      * In practice, this also manifests as nitpicking words and focusing a lot on definitions to achieve victory in a given discussion. 
 +    * **Cultural relativism**((:ref:cythe)) 
 +      * Post-Modernism holds that because objectivity does not exist and because people's biases are inherent to their position in society...no one culture is superior to another. Further, because no one culture is superior to another, any critique of a culture is seen as an implicit suggestion that the critic's own culture is inherently superior, which is morally abhorrent. 
 +      * However, not all cultural critiques are seen as equal. Generally, someone in a superior position of power per theory (such as white males) are seen as unequivocally evil. Thus their critiques should be discarded. This is because they have no way of knowing what it is like to be oppressed. On the other hand, those who belong to the oppressed (such as black women) are free to criticize the oppressors and themselves to their hearts content. 
 +    * **The loss of the individual and the universal**((:ref:cythe)) 
 +      * Post-Modernism holds that the individual as a concept doesn't exist. And neither does a universal principle (such as humanity). 
 +      * Essentially, Post-Modernists believe that humans are not individuals but are instead a product of their race, sexuality, class and so on. Because it is impossible (per their view) to see things from an angle different from the one you are a ‘part of’, the only way you can possibly relate to others (and communicate to them) is by sharing some of those traits (such as race, sexuality or class). 
 +All Post-Modern ideologies have the same principles/themes and all of them follow the same pattern of over-complicating themselves. Some of those principles/themes also manifest slightly differently depending on what exactly they're focused on. Though not all of them are quite as complicated as SocJus. And yes, we can move onto SocJus now.
  
 So...what //is// SocJus, really? Well, it isn't //one// ideology but rather an alliance of ideologies. This is called ‘intersectionality’ and I'll explain it in a bit more detail later but, for now, all you need to think of it as is a voluntary alliance.\\ So...what //is// SocJus, really? Well, it isn't //one// ideology but rather an alliance of ideologies. This is called ‘intersectionality’ and I'll explain it in a bit more detail later but, for now, all you need to think of it as is a voluntary alliance.\\
Line 246: Line 271:
  
 Post-Modernists will be intentionally ambiguous about the meanings of terms to avoid contradictions. Basically, they're treating individual terms like Schrödinger's cat: a term has both and neither meanings simultaneously.\\ Post-Modernists will be intentionally ambiguous about the meanings of terms to avoid contradictions. Basically, they're treating individual terms like Schrödinger's cat: a term has both and neither meanings simultaneously.\\
-This is a very childish yet undeniably effective method of avoiding being hypocritical. They just have to avoid making it clear //what// certain words men and this is why they will tend to get nervous/evasive/aggressive if any attempt at clarification is made – what is a woman?+This is a very childish yet undeniably effective method of avoiding being hypocritical. They just have to avoid making it clear //what// certain words mean and this is why they will tend to get nervous/evasive/aggressive if any attempt at clarification is made – what is a woman?
  
 This is also why pointing out the contradiction doesn't do anything: in their minds, there is no contradiction, because the term has both meanings at once. This is also why, once you clearly define a term, they will start vigorously denying the contradictions. This is also why pointing out the contradiction doesn't do anything: in their minds, there is no contradiction, because the term has both meanings at once. This is also why, once you clearly define a term, they will start vigorously denying the contradictions.
Line 283: Line 308:
 Half-Hearted typically aren't as tuned-in to the ideology as the Ideologically Pure, so they often find themselves running afoul of the eternal purity test. Half-Hearted typically aren't as tuned-in to the ideology as the Ideologically Pure, so they often find themselves running afoul of the eternal purity test.
  
-Basically, anyone who says “I was woke once but I'm not ever since x” then they're almost certainly a former Half-Hearted.+Basically, anyone who says <q>“I was woke once but I'm not ever since x”</q> then they're almost certainly a former Half-Hearted.
  
 These differentiate themselves further by having the capacity to see their own hypocritical beliefs. Though their solution to avoiding being hypocritical is the freeze and voluntary shutdown. These differentiate themselves further by having the capacity to see their own hypocritical beliefs. Though their solution to avoiding being hypocritical is the freeze and voluntary shutdown.
  
-A good (and public) example of a Half-Hearted is Red from [[youu>OverlySarcasticProductions|Overly Sarcastic Productions]]. In her [[you>j-yJDbC_a2c|Gilgamesh video]] there's a frame with a ranty text-wall about the issue of ‘Finders Keepers’((:fn:>‘Finders Keepers’ is the idea that if you discover an artifact during an archeological dig, you basically ‘own’ it. Post-Colonial thought opposes this on the basis that this is theft and, consequently, the former colonial powers should return the artifacts.)) and ISIS. To summarize the rant: Red was basically trying to reconcile Finders Keepers being bad with the fact many artifacts from Mesopotamia ended up being saved from destruction at the hands of ISIS because they weren't in the region. This text wall ends with a dramatic “aaaaaaaAAAAAAA”. In real terms, this just means that she voluntarily chose to stop thinking about it because that line of thinking naturally leads to the conclusion that Finders Keepers can’t be bad in all situations.\\+A good (and public) example of a Half-Hearted is Red from [[youu>OverlySarcasticProductions|Overly Sarcastic Productions]]. In her [[you>j-yJDbC_a2c|Gilgamesh video]] there's a frame with a ranty text-wall about the issue of ‘Finders Keepers’((:fn:>‘Finders Keepers’ is the idea that if you discover an artifact during an archeological dig, you basically ‘own’ it. Post-Colonial thought opposes this on the basis that this is theft and, consequently, the former colonial powers should return the artifacts.)) and ISIS. To summarize the rant: Red was basically trying to reconcile Finders Keepers being bad with the fact many artifacts from Mesopotamia ended up being saved from destruction at the hands of ISIS because they weren't in the region. This text wall ends with a dramatic <q>“aaaaaaaAAAAAAA”</q>. In real terms, this just means that she voluntarily chose to stop thinking about it because that line of thinking naturally leads to the conclusion that Finders Keepers can’t be bad in all situations.\\
 As a result, the Post-Colonial position that it's //always// bad breaks down. As a result, the Post-Colonial position that it's //always// bad breaks down.
  
Line 303: Line 328:
 Escapism (which is what ignoring reality is) is obviously appealing to everyone – I mean, who //doesn't// want to play as a dashing knight who saves the day in a game, right? – but with the added bonus of being a victim who is being treated unfairly by the world, with the means of getting back at the ones who did this to you? It's downright intoxicating. Escapism (which is what ignoring reality is) is obviously appealing to everyone – I mean, who //doesn't// want to play as a dashing knight who saves the day in a game, right? – but with the added bonus of being a victim who is being treated unfairly by the world, with the means of getting back at the ones who did this to you? It's downright intoxicating.
  
-Post-Modernism and its descendant ideologies basically fully enable being selfish to the highest degree while making oneself feel //extremely// good in the process. You feel like a warrior constantly battling against evil and all you really have to do is say things like “actually, calling me ‘he’ is transphobic because I identify as demisexual, so please call me ‘xer’. Check your privilege and stop being such a bigot”.+Post-Modernism and its descendant ideologies basically fully enable being selfish to the highest degree while making oneself feel //extremely// good in the process. You feel like a warrior constantly battling against evil and all you really have to do is say things like <q>“actually, calling me ‘he’ is transphobic because I identify as demisexual, so please call me ‘xer’. Check your privilege and stop being such a bigot”</q>.
  
 What furthers this perspective is the sensitivity to language. In their minds, literally any mistake, misunderstanding or banal comment is a targeted attack on their very being. This can give the impression that they really //are// being constantly attacked from every angle.\\ What furthers this perspective is the sensitivity to language. In their minds, literally any mistake, misunderstanding or banal comment is a targeted attack on their very being. This can give the impression that they really //are// being constantly attacked from every angle.\\
Line 337: Line 362:
  
 Here's the quote from the beginning of the article again: Here's the quote from the beginning of the article again:
-> My point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So, my position leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic activism. I think that the ethico-political choice we have to make every day is to determine which is the main danger. +<blockquote> 
 +My point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So, my position leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic activism. I think that the ethico-political choice we have to make every day is to determine which is the main danger. 
 +</blockquote>
 This quote is by **//Foucault//** – one of the **founders** of Post-Modernism.\\ This quote is by **//Foucault//** – one of the **founders** of Post-Modernism.\\
 To put this quote into layman's terms: it means that there is //always// more to fight, more to demand and more to gain. It's just that, in the short-term, they need to figure out what to prioritize. But the fight will never end. To put this quote into layman's terms: it means that there is //always// more to fight, more to demand and more to gain. It's just that, in the short-term, they need to figure out what to prioritize. But the fight will never end.
Line 392: Line 418:
 This connection with Post-Modernism/SocJus is implicitly understood by many people, though they usually don't reach the conclusion that MPC is a distinct ideology that doesn't get along with SocJus. This connection with Post-Modernism/SocJus is implicitly understood by many people, though they usually don't reach the conclusion that MPC is a distinct ideology that doesn't get along with SocJus.
 ==== Free & Open-Source Software Movements ==== ==== Free & Open-Source Software Movements ====
-When I told a friend that I started to think Richard Stallman was a Post-Modernist, he responded with “I don't even know what is or isn't Post-Modernist anymore” which I think perfectly encapsulates Post-Modernism.+When I told a friend that I started to think Richard Stallman was a Post-Modernist, he responded with <q>“I don't even know what is or isn't Post-Modernist anymore”</q> which I think perfectly encapsulates Post-Modernism.
  
 Anyways: yes, I'm being serious. Not only am I being serious, but this one might flirt with intersectionality more often than Veganism or Environmentalism. Anyways: yes, I'm being serious. Not only am I being serious, but this one might flirt with intersectionality more often than Veganism or Environmentalism.
Line 409: Line 435:
 A very small list of corporations they're fine with would be IBM, Red Hat, Sun Microsystems (when they still existed), Apple, Oracle and many more I can’t think of. A lot of these are at times much much worse than Microsoft, yet they don't care: because //Microsoft is the enemy//, not //Oracle//. A very small list of corporations they're fine with would be IBM, Red Hat, Sun Microsystems (when they still existed), Apple, Oracle and many more I can’t think of. A lot of these are at times much much worse than Microsoft, yet they don't care: because //Microsoft is the enemy//, not //Oracle//.
  
-And like any other Post-Modern ideology, they have the same blindspots. They don't realize that “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” is a far better description of GNU and Linux's approach to competition than it does Microsoft's.\\+And like any other Post-Modern ideology, they have the same blindspots. They don't realize that “**Embrace, Extend, Extinguish**” is a far better description of GNU and Linux's approach to competition than it does Microsoft's.\\
 The GNU Project was explicitly founded to clone proprietary software, then promote their use over proprietary software with the explicit goal of becoming the standard to kill proprietary software. How this is seen as ethical is beyond me, but Post-Modernists are not exactly rational thinkers.\\ The GNU Project was explicitly founded to clone proprietary software, then promote their use over proprietary software with the explicit goal of becoming the standard to kill proprietary software. How this is seen as ethical is beyond me, but Post-Modernists are not exactly rational thinkers.\\
 Linux has a similar approach, though it could be argued it's accidental rather than intentional like in the case of the GNU. Linux has a similar approach, though it could be argued it's accidental rather than intentional like in the case of the GNU.
Line 415: Line 441:
 Oh, and let's also mention the fact Academia in the West is dominated by the Free and Open-Source software movements. Even in this regard they're similar to SocJus. Oh, and let's also mention the fact Academia in the West is dominated by the Free and Open-Source software movements. Even in this regard they're similar to SocJus.
  
-Their denial of reality (such as Open-Source software usually being inferior to Proprietary software) and their methods of indoctrination all indicate these are Post-Modern ideologies.+Their denial of reality (such as Open-Source software usually being inferior to Proprietary software) and their methods of indoctrination all indicate these are Post-Modern ideologies.\\ 
 +The way people online keep announcing that they're switching to Linux and <q>"Never going back to Windows."</q> (sure) is also identical in structure to virtue-signalling. I'm even convinced that a lot of these people are lying, just as virtue-signallers do.
  
 Something else that's important to note is that the Free Software Movement //cannot// and //will not// support the abolition of copyright. On the surface this is strange and a little contradictory, but it makes sense once you realize...the truth.\\ Something else that's important to note is that the Free Software Movement //cannot// and //will not// support the abolition of copyright. On the surface this is strange and a little contradictory, but it makes sense once you realize...the truth.\\
Line 523: Line 550:
 But what //does// matter is the //reason// you're pirating and, in the second example, it's explicitly to damage a corporation. But what //does// matter is the //reason// you're pirating and, in the second example, it's explicitly to damage a corporation.
  
-I mean, just take the phrase they love repeating so much: “It's always moral to pirate X” (Nintendo/Adobe/Other...)\\+I mean, just take the phrase they love repeating so much: <q>“It's always moral to pirate X”</q> (Nintendo/Adobe/Other...)\\
 It's a very Post-Modern way of thinking basically. It's a very Post-Modern way of thinking basically.
  
Line 532: Line 559:
 One of the more insidious representatives of Post-Modern Piracy – though one unrelated to Reddit, interestingly enough – is ThePirateBay.\\ One of the more insidious representatives of Post-Modern Piracy – though one unrelated to Reddit, interestingly enough – is ThePirateBay.\\
 ThePirateBay is responsible for birthing the Swedish Pirate Party, from which all the other European Pirate Parties came. And //all// of those parties are SocJus aligned, just that they're a little crazier due to being technocratic.\\ ThePirateBay is responsible for birthing the Swedish Pirate Party, from which all the other European Pirate Parties came. And //all// of those parties are SocJus aligned, just that they're a little crazier due to being technocratic.\\
-ThePirateBay is itself a big rabbit-hole of “what the Hell’ if you bother to look into it...but just keep in mind that the statement “they flirt with Post-Modernism” isn't even the tip of the iceberg. If you're curious, look into Piratbyrån, Telecomix and Kopimi. All of those //really// explain what I mean.+ThePirateBay is itself a big rabbit-hole of <q>“what the Hell”</q> if you bother to look into it...but just keep in mind that the statement “they flirt with Post-Modernism” isn't even the tip of the iceberg. If you're curious, look into Piratbyrån, Telecomix and Kopimi. All of those //really// explain what I mean.
  
 Ironically, one of the other big representatives of this particular ideology is probably Mutahar,((:fn:>I had forgotten about him, but **Modern Vintage Gamer** is also a major representative of this ideology. In fact, I think I first identified it with him.)) who is otherwise anti-SocJus. It's just really ironic that he doesn't realize his ideology is Post-Modern. And he also demonstrates Post-Modern-style hypocrisy like the situation surrounding the Switch 2. Ironically, one of the other big representatives of this particular ideology is probably Mutahar,((:fn:>I had forgotten about him, but **Modern Vintage Gamer** is also a major representative of this ideology. In fact, I think I first identified it with him.)) who is otherwise anti-SocJus. It's just really ironic that he doesn't realize his ideology is Post-Modern. And he also demonstrates Post-Modern-style hypocrisy like the situation surrounding the Switch 2.
Line 552: Line 579:
 But since they believe with 100% certainty that men and women //are// different...a lot of those older roles are starting to make some sense to them. But since they believe with 100% certainty that men and women //are// different...a lot of those older roles are starting to make some sense to them.
  
-So while a regular SocJus Feminist Theorist might see a prostitute nd go “Slaaaay, Queen ♥~” a TERF might look at the same prostitute with disgust. Though take this with a grain of salt, since I'm not 100% sure, only about 93%.\\+So while a regular SocJus Feminist Theorist might see a prostitute and go <q>“Slaaaay, Queen ♥~”</q> a TERF might look at the same prostitute with disgust. Though take this with a grain of salt, since I'm not 100% sure, only about 93%.\\
 Though it //is// funny to think about. Though it //is// funny to think about.
  
Line 571: Line 598:
 As far as I know, the following ideas are tied to SocJus/Post-Modern thought in storytelling: As far as I know, the following ideas are tied to SocJus/Post-Modern thought in storytelling:
   * [[lb:damsel.in.distress]] being universally perceived as negative.   * [[lb:damsel.in.distress]] being universally perceived as negative.
 +  * [[lb:Death of the Author]] probably didn't originate with Post-Modernism, but is dominant among video essayists, reviewers and whatnot...who are all Post-Modernists.
   * [[lb:manic pixie dream girl|Manic Pixie Dream Girl]]. I believe the term originated with them and is considered universally negative.   * [[lb:manic pixie dream girl|Manic Pixie Dream Girl]]. I believe the term originated with them and is considered universally negative.
   * [[lb:ludo-narrative.dissonance]]: coined by Games Journalists, probably the pre-eminent example of being ideologically compromised.   * [[lb:ludo-narrative.dissonance]]: coined by Games Journalists, probably the pre-eminent example of being ideologically compromised.
Line 587: Line 615:
   * This section will mostly remain empty for now, because I don't know what to put here besides a few small disconnected notes.   * This section will mostly remain empty for now, because I don't know what to put here besides a few small disconnected notes.
   * When trolling SocJus, an effective counter-tactic is pretending to be a member of one of their constituent ideologies. You can then activate a purity test which will leave them bewildered. Though I don't think of this as a super legitimate long-term tactic – mostly just for harmless fun   * When trolling SocJus, an effective counter-tactic is pretending to be a member of one of their constituent ideologies. You can then activate a purity test which will leave them bewildered. Though I don't think of this as a super legitimate long-term tactic – mostly just for harmless fun
-    * This can take the form of them arguing that “x doesn't matter” and you responding with “how dare you suggest this doesn't matter, it's a case of trans rights, bigot”. This is something I actually did once. +    * This can take the form of them arguing that <q>“x doesn't matter”</q> and you responding with <q>“how dare you suggest this doesn't matter, it's a case of trans rights, bigot”</q>. This is something I actually did once. 
-    * Though this could be exploited to maximized in-fighting, it would be too much work, I think.+    * Though this could be exploited to maximize in-fighting, it would be too much work, I think.
   * Many Post-Modern ideologies are //very// transparent about what they actually believe despite them being wired to lie all the time. The main reason it doesn't seem to be this way is because they're lying for the sake of PR. But if they think you're one of them...they will reveal //a lot// about what they //actually// think.   * Many Post-Modern ideologies are //very// transparent about what they actually believe despite them being wired to lie all the time. The main reason it doesn't seem to be this way is because they're lying for the sake of PR. But if they think you're one of them...they will reveal //a lot// about what they //actually// think.
   * There //is// one weird effect of post-modernism in that, due to how vague and subjective it is, it basically forces being clear. Plus it forces making clear definitions. This is advantageous in the realm of [[lb:storytelling theory]] for example.   * There //is// one weird effect of post-modernism in that, due to how vague and subjective it is, it basically forces being clear. Plus it forces making clear definitions. This is advantageous in the realm of [[lb:storytelling theory]] for example.
     * Actually, I started writing all that out due to the realization that //only// Post-Modern thought seems to be represented in storytelling.     * Actually, I started writing all that out due to the realization that //only// Post-Modern thought seems to be represented in storytelling.
lb/socjus.1757081998.txt.gz · Last modified: 2025-09-05 14:19:58 by ninjasr
Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki