The Democratic belief that Millennials and Generation Z are more liberal and can be counted on to deliver substantial electoral majorities for liberal political causes is threatened by the rise of a "pseudo-liberal" ideology that is actively promoted by Bernie Sanders and a variety of other self-proclaimed "Democratic-Socialist" candidates. My use of the term "pseudo-liberalism" is intended to mirror historian Richard Hofstadter's use of the term "pseudo-conservative" to describe a particular kind of self-destructive ideology that has always been prominent in American politics, and which gained influence in America from the start of the original "America First" movement on through the Eisenhower years. Pseudo-liberal provides an interesting corollary to the concept of the pseudo-conservative as although pseudo-liberals claim support of progressive causes, they regularly demonstrate habits of thought and communication that correlate to conservative ideology.
In his book Understanding Media, Marshall McLuhan wrote that: "More and more we turn from the content of messages to study the total effect...Concern with effect, rather than meaning is a basic change of our electric time, for effect involves the total situation, and not a single level of information movement." In order to further develop our understanding of information warfare and its effect on social media users, we must begin with an honest evaluation of the proclivities of certain user groups, and how the individuals within those groups may be influenced in the long term by the style and delivery of political messaging. It is a firm belief of this author that the reason the Russian Government supported Bernie Sanders in the 2016 election is that the Russians have based their information warfare efforts on a comprehensive study of American media and psychology, and they recognized (even if Sanders didn't) that the Sanders campaign's style of political messaging had the potential to dramatically promote conservative interests over the long term.
In my essay On the need for pattern recognition in political messaging, I addressed how the most popular social media outlets have all adopted formats that tend to preclude complex or nuanced discussion, and which are highly conductive to low effort political thought, and the development of a "mob mentality" among users. As social media becomes more prominent, these tendencies threaten political stability around the world. In order to avoid chaos, users of social media must be aware of the influence of the medium, so they are better equipped to recognize changes in their own patterns of thought, and decide for themselves whether those changes are truly positive. In the digital age, it isn't the content of communication that matters, so much as the style of that communication, and the moles of thinking it encourages. A population that is raised in an environment where politics is defined by 240 character messages and meme wars will be naturally hostile to the process of reflection - a process that McLuhan defined as being characteristic of the print media format. Although the internet offers unlimited potential for the sharing of reflections and learned essays, social media users can easily click by that content, thereby demonstrating their preference for the "low effort" experience.
There are a number of behaviors that are well known to social media users that largely characterize the "Red Rose Twitter" (pro-Bernie progressive) community. All of the behaviors listed below demonstrate a preference for "low effort thought," a trait typically associated with conservative ideology. Those behaviors are:
- A preference for a dictatorial style of communication: Sanders' supporters responded eagerly to his "we're going to tell these people" proclamations, and felt that Sanders was effective, because he was willing to declare terms to others, and did not qualify his statements by addressing the difficulties of the legislative process. This is a behavioral pattern that clearly mirrors the behavior of Trump supporters, and fascist movements of the past.
- A preference for simple slogans and blatant hostility towards those who point out gaps in arguments or ask for clarification: During the 2016 Presidential election Sanders supporters would frequently repeat "We need Medicare for all", and then immediately attacking anyone who raised concerns or asked for clarification regarding exactly what "Medicare for all" would mean. This is another example of a population that is being geared towards low effort thought, and which responds with hostility towards anyone who asks for elaboration. Similar behavior has been observed in progressives talking about a "Green New Deal". They're perfectly happy to repeat their slogan, but anyone who dares to try to advance the discussion by describing a particular technology or its applications is immediately attacked and accused of being in the pocket of "big oil" or being a "closet fascist", regardless of what technology they are discussing, or its potential impact.
- Psuedo-liberals also demonstrate an open disdain for the Democratic process. This hostility may be observed by two key factors: the first is that progressives in the Federal Congress have drafted very few bills. This includes Bernie Sanders and members of "The Squad" in the House of Representatives. What this group seems far more inclined to do, is make public demands for sweeping executive action. An example of this is how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez insisted Joe Biden must "cancel more student loans," in spite of the fact that Ocasio-Cortez, as a lawmaker, should know that the President does not have unilateral authority to just wipe away over a Trillion dollars in government backed debt. The Constitution requires that all bills regarding the Federal budget must originate in the House of Representatives, yet instead of writing a bill, we have a psuedo-liberal "demanding" action.
- Psuedo-liberals also tend to focus almost exclusively on their own immediate financial interest. While they claim to be concerned about social justice issues, their tendency is to always go back to those things that have the greatest impact on their immediate financial future. The degree of economic self-centeredness among this community really isn't very different from the billionaire Libertarian who insists that it's "against the Constitution" to tax his capital gains, it's just economic self-interest as expressed by a different group in society. A willingness to hold the government hostage over one's immediate financial self-interest is a behavior that's long been associated with conservative ideology, not people who have a genuine concern for the betterment of society.
- pseudo-liberals also demonstrate a tendency towards "politics as a meme war". Interactions with pseudo-liberals frequently involve a litany of pseudo-liberal slogans, interspersed with insults towards anyone who asks for clarification or who points out holes in an argument, and then a flood of "Boom" memes, intended to suggest the Sanders supporter vanquished the person who was so gauche as to ask for details or clarification. This behavior is an example of "spiking the ball on the 50 yard line", but it's widely accepted, and commonly practiced, in the Red Rose Twitter community.
Those who claim to believe in liberal ideals need to begin a more careful evaluation of the progressive movement, and the pseudo-conservative tendencies demonstrated by that community. Human beings need to develop a greater understanding of pattern recognition in political messaging to prevent the influence of the social media format from exerting greater influence on American politics. Although the internet offers unlimited potential for the sharing of learned essays and extended comment, the most popular forms of social media are those which encourage mob mentality, and low effort thought. It is not the content or the professed ideals of a movement that matter so much as a certain style of speech, and manner of thinking associated with that movement. The pseudo-liberal youth of today are being conditioned to become the far-right conservatives of tomorrow.
If you enjoyed this essayPlease consider purchasing a copy of my book
Comments
Post a Comment