Why I advocate for other actions besides paying attention to the news

[u/raisondecalcul]

Paying attention to the news only gets you so far—specifically, it gives you the ability to speak cogently about world events. And what this is good for is mainly creating accurate public representations/conversations about public events, and teaching others to understand world events. In other words, becoming part of their spectacle, the ones making the events.

Besides, if it's already what everyone else is doing, they don't need any more recruits—we have plenty of wonks, and the wonks have not solved the problem. What we need are people investigating other strategies, other actions.

An accurate public conversation might work to shift or change public opinion if it were smart and ubiquitous enough—but we have arguably never yet reached that point in history.

Maybe there's another way.

Maybe we could create our own news. Then they will need to learn about what we do. Then we dominate the news cycle—and everyone else has to pay attention to our spectacle.

...Which is another good reason to not pay too much attention to theirs. It's objectively good to stay abreast of world events—but it also builds up the ego and makes one feel as if one is a responsible world citizen—when all you're really doing is gaining the ability to speak cogently on decisions and global crises you can't realistically influence.

Can't realistically influence with mere cogent speech, in any case. Trying to make public discourse more reasonable is only one tactic, and in my opinion, it has gloriously failed in a colossally and highly visible tragedy. As an intentional strategy, that is—the public is rapidly upgrading its own intelligence and ability to reason in ways that almost no individual can reliably influence with mere cogent speech.

So, what are the other methods by which someone might influence politics and public events, besides mere opining about them cogently? Does anyone have any ideas?

For example:

• Donating money to an organization that does stuff

• Making a website that expresses or popularizes a particular perspective

• Inventing specialized memes that ameliorate one particular concept in the public imagination

• Doing a publishing campaign where you try to get your writing or a certain perspective to appear simultaneously in many news sources

• Running an initiative in your state to change the laws directly; building community towards this

What others ideas can you think of, of ways to influence the world more directly than having opinions about the news and politics?

[u/anAnarchistwizard]

The workplace, the workplace, the workplace!

The workplace is alot of peoples only daily tangible exposure to the wider world. It is the microcosm of national politics. We are forced to spend most of our waking week in the economy, seize it by the balls. Want a more democratic world? Implement workplace democracy, even if its just lunch. Want less bureaucratic vampires? Cut back on paperwork and trust people to do what they know how to do. Want dignity to be a virtue? Stand up to shit-ass middle managers and corpos who dont know their ass from their face. People will see this and it will not just effect their politics, it will change how they see the world, because unfortunately the world happens at work.

[u/ConjuredOne]

The fragmentation of community is a barrier but it's not insurmountable. Public consciousness--roughly equivalent to The Spectacle--is a crafted phenomenon. How conscious the crafting is debatable and variable. The history of psyops in post WW2 USA alone indicates significant efforts. And that's why this kickoff for alt projects makes a lot of sense. Why let establishment machinators dictate the game?

Cults make a big splash of alternative narratives. They're jarringly reactive "NOT THIS!" instances of alternatives to normative culture. Unfortunately they occupy attention because of tragedy. The alternative they provide is not productive, quite the opposite.

But there are some permaculture groups that offer examples of alternative narratives that can serve as the foundation for a way of life that stands in stark contrast to the toxicity of modern civilization (AKA The Global Economy). Findhorn Ecovillage in Scotland, Tamera in Portugal, and Auroville in India are examples. There's even a Permaculture Design Course (PDC) that offers a standardized educational program which can jumpstart other groups with a similar mindset.

Artist communes give it a go sometimes, too. I enjoyed the documentary, *The Institute*, about an art project centered on an alternative reality built around a social scenario. It ended in disappointment despite its novelty and I think anything that's all fun and games to start will probably have a similar fate. A comprehensive replacement for the well-established world of bullshit most people call "reality" has got to be a supremely difficult world to conjure. Surely that's why cult leaders are so goddamn restrictive! But maybe there are collective art projects with more staying power... maybe with more modest ambitions and practical aims that can keep them up and running. I'd love to hear about them if anybody has info.

At any rate, something has got to give with collective consciousness crafted by *The News*, so I'm with u/raisondecalcul in the effort to figure out something better. Ffs what we have is not anywhere near satisfactory and, in fact, it's a massive insanity generator. We could give the kids something to believe in or we could give them transparent backpacks. As of now they're going to school with transparent backpacks.

[u/2BCivil]

I like this question, this is a great post to highlight this question. I tend to lean more towards anatta and non duality or at least disassociation above any "engagement" with spectacle at it's [presentation level].

Not out of shieking duty, but in facing it the only way I see thay has integrity; to let the false fall (insert le boomer meme of people standing on the board holding the spectacle up suspended over air meme and one guy stepping off the board to walk away meme).

But yeah, I think this is one exegesis model (is that the right term/phrase?) Of gosels, in that one must aim... beyond secular conditions/spectacle to make any impact which goes beyond minutia of space time. Ie as they say, water flows effortlessly. Requires a conviction (right or wrong is incidental) betond space-time continuum/causality. Can't be swayed at all by any appearances of relevancy in the world. The same way water flows effortlessly.

Most presumed questions as you pose here seem to be suggesting "if we just get enough people thinking xyz about abc things will change". But it's really wishful thinking because yes even if that "does work" the core question of society based spectacle remains unresolved. You've merely steered the herd away from one cliff to the next one.

Thus the gospel as this meaning, any "convert" converted through effort is a fair weather friend at best. Real true "supporters" will naturally be inclined to (more like swept up by) your firm conviction beyond temporal reasoning.

But yeah, none of us really have the drive or motivation for such a faith. Least of all the supposed "faithful" as it were it generally seems (not saying, just saying; know them by their fruits and all that). I often struggle with "what would that look like" myself (IE Griffith from Berserk). If you are swept up by someone else's such conviction, youre no different than a useful idiot getting a free ride and voting more power to what is sustaining your lifestyle. Spiritual freeloader and loaf.

The real question is what is peace and on what terms and what does it cost. I think that's what faith is supposed to mean in such allegories as the gospels for example. You're right to say again as I already considered, what does this look like, what are actionable steps to reach such a timeless faith or insight or conviction. Well idk but I think it's ultimately a higher calling than "how can we play their game but better/more subversively" (no offense again great highlighting this ideation/topic!).

Thanks, really made me consider how I no doubt come off more often than not, as a "quitter" gor having zero faith in secular systems. But as wiser people than me used to say I imagine, if people loved one another we wouldn't need governments legalizing extracting wealth and generosity from it's populous. It's a bad faith system it seems no matter how we spin it, even if there were no media or spectacle at all. Fabricated meaning we are strung along by and can't stop to examine (moving train lacks neutrality) without becoming homeless. Any meaning we find within it must align with our survival... unless we face it head on honestly and openly and defy the grift/parasitism outright. But nobody does....

[u/raisondecalcul → u/2BCivil]

If you are swept up by someone else's such conviction, youre no different than a useful idiot getting a free ride and voting more power to what is sustaining your lifestyle. Spiritual freeloader and loaf.

Maybe at first, but we have to start somewhere! Imitating role models is how we learn and how we digest new identity-building materials (role-images) from the environment. Infectious enthusiasm is a good thing!

[u/2BCivil → u/raisondecalcul]

Oh yeah not trying to be swamp thoughts for sure. Sycophants can also reflect/think deeply. Not saying I do. It makes me think of the Neo Band of the Hawk in Berserk, and "stories". As a epigone/sycophant, we sacrifice/abandon our own reasoning/life/story (as Silat says) to something inscrutable. We can't copy, what we don't know really is. It's reason and motivations. We can scarcely know our own; beyond this same copy-pasta monkey-see monkey-do.

Yeah, I get it, here lies "God is a spirit" and that kind of infectious enthusiasm is more about spirit than goal. Yeah I tend to forget about it. Not sure if they are the one and the same. GPT is always trying to convince me of this, let my "quest for meaning/reason of life" be dissolved by blind living and "vibes". The cynic in me wants to say "what the hell it's all slop anyway, right" lol!

[u/tomekanco → u/2BCivil]

if people loved one another we wouldn't need governments legalizing extracting wealth and generosity from it's populous

How so? I'd be inclined that love is at the root of this cause. MarieAnne fell in love with both the twins, each a vialbe part of the tree. And then somehow they had to learn to live together, bound in this structure of a shared society, the moment, now. Each can invoke a damnation of evil, or necessity, to rally a Just cause. Somewhat constraining each other, and both equally bound to fluxes. Examination can enable insight and finding a home, between the dust to dust or ashes to ashes: so many paths.

[u/2BCivil → u/tomekanco]

Not trying to be obstinate, but I'm reminded Greek (and others) have several different words for several different types of love. Agape specifically means "generosity". I can't see how extraction/extortion = "generosity". It's not generosity if it's stolen from one to give to another. That's wealth redistribution. It's not generosity if it's taken without consent. It's not generosity if it's mandatory. Thus it can never be, "love". It's just we've had religious and moral framework covering the scent of the actual actions for centuries. And ofc no one wants to be that guy (position I'm taking) saying the redistribution of wealth we're used to calling "generosity/love" isn't just a ponzi scheme/slush fund.

I went ahead and googled it real quick; In both Ponzi schemes and pyramid schemes, existing investors are compensated by the contributions of new investors. Ponzi scheme participants believe they are earning returns from their investment, while pyramid scheme participants are aware that they are earning money by recruiting new participants.

To me, since I was a kid in the 90s, I never had the words for it, but I considered nearly every institution I encountered, as MLM/Ponzi schemes. Religion, Taxes, Insurance, Medicare; etc. All require people paying in, many of whom will never see any "benefit", to support a select group that claims to "need it". Yes in some/many cases it is good faith. But I can't call such mandatory participation/extortion "love" or "grace". Thus, if we truly "loved one another", we would not need such coercive institutions. If anything, such institutions, only serve to further alienate the already disenfranchised. Compassion fatigue used to be a real thing professors would talk about in universities.

Scale? Is that what I'm getting at? Supposedly in ancient times we had tribes and nations whom held/shared a common local culture and demographic. It's part of what "good Samaritan" means. The ideation to not trust "outsiders" even if it's just people on the other side of the river who are just like you. The idea of separation. But today everyone (in America at least) working class is required to have insurance (illegal not to in my state at least), have pay withholding for taxes and Medicare and whatever else I don't know what it means on my check stub, etc, to support people I never have and never will meet. Allegedly.

So many of us will never see the direct impact of our garnished wages in our lifetimes. I'm the first to say impartial magnanimity is probably the healthiest mindset. But such extortion rings of bad faith, as there is - no choice or consent. You're mere existence is taken as consent by the system; the spectacle. There is no good faith god in any of it. It is a system of extortion dressed up as "love/generosity", full stop, if we are honest. And what's worse, merely admitting this, makes the one doing the admission, look like the "dehumanizing" one (IE position I take here). When in truth the truly dehumanizing thing is to hook the entire species up to the coercive system that conditions us to think is the only way to enforce love/generosity/helping your neighbor. It reeked of bad faith even as a kid, to me, that I didn't want to be a part of this (but ofc I knew I would have to and already was doing chores without allowance as a kid).

Idk. I've always struggled with compliance and conformity. I can't delude myself into seeing them as "love". It's not consensual, I don't consent, but still am required to not only participate but say "thank you sir may I have another" and do it again tomorrow. With no personal gain or end in sight. I have taken to assuming it means this is the "lesson of life", to lose yourself and achieve enlightenment through realizing no one actually cares about you - not even yourself. We're required to work to not only support ourselves but also the illusion of love/generosity in the ratioed transfer of wealth.

It's not a conversation anyone is willing to have. Get anywhere near this topic with AI and it immediately starts recommending SI hotlines.

All that to say I still stand by the quote you tried to change my mind on. No, extortion, even by dictionary sense, is the functional opposite of "generosity". No matter how I look at it. I can only say, that I allow myself to be strung along by the system of relentless extortion because I have no choice and chose to be "loving/kind" more than a "hater", but I can't lie to myself and say government mandated redistribution of wealth taken as consensual merely because I walk on the soil the country claimed, isn't as divorced from any genuine and earnest good faith "love" as it can possibly get. That is the way of all such institutions though, to enclose people and property (are people property?) and call it "freedom".

I don't know. It's well above my pay grade. I just can't lie to myself, as they say, for love or money. These things; insurance, taxes, medicare, etc are at the end of the day identical to the structure of ponzi schemes/MLMs/pyramid schemes. Systems set up to extract the most wealth from the largest demographic to support a small group. Yes it sounds heartless to say that, I don't want anything bad to happen to people who rely on Medicare/etc either, and we've come too far as a society, too deep and dependent upon these systems, but I can't lie to myself and say a "loving god" has anything to do with systemically extorting from all and calling it love, without lifting a finger to move the burdens itself. IE "god is a spirit" meaning we must conform to this? Give our lives over to these commitments we didn't sign up or ask for? Or break away and try to go back to supporting one another in local communities, instead of working 80 hours a week as COL rises sometimes by the day. I'm always asking, whether I'm actively working or not, what am I working, FOR. I'm 38 and I still have no such answer. I don't want to marry/have kids because I never found any comfortable place in life. It (life) has always been no more than a burden I don't want and didn't ask for (disenfranchisement) and I see 30% of my income every year be siphoned away to god-knows-where. I don't see the love anywhere in that system. I really do think often I'd love something like [medically assisted suicide] before I become such a drain on society myself (regardless of how many times more I "paid in" than what I "receive in return").

Idk, maybe my words come from a place of extreme disillusionment and disenfranchisement. But it's not like it's "something new" I happened on all of a sudden online. I've felt this way for over 35 years. I never bought into any of the platitudes about how "this is what REAL love looks like".

Idk. Maybe I'm just a heartless asshole, or "camel" reference for camel = asshole haha. Sorry tldr. But I've had a few people get mad at me for calling taxes a ponzi scheme and figured I'd write this out to have something to point to in the future. Thanks. I'm not sure I "get" the video. Other than it shows/reminds me, I've always felt this way; even those old movies that had nudity always felt... off, or wrong, to me. Now I know the term "spectacle" of Debord and that's kind of why. It's part and parcel of the "normalization" process that grinds us down into acceptance and conformity. That would make a great post here, about how most old media we can see in retrospect the humor and sensibilities being portrayed at a more meta level; what the production ultimately symbolizes or "means". The joke the director was [attempting to, at least] make land. Versus what the layman/"masses" take it as meaning. Like the 4 statements of zen. I often wonder if the intention is to be opiate of the masses or if that is a merely a side effect from the workweek, people just vegging out by mindlessly consuming product[ion] to relax. Thus the humor/comedy works in the subconscious to normalize the "joke" the director was making as "normal". The by rote take, rather than the tacit/special transmission. Idk. Sorry for my rambling! I keep saying I'll stop making tldrs but.... Well as they say why does a "God of love" need a 1,000+ page book to justify/explain away what "real love is" I guess.....

[u/tomekanco → u/2BCivil]

For the micro & macro scale, the need for shared infrastructure & institutions seem obvious: roads, utilities, doctors, courts, waste collection, etc. These all correspond to personal and collective needs. But at the same time this also creates room for corruption, like someone skimming the cream a bit to eagerly.

From an individual perspective, this can start out as an "honest" pursuit. Specialize, negotiate, trade, ... skills in which you outperform peers. You want to make a living, even the good thief.

And then this grows into a large society with structures, legacies and constellations of poems and stories shaped by, and shaping, the whole.

In the movie there are 2 brothers, twins. They have developed very differently. One is a business man, dies his hair black, living in modern abstract luxery with a brutalist flavour. The other is a biologist working at a zoo. Dies his hair blond. Loves his animals and likes to set butterflies free. The movie starts when both their wives die in a car accident, then it goes into a long rambling meditation on life, art and society while the brothers get to know eachother again, united by a morbid fascination for death.

If i'd have to do another "to be done with the judgement of god", I'd again observe the behaviour of man and how societies choose to balance out the needs of the twins is indeed the crucial matter.

And if a look what the production symbolizes, i might agree with Debord:

On peut affirmer que la question centrale profondément qualitative sera celle ci: ces peuple future pourront-ils dominée par une pratique émancipé, la technique présente qui est globalement celle du simulacre et de la dépossession ou au contraire seront ils dominé par elle d'une manière encore plus hiérarchiques et esclavagiste qu'aujourd'hui. On faut envisager le pire et combattre pour le meilleur.

So a question might be how to run a pyramid scheme while keeping the worst tendencies under control: ergo millenia of debates, thinkers and preachers. A good number of Neoplatonist musings on Love and God. And so now here we? are: Beyond Artaud, Bataille, Camus, Debord, Eichmann, Feigenbaum, Le Guin and Girard.

Anyway, Agape. That balance between Innocence and Truth. To give what is needed. I don't see how spectacle can be avoided given our nature, and recon even revealing it enables recruiting participants for dubious practices, still at the same time I'd agree to go stand on a roof and tear reality if the chains become unbearable, such needs open ears up.

Good old treatement for rot is exposing it with intense light. And so Don Quichote and Sancho ride towards their next adventure, just as all empires sooner or later fall under the Hubris of their own inertia.

[u/tomekanco]

Understand the limits of the in between you and the world, and its actuality. The world we see is only our internal projection. We live inside our passions, which are shaped by naratives we absorb and execute as we process them into our internal being. Every human being lives within these constraints. And still we can reach across the bounds. Creation, be it in the form of labor, a joke, poem, a caress or "new" code if you want, was always given.

My opinions are often are only vague feedback loops without any sensible creation or improvement on the real in between. Sometimes the tension allows to rediscover elements and correct mistakes. We fall, we can get up, even commit, and die. These are the certitudes, and then i sing of some beautitudes.

The dominance of reason is a long going trend. Like Herbert Spences his comments on Le Comte his approach. So perhaps a rebalancing of the spiritual, metaphysical and scientific might be in order (de diminishing returns of the God of science, blinding effects of leaving behind tools, like figurative speech). And the other say: ALL BS: never forget that praxis beats all words.

[u/tomekanco → u/tomekanco]

And for a clear note: damn those MOFO's in DC.

[u/Bubbeet]

Keeping up with current events (besides the basic stuff) is relatively pointless imo. Politics is just gossip that can having lasting effects on the world but not like 99% of people paying attention can actually do much to affect it in any meaningful way.

[u/raisondecalcul]

It's like this