[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/32/ - Psychopolitics

It's all in your head
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload5 per post.


The IRC is active at Rizon's #32.

File: 1439046147533.png (138.33 KB,840x563,840:563,20141015-theperfectcrime.png)

 No.2007

Does a moderate movement benefit from existence of extremists?

On the one hand, they can be taken for extremists and be considered guilty by association.

On the other hand they can seem very reasonable when contrasted with the extremists (overton window).

Is the net effect good or bad? Or does it depend on the situation?

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2028

The short answer would be "it depends", but considering where you posted this, I have a feeling you are not looking for short answers.

First lets determine what an extremist is. It seems that the term is used to refer to individuals whom the public at large places outside of the overton window, and thus are necessarily unacceptable and detrimental to those who are associated with them. In the strict sense of the word, it means a person or group who takes an ideology and takes it to the extreme, usually by turning generalities into absolutes and refusing to interpret situations through other perspectives. Extremists usually are selective in the parts of the ideology they stick to, so any given movement can have different sets of extremists that act in opposition to each other. For example: a group of Christian extremists may bomb abortion clinics and attack homosexuals, while another may stand for non-violence with no exceptions and absolute charity, giving all of their possessions to those in need. One represents what the public sees as the bad side of the movement, while the other represents the positive side.

The first factor to be taken into consideration is how much publicity the extremist faction gets in comparison with the moderates. In the case of the Muslim extremists, it is obvious that they are receiving more attention than their moderate counterparts, since the term "Muslim" is most often associated with the terms "terror", "terrorist", "attack" and "extremist". In this case, the impact of the extremists in the West is greater than that of the moderates, despite the huge numerical advantage of the latter, cementing this association.

The matter of time is also relevant. If an extremist faction appears too early in a movement's history, that movement is much more likely to be associated with it. The longer a movement has existed before the extremists made themselves known to the outsiders, the better for the movement.

It is also possible for the presence of the extremists to serve as an image booster for the moderates when they dramatically reject them during a schism. If the moderates stand with the public opinion and make it very visible how different they are from the extremists (with an enthusiasm even grater than that of the masses condemning them), this can be a good marketing strategy.

The examples above assume that the extremists are of the bad kind, which seems to be the kind that is either more prevalent or that receives the most publicity. I can think of one situation where positive extremists can help the movement, and that is by serving as poster boys and representatives in general (somewhat like missionaries), so that the first impression the masses have of the movement is a positive one. What is important here is for the moderates to explain that not everyone who joins the movement needs to sacrifice as much as the extremists, or believe as fervently as they do. Note that despite the fact that this is the only scenario I can think of for "positive" extremists, it is very general and useful.

There is probably much more than can be said about this topic, but I'm afraid that's all I've got right now.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2057

extremist is a meaningless buzzword, friend

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2074

>>2007

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguardism

It depends on the situation of course, the more radical Bolsheviks had to be put down once Communism required faithful servants instead of violent revolutionaries.

Sometimes moderates benefit from the extremists existence by attacking them, like when Buckley purged the National Review and the respectable right of isolationists, paleolibertarians, "racists", antisemites, and anyone with opinions. https://mises.org/library/strategy-right

"Left" and (especially) "Right" are both bundles of conflicting interests and ideologies that don't necessarily play nice with each other, which is probably a bigger factor then "extremism".

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2076

>>2074

*and anyone with opinions more right then his.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2077

>>2007

the Moderate/Extreme pairing is actually an essential tactic and has been for atleast a century.

the esoteric element is the one conducting assasinations, raids, bombings, kidnappings, ect

the exoteric element poses as a lobby group or a charity. their role is gather funds for the fighters/radicals and clandestinely funnel it to them while swaying public oppinion through debate. they also function as spies mapping out buildings for raid plans and forming dossiers on VIPS that should either be killed or pressure applied to in order to extract further intelegence.

here are the classic examples

>Exoteric - Esoteric

Sinn Fein - Irish Republican Army

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - Animal Liberation Front

Earth First! - Earth Liberation Front

Gay and Lesbian Anti-Defemation (GLAAD) - ACT-UP

African National Congress - "Burning Spear"

Palestinian Authority - Hamas

Min Yuan - Maylasion People's Liberation Army

Batasuna (Basque Seperatist Party) - Euskadi ta Askatasuna (Homeland and Freedom)

Ghandi's Movement - Indian Partizans

to answer your question OP, it depends on the situation. consider Ghandi's case and you may think that the effort is to support the Exoteric element in making gains by encouraging diplomacy with the "rational" people. on the other look At Sinn Fein which was openly acknowledged to be the "political wing" of the IRA and failed in its goal.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2078

>>2077

Thanks for explaining this so well.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2082

>>2007

>On the other hand they can seem very reasonable when contrasted with the extremists (overton window).

The opposite is true. Actions inside the window (but towards the borders) are what moves the area of acceptability outwards. Actions beyond the window will actually have the reverse effect, pushing society away from your intended target.

For example, let's say you're working for an Islamic group pushing the notion that Muslims are peaceful and will integrate into American society. You're well within the window, moving society towards your goal, when 9/11 happens. What was acceptable yesterday would now be seen as 'inflammatory', 'controversial', 'insulting', et cetera. You'll certainly attract police presence and possibly an angry mob. Good luck getting your message across.

Your picture is showing a different scenario, because one side has an overwhelming violence advantage (a gun), meaning social concepts such as the Overton window or guilt-by-association are meaningless. That's a needlessly complicated mugging. All they need is the guy with the gun demanding your money.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2083

>>2082

I think the comic is more of a criticism of statism and/or taxing.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2098

Extremist movements are good so far as they are controlled by the same people that control the moderates.

In that way you are able to sympathise with the opposition moderates. "Even they think like us" is a strong enabling force. It is only important that moderates do intellectual damage to extremists in a way that makes the opposition think in your way.

For example, beating the extreme right rhetoric with a moderate right rhetoric makes an average (non-expert) leftist adopt the functional right-wing response eventually infecting him with another stream of thoughts.

In real life practice you can see right-wingers siding with "moderate" feminists and turning them into idols because they provide them with sound rationalization of their stance. They do not see it as a seed for ideological neutralization over time.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2209

>>2007

"Extremist" I feel is an abused word. It seems like it should be relegated only to those willing to use violence, as their political actions will not wok within the current political framework but the media labels people whose opinions and views don't work within the existing political framework as "extremists".

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2227

>>2209

>the media labels people whose opinions and views don't work within the existing political framework as "extremists".

They do that because the overall idea is that extremists are those willing to use violence

Ergo by categorizing a non-violent political group as extremists you're destroying its public image by saying that they will in fact become violent and thus should be dismantled/destroyed as soon as possible

Of course this is done by certain interests which perceive said group as a future threat, regardless of the welfare of society at large

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]