[FUPQ-17] Listen for dangerous words
Day 3,762, 14:02
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by Pfenix Quinn
The Free University of Phoenix Quinn is a service of the Socialist Freedom Party, a free-wheeling mixed bag of the multiple left devoted to fun, frolic and fomenting solidarity amongst all the hard-working e-sentient beings.
This is Lecture Number 17 of a 20-part series on Combating Tyranny. It's a take on Timothy Snyder's NY Times bestseller ON TYRANNY, adapted to our New World conditions by world traveller R.F. Williams, who occasionally claims to be the reincarnation of Phoenix Quinn.
Para traducir este lío es más dificil que cagar en un frasquito, pero podéis encontrar unos traducciones al español de estas conferencias en VANGUARDIA SOCIALISTA.
Listen for dangerous words.
Be alert to the use of the words extremism and terrorism. Be alive to the fatal notions of emergency and exception. Be dubious about the treacherous use of patriotic vocabulary.
The Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmitt explained the essence of fascist government was to focus on the idea of the exception. A tyrant of the modern spectacle maneuvers his opponents by manufacturing a general conviction that the present moment is exceptional, and then -- bingo! -- transforming that into a permanent state of emergency.
Citizens trade real freedom for fake safety.
The invocation of a terrorist threat is supposed to denote an actual danger. But when aked to surrender freedom for safety, be on your guard. There is no necessary tradeoff between the two. It's a scam.
You can definitely concede freedom without becoming more secure.
Submission to authority might feel comforting, but it is not the same thing as actual safety. Gaining freedom may be unnerving, but momentary unease is not dangerous. Being in an abusive relationship -- or voting for a fascist -- means one has sacrificed both freedom and safety.
It is the government's job to increase both freedom and security.
Extremist ostrich?
Extremism may sound bad, and governments often try to make it sound worse by using terrorism in the same sentence. But it means next to nothing.
There is no doctrine called extremism. Tyrants use this word to refer to people who are not in the mainstream -- while they try to define what "mainstream" is supposed to mean. Dissidents are always called extremists. Authoritarian regimes, as well as plutocratic or puffed-up players in our little e-world, will always try to punish those who criticize or even disagree with their policies.
In this way, they twist the notion of extremism to mean virtually everything except what is, in fact, extreme: tyranny.
=======================================================
P.S. -- I am spending a few days visiting e-Argentina, home of our dear friends at the Vanguardia Socialista. It is lovely to be away from the winter storms of the cold north for a while, and to enjoy soaking up the southern Summer sun along with some of my new friends...
===========
At the end of this lecture series, wicked cool honorariums and titles will be awarded by Dr. Williams based on responses provided in the comment sections. Participation counts. Indicate attendance by leaving a comment or endorsing the article. Higher honors will be awarded according to the degree of critical thinking, mindfulness and humor exhibited by responders.
Examples of questions you might like to discuss in response to this lecture:
* How does the characterization of players as "extremists" play out in the game world? Is it easier or harder for governments or government officials to get away with it than when real-world governments do it?
* What are some of the other dangerous words to listen for?
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Examples of questions you might like to discuss in response to this lecture:
* How does the characterization of players as "extremists" play out in the game world? Is it easier or harder for governments or government officials to get away with it than when real-world governments do it?
* What are some of the other dangerous words to listen for?
V!!
This one is harder for me to think about objectively than some of the previous lessons. It is certainly clear, and has been written about extensively, that RL authoritarians knowingly utilize the politics of fear to keep people in line and voting for them. It is noteworthy that words like "extremist" may be equally applicable to those in power, but the powerful are often expert at manipulating the narrative in such a way that their voters don't see it. Many people just want to be kept safe from whatever nebulous threat the leaders are exploiting.
What is less clear to me is how this applies in game. Certainly the term "PTO" can be used to claim there is a threat from some individual or group of individuals. Conversely, there are definitely some who use the word "elite" as a code word to suggest that there are malicious people who want to take away your freedoms. There may be some elements of truth on both sides of these arguments, but in a virtual world, the threats, if they exist, are not to your life, just to your enjoyment of the game in a certain way.
In both the real world and the eWorld, it is advisable to consider whether those claiming to represent the voice of the people while using catch words and phrases to divide the people are really trying to protect the majority or their own interests. Don't just accept whatever people say because you think they are on your side. Do what you can to verify, then act accordingly.
Using the term "fake news" is akin to the examples here, and other dog whistle politics as it serves to incorrectly delegitimize any opposition in favour of a crooked agenda
Instilling fear, concern, or anything that threatens our safety is a common tactic of politically charged messages. It must invoke emotions, a reaction from the audience or readers. Triggering strong emotions, worry, or anxiety are often used method to arose the masses into either be docile or called to action.
Establishing an emotional connection with your audience or readers is not a bad thing and is not innately a negative thing. It all comes down to how one uses their ability to relate or connect with others, the intentions that make it good or something quite different.
"always"
"never"
"protestor"
"radical"
"they"
Citizens trade real freedom for fake safety.
It certainly is true that in a game the emotion about terrorists that are attacking us to take over doesn't work that good as in real life. Still it does work, see what MaryamQ said about PTO and elite. Be repeating this over and over again it will work because there was a real PTO threat in the past and there is always a kind of elite. Certainly it will dived the people and that is sad.
Best way to try to get people involved in the politics is not by giving words to people like elite, fools or scum, but by describing what is happening and what we could do about that. That way you can inform people but those who get the message about what is going on can judge for themselves whether it is bad or wrong. If the sender it is doing that the receivers are not taken serious. If you aren't taken serious ignore the one that does so and try to find others that do take you serious.
In other words, don't be a follower of government or opposition, choose your own road. In a game that should be easier (however I do know it can be difficult). Be wise and have fun. It is a game. 🙂
We are all guilty of this. Fascism is one of those words.