I think cognitive dissonance plays a huge part. They don't like having their beliefs torn to shreds in front of them, so they deny deny deny.
What particular things have you seen them deny?
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Denialism a typical Liberal or Conservative trait?
When in discussion with Liberals and Conservatives, one thing that consistently stick out is the enormous amount of denialism in there arguments. I started wondering why that is.
So i narrowed it down to two possibilities.
1) They are just that narrow-minded.
2) They need it, because it's the only way to support their arguments.
So, what do you guys think?
"But we anarchists do not want to emancipate the people; we want the people to emancipate themselfs" - Errico Malatesta ("Anarchism and Organization")
"It is very well imaginable that man can get a communist dictature, which takes care that the needs of the stomach are provided, but that thereby freedom still by far isn't for everyone. That's why the struggle shouldn't just be against private property, but against authority too." - Ferdinand Domela Nieuwenhuis ("Van christen tot anarchist ")
I think cognitive dissonance plays a huge part. They don't like having their beliefs torn to shreds in front of them, so they deny deny deny.
What particular things have you seen them deny?
Ruling class ideology can't accept anything but ruling class narratives and national myths I suppose.
I can't tell you how many liberals are ignorant of the west's more sinister history and deny examples of it, particularly the extent of CIA meddling.
When I talk about Iran '53, Chile '79, Afghanistan '89-'92 (funding Bin Laden and his Islamic extremists), Selling of weapons to Iraq and CIA helping Sadaam during Iran-Iraq war (and the secret weapon sales to Iran to fund Nicaraguan death squads), the way the FBI infiltrated the Black Panther Party and committed assassinations and smuggled drugs into the country, pretty much wrecking the black liberation movements in the US, and the prison industrial-complex..... people think I'm talking about conspiracy theories or some shit. That's why we need to smash the superstructure and the state in order to destroy it's legitimization of the relations to the means of production... but in order to do that we need the masses with us.... but they're influenced by the superstructure!!! What the fuck is a fella to do??
Last edited by Althusser; 21st March 2013 at 20:53.
Not too much. The state mediates the class antagonisms but it can only do so much as it must protect bourgeois interests. In a period of capitalist crisis the antagonisms tend to produce class consciousness and revolutionary workers, it's a question of the degree needed for a dotp. Communists must be ready to defend them, in thought and in action, and provide vanguard leadership through their parties if necessary, but then we are talking about proletarian revolution in an advanced capitalist nation, I don't think we'll need a party like the bolsheviks.
All kinds of things. From historical facts and carbon footprints to capitalisms role in crises and correct terminology (that only aplies to their side, of course).
The list is way too long and i'm just not all that good to remember stuff (especially bullshit).
"But we anarchists do not want to emancipate the people; we want the people to emancipate themselfs" - Errico Malatesta ("Anarchism and Organization")
"It is very well imaginable that man can get a communist dictature, which takes care that the needs of the stomach are provided, but that thereby freedom still by far isn't for everyone. That's why the struggle shouldn't just be against private property, but against authority too." - Ferdinand Domela Nieuwenhuis ("Van christen tot anarchist ")
