If you're on the left, everyone hates you.
And the reasons they hate you (and each other) is as varied as the source of the data that tells them to hate you. For the longest time in the united states it was talk radio that engaged and silo'd the right. Between talk radio and church, they had all the info they needed. Now there's social media (with each person having an equal weight of data authority) traditional media, and disparate non-social websites, as well as the traditional controlled media (talk radio and Fox News).
My father is a recent convert to far right mythology. He's on his computer 18 hours a day (he's the caretaker of both his folks so he is always home). His entire truth used to come from eight different sources, including family. Now it comes from a million little ones, all with the same weight, all of them rising and falling in a wave-like progression of memetic imagery. Every forwarded email, every link on facebook, every comment on the link, every comment in the link, all the comments on headlines at Fox or CNN, comments and comments on comments down to a fractal level...each point of data is weighed the same, and the underlying response seems to be: if I can think of it, someone has data to support it.
So, ten thousand people out there think I'm right, and ten thousand people think Obama is Hitler, and ten thousand people think Hitler didn't have anything to do with the Jews, and ten thousand people think the climate is fine, and ten thousand people think Michael Moore is the devil, literally.
This spreads on the left in a different way, since the left is deeply ideologically fractured between newleft (who tend to be following the Republicans of the early 80s), centerleft ("progressives" socially and right-of-center politically) and fringeleft (IWW and the like, far left socially and left politically). There's not an artificial division like the Tea Party vs the GOP, it's an actual set of divisions that are as deeply fractured as any. Someone in the fringeleft is shocked by Obama's continuation of war, the expansion of the Patriot Act, the killing of American citizens, and inability to address social issues, and they're very upset by the bankers and CEOs who own him. They're annoyed by how little the current administration has done in environmental, equality, and healthcare, and see much in the way of capitulating to lobbyists and special interests. The fringeleft is probably angrier with Obama than the right; he represented so much potential and has failed in every way. But without the fine detail, both sides are said to be dissatisfied. Generalizations are not allowed in our current data model. Specifics are required; we crave granularity.
So Obama is a failed leader. Then the economy, a thing already badly crippled by a complete lack of regulation in a greed-driven community, failed to produce for 99 percent of the people who work and live in it. In the years that have followed thr failed policies of Bush (and where nothing has been done by the current administration to attempt to apply punitive action), the People on the left-ish side of the spectrum have found a common enemy: the one percent of the population that controls the wealth, oddly well represented by the current administration's cabinet. With that common enemy (defined well by both right and left) they have yet to find a common cause or a common voice; enemy is enough, as they've learned. What they have now is a target with no way to engage the target; there's no surface area.
Think of it as a wordcloud defining both the target and the weapon. You've seen word clouds where a given word is presented in a larger font the more that it is represented in the data set being sampled. For the protests, the word cloud would be a giant cloud of emotional language used to describe the target and the protests, each based on some fine datapoint made somewhere authoritative to the person making the point, each equal.
Try finding purchase on a cloud. Try finding the lever point, the thing with which you control the action and focus the activity.
Now, instead of trying to do that...since it's a stupid (or zen, maybe!) exercise...try instead to imagine what happens when a large group of people get together and are not told what to do. The informational anarchy that created them is given a crowd-mangled memetic network that operates like a large game of telephone. From here it looks like chaos, a ball of twine so tangled that there isn't any point.
But from any point along that line of twine, the directions and intent are as obvious to you as they are obfuscated to the observer. You're in a wildly different universe there, fueled by the energy of the people around you and though you have no idea why or what, you know two things: there's a common fractal enemy, and a common fractal solution: the Big Picture is allowed and known. Sure the data changes, ebbs and flows, carries things into and out of it without much care. That doesn't matter on the ground. People disappear and reappear, they move through the system unnoticed, single data points in the cloud. Nothing important there; the Cause carries Momentum regardless. It isn't a cloud, it's an avalanche.
What is the goal of any large chaotic wave of data? Without a single will, without a defined goal, what is the entropy horizon? Where does the chaos start to spread? Where does it focus into order? How does it move?
The goal isn't, in any classic sense. The data is the goal. The group is the goal. The outcome is unimportant. The goal isn't a line or a thing. There is no goal, there is just momentum.
|< Even after reading the lists of demands floating around... | I Did Not Wish To Tempt The Wrath... >|