The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. It Will Be Streamed.
To be alive in the 21st century is to dive into maximum operational depth.
By now, humanity has acclimatised to the digital abyss of the great alternate habitat, social media. Many have meticulously crafted a profile-perfect image where if a choice were offered, a predicament on living preference would not exist as most of humanity’s social lives are now spent virtually.
How could doubt reign over robust statistics? Eleven new users per second couldn’t be wrong. Welcome to the vast codified divide of unique variances and utility augmented by the Meme — encompassing person, place and thing — radicalised versions rendered from the foundations of human rights.
Our attempt on the premise and spirit of communicative freedom have found us amiss, in an overshoot of the triumph of free speech by our arrogant miscalculations to be the grand fiasco of all ages. Rest assured, the penalty goes to the young generation who are born to wade the foul murky waters of tribalism. With this precedent, the setting of the stage unfolds in a neoteric age which dictates the modern lives of modern men in this all too modern times.
^NDX
The NASDAQ-100. An index at the forefront of designer technology. A secure cluster of forward-thinkers steered by the navigational engineers and operators of capitalism. A powerful composite of critical-thinkers that proudly carries the confluence of the collated density of brilliance — the innovators, leaders, movers and shakers of the progressive world.
The shaping of our future can be linked to the consumer-focused development think-tanks of the NASDAQ assemblage, serving the purpose of propelling innovation, vision, profit, and ambition. They are the wielders of consumerist technology — the mathematical gift that keeps on giving — a causal effect of precision via automation owed to their dominant musculature in the financial markets that move prices parabolic, bolstering economic strength and contributing to the unrelentingly aggressive edema of their GDP.
Yet at the drop of hypnotic detachment from the speed-churning of impressive techy-things comes about an afterthought. A query. What sudden darkness looms in the far distance behind the veil of code?
The melange of artisan builders in the NASDAQ collective has conceptualised a new kind of weaponry, although not so menacing in its form as most war machines, it nonetheless offers the consumer a serious brand of lethality. Particularly the smartphone — a weapon of functionality at the black heart of connectivity.
The provisions for practicability, finding new ways for integration, creating powerful features and the affordability of it all is the offered edge to wanting consumers, although monetised for influence and large profits, the concept is born of the innovator’s best interest for his community.
Good intentions do exist.
As are innate in all humanity, yet the brutality of commerce reads a different book altogether.
The shedding of ordinance between business titans and economic powerhouses can be defined within a single narrative giving an almost valid justification for the earth-shattering mercantile melees and industrial rixe of world economies. One example is the race to monopolise the much anticipated 5th generation of cellular technology, offering a diegesis of the game as a technically qualified excuse, for they who would be first claims dominion over the technological cities of the world.
But away from the contention between multinational consortium and conglomerate as this precedent also brings a different kind of arsenal to the modern radical lefty, creating change in the revolutionary game.
Are you ready?
So imagine a world in Technicolor’s High Dynamic Range, where a complete set of rallyist’s essentials can fit in your skinny jeans back pocket. In a day and age where latency is next to non-existent, that should one deploy a message in mere keystrokes — “storm the castle” — the time difference of a millisecond will convince you to believe you are telepathic.
It is here. Whether for your entertainment or sinistrous agenda, it is here. The ominous concepts of old pathological precepts have now gone digital. To the demagogue dedicated to gathering people to the cause, you could not have lived in a better time. Boastfully implying that the fervour of activism in this day and age means reality is indeed better than a propagandist’s wet dream.
The days of preaching dogma through the bleary projections of a megaphone are now a thing of the past. Activism has taken a new route. One that bypasses the call for invading personal space, negating the risk of its inherent stigma to be painted as a template-thinking collectivist, a sympathiser, or a subscriber to the utterances of group-think.
Welcome to Hacktivism. A methodology that empowers a person while disassociated from any notion of influence. The processes in confinement are deadly efficient as what one reads in solitude is claimed as a formulation and development of thought. It is the white-noise indoctrination of the masses. The lure of a stand-alone, Matrix-esque awakening fuel the intellectual imagery in a person, a stimulant to the ego, seeing oneself as no less than treś rationnel. It is the booster to the modern revolutionary. Carrying a dangerous sense of false-knowing, blindly believing while oblivious of one’s devotion to an ideal that is not their own.
“Propaganda works best when those being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will.” — Joseph Goebbels
The Meta-pattern of Tribalism
Survey the many who carry familiar tones of activism and see how few reveal an adherence to an ideology, if any. Left or Right, the perils of the seemingly inexistent message is substantial if given only to consider the multitude of ideological leanings ubiquitous in social media alone. Met with little to no resistance are the seeds of propaganda now readily implanted as it is easily digestible, discernible, and accessible to anyone who spends a few moments online. It is no longer a notion of absurdity that the call for revolution is echoed across the very rough streets of Instagram, ordaining new radicals and activists over free wifi.
A phenomenon called Che chic, a fashion trend that swept across the planet, dressing everyone into a global urban uniform is the image of Socialist revolutionary, Ernesto “Che” Guevarra. A Marxist champion, a political icon for the Cuban Revolution yet more popularly known as “the face that launched a thousand T-shirts.”
Guevarra was a devout communist to the end when after a fierce battle with the Bolivian Army, the Guerilla leader was captured and executed on October 9th, 1967. A pivotal moment of heroism for the celebrated child of communism. His life was the sacrificial offering to the triumph of an ideology, only to become a champion for every capitalist with a silkscreen or a fabric-printing machine.
A moving story of patriotism built on the foundations of irony, whose legend grows amongst university students who are offered discount prices if buying bulk. Who would have thought that Che’s famous words which translate to “until victory, always” was to become a slogan for good old capitalism?
“Hasta La Victoria Siempre” — Che Guevarra
A ridiculed tragedy, comedic if you will, until someone follows the breadcrumbs of hyperlinks and suggestive features on any browser of choice. Before you know it, ideological concepts permeate into the fabric of modern society. Stealthily slithering through social networking platforms, between prosaic preoccupations of the money-generating selfies of Kylie Jenner, all the way to the monetised exploits of DJ Khaled. It inevitably finds its intended audience and imprints deep into the young impressionable minds of our children, who safe in our knowledge are well within the confines of our meticulously fortified homes. To this effect, we have an ideologue born out of the tribal culture of cool.
Yet one may ask — what’s wrong with a belief system? If the present is derived from the oppressive past and our freedom is a gift from those who fought to achieve liberation from tyranny. Does it suggest that we cease to remember the heroism of those before us?
First-wave Feminism: Torches of Freedom
The Suffragettes. A term coined with the intent to denigrate the Women’s Social and Political Union of the early 20th century. The name was later embraced by the brave militant women whose heroism enabled the achievement of the same political rights as men. Steadily throughout the ensuing decades, the inspiration of the Suffragettes in triumphing equal rights echoed across nations, finding global recognition that empowered women to take their place in the fast-shifting times.
Feminism was all the rage then that in 1968, Martha Lear — who wrote for The New York Times Magazine — appropriated the women’s movement the term First-wave. A subject matter that greatly compelled public opinion.
Meanwhile, at the far end of the social landscape, capitalism was in full swing. The American Tobacco Company that acquired Lucky Strike wanted to expand sales by targeting the women’s market as cigarettes at the time catered mainly to men. The arduous task went to Edward Louis Bernays, an Austrian-American nonpareil in public relations and advertising, and nephew to the renowned Psychoanalyst, Sigmund Freud. However, it wasn’t without great difficulty as Bernays faced some challenging dilemmas. First was the insipidly unappealing green packaging which the company deemed too expensive to change. The second was the stigma of immorality attached to women smoking. However, nothing would hinder The Father of Spin.
Bernays sought the assistance of one of his uncle’s students, psychoanalyst Abraham Brill. Who suggested that cigarettes represented “Torches of Freedom” an act of rebellion from the suppression of feminine desires because of their expected role in society. The symbolism of torches, along with the mainstream popularity of feminism, could not have been in a more synchronous cadence for impeccable timing.
Edward orchestrated the “Torches of Freedom” march at the 1929 Easter Sunday parade in New York. It highlighted the Women’s Liberation Movement while linking it to Lucky Strike as a tool symbolic of the fight for gender equality.
In attendance was respected women’s rights activist, Ruth Hale. She showed support by lending her fiery feminist passion by urging women to join the march yelling “Women! Light another torch of freedom! Fight another sex taboo!” The event was set and carried out to its script with careful precision.
Addressing the contrasting packaging of Lucky Strike that clashed with women’s fashion of the time, Edward organised the Green Ball at the Waldorf Astoria. The motive was to make green the fashion colour of the season, alluring French designers to incorporate the Lucky Strike dark green into their fashion line to be showcased at the gala. Attendees were celebrities, socialites, famous women and intellectuals whose public influence were carefully hand-picked to share complimentary thoughts and comments on the “green theme”. The ball was purported to be a charity event hosted by American Suffragist, Narcissa Cox Vanderlip.
Long before the event took place, the media as influenced by Bernay’s firm, piqued public interest via compelling articles in newspapers and magazines. The strategic, well-written literary columns sparked arguments, discussions and politically charged debates. The Green Ball achieved the kind of notoriety equivalent to today’s version of viral, and by the time the dust settled, a pack of Lucky Strike accentuated the latest Parisian fashion which augmented the ideals of feminism — a fusion of rebellious allure and modern style.
What a time to be a feminist as well as a capitalist. Thus, paraphrasing the Virginia Slims slogan “We’ve come a long way, baby.”
But what happens when we take this innate ability to exploit to a capacity of precision? by digitising the passionate outcry of the majority and the flailing histrionics of the few? Where we indulgently fold our manipulative tendencies with machine learning and embed ourselves – the micro components of the ever growing multitude of seething underclasses, in these rebelliously chic yet trendy anarchic digital spaces?
The Memetic Wars
“Something imitated.” — the meaning of the Greek origin of the word mimeme, famously known today as the Meme, was coined by Professor Richard Dawkins in his 1976 bestselling book The Selfish Gene. The word imputes an idea or motive, disseminating within classes or culture and from person to person. However, the emergence of the internet sparked a digital revolution that saw fit a reappropriation of words for its techno-spaces.
Jeff Giesea, a writer and influential personality within the alt-right, authored an article in NATO’s Stratcom COE Defense Strategic Communications journal. There he describes Trolling as “the social media equivalent of guerrilla warfare, and memes are its currency of propaganda.” — Adding to its definition that ascribes to disruption and subversion of an enemy’s narrative as memes are tribalistic concepts in condensed form.
Our history’s brave warriors, the balladeers of the legend of their fallen comrades, could not have foreseen the lack of kinetic military forces in today’s battlefield — social media. I’d like to think this is why we have EDM.
Memetic warfare could also be viewed as a “digital native” version of psychological warfare, where according to Jacob Siegel, “Memes appear to function like the IEDs of information warfare. They are natural tools of an insurgency; great for blowing things up, but likely to sabotage the desired effects when handled by the larger actor in an asymmetric conflict.”
In the 2016 US Presidential Election, memetic warfare was in full display. Aptly named “The Great Meme Wars” the PSYOPs tactics were conducted through infamous online radical houses, Reddit and 4chan. The tandem launched a cyber campaign that effectively flooded all social media platforms, converting them into echo chambers for propaganda.
Pepe the Frog, A comic character created by artist Matt Furie became the avatar for alt-right political warfare of 2016. Compelling social media beyond the numbers and influence of historical political figures the likes of Che Guevarra or Mao Zedong. Pepe was successful in altering the sentiment of the online masses, which navigated the greater meme ecosystem. It secured the most coveted seat for Donald Trump and making him what most consider to be — the most powerful man on earth.
As a consequence, Pepe the Frog was later added to the Anti-Defamation League’s database of hate symbols along with the Swastika and the Ku Klux Klan’s “Blood Drop Cross.” However, Furie and the Anti-Defamation League has since launched the #SavePepe initiative to reclaim Pepe the Frog “so that he might be used as a force for good, or at the very least to help educate people about the dangers of prejudice and bigotry.”
It goes without saying that without social media, the legend of Pepe the Frog would not have been possible.
Tribalism 2.0 — Compromising Megamind Audiences
From a biological perspective, the interoperability of technology systems can be viewed as the analogous concepts that identify with the processes of human interaction. Modalities of sociological factors that determine and contextualise the most basic of human experience. Within the wide spectrum of communicative forms of interaction, rationalisation of conveyed information is received via suggestive imageries that reflect an individual’s prior context. A factual delineation of a phenomena wherein separate thought processes produces different reactions towards the same stimulus. However, when observed inside a distributed user-generated platform environment, the anomaly exponentially increases negatively despite significant technological advancements focused solely on interactive spaces. At the level of human interaction, the dangers become vast and uncontained as it is a well-known fact that Media has always been in full control of the culture.
The comeuppance of a now radicalised platform for communication founded on the ethos of “breaking down barriers of distance” and given to redefining proximity by “bringing the world closer together” — social media has taken over and is now the primary form of utility to communicate in the modern world. However, fifteen years since the conception of social media’s prince regent and now king — Facebook and its utopic vision, could not be further from the truth.
Gabor Maté, the author of In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts, identifies the increasing polarity observed in social media as a corollary of rapidly proliferating disconnection in today’s society. He argues that from an evolutionary viewpoint, human beings are ill-equipped to function in vast aggregations. This rendering of man’s technological brilliance is a rather recent occurrence that allowed for the industrial ages as compared to centuries of living as hunter-gatherers.
Today, the probability of people living in neighbourhoods while starkly alienated from their neighbours are near certain in which the profound need for connection is prevalent. To this extent, social media as Gabor puts it, “offers a simulacrum of connections through attachment dynamics — Friends who like each other.” A dangerous foray in daring to replicate the crescendos of human emotions. The risks can be life-altering.
However, social media is not without its brand of coded irony as user-generated personas exist in a synthetic reality, fully aware of the fleeting pleasures of a fabricated image.
Biological temperament predicated upon our own experience of the world, consequently forges our views of society through the orderliness and chaos of our surroundings. We begin to shape our own biases through the lenses of our past. The bridge of communication, whether between individuals or sizeable factions, goes beyond mere conveyances of words. It is from the successful integration of multi-varied tools innate in all humans, the tools we utilise for analysis and understanding. The inability of Media to provide these critical components for communication becomes the point of exploit which allows for polarisation and divisiveness — forcefully drowning out the voice of marginal individuals.
In closing, we bring to light a question on one’s personal mythology which early on, posits to an individual’s belief system. Should we abandon them in the context of social media?
Either fair or au contraire. However, if a belief system is of the individual, based on their own experiences of abasement and subjugation, on logic as opposed to arbitrary derivations, identity politics, political correctness, or anything structured through a collectivists’ viewpoint, then subversive inclinations are valid and should be upheld.
But the devil is in the details.
Group affiliation and its unclear delineation of rights, collectively encroach on the liberties of another. Accountability is inconceivable as our laws are made to provide justice to an individual within a community to both prosecute and defend, but just how do you hold a movement accountable? Is it in an Orwellian sphere where the screams of an individual are trifled by the whispers of the many, where only the voice of the collective is paramount?
Thus, if our predicament places us opposite in opinion and belief, then it is with great deference that I offer respect by thoroughly reflecting upon my reservations to willingly sacrifice you, the individual, to the tyranny of the masses.
Let us transport ourselves into a hypothetical country that, in a democratic way, practices the persecution of Christians, the burning of witches, and the slaughtering of Jews. We should certainly not approve of these practices on the ground that they have been decided on according to the rules of democratic procedure.” — Joseph A. Schumpeter
