Lead

[matrixmann]

Aufklärung allein macht noch keine Veränderung aus, wenn man sie nicht gepaart mit einem Konzept liefert wie es anders laufen könnte.

Throwing light on things on its own does't lead to make change happen, if you do not bring it up with some kind of concept that tries to lay down a better way.

Comments

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

This is a bit of a riddle for me. But here I remember class theory immediately. It is like that: lots of people know it is all screwed, the capitalism is not working etc but they don't know what to do: sit and wait until the richest 1% will give away their wealth? Change the government? Fight corruption? All these are ineffective means that won't change anything. Only if you know the root of the problem and how to deal with it will change things.

[matrixmann]

That's what I see too.
At least I got the impression like a lot of people try to bet on that card "give people a bunch of information how fucked up their world is in detail, where they get fooled and all" and just from that, something new's gonna develop out of the blue.
To me, I recognize: If you truly wanna change something, you don't only need to do one step at a time. You need to do three at the same time. Parallel.
Giving people information about the true face of their world is (only) one step.

This makes it logical then why don't people get up? Or why they don't find a better system to live and work by.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

As anything else the strategy is a key. And people are being fooled. You know yourself: lack of education and trust to government. Plus they always say: you don't want violence etc but they themselves are about to bring the world to rubble and it is ok. People don't see it this way. They have a little bit stability and sit and prefer to watch tv or eat or anything and pretend that somehow it will pass them personally by.

[matrixmann]

I experience that also from the sides of people which don't shut up and give a little voice to the protest. Up to those people which practice activism.
It's like... Even people which you know must be older than you, they have a still more simple view of the world and how protest must work than you. And when you try to point at it, it's rather like somebody snaps back at you than he listens.
I admit there's a ton of different ideas, different concepts how the world could work or human needs could rather be the focus of the attention again over financial profit, but, what I come to think about it: There's nothing in between that has a realistic likeliness to work.
You know, work as a system, work as a concept.
Then there adds on top a lot of these ideas seem to circle around the prerequirement, to me, that you need to get them to convert into the belief of your system.
Whereas I think that's pretty much a bad base to build a new system upon. Because you know it's not gonna happen.
...Nice concepts then if they all rely on that to happen first. Nothing understood about modern psychological indoctrination.

My impression is like you need to treat it like war.
Have different brigades for different tasks. Be positioned for several and different fronts.
You can't do it all one after another, you've got to do it all the same time. Otherwise you gonna fail.
This structured way I find within my thinking, but I find it missing with a lot of people which speak loudly about change, but fail to lay down a concept that draws people with them and that really lays down the first stone for a base of something else.

As I like to say currently: Complaining is good. But you shouldn't only remain with complaining. Complainers that remain with it never gonna make any errors, compared to those which dare to come up with some concept and try to make come true some of that, but they also never gonna achieve a change in the world. It's just complaining and saying how things shouldn't work, but it doesn't deliver an idea how things could be run differently.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

Activism is even dangerous sometimes and it is a paradox. People want to fix something and they fix it by putting a bandage on a big leak and now it is not visible anymore for a while but it will come back. I think the same about charities. They throw people some crumbs for them not to die but they are still living in poverty and indignantly. And that makes them complacent too.

About different fronts and tactics- agree.

[matrixmann]

I experience they want to make something else happen, but... I've got the impression like they still miss cognitively recognizing the seriousness of the situation and what they're trying to do.
Like, when you miss recognizing you're trying for something big and you treat it like nothing special.
Or, compare it to: When you've just only made it to stage 2 of strategic thinking, but what you're trying to do deeply requires level 4 or 5 before even starting.
And my thinking already partly scratces on stage 4, in general resides at least on level 3. I'd still not be where it needed to be for that, but I'm already a few steps ahead.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

Wait a second, so stage 2 is when you realize that something is wrong and stage 3 you know some solutions and stage 4 is communicating with others to interact with the strategy?

[matrixmann]

I didn't have a setting in mind which stage means what, it was just an example for showing what I mean.
Like, they have already made their steps up to make change happen, but - the final spark to thinking one level higher again doesn't appear. Like it's a matter of intelligence, of inspirations or just plain accident, just association from what another one puts out.
For me, throughout the years, I see that happen to me.
You maybe can already see it from what you can find here in this blog - I don't know.
And it still keeps happening to me, according to my understanding.

With some people whereas I have the impression like... One year, another year, it's the same stories one enrages about. It's the same which things people protest against. It systematically repeats itself without showing signs of progress. Only the rich take a piece more from the cake of the general public, that maybe is what happens. But no other.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

It will probably happen at the right time in history unless the world is destroyed by the time.

[matrixmann]

Well, I'm in such a position that I better do not wait for what's going to happen.
No need to say that I'd prefer it not to be helter skelter 'cause then you truly don't know what's gonna happen. I only expect the worst of mankind in that scenario.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

I am not saying you should wait I am just saying objectively the conditions should be right. History is an objective process and it is the main idea of materialism. It is a combination of waiting for the right conditions and working on the strategy so when it happens you are fully prepared and act.

[matrixmann]

Hm... Regard it that way: I don't want to put hopes into lucky accidents. Hopes are just illusions where you don't know if they come true at all. Not a very reliable source to build material circumstances on.

And... sometimes you feel alone, but that's only a feeling, not a fact. Sometimes there are some more out there which think similar to you, it only needs a call to make them visible.
Actually I should know that best.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

Not lucky accidents but objective reality. Part of materialism. If you try to change something on your own when there is not objective prerequisite you will end up like Russian SRs at the end of the 19th century. Marx wrote about all of this. No need to reinvent the wheel. And Lenin successfully used his theory so this is what everyone should refer to.

[matrixmann]

I know about not getting evolution of things pushed. It's not that what I mean.
...Call it "looking for allies" or something like that. One person can't change everything, it needs a network. Superman simply doesn't exist, he's only a comic figure.
Also, other fractions already have begun the same. Gathering, linking, exchanging their key points what they want and see if an alliance fits.
Compared to the left, the far right is in that advantage, no matter if it's factually wrong or not what they believe in, but they believe deeply in the nonsense they preach. And people eat from their hands like doves in the park. They literally got no problem in finding anyone to follow them, it's just the circumstances playing into their hands. And as people are as stupid as always, and the other fractions do their best to provoke a reaction like "when I'm not ought to think so, I think so even the more!", it doesn't look to me like the best option to just watch and sit idly by while the links develop that should better be yours, if you want to survive.

It's a little hard explainig; I end up again at the last point of the discussion where I told you "wait until November".
It would maybe explain some things I have in mind, but I want to keep silent about that subject until then.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

In this case, I did get what you mean and I agree that it is a right strategy. Of course rightists get followers because they use lies and deceptions. And people like to be fooled. Because it is easier this way.

That is definitely true: we desperately need allies.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

And even if you are not alone, the masses make history and still SRs would be a good example how things should not be done.