It used to be that people could disagree with each other's politics and still be friends. That's getting harder to do now that we've lumped everyone into two major political categories with no wiggle room.
"I wanted to become a free agent who isn't beholden to a political party."
Welcome to the world of wrongthink, Mr. Coleman.
You are now subject to criticism from all tribes, and are guilty of a cardinal sin; that of expecting unpaid emotional labor from others with whom you converse. It causes them emotional distress, you see, when you expect them to think for themselves.
Please forgive the sarcasm.
You are entirely correct with respect to the "avatar" hypothesis, and I will suggest that it explains a methodology, a manner of categorical discrimination. I hope that you will explore the matter further, going more deeply into the form that precedes the function you have so succinctly described.
You're blessed with a sharp wit and a neat turn of phrase. I'm looking forward to reading of your deeper investigations.
Excellent commentary. I chuckled at the ‘Tucker’ comment. I too often receive back in 1st or 2nd sentence of friends response ‘oh you sound like Fox News’.
Except I’m 🇨🇦, born, raised and always lived here.
I’ve never watched Fox News (once in FL on vaca) and don’t know anyone who does. Its only available as add-on cable subscription. I know my friends /family are just regurgitating CNN, but yes, being a political nomad is best.
Two different heuristics are at work here: the in/out-grouping heuristic (left/right) and the leadership heuristic (follow the leader). Both of them are elements of branding. You're supposed to build a brand as the perfect philosopher, a flawless person giving sage advice. Rubes will respond by shouting down questioners of your divine wisdom in the comments. Do in at the Pnyx and it's democracy. Do it on Madison Avenue and it's advertising. Social media lends itself to this narcissistic exercise better than any tool humans have ever invented. It is harder than ever to be humble, and objective, and succeed as a writer.
Perfectly stated. Tribalism is (ironically) tearing us apart. I can't tell you how many times someone has said to me a variation of, "your boy (insert name of gross Republican here) said, ..."
Ironically, I posted something about "tribes" earlier this week. :)
I just re-read your essay. It is even deeper the second time around. Your concept of avatars is a good way to not get triggered. I will remember it when seeing someone with a mask on; I will remember it is an avatar and there is a person with a soul hiding within.
You just described digital demagoguery. To a T. Interlocutors engaging in Us v. Them thinking and discourse patterns, eliding who you EACH really is. Your friend is ideologically captured, and by definition, doesn’t know it enough to stop fighting their version of you (you are John Nada). When will we stop referring to social media as ‘social’? It clearly isn’t. Bully Media or some more clever moniker. Digigoguery. Or algorithmed avatar identity supplanting identity formed from daily life and living.
I can definitely relate to your experience w/ your socialist friend, who didn't want to talk politics, but then couldn't help himself.
Same w/ my ultra-liberal cousin. Political debates via email (w/ email one will write something they'd never say in person) would get really ugly between us, and to make peace, I'd get him to agree to confine our communications to family stuff, and avoid politics. And he'd agree.
A few months later he's sending me links to articles from NYT or The Atlantic. Again.
I should add, I'd take some time to compose rebuttals to what he sent, and include some probing questions. He never responded to that. In fact, he never responded with any of his own thoughts. Just links to articles.
In a post a while ago you discussed how people tend to see things based on where they are and what is around them. This is in part why we turn people into avatars: we see them as how we think, not as they are.
Once again a refreshing and astute post from you Adam. Thanks.
Absolutely spot on as usual Adam! Framing this as "avatar" thinking is brilliant!
I tell people this all the time.
"I am not responsible for actions of the imaginary version of me you have inside your head." ~John Scalzi
It used to be that people could disagree with each other's politics and still be friends. That's getting harder to do now that we've lumped everyone into two major political categories with no wiggle room.
"I wanted to become a free agent who isn't beholden to a political party."
Welcome to the world of wrongthink, Mr. Coleman.
You are now subject to criticism from all tribes, and are guilty of a cardinal sin; that of expecting unpaid emotional labor from others with whom you converse. It causes them emotional distress, you see, when you expect them to think for themselves.
Please forgive the sarcasm.
You are entirely correct with respect to the "avatar" hypothesis, and I will suggest that it explains a methodology, a manner of categorical discrimination. I hope that you will explore the matter further, going more deeply into the form that precedes the function you have so succinctly described.
You're blessed with a sharp wit and a neat turn of phrase. I'm looking forward to reading of your deeper investigations.
This healed part of my soul.
Thank you for clarifying something that is so easy to overlook within the often miserable experience that is modern discourse :)
Great essay. Love your writing. You state deep issues with ease and clarity. No gobbledygook is necessary when you have great ingredients.
Excellent commentary. I chuckled at the ‘Tucker’ comment. I too often receive back in 1st or 2nd sentence of friends response ‘oh you sound like Fox News’.
Except I’m 🇨🇦, born, raised and always lived here.
I’ve never watched Fox News (once in FL on vaca) and don’t know anyone who does. Its only available as add-on cable subscription. I know my friends /family are just regurgitating CNN, but yes, being a political nomad is best.
Two different heuristics are at work here: the in/out-grouping heuristic (left/right) and the leadership heuristic (follow the leader). Both of them are elements of branding. You're supposed to build a brand as the perfect philosopher, a flawless person giving sage advice. Rubes will respond by shouting down questioners of your divine wisdom in the comments. Do in at the Pnyx and it's democracy. Do it on Madison Avenue and it's advertising. Social media lends itself to this narcissistic exercise better than any tool humans have ever invented. It is harder than ever to be humble, and objective, and succeed as a writer.
Great frame!
Perfectly stated. Tribalism is (ironically) tearing us apart. I can't tell you how many times someone has said to me a variation of, "your boy (insert name of gross Republican here) said, ..."
Ironically, I posted something about "tribes" earlier this week. :)
https://chuckvipperman.substack.com/p/in-my-tribe
I just re-read your essay. It is even deeper the second time around. Your concept of avatars is a good way to not get triggered. I will remember it when seeing someone with a mask on; I will remember it is an avatar and there is a person with a soul hiding within.
You just described digital demagoguery. To a T. Interlocutors engaging in Us v. Them thinking and discourse patterns, eliding who you EACH really is. Your friend is ideologically captured, and by definition, doesn’t know it enough to stop fighting their version of you (you are John Nada). When will we stop referring to social media as ‘social’? It clearly isn’t. Bully Media or some more clever moniker. Digigoguery. Or algorithmed avatar identity supplanting identity formed from daily life and living.
I can definitely relate to your experience w/ your socialist friend, who didn't want to talk politics, but then couldn't help himself.
Same w/ my ultra-liberal cousin. Political debates via email (w/ email one will write something they'd never say in person) would get really ugly between us, and to make peace, I'd get him to agree to confine our communications to family stuff, and avoid politics. And he'd agree.
A few months later he's sending me links to articles from NYT or The Atlantic. Again.
I should add, I'd take some time to compose rebuttals to what he sent, and include some probing questions. He never responded to that. In fact, he never responded with any of his own thoughts. Just links to articles.
EXACTLY!! Once again, PERFECTLY said!
In a post a while ago you discussed how people tend to see things based on where they are and what is around them. This is in part why we turn people into avatars: we see them as how we think, not as they are.
Once again a refreshing and astute post from you Adam. Thanks.
A very insightful description of what so many Americans have experienced over the past few years. Made me stop and be introspective as well.