Tried writing a socratic dialog.

I've been thinking about this for awhile. Writing about politics via arguments between characters. Showed it to some people today and their takeaway was as I intended. What does lainchan think? Is is good? And how well have I erased myself? Remind you of anything? https://substack.com/home/post/p-155155460

M "Pro-life propaganda" few would say this since every pro-choice knows the commonly held contradictions of people who label themselves as "pro life". It would be "anti-abortion rights propaganda" or some other similar term. You make the Marxist read too much like a liberal in some parts even though some views are shared many Marxists are against framing things on identity other than fellow workers, he's like a liberal LARPing as a Marxist. Also why would a conservative call a libertarian a "fence sitter", I've literally never heard this. Also a true conservative would not necessarily support Trump, conservatism is about conservation which Trump goes into territory outside of that. And what's up with this part? > C: It’s easy enough to say so, but I don’t how much of that applies. And its the funniest thing, you just described communism almost completely. >They were silent awhile longer. M looked dejectedly into the distance. >M: Maybe. >M: We’re all the same after all. And that’s why we lost. Marxism is more about the critique of capitalism than an explicit ideology and when it is an ideology it focuses on some kind of move to prepare for a post capitalist society, I think you may be thinking of more a Stalinist only a tankie really would agree to that unless it was said with sarcastic insincerity. Side note gulags originated in Russia before the Soviet Union, Stalin brought them back after Lenin shut them down. The libertarian seemed barely part of the conversation adding any substance anywhere except shoehorned in at the end. Was your intention to make everyone retarded?

>>10785 Intention was to make them all reasonable, but more casual ideologues than hard core philosophers. Really I wanted to steelman them, but first and foremost they are tired, regular people. I *hope* that makes them more relatable/likeable. The Marxist is just feeling pessimistic, I didn't think of him as a stalinist, it's more like he's remembering that stalinists exist. I think the libertarian felt he didn't have a horse in the race. He feels closer with the Marxist In spirit, which I tried to show more in body language. Disappointed you felt his monologue was shoehorned, but I can see it. I should have given it more buildup, or at least hinted earlier.

I read this expecting it to be terrible, I've read other things like this and typically it feels like the author just completely has no comprehension of at least one of the sides he's trying to represent. This is a narrow selection of viewpoints but they aren't caricaturish. On the other hand it is in the narrowness of the views that you reveal yourself, I expect, for these all are arguments one would have internally, perhaps trying to decide how to vote, whether to vote. Each is basically a protest voter, the green, the geriatric drop out or the convicted felon? and obviously rather important blocks are completely unconsidered. Harris mentioned only once, hardly touching core Trump issues like immigration except in the weak 'well they might suffer' sort of way. Even the Trumper is more an apologist than a True Believer. No disagreement in real world view or morality seems present, and I think this is one of the important disagreements to be considered in general. Perhaps its not interesting to depict in this fashion for there is little to discuss; what is there to say between a gay who's worried he's about to go to the ovens (I have met such persons even though its Trump's second term!) and someone who's mostly worried about immigration destroying the Nation? Your characters seem implausible precisely because they have little but common ground.

>>10782 reading this felt like watching modern television or talking to three distant relatives at christmas who watch TV and refuse to read or watching three terminally online people try to have a """""rational discussion""""" basically it was about how i expect lainchan to look in another 4-6 years... if that was your goal, i guess you succeeded but boy it left me with a headache

>>10782 it doesn't read like a real conversation, or even like real people. I did not get the impression of "tired, regular people." I got the impression of hollow constructs half-heartedly emulating a fuzzy reflection of humanity/ideology based on indirect glimpses they've caught of another system's imitation of personhood. That itself doesn't make the writing irredeemable, but there really doesn't seem to be anything worth saying being conveyed by the piece. I appreciate you sharing and hope the criticism doesn't dissuade you from further writing and sharing in the future.

Also like, I'm a Trump supporter, I had a few conversations with my friends that morning and they didn't go down like this at all. You have none of the concern over the states that were still counting, worry over the fact that it wasn't entirely clearly called immediately. Was the electoral college/state certification processes going to pull any shenanigans ? These and other things were on my mind very clearly, along with a just sort of giddy astonished relief. We even won the popular vote! Your trumper feels like he's sheepishly trying to justify himself when it should be his day of triumph. The libs I saw that day were quiet. They just got their asses handed to them on a platter and they did not know what to say or think about it. This is not a post election conversation but a pre election conversation from some cryptotrumper maybe, or maybe just a bernie bro who realizes how much of a looser bernie is and has switched to the next best thing (Donald John Trump) trying tentatively to score a couple extra votes from his fellow bernies from the local autism club in the hopes that Trump can win his state by maybe one or two votes, but without alienating anybody by going out on a limb and saying Trump is actually Good.

>>10799 I find heightened dialogue better than realistic dialogue but it doesn't feel like heightened dialogue because it lacks the whit so it's just three autists trying to pretend to be normal people. >>10800 I'm only concerned over Donald expanding mass surveillance, cutting welfare I rely on where I have no job for me to even get, and causing the death of people in military operations. He was responsible for passing the CLOUD Act, tried to gut food stamps, and under his administration the coup power struggle n Bolivia occurred and the way he pulled out of Syria was done irresponsibly in abruptness giving ISIS more power again. That and his retarded tariffs that will increase the price of goods in the US and negatively effect the global economy at least in the short term. It's no surprise the two guys who tried to off him were conservatives. >looser It's "loser" with one 'o'. About Bernie there was some video evidence in 2016 of some votes for him being thrown away and people that would vote for him physically being held back from entering voting by Hillary supporters. Regardless, the US has embarrassingly low voter turnout. The actual number of people who voted for Trump were about a quarter of the population and that's not even taking into account the flaw of first past the post voting methods and gerrymandering that forces the public into this two party system they mostly do not approve of. Democracy? More like demockery.

>>10801 I called Bernie a looser because when that happened he bent over and took lit like a wet noodle. When BLM tried to hijack his event where people went out of their way to goo listen to him speak, rolled over and let them take the podium. I expect similar shenanigans happened during 2020s primary and again, he permitted it too happen and in booth cases went and endorsed the cheater's candidate. Endorsing them wasn't even enough for him he went out and campaigned for them afterward. Compare Trump who isn't perfect but when challenged like this fought hard and came back. I sincerely think Sanders had a shoot at doing something like what Trump did (winning), but he literally cannot stand up for himself. >Democracy what about the US government makes you think its supposed to be a democracy. The entire point of the senate/electoral college/supreme court is too prevent the US from being to democratic. Some of these antidemocratic institutions have been weakened over the ages but its slander to call the US a democracy. Is not, never was meant too be. >im on welfare get well son!

>>10802 >>10801 please don't derail this thread with your own political arguments. there are threads in >>>/hum/ for that

>>10803 Wasn't an argument from me just a quick civil discussion to that Lainon basically in agreement in more or less on some things while trying to explain others. Though sure he may try to argue in return. You can always just report our replies if you wanted.

>>10799 >>10794 >>10797 I appreciate the criticism. I *wrote* this expecting it to be terrible. Getting specific feedback is encouraging. >>10794 You caught me. Thanks everyone for reading.