Ifwhiteamericatoldthetruthforonedayitsworldwouldfallapart

But all this is already well known: it is the classic concept of ideology as 'false consciousness', misrecognition of the social reality which is part of this reality itself. Our question is: Does this concept of ideology as a naive consciousness still apply to today's world? Is it still operating today? In the Critique of Cynical Reason, a great bestseller in Germany (Sloterdijk, 1983), Peter Sloterdijk puts forward the thesis that ideology's dominant mode of functioning is cynical, which renders impossible- or, more precisely, vain — the classic critical-ideological procedure. The cynical subject is quite aware of the distance between the ideological mask and the social reality, but he none the less still insists upon the mask. The formula, as proposed by Sloterdijk, would then be: "they know very well what they are doing, but still, they are doing it". Cynical reason is no longer naïve, but is a paradox of an enlightened false consciousness: one knows the falsehood very well, one is well aware of a particular interest hidden behind an ideological universality, but still one does not renounce it.

iirc you forgot the apostrophe

lol yes you are right. such a mysterious apostrophe

generally true. also, a very odd apostrophe for a group so fixated on literature

I've seen loads of otherwise brilliant people make the its/it's mistake. So weird to me.

i make it every other day, on this boar'd even

Strange antipathy towards gun control awkwardly tacked on at the end.

i suspect they're simply in favor of shooting reagan

Iirc they thought the bill was intended to restrict gun access for poor and black citizens. Confused, then, but maybe their hearts were in the right place. Don't think the stated positions on capital punishment or political correctness are as defensible.

I always thought they were in favor of gun control but were talking from the opponent's fucked up perspective

"If god made man they say, then Sam Colt made them equal"

The great thing about this album is that it rejects the safe liberal positions. I don't think "defensible" comes into it. These were ideas that Richey was exploring at a particular moment, not the band's stated position. Archives of Pain came from reading Foucault and PCP was triggered by an article in Living Marxism by (iirc) current Spiked editor Frank Furedi so I wouldn't be surprised if ifwhiteamerica came out of a single article arguing that the Brady Bill was racist. I know that Nicky doesn't agree with that now and he didn't agree about capital punishment then. I find it admirable that they honoured what Richey wanted to say rather than pushing back on the ideas they didn't share. It's what makes the record as thorny as it is.

Yeah i agree. The weird thing is that I've spent 20 years trying to understand exactly what worldview it is trying to advocate for, and i can't articulate it succinctly at all.

Unlike almost any other political album, it leaves you no safe place to stand and say "I am a good person". It takes away comforting binaries and any sense of moral superiority: "Who's responsible? You fucking are." It presents problems that aren't soluble. For that reason it's as refreshing now as it was then.

america don't need self-righteous preachers coming around anyhow.

Anyway, the Style Council :
iwasadoledadsteaboy

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Manics otm