Natural Progression - A Two-Pronged Attack On The System?

#1

I may be putting this idea forth earlier than it needs to be expressed, but better too early than too late…

My question to myself & everyone here is - do you think we are naturally developing into a two-pronged attack on the system?

By that I mean we have our grass roots ‘underground’ movement right here, that has developed on its own and isn’t part of the AC site & books, but was probably inspired by it. That’s the first prong. It tends towards changing the system from the outside.

Out of that, some of us are now forming political parties, though there’s only be two parties so far, [that I know of] that will no doubt grow in number. Political parties are subject to government rules of general running and conduct, in whatever country they’re located in, therefore they are a different kind of animal from the wider overall movement. That’s the second prong. It tends towards changing the system from the inside.

It looks to me as if we are naturally progressing into these two prongs, under the one umbrella - the Meritocracy International.

And it should be considered as positive progress. If this makes sense, we can work towards changing the system from the outside and the inside at the same time.

Not everyone wants to be involved in forming & running political parties. That’s understandable, it’s a lot of effort & hard work, not to mention time consuming. Probably the majority here enjoy the ‘underground movement’ activist aspect - making flyers, stickers, videos etc… & coming up with ideas & having general discussion on every aspect of what we’re about.

That should never be taken away or looked down upon as secondary in the grand scheme of things. That’s what makes what we’re doing ‘fun’ & not a boring chore that people feel they have to do half-heartedly, similar to a day-job that you hate. It’s the movement and grass-roots ‘do-it-yourself’ ethic that binds us together and holds our goals up on a stormy sea of old world order chaos. If it wasn’t for the d.i.y. activists, the political parties wouldn’t have happened.

We may individually disagree from time-to-time, but we are ‘The Meritocracy International’ - an international team & we will make a difference in the end!

1 Like
#2

I suppose the 2-prong approach could mean a couple of different things. It could mean the more practical approach of the current political sphere. And indeed the subversive aspect of ideas that could attack from any social angle. Within the social angle aspect, this can also be broken into another 2-pronge system. The first being the softer non-AC side of things, and the second being the side that doesn’t necessarily have to affiliate itself with the party, and might be better off in refraining from direct political affiliation due to a somewhat more coarse approach. This aspect could just be engaged in the general information war. Certainly all of the aspects are important and still interconnected. It seems that what you’re saying is that one aspect is the more mental(ideological faction), whereas the other is focused on the physical implementation within whatever the current framework is based off of it’s national laws.

1 Like
#3

Rather than ‘two pronged’ I prefer the academic term ‘discursive formation.’ According to a theorist of the media, Meadows, who wrote a few years back, that certain social movements caused the creation of the original print media, and the logical conclusion is that there is no reason to believe that ‘discursive formations’ cease to exist as time goes by.

This is an online phenomenon, and thus is considered to be a type of ‘citizen media’, just like origins of the media, it was an establishment face of an underground movement. It was sort of the ‘official reach of the resistance.’ Of course, the original print media was created in order to use information to subvert the oppressive regime of the English authorities.

Movements which erupt out of a social need, for freedom or whatever often have this underground aspect complimented by some sort of official reach which is then labelled the ‘discursive formation.’ The official actions come out of the talks and discussions of a displeased section of society.

However, precisely like the media and other discursive formations, the authorities tend to subsume them over time. The media was once anti establishment to the core, now it is their shield and their sword. There is no sufficient reason to believe our movement is immune to this type of gradual subversion and if we start to be successful, it could literally be our death sentence.

4 Likes