the iww
the hippies
ows
blm
it is important to learn from the past
but I think what people fail to realize is that "the establishment" learns from their past alot better than the people.
every movement in opposition, ever time the people rise up. The establishment learns what to do.
If our next movement doesn't absolutley demolish "the establishment"
then humanity will be doomed to be enslaved forever.
we as a people really need to get our shit together

Not to dispute that a lot of apparent opposition is controlled, or that the establishment does have sophisticated methods of coordinating it, but I think people overestimate their competence. The effectiveness of their efforts relies very much on the credulity of the target audience which is in increasingly short supply in an era where everyone is cynical and hyper-vigilant about shills and psyops. Plus, as conditions objectively deteriorate, they have less room for maneuver in terms of pulling off the bait and switch of propping up controlled opposition which then turns around and does nothing of substance to address those conditions

>>510508323
we need to get out of the reactionary cycle.
we havent actually thought about how to make a better society.
we just know that we need to burn it down.
which makes me think that there is other greater powers at play that want to destablize so they can fill in the inevitable power vacuum.

>>510507584 (OP)
The current establishment is made up of old counterculturists as is the case over and over forever, either the movement gets it's message coopted and commodified or it is destroyed or it takes over and becomes the blindly conformist dragon in need of slaying by the next movement
You are confused I think

>>510509393
I think reactionary as a term is misleading. It inherently pathologizes the advocacy of any practices or beliefs from the past as noxiously regressive, and thus as a corollary suggests that all social change is inherently good and represents a progressive movement towards something better. Thus it excludes the possibility that any given element of social change might actually be bad and something that it would be sensible to roll back, which when applied to any other field of thought would obviously and correctly be identified as a poor model of reasoning, but when it comes to social change we're all living in the autistic shadow of the Whigs and their fetish for setting tradition alight and insisting that the resultant smoking crater represents another step towards utopia

>>510510485
yes every new god turns the old gods into devils.
ideology doesn't have anything concrete its just a flight of ideas.
this dragon is nothing but an idea.
nothing practical behind it.
one could say those old counter culturalists sold out and were only counter culturalists in name.
or perhaps the top tiers of society is always that gate kept.
it seems like all the successful counter cultural movements were more about exodus and leaving the system instead of trying to change it

we must *disgusted pause* love one another, or go into the dark…

>>510510881
theres no "cardinal direction" in society.
regression is still social change which could be viewed as good.
ideas need to rot in the ground before they rise from the dead again. just like bell bottom jeans, corduroy, and vinyl

>>510511101
i ask what is love.
get meme reply "baby don't hurt me"
everytime.
but theres more to love than that.
i think we need to respect others.
that seems more concrete.
love has too many connotations to submission, and passivity. but true love isn't a stick in the mud or a wet blanket.

>>510511746
This is literally a language problem desu, in that English uses the same word (love) for a couple different feelings. What you're hitting on is the nature of what's called agape in Greek (selfless, unconditional love), which does indeed drift towards submissiveness and passivity if deployed uncritically. It's stereotypically a characteristic of God, who doesn't really have to worry about that given his omnipotence, whereas it's more difficult for people to deploy without other people cucking them and taking advantage of it. There's also eros, which is romantic / passionate love (like you'd feel towards a woman, faggot), and philia, which is fraternal love, like you feel towards friends and comrades

>>510512889
we are focused too much on semiotics.
its sign and signified.
society plays its shell game switching out ideas pointing to representations. and switching out representations of ideas.
language is control
but words are for fags
we mistake color blind scientists for philosopher kings.