Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q30,52 - Revision history

Reversedragon: Killers' contracts bury bodies

2026-06-02T06:11:34Z

Killers' contracts bury bodies

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:11, 2 June 2026
Line 27:		Line 27:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|h4= Killers' contracts bury bodies }} / Murderers' commissions bury bodies / Art depicts those who survived / Your art commissions reveal what atrocious acts you believe to be okay {{YouTube\|ZJ0nBDuoDd8}} [https://www.abc4.com/richins/kouri-richins-complete-timeline-in-murder-case/] -> huh. this is one of the only "true crime stories" that feels actually educational and valuable. because, let's go over what hypothetically happened. the mother kills her husband. she secures the children. she "wins". she wins the battle for custody or over whatever she remembers or believes her husband did to her. then she employs someone to write a book. the victors get to record history. the mother puts into that book what she wants everyone else to believe, not what's true. this case is a wonderful crash course in the concept of "bourgeois ideology". whenever there is an owner, or a commissioner, or literally anybody who pays a contractor anywhere, that person puts into the art they pay for exactly what they believe while omitting everything they don't want to exist or have previously killed or defeated in some sense. think about that concept a while. when racists win and get the money, they pay for works containing no Black people. when Zionists win and get the money, they'll do everything to erase the existence of Palestinians. that's how so-called "conditioning" or "ideological hegemony" actually works. media and ideas are only a footprint that occurs after the real killing, after the actually significant event. so you want to prevent the actually significant event rather than the media. but, with that said, capitalism always has a hidden death toll. something always had to die before a product is made that that product is then supposed to make you forget about.<br/>		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|h4= Killers' contracts bury bodies }} / Murderers' commissions bury bodies / Art depicts those who survived / Your art commissions reveal what atrocious acts you believe to be okay {{YouTube\|ZJ0nBDuoDd8}} [https://www.abc4.com/richins/kouri-richins-complete-timeline-in-murder-case/] -> huh. this is one of the only "true crime stories" that feels actually educational and valuable. because, let's go over what hypothetically happened. the mother kills her husband. she secures the children. she "wins". she wins the battle for custody or over whatever she remembers or believes her husband did to her. then she employs someone to write a book. the victors get to record history. the mother puts into that book what she wants everyone else to believe, not what's true. this case is a wonderful crash course in the concept of "bourgeois ideology". whenever there is an owner, or a commissioner, or literally anybody who pays a contractor anywhere, that person puts into the art they pay for exactly what they believe while omitting everything they don't want to exist or have previously killed or defeated in some sense. think about that concept a while. when racists win and get the money, they pay for works containing no Black people. when Zionists win and get the money, they'll do everything to erase the existence of Palestinians. that's how so-called "conditioning" or "ideological hegemony" actually works. media and ideas are only a footprint that occurs after the real killing, after the actually significant event. so you want to prevent the actually significant event rather than the media. but, with that said, capitalism always has a hidden death toll. something always had to die before a product is made that that product is then supposed to make you forget about.<br/>
	this court case is one of the best arguments I've seen in a while for the Soviet Union outlawing arbitrary people having employees. because ~~if they~~ create a product it all too often covers up something heinous.		this court case is one of the best arguments I've seen in a while for the Soviet Union outlawing arbitrary people having employees. because when owners create a product based on their own specific beliefs and personal battles it all too often covers up something heinous; they get to use the good things they have contributed to cover up the bad things they have to hide. and then we get the familiar cycle of people getting really obsessed with a product that's outwardly good and getting terribly shocked when they find out who the person who made or commissioned it actually was. death of the author is Communism, and that's a good thing.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: Your art commissions reveal what atrocious acts you believe to be okay

2026-06-02T05:59:18Z

Your art commissions reveal what atrocious acts you believe to be okay

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:59, 2 June 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	{{li\|I=S1/HM/W\|Q=30,50\|Q2=3050\|h4= right-wing semantic hegemony }} {{YouTube\|2BPTuMuYn_I}} -> how do I tell you this? there isn't any such thing. language isn't a thing anyone can have hegemony over. not really. not actually. language (ontology) is the holding of beliefs and the formation of culture itself. whatever its content is, you can't just tell people not to have it, or to "break free" of having it. they'll never think that being part of it isn't being free if they chose it in order to be free, which is almost always the case. talking about such nonsense as "right-wing semantic hegemony" is basically saying "I don't like the right-wing countable culture, I want to smash all of Tory culture and purge it from the world", and there's no real difference between those two things.<br/>		{{li\|I=S1/HM/W\|Q=30,50\|Q2=3050\|h4= right-wing semantic hegemony }} {{YouTube\|2BPTuMuYn_I}} -> how do I tell you this? there isn't any such thing. language isn't a thing anyone can have hegemony over. not really. not actually. language (ontology) is the holding of beliefs and the formation of culture itself. whatever its content is, you can't just tell people not to have it, or to "break free" of having it. they'll never think that being part of it isn't being free if they chose it in order to be free, which is almost always the case. talking about such nonsense as "right-wing semantic hegemony" is basically saying "I don't like the right-wing countable culture, I want to smash all of Tory culture and purge it from the world", and there's no real difference between those two things.<br/>
	absolute lies. the people who say this are absolute liars about what they're really talking about and what they really mean.		absolute lies. the people who say this are absolute liars about what they're really talking about and what they really mean.

			</li></ol>

			== Stories and the victors ==
			<ol class="hue clean">

			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|h4= Killers' contracts bury bodies }} / Murderers' commissions bury bodies / Art depicts those who survived / Your art commissions reveal what atrocious acts you believe to be okay {{YouTube\|ZJ0nBDuoDd8}} [https://www.abc4.com/richins/kouri-richins-complete-timeline-in-murder-case/] -> huh. this is one of the only "true crime stories" that feels actually educational and valuable. because, let's go over what hypothetically happened. the mother kills her husband. she secures the children. she "wins". she wins the battle for custody or over whatever she remembers or believes her husband did to her. then she employs someone to write a book. the victors get to record history. the mother puts into that book what she wants everyone else to believe, not what's true. this case is a wonderful crash course in the concept of "bourgeois ideology". whenever there is an owner, or a commissioner, or literally anybody who pays a contractor anywhere, that person puts into the art they pay for exactly what they believe while omitting everything they don't want to exist or have previously killed or defeated in some sense. think about that concept a while. when racists win and get the money, they pay for works containing no Black people. when Zionists win and get the money, they'll do everything to erase the existence of Palestinians. that's how so-called "conditioning" or "ideological hegemony" actually works. media and ideas are only a footprint that occurs after the real killing, after the actually significant event. so you want to prevent the actually significant event rather than the media. but, with that said, capitalism always has a hidden death toll. something always had to die before a product is made that that product is then supposed to make you forget about.<br/>
			this court case is one of the best arguments I've seen in a while for the Soviet Union outlawing arbitrary people having employees. because if they create a product it all too often covers up something heinous.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: right-wing semantic hegemony

2026-06-01T01:47:25Z

right-wing semantic hegemony

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 1 June 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:
	it leads to a lot of "[[E:Deltarune\|Gerson Boom]] {{censor\|bullshit\|tts=[BS]}}" where people start to believe that all politics and sociology is about constructed narratives and things people deliberately choose [[E:Idealism\|to believe and say]]		it leads to a lot of "[[E:Deltarune\|Gerson Boom]] {{censor\|bullshit\|tts=[BS]}}" where people start to believe that all politics and sociology is about constructed narratives and things people deliberately choose [[E:Idealism\|to believe and say]]

	{{li\|I=S1/ML\|Q=30,51\|Q2=3051}}~~ruling idea~~ (early Marxism) / ruling-class idea / bourgeois ideology (Liberal capitalism; in Liberal-capitalist historical period) / knightly code (in feudal period) / noble disposition; gentlemanly disposition (in feudal period) / Christlike disposition (in historical period dominated by clergy)		{{li\|I=S1/ML/LR\|Q=30,51\|Q2=3051\|h4= ruling idea }} (early Marxism) / ruling-class idea / bourgeois ideology (Liberal capitalism; in Liberal-capitalist historical period) / knightly code (in feudal period) / noble disposition; gentlemanly disposition (in feudal period) / Christlike disposition (in historical period dominated by clergy) -> this is the real thing. Western-Marxists started here, with the concept of "bourgeois ideology".... and then the concept got wildly vulgarized until it was just any idea that another faction of people was spreading that you didn't want being spread. for a bit prior to maybe 1980 when either Maoists and the Black Panthers were trying to work together or Maoists were scrambling to co-opt BlackPantherism in order to revive it, it was 'racist ideology' or 'settler ideology', and that almost came close to making a bit of sense for a second. but then it got vulgarized a second time into just.... this really really dumb concept that capitalism programs people "to be against hope" which makes no sense at all and this programs people to be Tories which is the only reason there is imperialism. this is a mythology. I swear Greek myths about constellations make more logical sense than that. I am deeply tired of Western-Marxism and I wish all of it would stop and everything pretending to be it would stop.

			{{li\|I=S1/HM/W\|Q=30,50\|Q2=3050\|h4= right-wing semantic hegemony }} {{YouTube\|2BPTuMuYn_I}} -> how do I tell you this? there isn't any such thing. language isn't a thing anyone can have hegemony over. not really. not actually. language (ontology) is the holding of beliefs and the formation of culture itself. whatever its content is, you can't just tell people not to have it, or to "break free" of having it. they'll never think that being part of it isn't being free if they chose it in order to be free, which is almost always the case. talking about such nonsense as "right-wing semantic hegemony" is basically saying "I don't like the right-wing countable culture, I want to smash all of Tory culture and purge it from the world", and there's no real difference between those two things.<br/>
			absolute lies. the people who say this are absolute liars about what they're really talking about and what they really mean.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3052 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q30,52: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

2026-05-12T01:36:21Z

Reversedragon moved page Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3052 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q30,52: Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

← Older revision	Revision as of 01:36, 12 May 2026
(No difference)

Reversedragon: war of position

2026-05-12T01:35:25Z

war of position

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:35, 12 May 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	== Main entry ==		== Main entry ==
	{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">		{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">
	~~<!-- {{li\|start=y\|I=S1/Fy\|Q=618\|Q2=618}} -->~~

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_gramsci" data-~~tradition="W, ES, A~~" value~~="3052~~" data-dimension~~=~~"S">~~hegemony politics / musical chairs attack (MDem) / stealth activism (center-Liberalism) -> the motif of people trying to "prevent fascism" by filling up business territories or government institutions with linked groups of people who are "not fascists" as fast as possible before "the fascists" get in. one of the chief strategies of Gramscianism. seems to me like it doesn't really make any sense because it is so chiefly defined by creating countable Cultures of people who belong in a particular cultural identity and carrying out competition between countable Cultures to exist instead of each other existing. that seems a lot more like it's the problem than the way the problem is resolved. realistically, you have to get all your progressives to good landlords and good capitalists who will pay the landlords if you want to end the graph struggle, and put good capitalists in all the reactionary businesses before you can drive the reactionary workers out. the capitalists have to lead this for it to be maximally effective and actually bring change. but it also clearly demonstrates that capitalist populations consist of multiple separate populations divided based on something other than who is a capitalist; you don't have a capitalist population and a worker population, you have specifically a Tory population and a center-Liberal population that recruit people into the nation and "allow" them to work. the bigger question to me is what creates these two populations. it isn't religion, because two people can be Protestants and still divide into these two populations. it has something to do with the inherent collapse of Liberal-republicanism.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/W\|tradition=W, ES, A\|Q=30,52\|Q2=3052\|h4= hegemony politics }} / war of position (Gramsci) / musical chairs attack (meta-Marxism, {{book\|MDem}} scraps) / stealth activism (center-Liberalism) -><br/>
			the motif of people trying to "prevent fascism" by filling up business territories or government institutions with linked groups of people who are "not fascists" as fast as possible before "the fascists" get in. one of the chief strategies of Gramscianism. seems to me like it doesn't really make any sense because it is so chiefly defined by creating countable Cultures of people who belong in a particular cultural identity and carrying out competition between countable Cultures to exist instead of each other existing. that seems a lot more like it's the problem than the way the problem is resolved. realistically, you have to get all your progressives to good landlords and good capitalists who will pay the landlords if you want to end the graph struggle, and put good capitalists in all the reactionary businesses before you can drive the reactionary workers out. the capitalists have to lead this for it to be maximally effective and actually bring change. but it also clearly demonstrates that capitalist populations consist of [[E:multicapitalism (meta-Marxism)\|multiple separate populations]] divided based on something other than who is a capitalist; you don't have a capitalist population and a worker population, you have specifically a Tory population and a center-Liberal population that recruit people into the nation and "allow" them to work. the bigger question to me is what creates these two populations. it isn't religion, because two people can be Protestants and still divide into these two populations. it has something to do with the inherent collapse of Liberal-republicanism.

			{{li\|I=S1/W\|tradition=W, ES, A\|Q=30,52\|Q2=3052}}hegemony politics -> note: in this context, "hegemony" politics refers to political activities obsessed with changing "ideological hegemony" inside a society rather than A) obsessing about particular candidates and elections or other such objects and processes that Liberal-republicans think of as "material" or B) materially constructing a workers' state through various physical steps to defend against the bourgeoisie rather than worrying about Ideas "going first" to defend society and basically trying to 'take over' society {{em\|with political ideas}}. definition "B" shows how basically, {{em\|Fisherists and Gramscians have redefined the term 'hegemony' to mean almost the same thing as Idealism}} rather than it referring to a physical population ruling over other populations (a bad thing in the case of ancient Rome labeling a neighboring population slaves, a good thing in the case of a [[E:dictatorship of the proletariat (Marxism)\|proletarian republic]] 'ruling' over a single republic), so that "hegemony politics" would translate to "Idealism politics".

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 11:		Line 13:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/W\|Q=30,51\|Q2=3051}}hegemonic ~~motif (~~idea; model~~; ideology; philosophy)~~ / hegemonic ideology ~~(Western Marxism)~~ / ~~ruling idea (early Marxism)~~ / dominant narrative (postmodernism) -> I wish people would stop saying that {{em\|Ideas}} can be dominant when [[E:chunk competition (meta-Marxism)\|it's always people]] that dominate [[E:Hyper-Materialism (meta-Marxism)\|and then spit ~~them~~ out]].<br/>		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/W\|Q=30,51\|Q2=3051\|h4= hegemonic motif }} (Western Marxism) / hegemonic idea / hegemonic concept / dominant model / hegemonic ideology / hegemonic philosophy / dominant narrative (postmodernism) -> I wish people would stop saying that {{em\|Ideas}} can be dominant when [[E:chunk competition (meta-Marxism)\|it's always people]] that dominate [[E:Hyper-Materialism (meta-Marxism)\|and then spit out ideas]].<br/>
	it leads to a lot of "[[E:Deltarune\|Gerson Boom]] {{censor\|bullshit}}" where people start to believe that all politics and sociology is about constructed narratives and things people deliberately choose [[E:Idealism\|to believe and say]]		it leads to a lot of "[[E:Deltarune\|Gerson Boom]] {{censor\|bullshit\|tts=[BS]}}" where people start to believe that all politics and sociology is about constructed narratives and things people deliberately choose [[E:Idealism\|to believe and say]]

			{{li\|I=S1/ML\|Q=30,51\|Q2=3051}}ruling idea (early Marxism) / ruling-class idea / bourgeois ideology (Liberal capitalism; in Liberal-capitalist historical period) / knightly code (in feudal period) / noble disposition; gentlemanly disposition (in feudal period) / Christlike disposition (in historical period dominated by clergy)

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Reversedragon: copy markup from 9k/Q30,52

2026-05-12T01:09:35Z

copy markup from 9k/Q30,52

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=hegemony politics|E=Q30,52|User=RD|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">


</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-tradition="W, ES, A" value="3052" data-dimension="S">hegemony politics / musical chairs attack (MDem) / stealth activism (center-Liberalism) -> the motif of people trying to "prevent fascism" by filling up business territories or government institutions with linked groups of people who are "not fascists" as fast as possible before "the fascists" get in. one of the chief strategies of Gramscianism. seems to me like it doesn't really make any sense because it is so chiefly defined by creating countable Cultures of people who belong in a particular cultural identity and carrying out competition between countable Cultures to exist instead of each other existing. that seems a lot more like it's the problem than the way the problem is resolved. realistically, you have to get all your progressives to good landlords and good capitalists who will pay the landlords if you want to end the graph struggle, and put good capitalists in all the reactionary businesses before you can drive the reactionary workers out. the capitalists have to lead this for it to be maximally effective and actually bring change. but it also clearly demonstrates that capitalist populations consist of multiple separate populations divided based on something other than who is a capitalist; you don't have a capitalist population and a worker population, you have specifically a Tory population and a center-Liberal population that recruit people into the nation and "allow" them to work. the bigger question to me is what creates these two populations. it isn't religion, because two people can be Protestants and still divide into these two populations. it has something to do with the inherent collapse of Liberal-republicanism.

</li></ol>

== Related ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/W|Q=30,51|Q2=3051}}hegemonic motif (idea; model; ideology; philosophy) / hegemonic ideology (Western Marxism) / ruling idea (early Marxism) / dominant narrative (postmodernism) -> I wish people would stop saying that {{em|Ideas}} can be dominant when [[E:chunk competition (meta-Marxism)|it's always people]] that dominate [[E:Hyper-Materialism (meta-Marxism)|and then spit them out]].<br/>
it leads to a lot of "[[E:Deltarune|Gerson Boom]] {{censor|bullshit}}" where people start to believe that all politics and sociology is about constructed narratives and things people deliberately choose [[E:Idealism|to believe and say]]

</li></ol>

== Ideologies or fields ==

* W / Western Marxism
* W / Gramscianism

== Subpages or related scraps ==


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]