Ontology:Q2487
- [S] "modest" proposal 1-1-1
Core characteristics[edit]
- label (en)
- [S] "modest" proposal 1-1-1
- QID references [Item] 1-1-1
- Q2489 The concept of "scarcity" is prejudiced
- [Z] A modest proposal (Swift 1729) 1-1-1
- color swatch references [Item]
- undesirable future 1-1-1
- [Z] A modest proposal (Swift 1729) 1-1-1
- case of
- non-fictional motif
Wavebuilder combinations[edit]
- pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]
- [Z] A modest proposal (Swift 1729) 1-1-1
- along with [Item]
- essay
- pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]
- Poppy Playtime
- along with [Item]
- sentient toys
- pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]
- Q?? Animal Farm
- along with [Item]
- animal independence movement
- pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]
- Q3684 If nobody ever got vaccines, we could have perfectly rational discussions about them
- along with [Item]
- pronounced [S2] Freedom requires rejecting COVID measures 1-1-1
Usage notes[edit]
Combinations[edit]
Due to the structure of this wiki, in which the internal reasoning or mechanics of various ideologies are represented in parallel before then covering how different ideologies support or debunk each other, this motif can easily end up serving as a bridge to any number of "offensive" results. Combinations in general are expected to be interpreted relative to the vantage point of the two things being combined, such that "Trotsky" plus "democracy" is expected to yield some result which would make sense from the populational vantage point of a group of Trotskyists, rather than the point of view of the overall Soviet Union or of any overseas country. However, at the same time, it is acceptable to code results which represent the action or path a particular group of people would realistically take and would be obligated to acknowledge as having been their choice if they were intellectually honest and wished to correctly understand history, as long as their vantage point is preserved. This means that in some cases it is acceptable to code routes which combine reactionary concepts to create reactionary propositions or strategies, if they serve an educational purpose of identifying and dissecting reactionary thinking or behavior. "Modest" proposals, while they can be used to criticize other ideologies, run into problems on a meta-ontological level in that when the concept pops up in any other socially-linked group of people with another ideology the standards which set them apart as obviously fake are no longer present and the element of irony is quickly lost; inside a group of Tories, the line between "modest proposal" and "dogwhistle for secretly announcing similar real-world plan" becomes increasingly fine, or nonexistent. This should be considered a problem with the motif itself, rather than SPoV or meta-ontological soundness.