DISCORDIA: A Brief Critique

[hashishi]

it's like the meme bomb "If this was a movie, would you be a character in it? Or just an extra?" -- activitists are generally the characters.

This reminds me of the Situationist International, in fact the whole topic does in a way. The Situationist International were a French art/ activist group around mainly in the 60's. Their most famous work "The Society of the Spectacle" viewed people as either 'actors' or 'spectators' and that society was geared to keep people spectating, rather than participating. To join the Situationist International, you had to contribute to their theory and because of this they never had more than a couple of dozen members, yet their influence was massive. Cram's quote above is just a re-formulation of their most famous meme, which is widely accepted these days by a lot of people, many of which havent even heard of Situationism.

The main reason Im bringing them up is that they demonstrated that you don't need a lot of people to get a lot done. Another reason is there is something in Eater of Clowns's idea of appearing to be secretive and exclusive. Of course things like the Pope Cards cut across this, so I am not sure how applicable it could be. For me, getting the ideas of Discordianism out there is more important than people knowing the name.

A really high quality gag could raise our profile, the problem being, that it needs to be a really good mindfuck for the media to pick it up.

Another way could be to pick a Discordian Holy day and try to get as many people involved in stunts as possible, everywhere. If it was left to me, April 1 would be a good day because it is the day of pranks, it would be easier to get people involved. The downside being, the message could just get lost in the April Fools madness. This would rely more on the quantity of pranks rather than the quality.

[OPTIMUS PINECONE]

http://www.youtube.com/user/ErisDiscordiana

     Thanks for sharing RAT. I was more (and, "as an example") brainfarting to Nigel about what I thought VEX was getting at. What I was emphasizing to her was more along the lines of, everyone who youtube's "FAMILY GUY" comes across "DISCORIA(AN)", etc.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

May I ask what the perceived benefit is to popularizing Discordianism?

I mean, if that's what it's all about, Pinecone just had the idea that if we each posted a bunch of Youtube videos, we'd probably hit a pretty decent slice of the Internet population.

Type Discordia into Youtube...

Right, of course you can find it if you're looking for it.

When Pinecone made the suggestion, what sprang to my mind was a bunch of videos that people would find when they weren't looking for Discordia. Video replies or parodies of the top five most popular videos, for instance.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

     was a really good example, of what I perceived to be more or less the point of your O.P. If we research hypothetically, the top five most played youtube clips, submitted (somehow) labeled "discordian" versions (whatever that means) thus, inevitably resulting in people stumbling across the 'phenomena' of "discordian-ism", I thought this was (just one) example of what you were getting at.

     WARNING: THIS PRODUCT NOT MEANT TO BE CONSUMED.

Oh look, you already said what I just said.

[fomenter]

not sure how well this fits with the direction of this thread but it occurred to me the trolling of other sites may be useful to incorporate. troll a site burn the chafe recruit the willing and when possible wrestle control , essentially turning any suitable site into a discordian cabal (pastafarianisum should be a discordian cabal for screwing with the teaching of creationism). the church of google trolls being an example of the type of trolling that could be used to create a larger more diverse/interconnected discordia.

[Manta Obscura]

It strikes me that with the wealth of skill and talent at our disposal, we should be making a much, much bigger splash than we are. This community is unique in that almost each of us is good at something and capable of learning how to be good at other things. We are creative, we have quite impressive rhetorical and media skills, and I don't think I'm really exaggerating when I say that if an advertising company had a pool as technically and creatively competent as this, it would have a marked advantage in the industry of making people believe stupid things.

So what is holding us back? We have the talent, the skills, and the ideas to make waves, but I don't think we are living up to our potential. So, in this post, I'll set out my sincere and constructive criticisms of the Discordian Society in general, and the PDCOM community in particular.


1. Lack of Identity

For all the energy we spend trying to make sure we're not getting stuck in dogmatism or typecasting the Discordian movement, it's ironic just how predictable and dogmatic we've become. Instead of saying FNORD or spouting 23 every ten seconds, we're laughing at FNORDs and 23s every ten seconds.

Discordia doesn't need a definition, but it needs a culture. As varied as Discordians are in our personal lives, we need cultural landmarks we can relate to and point to in order to communicate Discordian ideas that have no easy analogies in normal communication.

We shouldn't overhaul everything to be a carbon copy of the PD, but we need to recognize the cultural significance of those aspects of Discordia, and be able use them constructively without belittling each other.

Internally, we need to be able to communicate with a standard vocabulary and be able to recognize -- and accept -- one another quickly and efficiently.


2. Lack of Vision

We've got distaste for the Status Quo down to a science around here, and most of us aren't lacking in a general nonspecific desire to change things whether on a large scale or just locally. Many of us have taken to the streets in furtherance of various GASMs, so I don't think we lack motivation, dedication, or determination.

But we are, generally speaking, easily jaded and thoroughly cynical. We tend to think larger goals are either unacheivable or pointless. Either the task is too hard or it's too inconsequential; it's either impossible to change the world or such change is meaningless because it is corruptible.

This is complete horse shit, even if it is true. Of course any change we can make is corruptible. That's why we're HERE, because an idea that started out promising and new has become an entrenched, corrupted, stale, sour, and rotten System. That's why ten or ten thousand years from now, someone will be around to get rid of OUR stupid ideas.

The Discordian Community itself has become corrupt. Maybe it hasn't been mass-marketed or pre-packaged yet, but we have been sold out for some time on the idea that the ultimate goal of a philosophical revolution should be a static Utopia where everything is perfect.

History is not driven by periods of calm stability, but by tumultuous sequences of upheaval and cultural wreckage. It is only after the established order is demolished that a better order can be established.

Discordians, I fear, are sometimes worried about what would happen if we DID ultimately bring down the entire System. We are concerned about what we would do after that. But it isn't our job to put the pieces back together, it's our job to tear them apart.

Discordia isn't about being there, it's about GETTING there. That's the function of the Discordian Society.

So I think the first issue we need to address is, what exactly do we think we're trying to do? And the answer to that is, we're not bringing about the New Order, we're just getting rid of the OLD one.


3. Lack of Perspective

Today's world is far from the 1960's when Discordia was really born. Now, while people might read a flyer or a pamphlet, they won't spend much time reflecting on it. People don't spend much time reflecting on anything, and that's a problem for the bulk of Discordian materials.

These days everything is about image and convenience. People are hyper-stimulated and hyper-informed on everything, which means a simple analysis or question about reality or a person's assumptions will fade quickly into background noise.

And it would seem that there are entire denominations of Discordia devoted to complaining about that. But that's the way it is, and as with other social norms, it isn't in our best interest to wish it wasn't true. We need to engage our creativity and adapt. Discordia is, philosophically, still light-years ahead of the curve. But in practice, we are far too slow at changing with the times.

I think we also need a slight shift in our ideas about what constitutes a successful conspiracy. In the world of up-to-the-minute Media coverage of everything from war to fake penis enlargement, a fast headline will always outweigh a slow expose' in terms of perceived importance.

Discordia doesn't need to be a vast, well-planned, or very cohesive network in order to LOOK like that's what it is. We aren't really in the business of conspiracy anyway (we can leave that to the douchebags in the AISB). All we should be interested in is getting other people looking for the conspiracy that we aren't.

My suggestion here is to focus not on building a conspiracy that should exist, but on putting out CLUES to a conspiracy that doesn't exist at all. It would be infinitely easier to hoax a conspiracy than it would be to build one. And since it isn't really our job to manage expectations or guide people to the "truth," I say we just invent a bunch of apparently correlated evidence that is actually linked by nothing at all. If nothing else, it could provide endless lulz as we turn the Pinks into the conspiracy theorists and teach them about the Law of Fives the hard way.


I think that's about all I had at the moment in the way of criticism. I'm trying to offer some actual suggestions as well as bitching, though, so if you think I missed something please point it out.

vex,

This is a truly great critique. It exposes many of the saggy bits on the Discordian physique with both insightfulness and care.

As a critique of your critique, though, I would like to say that I am wary of the desire to make a "big splash." The outward, social amelioration focus of modern Discordia is a wonderful evolution of the irreligion's original navel-gazing, but I think devoting our efforts principally towards making ourselves known can become dangerous (in a mental-cognitive sense), if we let that aim distract us from the individual reasons that we pursue our "faith." I, for instance, don't give a shit about "bringing down the entire System," except during my most altruistic moments. Most of the time, my desires tend towards the gentle expression of individual humor, freedom and liberty in the midst of a milieu that promotes none of those virtues. One of the things that I love about the Discordian mindset is that it is not necessarily contingent upon the proliferation of or struggle against any ideology or way of life, but is, instead, an adaptive mechanism to make other ideas more workable.

In that sense, I agree that there are some major steps forward we can make to proselytize the liberating powers of Thinking for Yourself, but I think that such an endeavor must be approached in a way in which it is not simply swallowed up by the System. For instance, the idea of using viral marketing to reach people is an effective method, but the effects are not necessarily long-lasting, except on those who are open to the Discordian ideas, either positively or negatively. Those who are ambivalent or unthoughtful about Discordian ideas will gloss over viral campaigns as easily as they do traditional advertisement campaigns. Furthermore, the Discordian viral tools will not be proliferated to an effective degree within the mainstream media, as other viral tools sometimes are (e.g. news reports about the popularity of LOLcats; the movie "Snakes on a Plane;" etc), meaning that any campaign created virally will most likely live and die virally, not being picked up by larger media networks talking about conspiracies or whatever. Conspiracies are sort of old hat in the Info Age.

Some (purely speculative) possibilities that I see for the proliferation of the Discordian idea would be the organization of a large-scale event - a parade, perhaps, or a giant carnival, or some other fun event that generally garners media attention - coupled with the use of up-to-the-moment news feeds such as Twitter to expand the public knowledge of such events. In my estimation, the greatest asset to any ideological expansion is the use of large-scale spectacle inflated by word-of-mouth. The coupling of one-to-one viral resources with a central event to garner news-worthy attention is a surefire way to create some buzzes and Twitters. Just look at how those crazy followers of Yeshua took off after a few of them got fed to lions . . .

Anyway, I must reiterate that you have written a great critique, and that my meta-critique is merely a specification of some of the preparations and precautions that should probably be taken if one is up to the task of expanding the scope of the Discordian "mission." Great job.