Kinda trying to piece some ideas together here. If there’s theory on this, please send it.
For example, the George Floyd protests were very violent by U.S. standards but we never got to the point of, say, a massacre on the White House lawn. Instead, it was mostly tear gas, police brutality, and the media apparatus quickly countering with propaganda.
If a movement can’t be taken down with propaganda (i.e.; :vote: and it will all go away), then the state will need to use more brutal force to maintain itself, correct?
You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments 25 points
yeah this is a foucauldian idea: power isn’t very powerful, and any agent of power that has to enforce their authority must do so because they are losing power
