As Donald Trump stood in the Capitol Rotunda last week, blundering his way through his second oath of office, online liberals were preoccupied with debating another matter: who will be the first Democrat to call Republicans the R-word? Setting aside the question of whether they should use a term widely considered an ableist slur, that very debate was revealing, for a number of reasons.
On the morning of inauguration day, #DarkWoke began trending on Twitter/X. The hashtag – ostensibly a tongue-in-cheek reference to “Dark Brandon” – emerged in reaction to an exchange between the Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the far-right influencer Chaya Raichik.
Over the weekend, Ocasio-Cortez posted an Instagram Reel in which she explained her lack of interest in attending any inaugural festivities. “I don’t celebrate r[*]pists,” she says bluntly. Raichik, whose social media account @LibsofTikTok is widely recognized for proliferating the anti-LGBTQ+ “groomer” moral panic, shared the video, declaring “another person Trump should sue”.
The congresswoman then retweeted Raichik, stating: “Oh, are you triggered? Cry more.” The post accrued more than 17m views, and in the process it birthed both a meme and a debate about Democrats’ approach to messaging for the next four years.
Should liberals start using slurs? No – and anyone who seriously entertains such a question has no business crafting comms strategy. It’s clear that Democrats’ current approach to messaging, however, is broken – and party leaders have no conception of how to fix it.
Yahoo News: What is Dark Woke & should the left embrace it? An explainer
In a lot of ways, this feels like the core of what’s behind Dark Woke — treating MAGA the exact same way they’ve been treating everyone else. And if that means kicking civility to the curb, then so be it. Sorry, Michelle Obama, they went low and we’re meeting them right there in the dirt.
But it’s entirely possible to embrace Dark Woke without becoming a wannabe edgelord who’s lost the plot. As one person on X pointed out, it’s kind of even an internet-centric repackaging of punk.
mEsSaGiNg
yes thats exactly what these wimps need to focus on jfc
These fuckers BETTER NOT try to coopt our black-pilled shitposting or I’m gonna lose it
Blackpilled shitposting is not revolutionary action and therefore fair game for recuperation
But… But I thought posting was praxis
Agitating and educating is praxis, shit posting is not.
Idk if I’m not getting it but I was joking?
Yeah, but some people aren’t.
That’s ridiculous that people would think shitposting is praxis… Have there been actual strugglesessions over that before? I feel like there have been
Shit posting is praxis if it helps build community and provides folks with a safe outlet. I will die on this hill.
Oooo looks like I’ll be the one to start a struggle sesh
On one hand, an argument against it could be that one isn’t necessarily “doing anything” intentionally by shitposting; like the aim in and of itself isn’t to radicalize people I would think. And if the buck stops there in terms of what someone is offering in terms of praxis, then its just shitposting. But shitposting is part of what kept me around here, the combo of levity and serious politics. I didn’t really know much about Lenin, Stalin, or Mao and I learned a bunch about them here and started reading theory and books suggested by people here. So I’d say there’s a peripheral effect that can get people to be more curious and further radicalized, but its not like, direct action or whatever. So I can see it from both sides, I think. Anyway that’s it for me lol
I’m more talking about people who think being a leftist is shit posting on the internet.
The latest one was basically about that.
Oh fuck, I guess you’re right lol. I was reflecting on that, and I think what could help avoid really heated exchanges/unnecessary essay arguments is to have clear definitions of what it is that we’re talking about. Like within hundreds of people, there could be dozens of different definitions of “shitposting”, “praxis”, “irony poisoned”, “seriousness” etc etc so some people can get really pissed at other people when they both have a different understanding of the subject at hand, and could maybe be avoided if someone was like “wait, so this is what I’m taking you to mean”. At least thats how I feel a lot of it ended up spinning a out of control.
It doesn’t matter what dems messaging is because no one believes them and won’t until they actually do anything for anyone that isn’t bipartisan ghoul shit. Of course that isn’t going to gappen because that’s their whole purpose
Exactly my point! I feel like I’ve seen multiple articles since Trump’s inauguration that are talking about how they are so stumped as to how to reach the average voter like STOP FUCKING TALKING AND DO SOMETHING no one gives a shiiiiiit about your messaging, that should be painfully obvious, but the best you can do is manufacture a hashtag? Cmonnnnn