Source

Why do news articles pertaining to situations of human rights violations, instances of political figures being accused of having committed a crime, or discussions over the future of energy production often turn into debates over political ideology? This is a questions that I have asked myself in recent times and though I do not have the answers to such a question, this article analyzes and discusses that very topic.

Introduction

---

When browsing through the tags on Steemit, it is not uncommon to come across articles discussing current events. Though these articles often have nothing at all to do with political ideology they nonetheless often turn into debates over "left" and "right" wing politics.

Furthermore, the authors of such articles often make claims about how they have used logic, reason and critical thinking to formulate their views on a given subject. However, when reading the information being presented it becomes quite clear early on that these articles are nothing more than one persons biased political opinion. For instance, the articles are often over-generalized, written in a matter of fact tone, based on the authors own projections of others viewpoints in society, and filled with one sided arguments based on cherry picked confirming evidence that suites the authors agenda.

Needless to say, when an author blatantly states that they alone are critical in their thinking, it is often a sign that there is nothing critical about the information being presented.

A few examples of this process include things like:

---

1. News of an energy plant shutting down in the area (for any number of reasons) which prompts articles that make claims about how the “left” wants to take away societies jobs and destroy the economy, or how the “right” is favoring big business over the human race.

2. News of a political figure being accused of committing a crime which prompts people to argue in favor for or against the figure based simply on how much they represent a certain political ideology.

---

Instead of viewing these events in and of themselves, people often view them through the lens of their own viewpoint and argue “matter of fact-ly” in favor of situations that fall in line with their own ideology, even if doing so is not necessarily in their best interest or the interests of society.

For many individuals, news events simply become vehicles in which they can propagate their own egoistic viewpoint in order to create agreement among like-minded individuals.

This phenomenon does not only pertain to individuals but also to media outlets, even reputable one. With this in mind, it may be increasingly difficult to think critically on situations taking place in society since news agencies do not simply deliver the facts. Instead they tend to frame the events in such a way that fits in with their own biased agenda. As such, in order to be critical in ones thinking the individual not only has to think about “what” is being presented but also “how” it is presented. In other words, to truly engage in an act of critically thinking one must be aware of the biases of the source of the information they receive, something that is a challenge in itself.

Meme Politics

---

Meme politics is a phrase that I have come up with to describe the process of disseminating biased viewpoints in society for the purpose of obtaining agreement from other like-minded individuals or as a way to antagonize those who hold different viewpoints.

Authors who engage in meme politics isolate a very small aspect of a broad and complex issue that is taking place in society in order to narrow the public's focus to one aspect of the overall issue in a way that suits the authors biased agenda. Once the focus is narrowed, the author then creates a singular “key message” on the subject to represent their viewpoint and which is meant to represent the issue in its entirety. The individual then pastes that message onto a provocative image and disseminates it into the public domain where others who hold similar views can share and spread the simplified message.

These images and ideas generally tend to discourage critical thought on the subject by making the argument one sided, they tend to be polarizing in nature and they tend to discourage communication and open mindedness towards others viewpoints.

The Meme Politics Formula (or Sequence)

---

Take a complex issue > frame it based on your own political bias and agenda > narrow the complexity of the issue by focusing on only one small aspect of it > simplify it by creating a key message > pair the key message with a provocative and biased image > post it online where others may share and disseminate it among the masses.

Calling the Sheep to the Herd

---

Source

When news events take place in society, media outlets and people in general often use meme politics and propaganda like articles and videos to discuss the event in a way that calls their followers to join them in their thinking. As such, authors become like Sheppard’s, calling their sheep to the larger herd.

You can see this in any article or post that takes a very polarized “right” or “left” stance on a news event that really has nothing to do with political's. You can also typically see these articles from a mile away simply based on how often the author uses the terms “right” or “left” in their writing.

When I think of these posts on Steemit, I conjure up images of sheep gathered with their Sheppard in an echo chamber, all circle jerking each other while bleating “riiiiigght,” “riiiiigght” or “Leeefffft,” “Leeefffft.” It’s a bit of a disturbing image and an arrogant thing to say – I know.

Source

Why is this an Issue?

---

My opinion is that this behavior is an issue for several reasons.

1. It leads to group think – a psychological phenomenon in which groups of people reach consensus by isolating themselves from outside influence and actively suppressing alternative viewpoints.

2. It polarizes society and discourages communication and discourse among people with dissenting views. It creates an “Us vs Them” mentality with very little room for middle ground. Furthermore, individuals tend to be pigeonholed and categorized into one particular ideology (“right” or “left”) despite these concepts existing on a continuum. Since articles based on meme politics naturally take the stance of “you’re either with us (wholeheartedly) or you’re against us,” people are forced to decide if they are in complete agreeance with an often narrow viewpoint of a complex issue.

3. It leads to confirmation bias. This behavior appears to cloud judgement and leads to non-rational and non-critical thinking. Rather than viewing the event as its own singular occurrence individuals project their ideology onto the situation and look for evidence to support it. As such, people often surround themselves with confirming evidence while ignoring anything to the contrary which in turn makes them stuck believing in their own egotistical opinion based viewpoint.

4. It is harmful to society. In situations where individuals turn a singular event into a battle over political ideology, people will actually argue in favor of criminals or situations that harm humanity or their rights simply because, to them, the situation represents a conflict between two political stances. But it doesn't have to be that way.

Self Reflection

---

Source

I typically do not like calling people sheep. I find that the use of the term carries with it an ego sense of superiority for its user. Overall it is a belittling self-righteous term meant to point out the perceived flaws in another’s thinking while ignoring one’s own. Often people who use the term fail to recognize the instances in which they themselves also do the very same behavior which they accuse others of committing. As such, I would like to point out my realization that there are moments in which I consider myself to be an arrogant and self-righteous ass (this moment being one of them) and that there are also instances in which I too would demonstrate the characteristics of the sheep that my article describes. I get sucked into arguments over political ideology and at times I frame my writing based on my own biases. With that in mind, I think that we are all sheep in some instances.

Conclusion

---

Source

The overall message that I am trying to convey in this article is that we often use events taking place in society as a mechanism to engage in our own egotistical thinking and to promote and perpetuate our own political ideologies. However, this has the negative impact in society of promoting group think among its members and separating people into “Us vs Them” categories. As such, people tend to argue politics rather than discuss the actual underlying issues that relates to the event or situation in question. In other words, because people often choose a side (“right” or “left”) on non-political issues, they may end up arguing in favor of ideas that they believe represent their political viewpoint but that do not better our society.

As such, I ask why choose a side at all? Instead of arguing that the “right” or the “left” is to blame for a particular situation, why not discuss the morality concerns the situation represents, the repercussions and consequences of decisions associated with it, or how the situation relates to the long term well-being of people and society? I personally believe that if we did these things, we would all be better off.

Thanks for Reading