Bravo Johnson
@bravojohnson
I see schizmogenesis differently than Doctorow. I see it as a way to adjudicate the center and basically cancel the debate by essentially positioning one side as the neutral or “reasonable” center, it can effectively passively aggressively block out more interesting takes, thus stifling the potential for growth or deeper transformation. This creates a scenario where the debate isn’t about pushing for a more progressive direction, but about reinforcing a stagnant middle ground that may does not truly address the problem but only addresses that if and when this is a problem we already have mechanisms in place. What's especially problematic is how this maneuver appears to value moderation and compromise while actually functioning as a conversation-stopper. The self-declared reasonable position becomes a passive aggressive way to avoid engaging with challenging perspectives that might require more fundamental reassessment of our social arrangements.
1 reply
1 recast
3 reactions
Bravo Johnson
@bravojohnson
The joke here is that passive aggressive is probably preferable to aggressive aggressive but that aggression is always externalized and will find an outlet, that you may not consider proportional but you would say that of course. This process neutralizes potential change by containing frustration in a maze that produces no real outcomes. When people abandon these ineffective systems, their frustration is labeled as “extreme,” further reinforcing the narrative that the bureaucratic center is the only legitimate path - despite its ineffectiveness being by design rather than accident.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
