Read on Twitter
In any ideological conflict, each side competes for the same prize,
It is a mimetic duel, what one does, the other must do, and so on and so forth, with increasing escalation
Each act justifies the other in kind, and such conflicts inevitably become violent...
It is a mimetic duel, what one does, the other must do, and so on and so forth, with increasing escalation
Each act justifies the other in kind, and such conflicts inevitably become violent...
Eventually culminating in a narrative "battle for everything" in which one side must assert its version of history and the duel over the other
The usage of violence requires increasingly greater levels of moralization, which mandates and divinity as means of justification...
The usage of violence requires increasingly greater levels of moralization, which mandates and divinity as means of justification...
At no point can either side acknowledge the reality of the duel, as to do so would sentence them to death. To "take a step back" would justify the opponent and invalidate the play
the mimetic game must be played as life and death then, because it has become life and death
the mimetic game must be played as life and death then, because it has become life and death
The game ends when an appropriate scapegoat is found, that is sacrificed in the place of total annihilation
The scapegoat takes on the sins and attributes of the losing ideology, and its sacrifice spares the masses from total annihilation
Without a scapegoat, its obliteration
The scapegoat takes on the sins and attributes of the losing ideology, and its sacrifice spares the masses from total annihilation
Without a scapegoat, its obliteration
