Every time leftists try to style on a meme they just reveal how thoroughly they do not understand how jokes work https://twitter.com/DiccChocolate/status/1359958433760505861

This phenomena is a consequence of how their thinking works. As the old saying says, "laughter is the heart saying, ain't that the truth." In other words, ridicule and parody rely on an innate capability of the audience to know what the self-evident truth is w/o being told.

This is something that true collectivist thinking paradigms expressly lack; look no further than the doublethink phenomena for an example. The ultimate arbiter of Truth is the majority opinion, and collectivism allows no room whatsoever for dissent from that Truth.

And since collectivist systems so often fall under the sway of Rousseau's 'Great Statesman,' who invariably is required to 'tell the people what their will really is,' the so-called "majority" Truth is typically broadcast from the authorities to the people.

See how this works?

One of the most basic rules of humor is "you can't explain the joke." That's why jokes are something you "get;" you recognize the truth being alluded to.

Memes are really *joke formats.* Knock knock jokes could be considered a meme.

So of course they don't get memes.

If a joke is, at its core, something that uses various techniques to allude to a self-evident truth - and collectivist philosophy holds truth to be something dictated from above (thus necessitating lengthy rationalizations as it's not self-evident,) then they literally can't joke

Wikipedia's article on "Russian political jokes" is extremely insightful. Telling any of these jokes in the Soviet Union was running a risk. Telling jokes about the KGB was considered to be "pulling the tail of the tiger."

Jokes were subversive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_political_jokes

This is hands-down my favorite Russian joke on that page so I'll post it here.

I should also mention that the collectivist roots of the doublethink phenomena are also why they evince such obsession with fictional stories and relate everything back to Harry Potter or Star Wars.

They're not stories to them so much as Aesops or Parables.

Given that their conception of Truth is "what the majority agrees is true," it's no surprise that narrative completely overtakes evidence in their eyes. It's just a matter of which narratives are praised and vindicated by the authorities and/or the "majority" and vice-versa.

Brainwashing plays a big role in this - constant reinforcement from every quarter aids in it, and the kind of education one receives when young and pliable does as well.

But there's also a psychological element. Some are more susceptible to it than others.

The cringeworthy commentary of some checkmarks on Biden; esp. that one that literally said "it feels like I'm 4 years old asleep in the car seat and Daddy's driving again" reveal this side of it.

Some people fear and shy away from any authority or responsibility.

Responsibility, we can all agree, does suck. It's a burden, after all. But on the scale of national politics this dovetails with the narrative obsession. They're not cowards in their daily lives, necessarily. It's about their emotional reaction to things they have no control over

Gun control is an excellent and frequent example you'll see in the wild. I've oft been told that "you must be terrified all the time if you carry a GUN."

My response has always been: "why the hell would I be scared of things? I have a gun, don't I?"

One worldview distinguishes between things one can control and one can't; and thus directs efforts relating to the former to counteract the latter.

The other one can't even comprehend this. Its faith in one's own agency is insufficient to ward off the fear.

That level of fear naturally engenders a strong emotional need to believe in narratives; because only a fairy tale can sufficiently diminish the awfulness of the potential threat.

We used to have God to fulfill this purpose.

Collectivists usually reject God.

So.

You'll find these two different kinds of people in any time, place and system you care to look, I figure.

There have always been people who simply trust to God to do everything, and those who believe that God helps those who help themselves.

Understanding these psychological influences is important because it gives one an empirical (observational) basis to ground your political theory. If the other side can vanish up their own kiesters on wild flights of fancy, who's to say you can't, too?

It also serves as a strong reminder that you're not exempt from basic human psychology, either. You have your own blind spots too, and "your side" has naturally let confirmation bias reinforce it.

And any political system has to account for *both* types.