“It’s easy for me to imagine a millennial man who recommended Infinite Jest to his dates in 2010 very animatedly recommending Bernie’s call for Medicare for All to them in 2015. For some number of years, to point something like this out would be to make a self-evident joke at the expense of such a man. But what exactly was the joke? If you can answer that question, then you would have a key to the entire mood, the whole structure of feeling, of a cultural moment that remains, for better and worse, closer behind us than it sometimes appears.”
Social media seems uniquely capable of generating pointlessly self-destructive leftist/progressive social movements. The addictive quality of the anger you describe in your post seems to have some explanatory power here, explaining why something so self-destructive is also paradoxically self-sustaining.
That piece seems to significantly misunderstand what the critique of Bernie Bros was. It was never that they were annoyingly earnest (that was the charge leveled at Buttigieg supporters in 2020). It that they engaged in exactly the type of anger described here. The Bernie Bros were the people who treated voting for him as the only correct moral choice, and treated the people who supported other candidates as either stupid or corrupt. It wasn’t about them supporting Bernie, or even attacking Hillary. It was that they attacked people who supported Hillary, or even people who didn’t support her but criticized Bernie. And the people they attacked counterattacked and vice versa and on and on and as a result we’re still living in The Long 2016.
I noticed that same feeling; that I was addicted to the “Someone Is Wrong on the Internet” Syndrome. There’s something about my personality that makes it especially intoxicating. The thing that clicked for me is that I’m a criminal appeals lawyer. It’s literally my job to tell people they’re wrong, at length, and with copious supporting documentation. But very often instead of indulging my SIWOTIism in a healthy way that benefits my clients, society at large, and is very personally remunerative, I was wasting my life arguing about bullshit.
Keeping up those personal disciplines is the only way to stay sane on social media. I especially agree with #1 -- I always instinctively avoided algorithmic feeds wherever they were an option. (I tolerate Facebook's because it's so random that I don't know how they could possibly be manipulating me.)
It so happens I'm on my first day of the Lenten fast (Orthodox-style, but following the Western calendar) including a strict social media cleanse. So this came as a gift. Bookmarked for re-reading when the spirit weakens.
I have read your post the morning after reading this post on the confusing and sad recent history of hating on white male DFW/Bernie fans:
https://open.substack.com/pub/thepointmag/p/from-wallace-bros-to-bernie-bros?r=2lm9cf&utm_medium=ios
A quote from its conclusion:
“It’s easy for me to imagine a millennial man who recommended Infinite Jest to his dates in 2010 very animatedly recommending Bernie’s call for Medicare for All to them in 2015. For some number of years, to point something like this out would be to make a self-evident joke at the expense of such a man. But what exactly was the joke? If you can answer that question, then you would have a key to the entire mood, the whole structure of feeling, of a cultural moment that remains, for better and worse, closer behind us than it sometimes appears.”
Social media seems uniquely capable of generating pointlessly self-destructive leftist/progressive social movements. The addictive quality of the anger you describe in your post seems to have some explanatory power here, explaining why something so self-destructive is also paradoxically self-sustaining.
That piece seems to significantly misunderstand what the critique of Bernie Bros was. It was never that they were annoyingly earnest (that was the charge leveled at Buttigieg supporters in 2020). It that they engaged in exactly the type of anger described here. The Bernie Bros were the people who treated voting for him as the only correct moral choice, and treated the people who supported other candidates as either stupid or corrupt. It wasn’t about them supporting Bernie, or even attacking Hillary. It was that they attacked people who supported Hillary, or even people who didn’t support her but criticized Bernie. And the people they attacked counterattacked and vice versa and on and on and as a result we’re still living in The Long 2016.
I noticed that same feeling; that I was addicted to the “Someone Is Wrong on the Internet” Syndrome. There’s something about my personality that makes it especially intoxicating. The thing that clicked for me is that I’m a criminal appeals lawyer. It’s literally my job to tell people they’re wrong, at length, and with copious supporting documentation. But very often instead of indulging my SIWOTIism in a healthy way that benefits my clients, society at large, and is very personally remunerative, I was wasting my life arguing about bullshit.
Brilliantly said, Adam, all of it.
I would be remiss also not to congratulate you on your very charming dog. 12/10
I haven't managed to avoid these problems, but I have developed some counter strategies over ~25 years of blogs and social platforms
1. Avoid managed ("algorithmic" is a misnomer) feeds, stick to accounts you follow. You can find new options by looking at accounts they repost
2. Block obvious trolls and mute bores
3. After two or three rounds of an agumentr, I normally sign off with "Let's leave it there"
Keeping up those personal disciplines is the only way to stay sane on social media. I especially agree with #1 -- I always instinctively avoided algorithmic feeds wherever they were an option. (I tolerate Facebook's because it's so random that I don't know how they could possibly be manipulating me.)
It so happens I'm on my first day of the Lenten fast (Orthodox-style, but following the Western calendar) including a strict social media cleanse. So this came as a gift. Bookmarked for re-reading when the spirit weakens.