[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/ent/ - Entertainment

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only

Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


File: 1635947162998.png ( 2.4 MB , 1200x690 , ClipboardImage.png )

 No.7817

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLxYklZAnBs

How much power do you think entertainment has?

This video kinda got me thinking about Socialist Realism, Like sure the vid is teensy bit radlibby and silly in its conclusions in some places but whatever
I just am puzzled by how could socialist realism be a successful campaign in any aspect, I mean sure the projects under it, even those critiquing it are incredibly influential as opposed to the stuff made under capitalist realism

But I propose that is a matter of time, The earlier in time you exist, the more stuff you do is noteworthy
Anyways, I think even with socialist realism, The soviet union fell, Clearly it doesn't help prop up the system as the dangers to socialism exists in the real world in the form of opportunists and imperialists

My question is what level of censorship helps and what level doesn't?
Are all these anti-capitalist movies made under capitalism actually amount to any actual change?

If not,
Should a socialist society operate the same way?
Letting anti-socialist movies be made under socialism because they won't amount to socialism being toppled?

And at the end of the day does censorship in art actually a stain or just a thing that looks bad in retrospect when looked at by youtube video essays
>>

 No.7818

>>7817
>Like sure the vid is teensy bit radlibby and silly in its conclusions
thanks for the warning and sparing me that.

Socialist realism was just what most proles and peasants in the Soviet Union wanted to see during that time. Since the proletariat and the peasantry was the patron of the arts, that's what artists produced. In capitalism artists have to produce what people with money want. If you want creative freedom as an artist you have to do it as a hobby. We'll make sure people have enough leisure time to do that.

For entertainment we'll do healthy mental states vs unhealthy mental states. We stick people in a machine that looks at their brain while they consoom entertainment. And then try to support what ever entertainment correlates with the mental states that correlates with good brain health. Basically we are going with neurology over psychology because that has more objective data. Ideologically socialist media is what ever doesn't melt your brain. Because i think that ruling classes try to cause brain damage to the population as a way to make people cognitively impaired enough to be lorded over and screwed out of the wealth they produce.

Censorship was not very effective. I think the most effective tool for shaping the entertainment information sphere was just making sure that there is much more of the stuff you want people to see, so that statistically, people see more of the "correct information". The Soviets banned certain entertainment and in a weird turn of events that was like a stamp of approval that made that media very desirable and also politically credible.

I think we have to make sure that people who create the information that goes in the brain of people have similar life experiences than their audiences. The reason mainstream media has become so unbearably cringe is because people in that system live in a completely different world, and they have nothing in common with the masses.

In order to produce ideological stability i think socialism has to do something that allows people to track where economic surplus and resources are spend, and it has to be very accessible for normal people, basically the complete opposite of the incomprehensible stuff what wall-street does, that even baffles many so called expert economists. I think Socialism does transparent economy and the capitalists do obscurantist economy.

For social media i think we would build an evidence based fact checking system that is modeled after scientific mechanisms for finding correct information. And we should try to make a range of open source algorithms that warns about emotional manipulation that people can install on their devices (emotional intelligence in a can) This has to be open source so that it can't be hijacked by special interest groups that want to insert a special bias. I'm basically trying to take all the tasks that a state censor would do and break it up in to many little systems, that require less power and can operate with less ideological enforcement. My assumption is that it can have the same effect as a correctly functioning censor but with much less effort and trust. You have to keep tabs on a state censor to make sure it doesn't get subverted. that is like walking uphill. If you create a system that enables people who are inclined to seek truth from facts, it's like walking downhill because the system magnifies the tendency you want. This will need a lot of experimentation and has to be done with a ruthlessly realist mindset, to achieve a kind of higher level for the general intellect of society.
>>

 No.7819

>>7818
That's a good idea you said about a more transparent economy under socialism

>The Soviets banned certain entertainment and in a weird turn of events that was like a stamp of approval that made that media very desirable and also politically credible.


Very true, Like a troll, Ignoring is the first and best way to curb it, If something anti-socialist does get popular than idk what to do after that tho

>Socialist realism was just what most proles and peasants in the Soviet Union wanted to see during that time

Do you think the popular support of it ever fell out? Was it co-related with people's faith in the direction the government was going in?

>thanks for the warning and sparing me that.

It's not really that bad, It's mostly just talking about Tarkovsky's Stalker and film theory along with socialist and capitalist realism, one of the moments she kind of paints Stalin as an authoritarian who only wanted power kinda thing which is why I called it little radlib-y

I don't know who this Tarkovsky's guy really is but he came off kinda anti-communist in this vid
>>

 No.7820

The insistence on prioritizing Socialist Realism at the expense of based prolekult is what caused Mayakovsky (based OP of the porky meme) to an hero. Terrible mistake. USSR could have dominated the art world as the home of the avantgarde but they chose to bet on promoting themselves as boring and lame instead. This is ur brain on demcent.
>>

 No.7821

>>7820
what's demcent

>Mayakovsky

This guy sounds interesting, Russian Futurist and whatnot and the rocky relationship with the government
>>

 No.7822

>>7821
>what's demcent
it might mean democratic centralism, not sure tho

Unique IPs: 5

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome