A writer had an open invitation to construct counternarratives based on her summary of groups who attended the "Battles of Berkeley"
What I am asking is a similar call for researchers to provide counternarrative extrapolations from these bullet points.
Pick one, or several, or all OR critique this method for its ability to effectively construct counternarratives. If you do critique, however, please provide more fruitful alternatives :)
MAIN MESSAGING FROM RALLIES (so you can make good counter messaging)
- Anti-immigration/supports deportation & ICE
- For Muslim ban
- Anti-abortion and planned parenthood
- Anti-government social safety nets like healthcare & snap
- Mostly Christian
- Passionately hate Obama and Hillary Clinton (still talks about them)
- Love president Donald Trump no matter what he does
- Propaganda pushers of false media
- Blue Lives Matter
- Obsessively against Communism
- Pro-Western Culture, believe everyone should assimilate to their ideal state
- Pro Confederate monument preservation
- Fine with people of color (they really hate being called racist)
- Anti-Black Lives Matter
- Extremely Patriotic
- In favor of traditional Male/Female roles (Patriarchy)
- Fine with LGBT but against trans in the military (because Trump said so)
- Pretty much anything Trump says they support, except white supremacy because again, they hate being called racist
- *source link https://www.classic8media.com/news/2017/8/21/battle-for-the-bay-whats-the-real-message
Regarding the sentiment of loving President Trump no matter what he does, I would tell the counter-narrative that a person's actions, whether good or bad, do not equate to political policies of the same quality. Likewise, a person's political policies, whether good or bad, do not equate to sound morality. By teasing out these two threads, persons who like (I don't understand why!) some of Trump's actions will hopefully see that these actions do nothing to guarantee the soundness of his politics. And persons who like (again, I don't understand why!) some of Trump's political policies will see that those policies don't render him a good person.
If I may,
the narrative is not relevant as a series of ideas, those ideas change,
especially given Trump's flip flopping. The narrative is based on groupthink around a personnality (trump) and leaders (pro trump figures, some of the republican leadership) though the identity itself is built, on opposition to mainstream elites, within the right wing. The most effective counter narrative would be to challenge the validity of the basis of the group or the narrative, to destabilize the current ideological bubble. Either showing that elites are just people that should not be opposed as a group, or to show that Trump is not deviating from the mainstream. That would be limited by the fact that the counter narrative cannot be deployed by people who would have interest in lying and can still be dismissed as a democrat plot. Ultimately, the only way to properly engage such a narrative is first on an individual basis, where group effects can be minimized, and then to put such objective and unquestionable points (to a Trump supporter not a liberal) that they would be listened to even if they are opposite to what the group's narrative is.
- Badges
- Science topic