Not the general public, but people ideologically inclined towards them, yes. And the reasons for that is because they want to learn how to back their stuff up, respond to criticisms, things like that.
Left Wikipedia
Jonathan Cook
Alexander Martinez
No, as I said before, it has to have the correct focus and tactics from the outset.
No it wouldn't, in order to maintain a wiki you need an objective stance on things, different factions of "the left" have outright different versions of history that they base their politics on.
see:
Samuel Lopez
It seems really useless, all you're doing is making a site so that you can copy paste onto wikipedia. A "PR war" with wikipedia is an extremely far-fetched fantasy that doesn't need to happen when the more direct solution is to start actually doing things that normal people are going to see.
David Miller
we have wikipedia
Joseph Miller
Honestly this talk of a Zig Forums wiki is really just jerking off because people have fantasies about having stuff "but with added marxism" for some reason. No point in making an entire wiki that no one will read seriously. The real fight is promoting intellectual honesty in face of bourgeois historical ideologues in the mainstream, one of these being wikipedia which attracts millions of visitors and has a relatively respectable community of fact checkers.
Ian Bell
Yeah because we can totally take down capitalism and the largest military power in history, but having material to edit Wikipedia articles with is a fantasy.
This was already discussed here, having a platform to organize and compile leftist knowledge IS the pre-requisite for reaching the people elsewhere.
Grayson Jones
Read
Christopher Watson
That's quite literally what I point out in my post as being the most effective route, not some really dumb snowflake wiki that no one will read so you can launch a propaganda campaign against wikipedia. Also lol at your "hurr durr you believe we can take down capitalism through disciplined scientific approach to theory but we can't wage some hypothetical PR war!?"
You're not understanding. Places like RationalWiki aren't compilations of knowledge in order to fight power, they're literally to jerk off people you agree with ideologically and make funny satire articles.
And this just opens up another question: how come people on here who want others to contribute intellectually aren't contributing intellectually by editing wikipedia articles, which are going to immediately be open to a wide audience and not just a Zig Forums microcosm? We already have the intellectual basis for making counterarguments.
There are differing levels of use here.
Luis Ramirez
Then you misread the post you quoted, because editing Wikipedia concomitantly is an idea we agreed upon here.
Will leftists read it? Will leftists have access to sourced information on leftist perspectives through it? Then that's enough. We're not trying to win the general public you dummy, leftists are not supposed to read metapedia either.
It's not a war AGAINST wikipedia, you idiot. Not one person made that point.
If you're going to lol at something, lol @ yourself for being such a fucking retard that you misread a post that was literally calling for us to centralized and organize efforts elsewhere before we can push that narrative to other places, including Wikipedia - which was the point he was making - and making this central to your dumb argument.
They're compilations of DATA meant to build a NARRATIVE that they can then push ELSEWHERE. You are obviously not a very intelligent person, but the difficulty you're having in grasping this simple concept is astonishing.
I won't bother repeating myself here
TL;DR you're confused, you're not grasping the central idea and you're wasting our time by having us explain it to you again and again.
Grayson Cruz
What I'm imagining is a wiki recording things of special concern to people sharing our rough political coordinates. A collective notebook organizing ideas from various left-wing thinkers, providing leftist commentary on various subjects, providing ideological critique of common "memes" in contemporary political dialogue… It could be a place to organize various perspectives on issues and collectively build a strong leftist narrative.
Wikipedia isn't going to accept us writing a bunch of highly specific material on Stirner, Marx, Kropotkin, Zizek, Cockshott, Wolff or whoever else we're suddenly interested in. It would be a lot more casual than the material on that site as well.