Capitalists and marxists often level the same attack on each other  —  that attack being that the opposing side is propagandized. This is often done without addressing if their own side is too propagandized. One of the influences of propaganda can include the dismantling of critical thinking skills. I believe that most capitalists and marxists have a tendency to develop their belief system via propagandization. But there is a sector from both camps that actually do pick up a book and engage with the various ideological frameworks with an open-mind and via critical thinking skills although I do believe it is rare. 

In order to counter the impacts of propaganda one needs to both put their preconceived notions and subjective experience aside while learning about various ideologies AND eventually bring in their own subjective experience as leverage to inform their worldview. The following is the theoretical foundation for this argument. Modernism (1890s/1900s - 1940s) embraced objectivity, reason and logic while the cultural movement following it, Postmodernism (1950s/1960s - 1990s), had ideals of subjectivity, uncertainty and ambiguity. I argue that one should refrain from embracing Modernist notions BUT nor should Postmodernist notions unequivocally be embraced; this is because we have emerged into our current era of Metamodernism (2000s - Present). Cultural movements transition from one to the next by reacting in direct opposition to some aspects of the previous cultural movement while carrying on other elements of that same movement instead of reacting in reaction to it. Basically, they function according to contradictions. Thus our current times are both a product of both Modernism and Postmodernism; Metamodernism oscillates between Modernism’s notion of logic and reason + Postmodernism’s ideals of uncertainty and subjectivity. 

Thus, this is the theoretical foundation for why one needs to both put their preconceived notions and subjective experience aside while learning about various ideologies – or what Modernism would frame as objectivity – AND eventually bring their own subjective experience in as leverage to inform their worldview – what Postmodernism would frame as relativism. This can allow one to assess both opposing and nuanced arguments, along with their own arguments for all its dimensions. I think one of the elements both sides fail to recognize is that politics at the end of the day are subjective. Two people can read the exact same books and look at the exact same resources on ideological frameworks via the lens of critical thinking skills and still come to two different conclusions and interpretations due to politics being subjective  —  but at least it will be views that are the product of educated conclusions. 

The issue becomes that the majority of society does not attempt to engage with ideological frameworks via the lens of critical thinking skills. For this reason, I reject the premise of both sides accusing each other of being propagandized as it does not take a bird’s eye view (or a meta view) of the bigger picture. I think if we lived in a society that attempted to let people develop their ideological frameworks via critical thinking skills combined with subjective experience rather than attempting to sway them to one’s side, individuals in society would have greater satisfaction with themselves as their own ideological frameworks would be the organic deduction of what their education and subjective experience naturally/authentically led them to.

When American society is breaking at the seams due to political polarization and broader society continues facing unprecedented issues – from AI to the climate crisis – the issue of “why” is bound to surface. The question isn’t why our society is breaking at the seams. The question is why our current set of tools isn’t enough to address the challenges? Aspects of the answer to this question sit with recognizing that our current society is running on outdated logic. The challenges we face are beyond our current logic and are instead better understood via the lens of the emerging logic of Metamodernism. As we continue running on outdated logic, the transition into Metamodernist logic becomes one that is a slow burn.