diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | log.md | 20 |
1 files changed, 11 insertions, 9 deletions
@@ -23,20 +23,22 @@ Structure: 7. This has led some critics to blame apocalypticism for the failure of R 8. This is a traditional criticism of apocalypticism 'from above' 9. Apocalypse 'from below' has often worked very differently -10. This difference is due to the different interests of the readers -11. John's rhetoric exhorts his audience to a martyrdom ethic -12. R needs to exhort their audiences to a martyrdom ethic -13. Socialist rhetoric in the past has used apocalypticism for this very purpose -14. Once rhetors addressing the PMC have fixed all the other problems with R, +10. This difference is due to the different interests of the readers -- a + difference which does not apply in the case of green crises +11. In fact, apocalypse can meet the critic's concerns in principle +12. (In order to do so in practice, those with power need to attack the + structures which drive the downward spiral) +13. John's rhetoric exhorts his audience to a martyrdom ethic +14. R needs to exhort their audiences to a martyrdom ethic +15. Socialist rhetoric in the past has used apocalypticism for this very purpose +16. Once rhetors addressing the PMC have fixed all the other problems with R, they'll need this apocalyptic hope, too If I had to chop it up into chapters: 1. (1-5) R is a failure -2. (6-10) anti-apocalyptic criticism of R repeats traditional anti-apocalyptic - rhetoric, which is class-based and not fit for purpose -3. (11-14) apocalyptic rhetoric is now needed for both the working class and the - PMC in order to motivate people to a martyrdom ethic +2. (6-12) anti-apocalyptic criticism of R mis-diagnoses the problem +3. (13-16) green rhetors need to use apocalyptic rhetoric What follows is the structure explored in more detail. |