What is Meme Busting?
In Political Mirroring, it means to "demolish" political memes using critical thinking and rational analysis. People striving to be rational form their own arguments and do not post memes to explain what they're incapable of explaining. Memes are stand-ins for actual arguments. They're what I call "totems" because they're meant to be worshiped as the perfect example of the poster's emotions and feelings about an issue rather than provoking a rational debate with an opponent. They're meant to be untouched and unspoiled, not debated against.
Political memes are the lazy online version of protest signs. Think about the time a protester spends on a sign instead of forming a coherent argument that can withstand opposition scrutiny. If you put lots of glitter on your paper placard, think really hard about your freedom of assembly rights meant exclusively for you and your crew, and march down the block to spit on some cops or to angrily have your car roll over protesters because of the beliefs you've splattered onto your poster, at least you made some physical effort.
Like their more aggressive cardboard cousins, memes are also arguments stuck in time though online and more pathetic, protected First Amendment speech however stupid of course, but inarguable placeholders for actual rational debate. They represent the emotions of the person posting them, just like a placard holder chanting behind their sign. What memes lack is the force of the person in your face, using their body to impose fallacies (resort to force and ad hominem) on others since physical action is not any more of a rational argument than chanting repetitively.
Memes advertise the concept of an argument, yet not one in of itself. After-all, what are you supposed to do to a disagreeable billboard on a highway? Yelling out your car window probably won't do much more than vent a little anger. Likewise, a meme is meant to harvest "likes" or serve as a baited trap ready for the opposition prey who dare to question it in the comment section below. Advertising and memes are quite different because political memes really aren't meant to convince a potential customer to buy that which they aren't likely to buy. Instead, memes are therapeutic for the poster, antagonistic for the disagreeable, or ignorable for the disgusted.
IMPORTANT NOTE: I am not arguing about the supposed content or the feelings behind the memes. Instead, the purpose of busting them is the same that any critical thinking lesson would teach students: improving arguments and limiting logical fallacies. Whether you choose to treat them as art, music, or merely as the impulse to click and add something your instincts already leads you to agree with, really, memes dumb down argument in the name of democratizing opinion.
5 Step Meme Busting Method:
1. EVERYTHING about a meme is in play. Any interpretation is acceptable if based exclusively on the evidence provided and using common knowledge to explain it. The poster of the meme is irrelevant as are their political views, but potentially applicable if your knowledge of them contradicts a literal interpretation of their meme. You do not have to know anything that isn't explicitly depicted. Names, causes, beliefs, or events are all up to the interpreter if they're not there.
2. Take every picture literally. Only describe elements directly showed and nothing else. Lighting, texture, stock images, symbols, shapes, and colors are all usable. If there is only an image, feel free to tell whatever story about it that you want. If there are only words and the meme is a screenshot of them, dissect it as one would a protest sign since it's not a conversation, but a picture of words.
3. Take every word and sentence structure literally. If there are multiple definitions of a word, any or all are acceptable if there is no evidence to contradict your explanation. Take care to point out every spelling or grammatical mistake where applicable as the meaning may be altered.
4. Compare every part of the image with every part of the words.
5. Nearly every political meme CAN be busted.
I have chosen five of the most serious and difficult memes to bust as an example.
Meme Sample #1: A Person May or May Not Represent "Science First"
Fallacies: Arguments from authority? Glittering Generality? (very little information)
The scientific method is noticeably absent as is something representative of "science." Instead, this a "worship meme," a glittering generality so broad that to debate its core dogma would invite universal scorn.
Is this about all science or something specific? Is it Paleontology? Lepidopterology? We don't even know what sort of science it claims to find so important, we don't know if it considers criminal justice specialists as social scientists and thus as part of "Science First," or whether "Science" is competing with non-sciences like Art for placement. Who knows based on the minimal information provided.
No doubt this meme is a potent worship totem to those who believe that their mystical science religion isn't properly being venerated. One
would certainly have a difficult time arguing that science is
prioritized in protests or by posting a meme to make it important. And remember, we don't have to know that the person is Anthony Fauci. His name isn't provided. This person is presumably used as an argument from authority, a logical fallacy. It assumes that because the person represented is who he is, that his arguments are always true and that he is the Messiah of Science-Firstism. Because we take everything literally as if we just stepped off a space ship (from the planet Science First maybe?) and we knew nothing about the symbols or people involved, all we'd know is that some person's picture is combined with two words. So, let's meme bust using the scientific method and act more scientifically than the meme "artist."
Hypothesis: It is of the
species homo homo sapien with its symbolic portrait picture taken using
spotlighting and shadow to give weight to the glittering generality of
"science first" (as opposed to second or last).
Control group: Upper body
business-style dress, no facial hair, grey mid-length hair, aging face, indifferent or at least straight facial expression, lighter color skin.
Experimental/Unknown variables: Gender.
Age. Race. Health condition. Clothing below upper body. It would be quite presumptive to suggest he's either a leader of Science-Firstism or a villain, because he comes from a dark place. This person appears to be
a white male, though we'd have no way of knowing based on the limited information provided so it's perfectly reasonable to assume it's a hidden variable. So, perhaps she's a self-identifying female that doesn't conform to gender stereotypes about women. However, assuming he is a white male means that we should also assume that white males are most capable of representing prioritizing "science"
over everything or non-comforming females show themselves as conformist white males because they best fit the stereotype of a good Science First representative.
Experiment setup: Expose this
portrait picture to different levels of light and see if "science"
changes to another placement on the first to last scale of science prioritization.
Conclusion from this
meme: Unknown.
BONUS
Sample #1B: Dan Rather Discounts Arguments for Fallacious Reasons
This is a very entertaining meme of a picture of another stupid Dan Rather quote. Like the previous meme, this is an extremely fallacious argument of authority and an ad hominem about "science." According to this meme, arguments should only be listened to because of THE PERSON giving them (only scientists can), not the truth or content of the arguments. In this quote, he purports to be the adjudicator of when to listen to arguments or not, when someone is qualified to talk about science or when they're not. When did Dan Rather get his Scientific Qualifications Board membership? Or does that not matter? When did he become a "Pundit Prosecutor" after being on camera for that lengthy journalism career?
Taken literally, if a person is not identifying as a "scientist" of whatever variety, but reads a medical study aloud to their audience, be it by posting it online or acting as a "pundit" on TV, then that person would not be worthy of being listened to and "the science" they read aloud wouldn't be science. The person could say "I'm a scientist. I study astrophysics," therefore they would be given weight on whatever subject has Rather all hot and bothered. He doesn't say what subject non-scientists are being pundits about. However, if it's cat medicine, the astrophysicist should be listened to because they correctly self-identified or didn't use the word "but" after incorrectly self-identifying.
All that matters to Rather is the person self-identifies as a "scientist" and doesn't use the contraction "but" after saying they're not one. Anyone who is on television, excluding himself of course and his years reading science news stories, is a "pundit" if they are asked a question about a science-related topic, yet they aren't self-identifying as a scientist, "but" something else. "Pundit" is made into a particularly nasty pejorative as anyone not self-identifying as a scientist, "but" still talks about "science" doesn't have the necessary qualifications to be listened to regardless of the content. We also need further information, especially examples, about whom he is referring to as either qualified to talk or an example of "punditry" gone bad. His fallacious oversimplification merely labels groups based on self-identification and "but" as well as the disqualifying slur of "punditry."
Meme Sample #2: Fashion: Mask Wearing is the Same as Underwear Wearing, Noses and Penises are the Basically the Same, and it's Unfashionable to Improperly Wear Coverings on Either of Them.
Fallacies: False Equivalency
This meme compares covering two completely different parts of the human body and equates the fashion effects of improperly covering those parts. As you'll see, there is NO EVIDENCE presented in this meme of the health benefits to proper mask wearing and underwear wearing. We can't even assume that masks are protective let alone is underwear stopping diseases from entering your body through a small penis. Instead, I argue that the purpose of this meme is style only, which is subjective and entirely up to the taste of the mask/underwear wearer even if the author is trying to set fashion trends for you!
We can surmise that the body parts they're referring to are a nose and a penis, albeit a smaller penis than the nose because were it a bigger penis, we could presume that the person would feel less likely to cover it up since there's less shame. Apparently penis size matters to this artist while nose size does not. But, since when are big exposed noses shameful? Literary theorists might make something of the author's penis envy, but I have no way of knowing who is doing the penis shaming or why some sizes are fashionable and others aren't.
Now let's compare the effects of uncovering the two body parts. Were a penis to be the same as a nose then we'd have to breath through our penises like we do our noses or to reproduce or urinate we'd have to do those things through our noses. So that doesn't make logical sense. In terms of fluids, both have them, but we don't need to go down that route. In terms of physiological structure, the nose and the cartoon penis seem little different from each other other than size, so we can presume that this untalented artist isn't very familiar with two very distinct parts of the human body. It's seems plausible they didn't do too well in art school or in biology and their fashion arguments probably won't win them a spot on Vogue magazine's cover.
So let's look at prophylactics next. Could we assume that there is a health benefit to wearing something over both body parts? No, we have no information about health in this picture. We don't even know if there are health benefits to wearing underwear unless somehow they're suggesting that underwear is similar to a condom. Can a properly worn face mask hold back pregnancy by protecting your nose? Difficult to say without being extremely imaginative, which we don't have to do because the meme makers are supposed to put in the effort since they're trying to get a point across. Therefore, we're simply not told anything about health or the benefits of using protection. Again, we don't have to presume anything about COVID-19 or how important it is to wear masks to stop that spread. All we have to understand is their fashion argument about covering up big noses and small penises.
So to conclude, there is a serious case to be made that coverings in both cases are merely fashion implements. One could argue this entire meme is simply arguing a proper style of dress. One doesn't wear a dress backwards, one doesn't wear socks on ones' hands, so the author of this meme is arguing that it's unfashionable to wear a mask that uncovers your nose. It's equally absurd to expose a small penis because small penises are laughable to the artist and also unfashionable.
Meme Sample #3: Masked Uniformed People are Mouthed at by an Unmasked, Non-Uniformed Bearded Person.
Fallacies: Oversimplification, Hypocrisy Fallacy, False Equivalency, Causation
The maker of this meme likely believes in magic because one moment something called "Blue lives" matters, "and just like that" it doesn't. I'm not sure why this person Blue living doesn't matter anymore, but we'll get to that. Whatever it is, it's gone from all existence never to be seen again. We could presume the connection between the instant disappearance is connected in some way to the probable white men in this photo and the way that they're communicating. Thus, this meme has multiple fallacies present like causation as there is no evidence that someone's life is completely worthless if mouthed at by an unmasked man. The cause, mouthing, need not lead to the effect: a life that doesn't matter.
Let's back up and describe what we see here since we're going to take the literal route. Someone who is likely a man, though we know none of their genders for certain, and who I'll refer to as Beardo, mouths something at what we can assume are police officers if we're being charitable, but at minimum people of a uniform dress. We can make a few assumptions about the racial characteristics of this picture. First, everyone is probably white and likely male. So, we may assume that a white unmasked man is mouthing at other masked white men in black uniforms with gold badges on their arms. Maybe white men shouldn't yell at each other with their masks off? Does yelling with no mask on make someone else's life not matter if they're all white? If they were another color, say, blue? Who knows if Blue matters to anyone in this picture.
No one in the picture has blue on them so I argue that we must disconnect "Blue lives" from the black uniformed men and the other people here. There is either a grammatical error with the missed capitalization of "lives," or Blue is the name of one of the people in the picture, that this person called Blue lives, but that fact doesn't matter anymore because "just like that" something happened. Maybe the bearded man was notifying the officers that Blue lives and not to worry anymore because Blue's problem doesn't matter any longer. It's probably why Beardo took the mask off so that could be what he's trying to tell the officers who don't seem to care about Blue living. Maybe Beardo is upset because other white men aren't reacting as he tells them that Blue lives. Makes sense to me.
Though
it's not explicitly stated, "Blue lives" could also refer to the lively
blue color of the text of that part of the sentence. The artist wanted to show a
contrast between the white color of the "Tada!" line, the "And just like that," with
the latter blue part where the afflicted Blue living no long matters. There could be a connection between the white color choice and the white people in the picture and if Blue lives, but is missing or at some different physical condition at the time of this meme, it doesn't matter, then possibly Blue has blue colored skin to match the color of the words about them. Yet, if blue refers to the powder blue masks on the uniformed men, then was Blue turned into a powder blue mask, is the man complaining because Blue is being worn against their will as a mask, and maybe he's trying to free them? We'll never know.
We could do a little more work for the meme maker as so far it's pretty lazy and sloppy. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, as they at least spent a few minutes creating this on their computer, we should try to decide what the man might be mouthing and whether he could mouth it with or without a powder blue mask on. But that would be adding an element not present. There is no evidence that mask wearing or not is connected in any way to the magic of Blue still living and that fact no longer mattering to the meme maker. So, the masks are probably irrelevant.
However, even if masks were important to this meme, we might be confused how a bearded probable man with no mask on might devalue the lives of the masked uniform men simply by mouthing at them if we accepted all of these assumptions without evidence. Yet, we don't even know that the mouthing is connected to something mattering or not. We know nothing about the intent of anyone involved, COVID-19, facemask wearing, or freedoms as they aren't found in this meme so we don't have to assume anything about it or the intent of its crappy maker.
The choice of an unmasked likely-white man could be important. The beard unleashed could be important to understand what his facial movements mean. The beard could add an element of unruliness because it couldn't be contained under a similar
styled mask. We can also presume that the orderly-looking police officers don't have any unruly facial hair or at least none that would obstruct their masks, thus jeopardizing their lives when the mouthing begins, "and just like that" Blue living doesn't matter anymore. Or the officers are jeopardizing the beard on the mouther by staying silent and keeping their own facial hair neatly contained while Beardo wants the powder blue masks off them so Blue matters again.
So finally, we can only fantasize about what Beardo is saying here. I've written "mouthed" exclusively because the bearded man could be doing any number of things with his mouth. He could be yelling at them or perhaps he's burping at them and that's why he took his mask off in order to gain greater effect. We don't know what the man is saying or even the sounds he's making. My fervent hope is that Blue living is a positive development and that whatever happened to them to make magic happen is over with and they can live a peaceful life with all of their freedoms intact.
Meme Sample #4: Freedoms are Endured when Children are Traumatized by Active Shooter Drills and Another Person Doesn't Wear a Mask at Costco.
Fallacies: Causation, False Equivalence
The main thrust of this meme is the false equivalency between causing trauma to children and shopping at Costco without a mask. I've never shopped at a Costco so I don't know if the experience can be characterized as traumatic if you don't have a mask. We don't even know if shopping there in general is an emotional experience. We're supposed to take the artist's word.
What kind of active shooter drills is the author "expecting" kids to go through? Is there live ammunition and simulated shooters that pretend to kill teachers and students without telling them it's just a drill? I'm not certain if the drills are that extreme or if they're lockdowns or shelter in place, where students merely sit in a locked room for a few minutes with the lights off. Not much more traumatic than its inverse of exiting the building during your average fire drill. But, maybe fire drills are also as traumatic to kids as active shooter drills or going into Costco without a mask? More importantly, why do we traumatize our kids by doing fire drills or active shooting drills if it's at least as serious as a person who shopped at Costco without a mask? If these drills are that serious and terrifying maybe we ought to come up with a different way to do safety in schools.
The clearest fallacy is causation in both the "if" and "then" parts of the sentence. We have no way of knowing if enduring freedoms leads to active shooter drills because we don't know which freedoms. The author clearly chose the verb "to endure" because they clearly want to show that all freedom is something that children have to suffer through. So, freedom of speech by other people is endured by children as trauma, freedom of assembly is endured as trauma, etc. etc. She didn't specify the 2nd Amendment so we'll assume that any freedom has the potential to lead to an endurance of trauma by poor children.
Yet, if the freedom is to engage in active shooting, then possibly the effect could make sense because people using that freedom to active shoot could cause active shooting drills to take place in schools. Again, we don't have to know that the author is talking about guns or the 2nd Amendment. If they were, it's on them to provide evidence of a link whereby exercising 2nd amendment freedoms causes traumatizing school drills (the effect).
The false equivalence fallacy is connecting two unrelated topics together. Not wearing a mask at Costco is not equivalent to the fallacious link between freedoms and schools drills. And is not wearing a mask as traumatic as a fire drill or an active shooter scenario for either the unmasked person or the rest of the people in the store? But how does this author know that the unmasked person expects horrifying active shooter drills in schools? They fallaciously assume that expecting traumatic drills and not wearing a mask comes from the same group without exception. We don't know that.
So let's focus on the grocery store. We already know any comparison depends on how terrible the safety practice is and why a school safety drill is equivalent to shopping at a grocery store under such terrifying conditions. If that person doesn't wear a mask, are they treated as the real or simulated active shooter? Are the baggers and cashiers locked down in the stock room when that person comes in or will they complain, force them out of the store, and maybe squirt some extra hand sanitizer on their hands once they're gone? I'm not sure if teachers and students follow these practices after their active shooter drills are over with. I'm not sure how traumatic store removal is, but if schools drills are that scary, then store employees will probably also need serious therapy.
Sidenote: This person could be attempting to be clever by comparing shooters with the unmasked shooting around viral pathogens in Costco. Yet, because this is another lazy quote, we don't have to make any of those assumptions because to go unmasked is at least as bad as a school shooting drill, not active shooters as being as traumatic as unmasked shoppers shooting viruses. We know nothing of health concerns other than emotional distress so we don't know if the unmasked wearer's actions are even a health concern, just that it's comparable to an active shooter drill.
Meme
Sample #5: Actors Make Pledges: Doing Anything for Your Country Applies to Reenactors from Mel Gibson's Movie "The Patriot," a group of Masked People, But Not One Crying Bald Person.
