Why did this story produce so much wow-effect? Well, because it portrays Taliban ex-fighters as humans with ordinary human problems relatable to a Westerner. Since we are used to reading absolutely dehumanizing narratives, the *slightest* humanizing perspective may be shocking
https://twitter.com/armanddoma/status/1621971518086602753
This is not so much about the Taliban as about the arbitrariness of story-telling. Humanization/dehumanization is an author’s choice. And whichever angle you choose, you can always find enough factual material to present you (arbitrary) perspective as the objective reality
Paradoxically, humanizing the absolutely dehumanized may be very easy. Choose their experiences that your audience can relate with, and discuss them in meticulous details:
“Wow, they’re almost like us!”
That’s conditional ofc. In this case conditional upon Taliban having won
“Wow, they’re almost like us!”
That’s conditional ofc. In this case conditional upon Taliban having won
An author chooses an angle that the audience likes. And the audience likes an angle that makes it feel good about accepting reality. In this case - reality of Taliban’s victory. If the monsters won, that’s uncomfortable. So once they win, we stop portraying them as monsters
People love winners and hate losers. They always look for the innumerable faults of the losing side and the redeeming qualities of the winning side. It is largely a cope, that makes them feel better about accepting reality. Therefore, whoever wins turns out to be not *that* bad
This human proclivity will work in you favor, should you win and against it should you lose. In both cases, people will construct a set of values, beliefs and verified facts that would make them feel better about accepting either your victory or defeat as the fait accompli
The end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
