Gramsci, the War of Position, and the Revolutionary Vanguard

So, I want to make this video in hindsight of the Black Lives Matter and the conservative response to them. In particular, a the response of people like Matt Walsh, of the Daily Wire, who seemed genuinely dumbstruck by the fact that this sort of thing could happen and that the left could blatantly lie about the events which too place during the riots and that the public believed the leftist narrative of events over the conservative one. It completely emphasized something I've noticed about conservatives for years now, and it's that they completely ignore structural issues.
Conservatives seem to not understand that it matters not what is true or false, buy rather what we perceive to be true or false. what we perceive as reality is ultimately a product of our senses. Therefore, it is possible to manufacture what an audience perceives to be true by controlling what they are allowed to see and training them to seek out key ideas, phenomena, and concepts which will ultimately make up their perception of reality.

Ideology, religion, culture and education play a key role in reinforcing hegemony. 

Take for example, the issue of natural phenomena like a thunderstorm. A believer of a tribal religion may attribute the thunderstorm to the will of the gods, whereby a believer in scientism would attribute the thunderstorm to the work of mere nature. In this scenario, both the tribal religionist and the scientist are observing the same phenomenon. What's different is what they've been trained to see in this phenomenon and what cause they've been trained to ascribe to it. You may argue that the scientist is ultimately right and that the thunderstorm is ultimately the cause of nature, not of some tribal rain god, but to the tribal religionist, his personal ascription of the phenomenon is no less real to him.

As a whole, this phenomenon takes place at all levels of society where values and issues of non-empiricism is applied to human society, especially in democratic society. For the most part, human beings act out the reality they have been prescribed to view as normal. Our society could just as easily be one of interrupted libertinism as it could be one of traditional Catholicism. What matters is not the truth, but who reigns as the Hegemonic force in the institutions of our societies which determine which truth society will live out.

What's most important isn't to exhaust ourselves in a war of manuever on the cultural in the culture war against the left, but to fight a war of position, and ultimately, reign hegemonic in the institutions that define society in a top-down phenomenon.

This is why conservative ideologies like libertarianism, which eschew that need of conservatives to control the government are doomed to fail. Institutions exist. Government exists, and the government and institutions of our society must be occupied by someone. Whoever occupied these institutions of power will ultimately define the way in which society operates.

Libertarianism fundamentally fails because it cedes this institutions not only to the left, by virtue of advocate non-intervention in government, but also because they advocate that private enterprise, which has no loyalty to society, should reign supreme. I'd much rather have my neighbor or a member of my country control the institutions of my society than a faceless corporate body that can't be held accountable. That privatizes gains and socializes loses.
What we're seeing with the reality of institutional power is that it has the power to bend, what we're formerly seen as social and political absolutes, to the will of the people who inhabit the institutions. We see this with Christianity, social etiquette, even the constitution has bent to the will of institutional power.
Of course, the major reason for this is because most of what we see as essential parts of everyday life are actually contextual. They exist in a certain place, in a certain time, under a certain period of human development, and most importantly, they were allowed to exist, or even brought into existence, by a ruling elite who willed them to be so. The reason why Christian social morals are now seen as obsolete and of society has embraced libertine social values isn't because human beings have magically evolved to favor one over the other, but rather, our current ruling elite is no longer a Christian ruling elite. The ruling elite will forever define the context in which the whole is society will exist under a hierarchical system, especially in the managerial system we exist in today.
Bringing this all back to the black lives matter riots the the tendency for the public to be so easily duped by the leftist narrative; what did conservatives think would happen. For years, the left has controlled the mechanism of power in our society, the institutions that define what we perceive to normal and moral, and conservatives have told the public that the free market would solve the problem. But of course, this is nonsensical, because the left is, for the most part, defining what is normal in our society, and thus, what the free market will respond to. Moreover, they control the mechanisms of power which manages international finance-capital, so not only do they control the means of manufacturing the zeitgeist of society, but they also control the capital which controls the market. So, of course the leftist narrative would win out over the conservative one. This is the "so called" free market in action.



Due to mass technology, human behavior has become systematic and carry widerange consequences.