Collectivize the means of infographs

What infograph-making software or application do people recommend?

Paint.net for small jobs, cracked Photoshop CS6 for big jobs. I like Gimp myself, but many people find it too confusing.

hi Holla Forums. whatcha doin?

no Holla Forums posters
/pol infestation

the jokes write themselves lads

...

I always like the first one

...

...

...

The classic

I have no infographs but these are all excerpts from books that I think are worth reading

Part 2

I don't know if you are sincere or if you are trying to sabotage communists who feel as if they should disseminate material to 'the masses' by giving these almost-completely-unsourced infographs based on what you've posted in the post that I'm replying to. The first infograph in this post lacks citations. If you wish to convince people who feel as if they are slightly above others who would take these statistics for granted then you must provide citations. They are far too lazy to search for these tables and papers assuming that they exist at all, let alone on the internet. It is a similar story for the second infograph, it will attract rabid Hillarybots who will scream 'WERE IS DA PROOFS' and make rhetorical points out of their absence. The third one is very similar, though it will attract reactionaries, just as the fourth one will along with the fifth. Again, if you are looking to convince someone who is too lazy to perform deep research but not lazy enough to be cynical and superficially critical of information which has been presented to them, then you're doing it in the wrong way. If you try to tell me that you're 'making it accessible', I shall repeat myself considering that you are doing just the fucking opposite of that. You aren't writing polemics to persuade people who are already parts of our movement.
These arguments apply to anyone who posts unsourced infographics in this thread, by which I mean links or notes about the sources which are involved or at least directly referred to. Forget even rigorously determining an effective aim; you aren't even fulfilling that aim to the best of your abilities.

...

Didn't you read what I said about unsourced infographics?

...

nobody reads citations tho
(source: that one infographic about race that cites something like 'the national college board' which simply does not exist.)
feel far more important than citations is graphic design. in particular the third one, you can clearly tell it's a newspaper made thing rather than necessarily propaganda. similarly with the keynes one in you can tell it's a wikipedia infobox that forms the actual information of the graphic. (also in terms of the two sourced graphics i posted, the sources are shit - one just says "x analysis of y" without linking directly to it, and the other just says "yougov" - digging through those sites is far more irritating than hitting reverse image search

although there is perhaps a need for a distinction between a 'memetic infographic' and a 'broadsheet infographic' depending on the goal at hand. (this isn't as simple as polemic to appeal to people on our own side already - it does appeal to the undecided, but it does so via fast-and-soft attacks rather than boring deep. while the whole 'memes are reactionary' thing should be kept in mind, this isn't a strategy wholly out of our reach.)

...

Yay or nay?

...

America tried to overthrow France and Australia in the 60s and 70s? Need a source on that.

Reductionism, pure and simple. Even if you mean 'insignificant numbers', you've stopped there and given no justifications or evidence.
One can still include citations.
Great, so one must believe everything that they see. You didn't look at the case which I was applying it to, namely those who are marginally critical of sources and will ask about their validity. I justify my use of that case through reminding you of how vocal they are. I have taken on one of those 'PROOFS' hotshots myself ('Herr Neoliberal') on two threads here, the lengthier of them being >2232024, and I have seen many more lurking in comments sections and even the odd Plebbit post which I happen to be passing through. You wish to create effective propaganda but you show no indication that you know about the social landscape which one faces on the internet and in other places.
Right, and how many of those hotshots know about such a tool?
Pathetic. The flag must check out, as they say.
So one can understand communism through memes, I take it. Those memes must be deployed within spaces where people are complete newcomers to even the idea of analysing their world through the social order; they are otherwise masturbatory and useless and may even lead one to anticommunist movements depending on their interpretations of words and themes used in such memes. Furthermore, there is also the tendency of 'apoliticism' to wrangle with. I recognise that people will not instantaneously be 'cleansed of their liberalism' and whatnot but that does not mean that leading people into a communist movement must be carelessly-managed process.

Australia is probably the ousting of Gough Whitlam en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis

Meant for

goddamn man lighten up
maybe i'll reply to you properly after i've slept in my clothes for 11 hours.

have an infographic showing that the public are morons

...

...

it's an imageboard, nobody cares.
that would mean editing them in when it comes to cases of images saved from elsewhere.
i only really care about the social landscape of imageboards and maybe discord, reddit is a wasteland. furthermore it takes about 15 seconds to find other sources that back up your original point (which is my own preferred strategy, failing 'post another graphic showing a similar trend' because it's quite easy to find graphs showing things getting worse.)
who cares
i mean, it's a valid source - but if you're just going to say "x analysis of y" then you could easily make it up. people are more likely to assume it's real than not.
One can understand why the present state of affairs is shit and why fascism won't solve it, politics is as much about who you hate as it is about who you love.
Also, think: Do you actually want redditor weirdos who go around spouting SOURCE on /r/neoliberal as part of the same movement as you? Do you actually want to converse with them on fraternal terms? (This equally applies to meme breathing cretins, but whatever.)

this one needs a third column citing the sources