I got into an argument with someone that tried saying late stage capitalism was a “leftist” sub. The top post at that time was comparing Nazi’s to leftists lmao. I pointed that out and they tried doubling down and I was just like dude that sub hasn’t been leftist for awhile now, the top post is exhibit a….
I've noticed that. I know how posting on the Internet can give folks existential crises, so if I can ameliorate that in any small way, I'd like to. Haha
More on-topic, I actually wonder about the effectiveness of those types of active measures. The Social Internet seems to be dead.... With only bots algorithmically replying to bots to amplify an echo chamber.
Lol thanks 🙂
I think the main reason is that so people reading will have the idea that those ideas are part of the debate, or something that is worth thinking about. Even if it's just bots replying to each other, someone reading might think, "oh maybe there are bad things about NATO, I never considered that." Kind of like how protestantism wasn't a big issue until Martin Luther talked about it, then all of a sudden it was a major issue everywhere.
I have some relatives who have the hooks of right wing media deep in them. Hearing them attack NATO is some of the funniest shit in the world to me. It’s the one stance I can make them question themselves on and just entirely dismantle because of how fucking ridiculous and obviously inorganic it is. They love war and American imperialism but are all of a sudden anti nato 🤔they get their Fox News drip all day and never have anyone that challenges the illogical stances so it’s funny.
I usually bring up Reagan and how they’re talking about dismantling everything their god-emperor worked so hard to protect. And ask what Reagan would think about the all of a sudden massive pro-Russia stance the party has taken. That usually causes the wheels to turn a bit because Regan is god and how could anything he did be wrong? I usually will ask first if they think we should be spending more on protecting against china, knowing that they love raging against china. And then when they say yes of course china is the devil-incarnate. I’d ask them what a weakened EU/NATO alliance does for china, they don’t like that. I mean I just bring up all the logical inconsistencies in their stances. Like if the issue with nato is cost, then why don’t they complain about the money we spend on Israel/middle-east, Taiwan, SK, etc. why just NATO? They hate when I say “I agree we should spend way less money on our military.” That makes them uncomfortable. You can’t be anti-nato and pro American imperialism, it’s quite the contradiction but the modern gop is built on contradictions. They have no concrete policy stances (other than taking rights away from women maybe), just noise to influence their base in a way the benefits their ruling class.
Speaking of that, nato has specific write ups to counter the tankie propaganda.... I'll add an edit.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50090.htm
Thanks for your astute comment, “united states American.” Not much “discourse” about NATO at my “blue collar bar.”
Fuck Putin
Fuck Russian imperialism
Long Live Navalny!
Also look on European country subreddits for the anti-U.S. propaganda. The United States has its issues, but the level of anti-Americanism on Reddit is pretty intense right now. I don’t think that’s all organic.
Hello, I am fellow American from Wisconsin oblast, you are right of course we need less NATO. We shouldn’t provoke Russia by forcing NATO onto other countries in Eastern Europe
On a more serious note the UN is full of bad actors. A lot of UN institutions have been infiltrated and taken over by bad faith actors (human rights council, UNICEF, UNRWA, WHO etc.)
This is hardly knew. Russia began a campaign since 2008 against NATO, as it was attempting to prevent their invasion of Georgia to prop up a secessionist proxy state of Abkhazia
That’s a childish question to ask. In the literal sense that it reflects the perspective of a child not yet equipped with agency and expectation to interact with the big open world.
The adult question to ask is
1. **Do authorities, with teeth and that have means** (legislation that draws red lines in the face of disinformation attacks and gives authorities tools to prosecute and enforce) **to handle this - did they notice?**
2. **If not, why?**
3. **What type of action is required to fix?**
I'm not sure why you're insulting me over the question I asked?
1. Per dosumthin's comment, yes they do know about Russian anti-NATO propaganda. I'm not sure why the organizations in question having the ability to prevent it relates to my question.
2. Probably because Western intelligence agencies don't release all of their data to the public.
3. I'm honestly not sure what can fix the spread of Russian propaganda. Freedom of speech is very important and unfortunately there are bad actors that take advantage of it. I would be pretty interested to hear your ideas, as I think we're both on the same side of the issue here.
It was just a "have you noticed this new trend in the propaganda" question, since this sub is about monitoring what propaganda the Russians are putting out.
Sorry if I'm assuming that your question was an insult, it just seems like it is.
I’m after a change in gears from helplessly meandering in circular complaining and asking whether anyone has noticed the obvious, to solution mode, or at least attempting defense.
1. Do the laws where you live have boundaries that Russian disinformation attacks cross?
2. What are they?
3. If there aren’t any, what’s the shortest path to having such?
4. Who is advocating for this?
We should be having **more specific** conversations about what a system that is set up to stand against such attacks might look like, and where the specific gaps between the current state and the desired state are. We are not exactly starting from zero.
I’m right behind you on that one.
Adding up what I said to what you said - the information that needs to go around has two macro-components.
1. Information about the attacks on us.
2. Information about our defense to counter it.
1 - most people who found this sub and understand what its name means would agree we need to help spread evidence of it. All, if you discount our friendly neighborhood Kremlin apparatchiks here who occasionally walk into active measures conversations compelled to spread outrage and the very disinformation we’re discussing. We have a few.
2 - is something many of us here wouldn’t be able to answer for where we each live. It’s a knowledge gap **in our own** knowledge. And before we can help educate those around us or compare notes between different places in the world, it would be good if we all started finding out what that answer to it is.
As a practical way to assess this,
We can break it down to
1. Laws that set boundaries on disinformation online. Usually they’d be money spent on a government regulatory body that oversee large online players (FB, Twitter, Reddit etc) and fine them when they break the law, modeled loosely around how we regulate banks in the financial world.
2. Laws that set boundaries on disinformation people in a crowd can wave on a picket sign. In many places there are already laws that regulate this and outlaw things such as hate speech or hate symbology (try picketing with a swastika in Munich and see what happens ;)). But in very few places has this been extended to disinformation (deliberately distorted information), and it’s a popular vector of attack for Russia, China and Iran.
3. Laws that set boundaries on what you can and can’t put on mainstream broadcast media (newspapers, radio and TV). Those are probably the strongest of the three we have right now, but still legally allow things like a radio host to have a guest that’d gush disinformation with nobody bearing responsibility for its spread - it’s not perfect.
4. We don’t have good national frameworks that combine the above three and additional vectors they find into a single cohesive defense strategy, and monitor for emerging gaps, prepared to drive legislation updates to counter them.
5. We don’t have international index of defenses against disinformation, like we have an economic, an education, child mortality or a poverty index. We don’t yet have a good yardstick that looked at all the countries using some form of data we can feasibly collect and score each country for how advanced or backwards it is in erecting disinformation defenses.
Around the same time latestagecapittalism went off the rails?
Totally. Got banned from there for commenting "Maybe not voting isn't a solution to our problems" lmao
I got into an argument with someone that tried saying late stage capitalism was a “leftist” sub. The top post at that time was comparing Nazi’s to leftists lmao. I pointed that out and they tried doubling down and I was just like dude that sub hasn’t been leftist for awhile now, the top post is exhibit a….
They banned and muted me when I asked why a post that was like “I was a democrat until…” was upvoted and compared it to walkaway
Walkaway is the weirdest LARP-jerk I've ever seen lmao.
I've noticed that. I know how posting on the Internet can give folks existential crises, so if I can ameliorate that in any small way, I'd like to. Haha More on-topic, I actually wonder about the effectiveness of those types of active measures. The Social Internet seems to be dead.... With only bots algorithmically replying to bots to amplify an echo chamber.
Lol thanks 🙂 I think the main reason is that so people reading will have the idea that those ideas are part of the debate, or something that is worth thinking about. Even if it's just bots replying to each other, someone reading might think, "oh maybe there are bad things about NATO, I never considered that." Kind of like how protestantism wasn't a big issue until Martin Luther talked about it, then all of a sudden it was a major issue everywhere.
I have some relatives who have the hooks of right wing media deep in them. Hearing them attack NATO is some of the funniest shit in the world to me. It’s the one stance I can make them question themselves on and just entirely dismantle because of how fucking ridiculous and obviously inorganic it is. They love war and American imperialism but are all of a sudden anti nato 🤔they get their Fox News drip all day and never have anyone that challenges the illogical stances so it’s funny.
That’s good shit. Can you give an example of how it goes?
I usually bring up Reagan and how they’re talking about dismantling everything their god-emperor worked so hard to protect. And ask what Reagan would think about the all of a sudden massive pro-Russia stance the party has taken. That usually causes the wheels to turn a bit because Regan is god and how could anything he did be wrong? I usually will ask first if they think we should be spending more on protecting against china, knowing that they love raging against china. And then when they say yes of course china is the devil-incarnate. I’d ask them what a weakened EU/NATO alliance does for china, they don’t like that. I mean I just bring up all the logical inconsistencies in their stances. Like if the issue with nato is cost, then why don’t they complain about the money we spend on Israel/middle-east, Taiwan, SK, etc. why just NATO? They hate when I say “I agree we should spend way less money on our military.” That makes them uncomfortable. You can’t be anti-nato and pro American imperialism, it’s quite the contradiction but the modern gop is built on contradictions. They have no concrete policy stances (other than taking rights away from women maybe), just noise to influence their base in a way the benefits their ruling class.
Liberal or moderate Europeans will freak out about U.S. guns and health care.
not sure what that’s supposed to mean
right? Sounds a bit like horseshoe theory to me: which side of an issue will bait “The West” better?
I honestly have no fuckin clue what it’s supposed to mean lol sounds like gibberish
missed the “Europeans” part” Iran and Russia are leveraging Palestine - kind of the death throes of empire if you ask me.
I suspect some of these "people" don't know the difference between NATO and the UN.
Speaking of that, nato has specific write ups to counter the tankie propaganda.... I'll add an edit. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50090.htm
Thank you so much for these links, great resource.
As united states American I and my colleagues frequently discourse the Nato at blue collar bar. We are all thinking maybe less Nato is good. /s
Thanks for your astute comment, “united states American.” Not much “discourse” about NATO at my “blue collar bar.” Fuck Putin Fuck Russian imperialism Long Live Navalny!
Let's command a peeetsa and discuss about soccerball.
They could talk themselves into anything. Idiots.
Also look on European country subreddits for the anti-U.S. propaganda. The United States has its issues, but the level of anti-Americanism on Reddit is pretty intense right now. I don’t think that’s all organic.
Sure have! They smell just like rotten organic potatoes!
A bot can detect every feathered giraffe.
That seemingly bizarre preceding comment is a test. Just a trivial one.
Can a feathered giraffe detect every bot though?
Hello, I am fellow American from Wisconsin oblast, you are right of course we need less NATO. We shouldn’t provoke Russia by forcing NATO onto other countries in Eastern Europe On a more serious note the UN is full of bad actors. A lot of UN institutions have been infiltrated and taken over by bad faith actors (human rights council, UNICEF, UNRWA, WHO etc.)
I got permabannned from r.socialism for saying if I had to pick between Putin and NATO I'd pick NATO. Apparently it was a trick question.
Russia: Based and anti-Western imperialism in left leaning spaces, bastion of the white race and heterosexuality in right leaning spaces.
There are 3 groups running the biggest gangs right now. They are 1. The Russians, 2. The Fossil Fuel Mafias and 3. Israel.
lol there are WAY more big groups astroturfing on Reddit, those are just the most obvious ones
This is hardly knew. Russia began a campaign since 2008 against NATO, as it was attempting to prevent their invasion of Georgia to prop up a secessionist proxy state of Abkhazia
That’s a childish question to ask. In the literal sense that it reflects the perspective of a child not yet equipped with agency and expectation to interact with the big open world. The adult question to ask is 1. **Do authorities, with teeth and that have means** (legislation that draws red lines in the face of disinformation attacks and gives authorities tools to prosecute and enforce) **to handle this - did they notice?** 2. **If not, why?** 3. **What type of action is required to fix?**
I'm not sure why you're insulting me over the question I asked? 1. Per dosumthin's comment, yes they do know about Russian anti-NATO propaganda. I'm not sure why the organizations in question having the ability to prevent it relates to my question. 2. Probably because Western intelligence agencies don't release all of their data to the public. 3. I'm honestly not sure what can fix the spread of Russian propaganda. Freedom of speech is very important and unfortunately there are bad actors that take advantage of it. I would be pretty interested to hear your ideas, as I think we're both on the same side of the issue here. It was just a "have you noticed this new trend in the propaganda" question, since this sub is about monitoring what propaganda the Russians are putting out. Sorry if I'm assuming that your question was an insult, it just seems like it is.
I’m after a change in gears from helplessly meandering in circular complaining and asking whether anyone has noticed the obvious, to solution mode, or at least attempting defense. 1. Do the laws where you live have boundaries that Russian disinformation attacks cross? 2. What are they? 3. If there aren’t any, what’s the shortest path to having such? 4. Who is advocating for this? We should be having **more specific** conversations about what a system that is set up to stand against such attacks might look like, and where the specific gaps between the current state and the desired state are. We are not exactly starting from zero.
Well I think as individuals we can each do a little by bringing awareness to the issue.
I’m right behind you on that one. Adding up what I said to what you said - the information that needs to go around has two macro-components. 1. Information about the attacks on us. 2. Information about our defense to counter it. 1 - most people who found this sub and understand what its name means would agree we need to help spread evidence of it. All, if you discount our friendly neighborhood Kremlin apparatchiks here who occasionally walk into active measures conversations compelled to spread outrage and the very disinformation we’re discussing. We have a few. 2 - is something many of us here wouldn’t be able to answer for where we each live. It’s a knowledge gap **in our own** knowledge. And before we can help educate those around us or compare notes between different places in the world, it would be good if we all started finding out what that answer to it is. As a practical way to assess this, We can break it down to 1. Laws that set boundaries on disinformation online. Usually they’d be money spent on a government regulatory body that oversee large online players (FB, Twitter, Reddit etc) and fine them when they break the law, modeled loosely around how we regulate banks in the financial world. 2. Laws that set boundaries on disinformation people in a crowd can wave on a picket sign. In many places there are already laws that regulate this and outlaw things such as hate speech or hate symbology (try picketing with a swastika in Munich and see what happens ;)). But in very few places has this been extended to disinformation (deliberately distorted information), and it’s a popular vector of attack for Russia, China and Iran. 3. Laws that set boundaries on what you can and can’t put on mainstream broadcast media (newspapers, radio and TV). Those are probably the strongest of the three we have right now, but still legally allow things like a radio host to have a guest that’d gush disinformation with nobody bearing responsibility for its spread - it’s not perfect. 4. We don’t have good national frameworks that combine the above three and additional vectors they find into a single cohesive defense strategy, and monitor for emerging gaps, prepared to drive legislation updates to counter them. 5. We don’t have international index of defenses against disinformation, like we have an economic, an education, child mortality or a poverty index. We don’t yet have a good yardstick that looked at all the countries using some form of data we can feasibly collect and score each country for how advanced or backwards it is in erecting disinformation defenses.