10 ms·

> West shouldn't allow Russia or China to broadcast directly into people's homes willy nilly. My god man. What will happen if West would allow it? Will it coll

by vogre 4y ago

> West shouldn't allow Russia or China to broadcast directly into people's homes willy nilly. My god man. What will happen if West would allow it? Will it collapse? If not, why censor it? If it will, what's the difference between West and Putin? Both will collapse without censorship.

jollybean 4y ago
"What is the difference between the Allied 'liberation' of France and Hitler's 'liberation' of France? They both deserve an equal voice!" If you're wading int moral relativism, then what is the point, really? The West mostly acts in good faith (not always), and, bad information mostly is marginalized though definitely available. For example, we suppress some kinds of bad information about health, and definitely suppress things like 'how to make nuclear weapons' etc. though generally, it's available if you really try. We don't completely shut down pirate bay. RT.com is a propaganda outlet, designed to spread falsehoods and to undermine civic integrity. If RT.com was 'in every home', a large swath of Europeans would come to believe things that are not true, and likely undermine important efforts, specifically around security. Stalin controlled 17% of the Bundestag during the Wiemar Republic through direct control over the Germany Communist party. He used information, thugs, violence, populism to try to overthrow the Social Democrats (center left) many times, in an attempt to spread his tyranny. He even worked with the far right (aka nascent Hitler) during that time, as they were considered fools. The far right used the legitimacy of Soviet intervention as a means for violent populism. They lied themselves about various things in order to gain power. Mass destruction ensued. The Russians ironically initiated the spread of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' a pretty good example of 'misinformation' which has seriously dire consequences. 30% of Americans believe that 'Joe Biden Stole the Election' which combined with events on Jan 6 which was a clear and direct attempt to dismiss valid votes in lieu of political 'votes' to overthrow the government, has very real consequences. None of that could have happened of only, say, 1% of Americans believed the election stolen. And that's in a media system where most mainstream outlets did not directly promulgate the lie (Fox News didn't sufficiently question the lies about election integrity, but they didn't usually directly support the lie either). The issue matters, greatly. I have access to RT in North American and I don't think it's a big deal, but collectively it is, much more so in Europe where there are Russian sympathizers. For example, RT was pulled form regular broadcast, which is rational. Someone noted above that 'Vodafone' blocked them from RT.com, which I think is fine so long as there is some way to conscientiously get around that arbitrary blocking. Finally, you'll note that Russians do have access to tons of information from outside the censors, but they don't access it, or even care to, which denotes how kind of 'lazy' most of us plebes are - we tend to watch what is in front of us, and believe what we want to believe. Go ahead and watch Russia 1, i.e. Russia's main TV broadcast for a bit, translated into English. It's utterly shocking, now contemplate that 50% of the country believes most of what is beings said because of how they are being fed information. This idea that 'the truth' rises to the point is worse than naive, it's extremely dangerous because it's absolutely false. The most engaging ideas that appeal to our impulses are those that 'rise to the top' to become 'truth'. It's a serious issue. Though again, Europeans should be able to access RT by jumping a few small hoops.
- cabirum 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - marvin 4y ago
    You can bet your ass that I'm afraid that an expanding, violent imperialist dictatorship will continue its historically proven tradition of undermining the political stability of my country and thereby make us much poorer and less free. It just so happens that I'm not stupid, and am sufficiently worried about this real and imminent risk that I will support quite strong measures to defend against it. One of which is making blatant lies and propaganda from the enemy somewhat harder to access for the population of my country, who collectively have the power to surrender to this attack.
    - thriftwy 4y ago
      That's OK, but you've just gave up on free speech and settled with "information is weapon which must be contained" like in good ol' pre-modern age.
      - marvin 4y ago
        I did not abolish the freedom of speech. This sorts under «tolerate everything except intolerance». Russia will not extend the courtesy of freedom of speech if their propaganda operations succeed, so we must defend it before we get to that point. Before I’m accused of being totalitarian, I’ll just state the obvious that this is a subtle and complex subject.
        thriftwy 4y ago
        The problem here is that it takes just one case of intolerance to introduce cascading limitations, and after a short while most everyone is pointing guns to everyone else. Neither Russia nor China are not going to open up their media unless there is reciprocity. But there is no longer any mechanism to source it.
- 4y ago
wiseowise 4y ago
Look at Serbia to see the result.
- vogre 4y ago
  West will be bombed by NATO? Or what result?
  - wiseowise 4y ago
    Brainwashed population blaming Ukraine, US and EU for war against Ukraine. https://intellinews.com/serbians-blame-us-and-nato-for-ukraine-war-237960/ https://intellinews.com/serbians-blame-us-and-nato-for-ukrai...
    - vogre 4y ago
      Maybe they just remember their country being bombed by EU and NATO and can see the same patterns in the current situation.
      - wiseowise 4y ago
        Indeed! Minus the literal genocide, of course, but that’s just a minor detail.
      - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        Yep, and the blatant misiformation and propaganda plus war crimes from nato eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grdelica_train_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grdelica_train_bombing > The Grdelica train bombing occurred on 12 April 1999, when two missiles fired by US aircraft F-15E Strike Eagle hit a passenger train while it was passing across a railway bridge over the Južna Morava river in the Grdelica gorge, some 300 kilometres (190 mi) south of Belgrade, Serbia. At least 20 civilian passengers were killed or declared missing. Estimates of the total death toll run as high as 60.[1] It is considered the deadliest rail disaster in Serbian history.[3][4] So, nato bombed a civillian train, claiming it was an accident, because the train was "so fast",... which anyone knowin trains in serbia knows it's a lie. So, nato sped up the video: > Later investigation by Frankfurter Rundschau asserted that the video was sped up 4.7 times.[8] So again... we have an area of a country, where "other people" live and want their own country, main country won't let them, there are some shootings, shellings etc. for years, and then an "outside" superpower intervenes, basically destroys the main country to achieve independence for that area. Kosovo, ukraine.. it's all the same, just different actors.

by vogre 4y ago

jollybean 4y ago

"What is the difference between the Allied 'liberation' of France and Hitler's 'liberation' of France? They both deserve an equal voice!" If you're wading int moral relativism, then what is the point, really? The West mostly acts in good faith (not always), and, bad information mostly is marginalized though definitely available. For example, we suppress some kinds of bad information about health, and definitely suppress things like 'how to make nuclear weapons' etc. though generally, it's available if you really try. We don't completely shut down pirate bay. RT.com is a propaganda outlet, designed to spread falsehoods and to undermine civic integrity. If RT.com was 'in every home', a large swath of Europeans would come to believe things that are not true, and likely undermine important efforts, specifically around security. Stalin controlled 17% of the Bundestag during the Wiemar Republic through direct control over the Germany Communist party. He used information, thugs, violence, populism to try to overthrow the Social Democrats (center left) many times, in an attempt to spread his tyranny. He even worked with the far right (aka nascent Hitler) during that time, as they were considered fools. The far right used the legitimacy of Soviet intervention as a means for violent populism. They lied themselves about various things in order to gain power. Mass destruction ensued. The Russians ironically initiated the spread of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' a pretty good example of 'misinformation' which has seriously dire consequences. 30% of Americans believe that 'Joe Biden Stole the Election' which combined with events on Jan 6 which was a clear and direct attempt to dismiss valid votes in lieu of political 'votes' to overthrow the government, has very real consequences. None of that could have happened of only, say, 1% of Americans believed the election stolen. And that's in a media system where most mainstream outlets did not directly promulgate the lie (Fox News didn't sufficiently question the lies about election integrity, but they didn't usually directly support the lie either). The issue matters, greatly. I have access to RT in North American and I don't think it's a big deal, but collectively it is, much more so in Europe where there are Russian sympathizers. For example, RT was pulled form regular broadcast, which is rational. Someone noted above that 'Vodafone' blocked them from RT.com, which I think is fine so long as there is some way to conscientiously get around that arbitrary blocking. Finally, you'll note that Russians do have access to tons of information from outside the censors, but they don't access it, or even care to, which denotes how kind of 'lazy' most of us plebes are - we tend to watch what is in front of us, and believe what we want to believe. Go ahead and watch Russia 1, i.e. Russia's main TV broadcast for a bit, translated into English. It's utterly shocking, now contemplate that 50% of the country believes most of what is beings said because of how they are being fed information. This idea that 'the truth' rises to the point is worse than naive, it's extremely dangerous because it's absolutely false. The most engaging ideas that appeal to our impulses are those that 'rise to the top' to become 'truth'. It's a serious issue. Though again, Europeans should be able to access RT by jumping a few small hoops.

cabirum 4y ago
[flagged]
- marvin 4y ago
  You can bet your ass that I'm afraid that an expanding, violent imperialist dictatorship will continue its historically proven tradition of undermining the political stability of my country and thereby make us much poorer and less free. It just so happens that I'm not stupid, and am sufficiently worried about this real and imminent risk that I will support quite strong measures to defend against it. One of which is making blatant lies and propaganda from the enemy somewhat harder to access for the population of my country, who collectively have the power to surrender to this attack.
  - thriftwy 4y ago
    That's OK, but you've just gave up on free speech and settled with "information is weapon which must be contained" like in good ol' pre-modern age.
    - marvin 4y ago
      I did not abolish the freedom of speech. This sorts under «tolerate everything except intolerance». Russia will not extend the courtesy of freedom of speech if their propaganda operations succeed, so we must defend it before we get to that point. Before I’m accused of being totalitarian, I’ll just state the obvious that this is a subtle and complex subject.
      - thriftwy 4y ago
        The problem here is that it takes just one case of intolerance to introduce cascading limitations, and after a short while most everyone is pointing guns to everyone else. Neither Russia nor China are not going to open up their media unless there is reciprocity. But there is no longer any mechanism to source it.
4y ago

wiseowise 4y ago

Look at Serbia to see the result.

vogre 4y ago
West will be bombed by NATO? Or what result?
- wiseowise 4y ago
  Brainwashed population blaming Ukraine, US and EU for war against Ukraine. https://intellinews.com/serbians-blame-us-and-nato-for-ukraine-war-237960/ https://intellinews.com/serbians-blame-us-and-nato-for-ukrai...
  - vogre 4y ago
    Maybe they just remember their country being bombed by EU and NATO and can see the same patterns in the current situation.
    - wiseowise 4y ago
      Indeed! Minus the literal genocide, of course, but that’s just a minor detail.
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      Yep, and the blatant misiformation and propaganda plus war crimes from nato eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grdelica_train_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grdelica_train_bombing > The Grdelica train bombing occurred on 12 April 1999, when two missiles fired by US aircraft F-15E Strike Eagle hit a passenger train while it was passing across a railway bridge over the Južna Morava river in the Grdelica gorge, some 300 kilometres (190 mi) south of Belgrade, Serbia. At least 20 civilian passengers were killed or declared missing. Estimates of the total death toll run as high as 60.[1] It is considered the deadliest rail disaster in Serbian history.[3][4] So, nato bombed a civillian train, claiming it was an accident, because the train was "so fast",... which anyone knowin trains in serbia knows it's a lie. So, nato sped up the video: > Later investigation by Frankfurter Rundschau asserted that the video was sped up 4.7 times.[8] So again... we have an area of a country, where "other people" live and want their own country, main country won't let them, there are some shootings, shellings etc. for years, and then an "outside" superpower intervenes, basically destroys the main country to achieve independence for that area. Kosovo, ukraine.. it's all the same, just different actors.