6 ms·

I find intensive marketing/PR efforts are often inversely correlated with the claims being made - whether it's products or geopolitics. Israel certainly engages

by N_Lens 1mo ago

I find intensive marketing/PR efforts are often inversely correlated with the claims being made - whether it's products or geopolitics. Israel certainly engages in very intense marketing on certain fronts, but truth cannot be obscured forever. In Physics the law of conservation includes not only matter and energy, but also information (Information cannot be destroyed from the Universe).

somenameforme 1mo ago
I've also found this to be true, but also only in relatively modern times. For instance during the Cold War there was an obscene amount of propaganda, but it was mostly true. For instance the wide array of cheap affordable goods in American shelves was constantly flaunted, but not in the least bit misleading. I don't understand the modern effort to engage in 'information warfare' as a thing in and of itself. Each time it collapses and people sees what was 'really' happening, it just makes them that much less likely to believe you next time. And you also create a significant number of perpetually jaded people who will basically never believe you again, even when you're telling the truth. Countless politicians have proudly paraded around their pristine, seemingly untouched, copies of Meditations, but perhaps they should go for more foundational works, like The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
- N_Lens 1mo ago
  The difference between American and Russian propaganda is that Russians know it's propaganda.
  - wiseowise 1mo ago
    This was a great, old anecdote. Until they’ve started the biggest European war of the century.
    - deleted 1mo ago
      [deleted]
    - somenameforme 1mo ago
      The scale of a war is more often decided by who decides to unexpectedly jump in moreso than the initial party. WW1 starts when a Bosnian Serb assassinates an Austro-Hungarian royal leading to Austria-Hungary invading Serbia. The the next thing you know Brits are killing Germans over it. There are endless border clashes. Even in very recent times we have Armenia-Azerbaijan, Afghanistan-Pakistan, Thailand-Cambodia, and many more. Wiki gives more than 60 in the 21st century [1], and we're just getting started! And if other parties had decided to get involved and start jamming up the escalation ladder, any of those could have easily turned into a much bigger war, instead of being just yet another relatively inconsequential border conflict. Or imagine if another country (perhaps Russia or China) had decided to 'pull a US' when the US invaded any of the countless countries we've invaded over the years - Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Yemen, and so on just in quite recent times. That could very well have led to WW3, but it didn't because they didn't. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_border_conflicts#21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_border_conflicts#21st_...
  - victorbjorklund 1mo ago
    Not sure it is true. If it was true that all Russians know it’s just propaganda and that they are just engaged in an illegal genocide then less Russians would sign up for the army.
- xg15 1mo ago
  > And you also create a significant number of perpetually jaded people who will basically never believe you again, even when you're telling the truth. Yes, but they will also not believe my enemies. Making people not believe anything anymore is a classic strategy of propaganda.
  - somenameforme 1mo ago
    Maybe that is the rationale. It's the only thing that'd make sense, but for problem that it doesn't. When somebody, or some entity, lies to you - that entity becomes the liar. People may not want to believe 'the enemy', but that's going to be because of their own ideological reasons, and not because they now refuse to believe anybody. On the contrary non-ideologues may even be ever more swayed towards your enemy as a result of this. Personally I think the issue is that after WW2 we were left with a large scale and ever growing intelligence apparatus, but with ever fewer appropriate tasks for them. That led directly to the era of recklessly overthrowing nations, often to our own detriment, and gradually transitioned to the modern era of aimless 'information warfare' which I think will ultimately be shown to be very much to our detriment, once again.
    - deleted 1mo ago
      [deleted]
edmundsauto 1mo ago
One goal of modern propaganda is to make it irrelevant when the truth inevitably comes out. Look at the US situation. It’s clear that Trump is a rapist - the truth has come out. It’s clear he’s corrupt. For all the “release the full Epstein files” discussion, it really wouldn’t change anything. The truth will come out but will the people who can make it matter be listening?
- hunterpayne 1mo ago
  Oh the irony.

by N_Lens 1mo ago

somenameforme 1mo ago

I've also found this to be true, but also only in relatively modern times. For instance during the Cold War there was an obscene amount of propaganda, but it was mostly true. For instance the wide array of cheap affordable goods in American shelves was constantly flaunted, but not in the least bit misleading. I don't understand the modern effort to engage in 'information warfare' as a thing in and of itself. Each time it collapses and people sees what was 'really' happening, it just makes them that much less likely to believe you next time. And you also create a significant number of perpetually jaded people who will basically never believe you again, even when you're telling the truth. Countless politicians have proudly paraded around their pristine, seemingly untouched, copies of Meditations, but perhaps they should go for more foundational works, like The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

N_Lens 1mo ago
The difference between American and Russian propaganda is that Russians know it's propaganda.
- wiseowise 1mo ago
  This was a great, old anecdote. Until they’ve started the biggest European war of the century.
  - deleted 1mo ago
    [deleted]
  - somenameforme 1mo ago
    The scale of a war is more often decided by who decides to unexpectedly jump in moreso than the initial party. WW1 starts when a Bosnian Serb assassinates an Austro-Hungarian royal leading to Austria-Hungary invading Serbia. The the next thing you know Brits are killing Germans over it. There are endless border clashes. Even in very recent times we have Armenia-Azerbaijan, Afghanistan-Pakistan, Thailand-Cambodia, and many more. Wiki gives more than 60 in the 21st century [1], and we're just getting started! And if other parties had decided to get involved and start jamming up the escalation ladder, any of those could have easily turned into a much bigger war, instead of being just yet another relatively inconsequential border conflict. Or imagine if another country (perhaps Russia or China) had decided to 'pull a US' when the US invaded any of the countless countries we've invaded over the years - Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Yemen, and so on just in quite recent times. That could very well have led to WW3, but it didn't because they didn't. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_border_conflicts#21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_border_conflicts#21st_...
- victorbjorklund 1mo ago
  Not sure it is true. If it was true that all Russians know it’s just propaganda and that they are just engaged in an illegal genocide then less Russians would sign up for the army.
xg15 1mo ago
> And you also create a significant number of perpetually jaded people who will basically never believe you again, even when you're telling the truth. Yes, but they will also not believe my enemies. Making people not believe anything anymore is a classic strategy of propaganda.
- somenameforme 1mo ago
  Maybe that is the rationale. It's the only thing that'd make sense, but for problem that it doesn't. When somebody, or some entity, lies to you - that entity becomes the liar. People may not want to believe 'the enemy', but that's going to be because of their own ideological reasons, and not because they now refuse to believe anybody. On the contrary non-ideologues may even be ever more swayed towards your enemy as a result of this. Personally I think the issue is that after WW2 we were left with a large scale and ever growing intelligence apparatus, but with ever fewer appropriate tasks for them. That led directly to the era of recklessly overthrowing nations, often to our own detriment, and gradually transitioned to the modern era of aimless 'information warfare' which I think will ultimately be shown to be very much to our detriment, once again.
  - deleted 1mo ago
    [deleted]

edmundsauto 1mo ago

One goal of modern propaganda is to make it irrelevant when the truth inevitably comes out. Look at the US situation. It’s clear that Trump is a rapist - the truth has come out. It’s clear he’s corrupt. For all the “release the full Epstein files” discussion, it really wouldn’t change anything. The truth will come out but will the people who can make it matter be listening?

hunterpayne 1mo ago
Oh the irony.