The source websites are still available. If you want to look for Russian propaganda it's not hard to find.
That said, I would like to at least see the option of, say, not making a channel's videos discoverable in the feed, or even force-delisting them, short of deleting them or banning the channel.
The Western sanctions are said to be targeting Putin’s inner circle. Should they be targeting the Russian propaganda mouth pieces on RT/Sputnik? I’m not suggesting the west sanction the average Russian citizens who are simply parroting the government narrative.
People like this are the authors for Russian government Think Tank position papers advocating the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
This individual is literally writing the papers that advocate for the war, and pushing propaganda on RT, and yet you can pay to take his course on Coursera.
He’s coldly calculating that Russia should invade, and he’s making these recommendation knowing that he will remain employed at the HSE and his life will remain largely unimpacted by sanctions.
It’s people like these who should be sanctioned the most.
“It is not surprising that the most common reaction on the part of sincere, although not always sufficiently enlightened ordinary people to current events and statements by the parties is an expectation of a catastrophe, which, in fact, can never be ruled out when it comes to interaction among sovereign states.
“
Im a sincere, although not always sufficiently enlightened ordinary person would like to see this person sanctioned.
The interviewee appears to be a psychopath worthy of a future Bond villain. I don’t understand the morality of International Relations, but abstractly they’re providing a game theory analysis of nation options. Someone has to do it, but eventually you cross the line when you’re actively advocating the war. At that point, you have blood on your hands.
Every side of this conflict is being exposed to a massive and relentless propaganda campaign.
Neither side will report the (whole) truth.
Each side has an agenda that is partially public and partially suppressed/hidden.
This is nothing new or novel this time around.
In years past it was relatively easy for the governments to ensure that
their people only hear the "official authorized truth" and thus will remain
easy to manipulate, obedient and angry.
(Well shortwave radio and such innovations also contributed much earlier).
If an individual has the ability to hear more than one sides propaganda
it will at the very least illuminate a different perspective.
It might start one thinking a bit more independently.
In some cases, there will be nations that are not within the sphere of
propaganda from one or the other and sometimes you can get a more objective
voice from such a place.
These days with the global Internet reading different stories is a possible blessing.
If one side (or several) invoke the autocratic censorship of competing perspectives it highlights that the arguments and rhetoric being used by them is probably not able to stand up to careful scrutiny.
Years, sometimes decades later, a more objective and nuanced interpretation is possible.
When people have been indoctrinated to believe and accept that even hearing propaganda from the other side presents a grave danger, I start to get worried.
At least those in the EU/UK/USA are in the middle of a torrent of propaganda.
Russia and its loyal states are in the middle of a torrent of propaganda.
(The concept of truth is a complicated philosophical problem that makes the use of the term always problematic. Does one truth exist? Does the truth exist?
When applied in politics and war I think the answer is no.
But in its simple form it conveys a concept)
This represses me, as a EU citizen. Let me hear the other side and make up my own mind. Are we really going to pretend that all the state run media in the EU are presenting an unbiased view?
Scary how we go from zero to fascism in no time flat, at even the hint of conflict.
12 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 39.3 ms ] threadIf you don't have access to the propaganda that some group of people are exposed to, your ability to understand them is impaired.
That said, I would like to at least see the option of, say, not making a channel's videos discoverable in the feed, or even force-delisting them, short of deleting them or banning the channel.
People like this are the authors for Russian government Think Tank position papers advocating the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
https://youtu.be/8wt2JlTV3bo
This individual is literally writing the papers that advocate for the war, and pushing propaganda on RT, and yet you can pay to take his course on Coursera.
He’s coldly calculating that Russia should invade, and he’s making these recommendation knowing that he will remain employed at the HSE and his life will remain largely unimpacted by sanctions.
It’s people like these who should be sanctioned the most.
From one of his recent papers: https://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/great-power-politics-and...
“It is not surprising that the most common reaction on the part of sincere, although not always sufficiently enlightened ordinary people to current events and statements by the parties is an expectation of a catastrophe, which, in fact, can never be ruled out when it comes to interaction among sovereign states. “
Im a sincere, although not always sufficiently enlightened ordinary person would like to see this person sanctioned.
"This video is not available in your country" (Im in Europe)
The interviewee appears to be a psychopath worthy of a future Bond villain. I don’t understand the morality of International Relations, but abstractly they’re providing a game theory analysis of nation options. Someone has to do it, but eventually you cross the line when you’re actively advocating the war. At that point, you have blood on your hands.
Every side of this conflict is being exposed to a massive and relentless propaganda campaign.
Neither side will report the (whole) truth. Each side has an agenda that is partially public and partially suppressed/hidden.
This is nothing new or novel this time around.
In years past it was relatively easy for the governments to ensure that their people only hear the "official authorized truth" and thus will remain easy to manipulate, obedient and angry.
(Well shortwave radio and such innovations also contributed much earlier).
If an individual has the ability to hear more than one sides propaganda it will at the very least illuminate a different perspective. It might start one thinking a bit more independently.
In some cases, there will be nations that are not within the sphere of propaganda from one or the other and sometimes you can get a more objective voice from such a place.
These days with the global Internet reading different stories is a possible blessing.
If one side (or several) invoke the autocratic censorship of competing perspectives it highlights that the arguments and rhetoric being used by them is probably not able to stand up to careful scrutiny.
Years, sometimes decades later, a more objective and nuanced interpretation is possible.
When people have been indoctrinated to believe and accept that even hearing propaganda from the other side presents a grave danger, I start to get worried.
At least those in the EU/UK/USA are in the middle of a torrent of propaganda. Russia and its loyal states are in the middle of a torrent of propaganda.
(The concept of truth is a complicated philosophical problem that makes the use of the term always problematic. Does one truth exist? Does the truth exist? When applied in politics and war I think the answer is no. But in its simple form it conveys a concept)
Scary how we go from zero to fascism in no time flat, at even the hint of conflict.