this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
1429 points (98.6% liked)

World News

32289 readers
954 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 year ago (1 children)

then this will just further enforce option that russia can not be trusted to do anything it says and that putin is weak and threatened

If they let him live, they're weak. If they kill him, they're weak.

During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

parenti-hands

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The USSR is not the russian federation and the later is an oligarchy. Why do you think such cold war arguments (that over simplify) have some sort of play in this conflict?

I also noticed you skated right on by the "can not be trusted" part of my quoted text.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you think I'm talking about the USSR, or about how American propaganda cultivates the mentality of "they are wrong no matter what they do"?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Your entire argument was about the soviet union and its cold war relationship with the US. I have had it up to my nipples here on how fixated you all are on the US, I am not from the US, I don't like the US, I am sick of somehow having to explain to people who apparently think the US is evil but simultaneously think the world revolves around it.

WE GET IT YOU ARE AMERICAN AND YOU ARE DIFFERENT BUT LIKE MOST AMERICANS CAN NOT STAND WHEN SOMETHING IS NOT ABOUT YOU.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The quote is from "inventing reality by michael parenti". the cold war is an EXAMPLE, the authors POINT is that media will interpret literally ANY EVENT in a bad way to make enemies look morally inferior and bad.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Are socialist states immune from this fallacy?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

But I am not media, the post I made is my honest take, and in this case the media stating this news is wagner and the russian state. How does this wall of text help me understand the apparent flaw in my statement?

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago

They are suggesting that you have learned to reason backwards from certain conclusions.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah connect the dots by yourself, you cant be this unironically oblivious.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I can and very much am. Please put some effort into this.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you know what an example is? What about an analogy?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Why do you ask? I think you replied to the wrong post