news
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
view the rest of the comments
Yeah I've noticed that here too. It seems like the final stage of disinfo is for people to repeat the lie on their own without any outside influence. It's the same deal with the Uyghur thing - official government sources dropped the narrative ages ago, but you'll still hear it repeated as if it were historical fact from journalists, influencers, redditors, etc.
Russiagate was comprehensively debunked by years of bipartisan congressional investigations, and yet the idea that Vladimir Putin personally overthrew the United States government and will again unless militarily removed from power is still hegemonic among American liberals. 25 years of celebrating peaceful coexistence with the "triumph of liberal democracy" in Russia and overnight they're all Joe McCarthy swearing an eternal crusade against the hated Muscovite.
Rather than instant and comprehensive systems of brainwashing, I think this is better understood as licensing American settlers to unleash their preexisting white supremacist worldview onto a politically acceptable target. "Correcting the disinformation " doesn't eliminate the bigotry, because the disinformation didn't put it there. The "disinformation", even when they know it's bullshit, is just a social signal that they'll no longer be stigmatized for saying what they've always wanted to believe.
Ya I don't think libs are brainwashed either. I read that red sails essay too and I agree with it but idk what better word there is to describe this. Bigotry permit? Hate pass?
What do you think is lacking from the term used in the essay, "licensing"?
I can't see it catching on. I mean, have you ever seen anyone here use the term (other than to define it)?
"The US is running a licensing campaign against Russia."
"These people have all been licensed."
"Dude shut it with the Uyghur shit, you're super licensed."
It just doesn't fit right in anything other than an academic context.
Accusing someone of being "brainwashed" isn't, as far as I have seen, so rhetorically effective that I think we need a drop-in replacement like "hate-passed." If "you're super licensed" sounds silly it's because "you're super brainwashed" is also silly.
What about:
"Do you actually believe that nonsense or does it just give you license to discount the incredible social progress China has made?"
I think the post earlier in this thread used it well. They're not defining the term, they're explaining the phenomenon. Because it uses a familiar term, it is easy to understand and doesn't read jargony:
Rejecting the term "brainwashing" means not only improving our understanding of how propaganda works but also improving our rhetoric.
People call each other brainwashed all the time though? I've heard people say another person is "so/super/incredibly brainwashed" irl. It gets the message across pretty well I think
I'll admit licensing does sound natural in those sentences but I guess I just want a pithier way of saying something similar. It still comes off as academic, like someone saying "contradiction" instead of disagreement.