EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8043
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 10 2017 21:35 Nevuk wrote: Listening to NPR a guest claimed that Russian spreading propaganda was "in their genes" which uh, I know what he probably meant but I don't think that a propensity for meddling in other countries politics is in any way genetic to a specific nationality. That is how I took it, but it's a terrible choice of words. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On July 10 2017 21:35 Nevuk wrote: Listening to NPR a guest claimed that Russian spreading propaganda was "in their genes" which uh, I know what he probably meant but I don't think that a propensity for meddling in other countries politics is in any way genetic to a specific nationality. On July 10 2017 21:50 Plansix wrote: That is how I took it, but it's a terrible choice of words. He probably heard it from someone else and then repeated it. Former FBI director James Clapper said the same thing. Do you (Nevuk) happen to know who the guest was, or if it was at least someone different than James Clapper? Honestly, the characterization of Russia by the intelligence community says more about the US than Russia. In America, the mythical idea of exceptionalism has created a self-image where all of their nastiest traits are concealed from them and projected on other. This plays out everywhere - from the media to politics and the daily lives of citizens, but also in the intelligence community. Trump as the elected leader of the US is an excellent example of this as well, although it is mainly a personal character flaw for him. It can also be found in make believe stories about foreigners who don't fit in with the vision of the American Empire. If this thing about Russian genetics and so forth continues to be spread around in the media... I mean, where does it end? You've already got 50% of the people of the largest political party thinking that the Russians changed votes in the election machines. All this hyperbole in the media, the continued reiteration of "the Russians meddled" (without defining what that means, leaving it as open as possible to interpretation of the viewer) and so forth is producing some really disturbing views in people. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:01 farvacola wrote: Decrying hyperbole alongside use of it in service of establishing that America at large operates under anti-Russian delusions isn't exactly convincing. Yes, a fair number of Americans act as though the Cold War never ended, but letting the tactics of CNN outline the figure of American attitudes is like doing the same with RT and Russia. Don't do it. The problem is that the tactics are effective into making people believe things that didn't actually happen. Fifty percent of Democrats believe that the Russians changed votes in the election (admittedly it may have changed by now, but somehow I doubt it's actually gotten any better). That's not me using the tactics of CNN to outline American attitudes, by the way, that's me using this data. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On July 10 2017 21:43 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Freudian slip? https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/884378624660582405 I guess we're long past questioning whether Trump is an intelligent person. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On July 10 2017 21:57 a_flayer wrote: He probably heard it from someone else and then repeated it. Former FBI director James Clapper said the same thing. Do you (Nevuk) happen to know who the guest was, or if it was at least someone different than James Clapper? Honestly, the characterization of Russia by the intelligence community says more about the US than Russia. In America, the mythical idea of exceptionalism has created a self-image where all of their nastiest traits are concealed from them and projected on other. This plays out everywhere - from the media to politics and the daily lives of citizens, but also in the intelligence community. Trump as the elected leader of the US is an excellent example of this as well, although it is mainly a personal character flaw for him. It can also be found in make believe stories about foreigners who don't fit in with the vision of the American Empire. If this thing about Russian genetics and so forth continues to be spread around in the media... I mean, where does it end? You've already got 50% of the people of the largest political party thinking that the Russians changed votes in the election machines. All this hyperbole in the media, the continued reiteration of "the Russians meddled" (without defining what that means, leaving it as open as possible to interpretation of the viewer) and so forth is producing some really disturbing views in people. Joel Brenner, former NSA inspector general, now at MIT www.npr.org | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:09 a_flayer wrote: The problem is that the tactics are effective into making people believe things that didn't actually happen. Fifty percent of Democrats believe that the Russians changed votes in the election (admittedly it may have changed by now, but somehow I doubt it's actually gotten any better). That's not me using the tactics of CNN to outline American attitudes. That's me using this data. Yes, that's you using a single kind of data (polling) to try and prove endemicity, all the while polling gets shit on by the actual results of elections and what not throughout the world. One can find a poll that supports one's view of a group without much hassle, and yes, 50% in some yougov poll is troubling, but so is pretending that those results actually speak to 50% of Democrats. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:03 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/884217710955159554 So it took bad press for him to realize a shared 'cyber security unit' with Russia might not be a great idea, and then he claims he never thought it was a great idea, while he himself and his people say it was a great idea just hours earlier? | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11839 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:30 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: So it took bad press for him to realize a shared 'cyber security unit' with Russia might not be a great idea, and then he claims he never thought it was a great idea, while he himself and his people say it was a great idea just hours earlier? You have to realize that we have always been at war with Eurasia. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:30 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: So it took bad press for him to realize a shared 'cyber security unit' with Russia might not be a great idea, and then he claims he never thought it was a great idea, while he himself and his people say it was a great idea just hours earlier? Its painfully obvious we are being governed by an Idiot. Regardless of his policies or how you feel about them its clear hes an idiot. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 10 2017 13:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: It's sad that gross incompetence isn't an impeachable offense. This is just...sad that we as Americans continue to allow this to happen. I feel that all Republicans should be brought up on charges of treason at times for allowing this farce to continue. On July 10 2017 13:19 LegalLord wrote: If Republicans were to be impeached for allowing this farce to continue, Democrats would have little cover under which to allow their own farce to continue. Face it, both sides are remarkably scummy. It would just be great if both parties could never occupy the white house with high opposition numbers in House and Senate. Let's just brush on the criminalization of incompetance and farcical notions of treason and pretend it wouldn't be a disgusting slap in the face of democratic elections. Don't like who won? Just get a lynch mob going! Thank God for the constitution. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:55 Danglars wrote: It would just be great if both parties could never occupy the white house with high opposition numbers in House and Senate. Let's just brush on the criminalization of incompetance and farcical notions of treason and pretend it wouldn't be a disgusting slap in the face of democratic elections. Don't like who won? Just get a lynch mob going! Thank God for the constitution. People do have a hard time wrapping their brain around the idea that you get what you vote for. On the other hand, both parties have been guilty of impeachment mongering in the last 30 years. I remember the calls for Bill to be removed from office. Obama and even Bush managed to avoid this, so I think we should lay the blame on the people holding the oval office. Don’t want calls for impeachment, don’t lie and cover up if you are being investigated. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On July 10 2017 21:35 Nevuk wrote: Listening to NPR a guest claimed that Russian spreading propaganda was "in their genes" which uh, I know what he probably meant but I don't think that a propensity for meddling in other countries politics is in any way genetic to a specific nationality. It's hyperbole considering russia's involvement with urkaine, georgia, moldova, azerbaijan the hacking campagins in western europe. I'm there is are more things i'm forgetting but putin's russia has made it pretty clear it's not far off. Depending on how doomday'e you feel like between Russian and Chinese non U.N. approved methods over the years wont be long till open armed conflict. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
That's easy to just say, but I think the facts show it to be true. Many of the most significant blunders of the IC have been due to a failure to understand motivations of people. Hell, most of the Russian-descendant folks I know thought the US IC was just playing dumb whenever they said stupid things about Russia. They quickly found out that wasn't the case; the US intelligence is good at the technical aspects of intelligence, not so much at the human side. Endless blunders of the latter form attest to that. It does, of course, stem from the more general American lack of knowledge about Russia and probably many other countries. Of course you could ask any of us actual Russians to clarify - and those few who are capable of formulating the question in a non-trollish manner might just get an answer. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On July 10 2017 22:12 farvacola wrote: Yes, that's you using a single kind of data (polling) to try and prove endemicity, all the while polling gets shit on by the actual results of elections and what not throughout the world. One can find a poll that supports one's view of a group without much hassle, and yes, 50% in some yougov poll is troubling, but so is pretending that those results actually speak to 50% of Democrats. Since it wouldn't be much hassle, perhaps could you help alleviate my fears about how easily people are manipulated into a hateful doctrine by mass media and show me the polls that indicate less than 20% of Democrats believe that the Russians tampered with the vote tallies? But even if you did find a poll that suited your particular ideas, it's not as if I'm basing my own perceptions regarding this whole thing entirely on that one poll. It's the only bit of actual data that I have, sure, and that's certainly not scientifically responsible, but I'm not a scientist and I don't need to be a scientist to see there's a lot of hatred for Muslims out there in social media to be alarmed about the potential political consequences. I'm now seeing that same rhetoric aimed towards Russians, and it's based on the kind of hyperbole used for hatred towards Muslims. That hate is fuelled in mainstream media by their generic sensationalism about issues, but also by people such as Mr Clapper and Mr Brenner who should be more responsible in choosing their words. Yes, there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about Muslims in association with terrorists (specifically, the vulnerability to propaganda meant to radicalise through an ideological and religious link). There's also various legitimate reasons to be concerned about Russia in international politics. But there is a certain lack of responsible behaviour by the media in covering both of these issues. From interviewers not calling out such horrible statements with "What?! You think it's genetics ?! Kindly explain yourself, sir!" all the way through to what you referred to as CNN tactics. Social media then follows up to add another level of hyperbole to this, just as it did with Islamic terrorism. You can at least agree that the MSM coverage of Islamic terrorism has contributed towards Islamophobia, right? Can you not see that the same kind of MSM coverage with regards to any potential level of Russian election interference is now shaping the minds of people towards some level of Russophobia? + Show Spoiler + I suspect that even the mere mention of the word "Russophobia" will make some Democrats in this thread think the same kind of thing as right-wing people think when they hear "Islamophobia": it's not an unreasonable fear in my case. Honestly... genetically predisposed... Yeah, that sure sounds reasonable! Of course | ||
KwarK
United States43991 Posts
On July 10 2017 23:35 LegalLord wrote: Experience has taught me that whenever the so-called intelligence community makes a broad generalizations about Russia, they are more likely than not just talking out of their collective asses. Even consistent Putin critics would say as much when asked about it. Maybe it's just Russia, maybe it's everybody, but I only know the one in enough depth to be able to consistently note complete BS being passed as fact. That's easy to just say, but I think the facts show it to be true. Many of the most significant blunders of the IC have been due to a failure to understand motivations of people. Hell, most of the Russian-descendant folks I know thought the US IC was just playing dumb whenever they said stupid things about Russia. They quickly found out that wasn't the case; the US intelligence is good at the technical aspects of intelligence, not so much at the human side. Endless blunders of the latter form attest to that. It does, of course, stem from the more general American lack of knowledge about Russia and probably many other countries. Of course you could ask any of us actual Russians to clarify - and those few who are capable of formulating the question in a non-trollish manner might just get an answer. Your stance is "don't trust the paid experts who are employed specifically to tell you about Russia with your interests in mind, trust a Russian"? I mean I can see why that's your stance, but it's not a very good one. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On July 11 2017 00:32 KwarK wrote: Your stance is "don't trust the paid experts who are employed specifically to tell you about Russia with your interests in mind, trust a Russian"? I mean I can see why that's your stance, but it's not a very good one. You can trust their results to tell you about how good of experts they are. I know that the "expert fetish" is strong around here but you really don't have to take my word for it that the Russian intelligence in the IC is quite middling. Just look at the results. That you talk about "having your best interests in mind" belies a necessarily hostile attitude towards anything that could be said. By that logic, if you say anything about Britain that is at odds with anything our experts say, we should instantly assume you're wrong because the experts are the ones with our best interests in mind, right? | ||
| ||
