But you should care. It’s no use simply feeling good about yourself for recognizing the bullshit if most people are still trapped in that narrative. If you want things to change you need to find a way to help others to also stop believing that bullshit. Because real change is made by the masses, not singular enlightened individuals.
I agree, and I’d add that there is a material aspect to the equation as well. As the standard of living continues to decline due to neoliberal policies, people in the mainstream start having a crisis of faith and they become more open to alternative interpretations of reality. It’s important to pick your battles and focus on educating people who have already started developing doubts on their own. People who are still living in liberal wonderland will not be swayed by any argument, and you’d almost certainly will just be wasting your time.
You’re right. I do and should care. Thinking it over, I didn’t quite have a right understanding of my own opinion. Trying again:
I do care about the consequences of many people believing bullshit. And we can see this happening with American and Russian influence of disinformation around the world right now. And a lot of people are hurt because of it.
As for the validity of the bullshit, that’s where I don’t care how many people believe it.
Please, these lies about Russian “disinformation” are tired and overdone. At least come up with a new ridiculous narrative that is at least novel if you want to spread lies.
Lies? I just follow the news. But feel free to debunk a few for me. I wouldn’t really know where to start. A recent issue claimed to be Russian disinformation was that Ukraine started the war. Is that true?
Dang, someone feels attacked by a different perspective. Just don’t listen, and let me learn about these ideas. With how much of a mess news sources are nowadays I appreciate learning about how others view things ever more. I want to know what’s going on
If you are trying to “learn” about these ideas you shouldn’t be offering a different perspective but in fact learning. The two are in opposition to one another. Hmm wonder why a communist isn’t entertaining propaganda on a communist website? Hmmmm wonder why?
I can’t really hide my perspective to have it challenged. Someone linked an article from a place that’s new to me though. It does present a different bit of the picture of recent events
There’s an awful lot behind those disagreements, but significant violence only started in the spring of 2014:
April 12, 2014: Coup government in Kiev launches war against anti-coup, pro-democracy separatists in Donbass. Openly neo-Nazi Azov Battalion plays a key role in the fighting for Kiev. Wagner forces arrive to support Donbass militias. U.S. again exaggerates this as a Russian “invasion” of Ukraine. “You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text,” says U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who voted as a senator in favor of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 on a completely trumped up pre-text.
May 2, 2014: Dozens of ethnic Russian protestors are burnt alive in a building in Odessa by neo-Nazi thugs. Eight days later, Luhansk and Donetsk declare independence and vote to leave Ukraine.
Russia twice agrees to try and resolve the violence on its border (and the larger NATO expansion question) with diplomacy, in the Minsk Agreements:
Sept. 5, 2014: First Minsk agreement is signed in Minsk, Belarus by Russia, Ukraine, the OSCE, and the leaders of the breakaway Donbass republics, with mediation by Germany and France in a Normandy Format. It fails to resolve the conflict.
Feb. 12, 2015: Minsk II is signed in Belarus, which would end the fighting and grant the republics autonomy while they remain part of Ukraine. The accord was unanimously endorsed by the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 15. In December 2022 former German Chancellor Angela Merkel admits West never had intention of pushing for Minsk implementation and essentially used it as a ruse to give time for NATO to arm and train the Ukraine armed forces.
Note how the West later admitted these agreements were a sham, and the intent was always to create a hostile state on Russia’s border.
Most recently,
February 2022: Russia begins its military intervention into Donbass in the still ongoing Ukrainian civil war after first recognizing the independence of Luhansk and Donetsk.
Before the intervention, OSCE maps show a significant uptick of shelling from Ukraine into the separatist republics, where more than 10,000 people have been killed since 2014.
Ahh, this is framed differently. But in the end there was a diplomatic contract and Russia broke it. I get that they could’ve been worried about a country near them having military forces, but going to war is not an appropriate response to that.
I don’t care how many people believe bullshit, it’s still bullshit. I think we’re on the same page there
But you should care. It’s no use simply feeling good about yourself for recognizing the bullshit if most people are still trapped in that narrative. If you want things to change you need to find a way to help others to also stop believing that bullshit. Because real change is made by the masses, not singular enlightened individuals.
I agree, and I’d add that there is a material aspect to the equation as well. As the standard of living continues to decline due to neoliberal policies, people in the mainstream start having a crisis of faith and they become more open to alternative interpretations of reality. It’s important to pick your battles and focus on educating people who have already started developing doubts on their own. People who are still living in liberal wonderland will not be swayed by any argument, and you’d almost certainly will just be wasting your time.
You’re right. I do and should care. Thinking it over, I didn’t quite have a right understanding of my own opinion. Trying again:
I do care about the consequences of many people believing bullshit. And we can see this happening with American and Russian influence of disinformation around the world right now. And a lot of people are hurt because of it.
As for the validity of the bullshit, that’s where I don’t care how many people believe it.
Please, these lies about Russian “disinformation” are tired and overdone. At least come up with a new ridiculous narrative that is at least novel if you want to spread lies.
Lies? I just follow the news. But feel free to debunk a few for me. I wouldn’t really know where to start. A recent issue claimed to be Russian disinformation was that Ukraine started the war. Is that true?
Keep your mouth closed about things you admit you know nothing about
Dang, someone feels attacked by a different perspective. Just don’t listen, and let me learn about these ideas. With how much of a mess news sources are nowadays I appreciate learning about how others view things ever more. I want to know what’s going on
If you are trying to “learn” about these ideas you shouldn’t be offering a different perspective but in fact learning. The two are in opposition to one another. Hmm wonder why a communist isn’t entertaining propaganda on a communist website? Hmmmm wonder why?
I can’t really hide my perspective to have it challenged. Someone linked an article from a place that’s new to me though. It does present a different bit of the picture of recent events
I recommend this 2016 documentary called Donbass by Anne-Laure Bonnel for some background on the issue
(Alt link if that one doesn’t work)
I do like myself documentaries! It might have to wait for the weekend though, thank you!
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
a place to start: https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/2022_Russo-Ukrainian_conflict
I’ll have a look! Thank you!
It presents about the same story as what I’ve heard up until now. But with a bunch more details, I like it. And now I’ve got some fact checking to do.
Thank you for giving me a starting point!
How do you define the start of the war?
How much do you know about the Minsk Agreements, for instance?
I know there were disagreements. But as I understand it, Russia first brought guns to the situation
There’s an awful lot behind those disagreements, but significant violence only started in the spring of 2014:
Russia twice agrees to try and resolve the violence on its border (and the larger NATO expansion question) with diplomacy, in the Minsk Agreements:
Note how the West later admitted these agreements were a sham, and the intent was always to create a hostile state on Russia’s border.
Most recently,
Ahh, this is framed differently. But in the end there was a diplomatic contract and Russia broke it. I get that they could’ve been worried about a country near them having military forces, but going to war is not an appropriate response to that.