Carrolade @ Carrolade @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

2,050

Joined

1 yr. ago

If true, does that mean he's going to stand up against any attempts Trump makes to trample on personal liberties? As I recall, when he spoke at the Libertarian Convention, their reaction indicated they remembered what they (and he) really stand for.

https://youtu.be/dhgjnAxD6-k

You very well might be able to, actually, though I'm not going to guarantee it. Regardless though, if the line is commonly parroted by a certain group, then the claims are not particularly wild, are they?

And yes, there are lots of very useful tips that can identify most propaganda based off of common traits. This is not foolproof though. Still very good to know, though.

Nothing about the term tankie does or should deny their right to live. Advocating for the deaths of people who disagree with you is profoundly against everything liberalism (the freedom-based guiding principle of what we'd call "the west") stands for.

To the contrary, as a pretty standard liberal American I fully support their rights to advocate for whatever they wish. Since there is no realistic way to accurately and objectively determine what is or is not propaganda, I support their right to create that as well.

Regarding the utility of recognizing where propaganda comes from, it can occasionally be useful to know, as it tends to follow certain patterns based on the goals of whoever created it.

Actually the goal of terms like that is efficiency. We could say "supporter of aggressively implemented authoritarian communism" if we wanted, but tankie is shorter.

Helps if you have the background to understand the specifics of what different "isms" support and thus what they disagree on that leads them into genuinely fighting each other. A fascist, a lib and a tankie really do have very core disagreements that cannot be realistically compromised on. At the most basic, a fascist wants a unified society with a strict hierarchy, the tankie wants a unified society with no hierarchy, the lib doesn't want any kind of unified society. If any one of these people gets their way, the other two do not, which leads to conflict.

Left/right are more economic arguments with some wiggle room due to being more or less a spectrum, but also tend to feature significant real world disagreements.

Anyways, I do agree that it's important to have conversations about these underlying details, but when you're talking amongst other people who know the background already, some shorthand terms are going to start appearing. Since these are overarching governance philosophies that any person can adopt or discard at will, they're also a little different from more inherent divisions, like ethnicity for instance. Being a tankie, lib or fascist is a choice, where being Arabic or gay or something is not.

Somebody needs to put this guy in charge of all the branding elements.

lol I would absolutely check out this community. Idea is brilliant, honestly.

I think he's going to go down in history as one of the most successful civilian wartime leaders, ever. I truly cannot even begin to imagine how much he has had to learn on the job, and it has certainly taken years off his lifespan. Pictures of him now vs pictures of him pre-war could almost be a father and his son. But his sheer effectiveness at rallying his people and the world has been nothing short of legendary.

"I need ammo, not a ride" is fully equivalent to "We will fight on the beaches". So far I consider him in that same tier as the titans of history. This, I think, is what historical figures look like when you're living alongside them, certainly mired in propaganda and debate, but with a certain shine that is hard to deny.

Just call it the Russo-Ukrainian War. It's the formal English language name we seem to have settled on, and is unbiased and objective, just listing the two main participants.

For a conservative that's amazing, I'd be kinda proud of him. I'd comply with his request, assuming he wants you to see a couple other doctors and not attend some conversion camp or something. I'd just frame that as getting a second/third opinion, basically, which is always a good idea anyway.

Interesting to be cutting oversight during a time when Boeing was having so much trouble with its planes.

Pfah, weak. A coal powered turbine delivers superior performance, and coal is cheaper than snow leopard food.

Don't forget what eventually becomes necessary to retain domestic control.

They're not liberals, they don't stomach the idea that the populace could choose something else if they prove themselves unable to deliver on their promises. Liberals get around this by embracing change, giving people the option to change the status quo if they wish. Even to the point of discarding liberalism itself.

Authoritarians don't believe in that option though.

Supply and demand, since they're all collectors items now.

... really? Even we learn a fair bit about the British Empire, though I suppose Anglo-American history is somewhat intertwined, so it makes sense. We covered Magna Carta, 100 Years War, Henry VIII, then some British Empire. And the World Wars of course.

We don't really go over the Commonwealth nations that much, but we definitely touch on Britain quite a lot. Though we did cover Indian Independence a little bit, Gandhi and all that, if memory serves.

Glazing over the largest empire ever created on our planet seems a little odd to me though, especially when its your own. That'd be like Greek kids not covering Alexander.

Yes, it is very much an ongoing battle, that's for sure.

You also said it was a Hollywood production.

I'm neutral on your overall argument, I think it's a little frivolous. I don't know of any way to accurately guage how effective CCP methods are, and I have no personal experience with living in China, so a comparison is impossible for me to make. Your opinion is noted, but it's just a random opinion to me.

Yes, we are talking about education. You can receive education in all of these things in more advanced studies, it is available and anyone can choose it. This is because the information is not suppressed.

I'm unfamiliar with this PR campaign you're discussing. Is this the film you're talking about?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Haditha

If so, it's British and you seem to have your facts incorrect. Though I do agree the DoD engages in domestic propaganda and is overly aggressive with classifying information, no question about that. This does not prevent any American from receiving an education that includes what is known of the real events, however.

North Dakota makes sense, that's a fairly conservative region if I'm not mistaken. I'm from a more purple region.

I don't expect everything to be covered in junior high or high school, there isn't enough time in a general US history or world history class to focus on most details. They're not US imperialism classes, they're generalist with a lot of material worthy of time and attention. This is what more advanced studies are for.

This is entirely different from actively suppressing information. The information is available, even if teaching it to all teenagers is not mandatory. One thing is active suppression, another is prioritization of limited time.

I learned about around half of that in junior high and high school. Where did you study? That has a lot to do with it, our education system is controlled at the local level by individual school boards.

We also had discussions on war crimes, though that wasn't until high school.

This was before 9/11, so the War on Terror had not happened yet. It was mainly focused on Vietnam. We did learn about some of the covert stuff, but most of it was not covered.

I agree none of it is part of mainstream US discourse, but neither is the vast majority of the things covered in history class. This reflects American anti-intellectualism overall imo.