If hundreds of millions of Americans and Europeans knew what was actually going on, they’d certainly be against the policies their unelected bureaucratic oligarchies are imposing, both at home and abroad. Precisely this is why knowing the truth is all the more important. Unfortunately, it can indeed be dangerous to think and speak freely at this time, and we can only expect more censorship and more “thought criminals”, as any deviation from the official narrative is “dangerous for our democracy”.
I can handle nonsense but please don’t call me a liberal.
Can you point to the part you want me to engage with? Half your comments are you fantasizing about me so I’m not sure what you’re even trying to tell me.
One important factor in the whole discussion over whether we take western propaganda seriously, whether we take the censorship to be benevolent, which I’m seeing completely neglected, is how we’re dismissing it because of all the lies which western governments have told in the past, we’re not just dismissing it because it’s state affiliated, or propaganda, all journalism is propaganda. When former CIA officers tell us that the purpose of the organization is misinformation I think we would be wise to listen to them, if only on that point. With a little bit of reading we can easily discover that western propaganda is based entirely in taking embedded reporters who serve alongside the Israeli military, the Ukrainian military, and other allies at face value, or taking statements by the US and its allies at face value without investigation or waiting for them to provide any evidence for these claims. Due to a monopoly on media distribution and high-ranking universities they don’t have to make any contact with reality to be taken seriously. Quite the opposite, the more uncritically they repeat what they’re told the more prestige is heaped upon them.
I am speaking directly to you about what you are doing and saying there is no fantasy here I am describing you.
That’s not how it works you’re the one complaining about the article you have to find a point that was made in the article that you disagree with you need to supply the evidence that refutes the point otherwise you’re just thoughtlessly dismissing it because that affirms your liberal worldview.
Of course there are other reasons that you could dismiss the article such as actually pointing to something that made the source unreliable that they’d said in the past. But I don’t think you can do that either.