it’s like you believe you can tariff them expecting they won’t do the same. Why do you believe the rest of the world is not going to retaliate and why do you believe America can prosper without the rest of the world?
What’s the point of having a military alliance with countries you puts tariffs on? That’s unfriendly to say the least.
I don’t care that “many people don’t agree with that statement”. Who? Republicucks? Right wing grifters/Russian puppets on YouTube? The morons who listen to them?
The consensus is that the military defeat of Russia is paramount to the West. Especially among those who are most qualified to opine on the matter.
Roughly 50% of all Americans. I’m not sure who determines “the consensus” if polls are devided and the side that disagrees just won an election.
Right wing opinion has been highjacked by the Russians, it’s a compromised crowd. Hell, the government is compromised nevermind the idiot followers.
Conflating the election result with support for Ukraine is also disingenuous, given that most americans actually support sending aid.
That’s the narrowest margin I’ve ever seen described as “a majority” lmao.
If Russia has the ability to brainwash half the country using a handful of bot farms, then I can only imagine what our own, much more powerful and well funded intelligence agencies are capable of.
This whole, “they disagree with me therefore they’ve been brainwashed by Russia” but is tiresome. Sure, Russia has made some attempts to influence public opinion but it’s not nearly as broad as you suggest. Even if it were, that raises the question of why they were so receptive to Russia’s techniques and why your side can’t employ similar ones to persuade them. Honestly, when people say stuff like this, I have to wonder if they really believe it themselves, or if they’re just saying it to discredit the other side or to resolve the psychological discomfort of other people disagreeing about something.
I think you just lack the information, here are just a few examples off the top of my head:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mueller_report
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Tenet_Media_investigation
The West can’t engage in the same disgusting tactics even if it wanted to because unlike the authoritian state of Russia, we don’t control our internet to the point of blocking YouTube/Wikipedia. This can’t possibly be news to you.
Yes, I’m aware that Russia makes attempts to influence American public opinion. But you’re vastly overstating the scope and effectiveness of these efforts.
You can’t be serious with this. First of all, the US did recently move to ban TikTok because it had too much pro-Palestine content, when it was unbanned, it sent out a message praising the Trump administration, clearly having come to an understanding with the government. Twitter was bought out by Musk who censors left-wing content and is deeply involved in the government. Zuckerberg suddenly unveiled a bunch of anti-woke policies as soon as Trump was taking office. So, censorship of platforms is an issue in the US.
But secondly, and much more importantly, you’re talking about Russia propagandizing Americans, who have access to YouTube and Wikipedia! If the reason that Russian propaganda is so effective is that they censor those platforms, then how can it be that it’s still so effective when people have access to them? It’s complete nonsense.
Again, you’re doing that thing of getting distracted reaffirming that Russia is bad and losing sight of reality.
First, TikTok isn’t banned and the push for it wasn’t because of “pro-palestinian” content. There’s no lack of that on every platform available.
Second, Musk and Zuckerberg aren’t foreign states, try to stay on topic.
None of this made any sense. What don’t you understand? Westerners see the charlatan grifters that Russians fund on YouTube/Rumble etc because it isn’t blocked, meanwhile the Russian population has no access to Wikipedia and wouldn’t be able to see “western propaganda” on YouTube because it is blocked. Duh
I’m super confused by what chain of reasoning would lead you to say this. First, it doesn’t matter at all that they’re not foreign states, they still have interests directly opposed to the vast majority of Americans. Second, we’re talking about whether the American government has the ability to influence Americans’ media diet in a way comparable to what Russia does, so the point that they’re “not foreign governments” is doubly confusing.
Your argument is that Russian propaganda is effective because they’re able to censor platforms with conflicting views, but they aren’t able to control what media Americans have access to, meaning that your position makes absolutely zero sense.
Also, I’m not talking about the US government using propaganda to influence Russian citizens, I’m talking about the US government using propaganda to influence US citizens. Which seems to be a fully alien concept to you. But US citizens have access to the same set of media that could be used to host either Russian or American propaganda, it’s an even playing field. Except the US has more money and a major home field advantage, so why would Russian propaganda be so much more effective? It’s nonsense, and there are much simpler, more logical explanations.
I see, we’re talking past eachother because you fail to follow the topic. As a reminder, the topic was USA/Russia influencing eachothers population. That should help you finally understand why it works better in one direction and not the other, and why internal bad actors aren’t relevant to the conversation.