6 ms·

Most modern states with the necessary capabilities spread disinformation to other countries for their own political gain or the political gain of their allies,

Most modern states with the necessary capabilities spread disinformation to other countries for their own political gain or the political gain of their allies, Russia is far from the only one.

slg 6y ago
Fair, but Russia is the most direct example of the specific fears mentioned in spreading disinformation with the goal of polarization as opposed to a different specific goal. When the US spreads propaganda in a foreign country, it is usually to get the people to align with US values as opposed to a goal of destabilization.
- xtian 6y ago
  That’s deeply false. The US has engineered and provided support for coups around the world. Does that not count as destabilization?
  - slg 6y ago
    >The US has engineered and provided support for coups around the world With the goal of allies gaining power. That is fundamentally different than Russian's initial goal of simply knocking the US out of their superpower role by causing polarization, internal strife, loss of faith in institutions, and just general chaos. I think people associate Russian disinformation as purely a right wing phenomenon because that is where they have had more success, but there is plenty of Russian disinformation targeted at and supporting the left wing too.
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      > With the goal of allies gaining power. That is fundamentally different than Russian's initial goal of simply knocking the US out of their superpower role Why do you think Russia is trying to knock the US out of its superpower of its superpower role? They’re not doing it just to be petty.
      - slg 6y ago
        Who said they were doing it to be petty? They are doing it because we have a hostile relationship, not because they want to eventually be allies. There is a fundamental difference between let's interfere with this country to install a friendly government and let's interfere with this country so it rips itself apart.
        shadowgovt 6y ago
        I think there can be a difference in goals, but history strongly suggests no country has mastered the difference in outcomes, so regardless of which goal, attempts to do either should be held to the highest suspicion and probably censured by the international community. America learned a bloody and horrible lesson trying to install a friendly government in Afghanistan after Russia diminished their influence in the region.
        xtian 6y ago
        Can you please explain the difference you’re talking about from the standpoint of a working class citizen of Iran in 1953 or of Chile in 1973?
        slg 6y ago
        The people of Iran and Chile were collateral damage of the US. Our government did not care one way or another about them. The people of the US are the primary target of Russia. Their government is actively trying to do us harm. It is indifference versus malice. This isn't a defense of US foreign policy. We have a history of doing awful things. It is simply recognizing differences between the two countries approaches and noting that the fears that initially sparked this tangent match up nearly perfectly with Russia's goals and actions.
        xtian 6y ago
        How have you gained so much insight into Russia’s long-term geopolitical strategy and deduced that their primary goal is malice against American people? Through US media? Why do you think they’d invest considerable national resources into this malice for the powerless citizenry? And why do you think this supposed intent matters so much? Do you think outcomes will be worse for the people of the US than living under Pinochet or in modern-day Fallujah? Or do you think polarization and misinformation are not the least of the strategies the US uses in its foreign interventions? I’m legitimately confused by your viewpoint.

Most modern states with the necessary capabilities spread disinformation to other countries for their own political gain or the political gain of their allies, Russia is far from the only one.

slg 6y ago

Fair, but Russia is the most direct example of the specific fears mentioned in spreading disinformation with the goal of polarization as opposed to a different specific goal. When the US spreads propaganda in a foreign country, it is usually to get the people to align with US values as opposed to a goal of destabilization.

xtian 6y ago
That’s deeply false. The US has engineered and provided support for coups around the world. Does that not count as destabilization?
- slg 6y ago
  >The US has engineered and provided support for coups around the world With the goal of allies gaining power. That is fundamentally different than Russian's initial goal of simply knocking the US out of their superpower role by causing polarization, internal strife, loss of faith in institutions, and just general chaos. I think people associate Russian disinformation as purely a right wing phenomenon because that is where they have had more success, but there is plenty of Russian disinformation targeted at and supporting the left wing too.
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    > With the goal of allies gaining power. That is fundamentally different than Russian's initial goal of simply knocking the US out of their superpower role Why do you think Russia is trying to knock the US out of its superpower of its superpower role? They’re not doing it just to be petty.
    - slg 6y ago
      Who said they were doing it to be petty? They are doing it because we have a hostile relationship, not because they want to eventually be allies. There is a fundamental difference between let's interfere with this country to install a friendly government and let's interfere with this country so it rips itself apart.
      - shadowgovt 6y ago
        I think there can be a difference in goals, but history strongly suggests no country has mastered the difference in outcomes, so regardless of which goal, attempts to do either should be held to the highest suspicion and probably censured by the international community. America learned a bloody and horrible lesson trying to install a friendly government in Afghanistan after Russia diminished their influence in the region.
      - xtian 6y ago
        Can you please explain the difference you’re talking about from the standpoint of a working class citizen of Iran in 1953 or of Chile in 1973?
        slg 6y ago
        The people of Iran and Chile were collateral damage of the US. Our government did not care one way or another about them. The people of the US are the primary target of Russia. Their government is actively trying to do us harm. It is indifference versus malice. This isn't a defense of US foreign policy. We have a history of doing awful things. It is simply recognizing differences between the two countries approaches and noting that the fears that initially sparked this tangent match up nearly perfectly with Russia's goals and actions.
        xtian 6y ago
        How have you gained so much insight into Russia’s long-term geopolitical strategy and deduced that their primary goal is malice against American people? Through US media? Why do you think they’d invest considerable national resources into this malice for the powerless citizenry? And why do you think this supposed intent matters so much? Do you think outcomes will be worse for the people of the US than living under Pinochet or in modern-day Fallujah? Or do you think polarization and misinformation are not the least of the strategies the US uses in its foreign interventions? I’m legitimately confused by your viewpoint.