4 ms·

As great as free press and democracies are, they also come with huge weaknesses. Those make it easy for foreign propaganda to influence the public and hence run

As great as free press and democracies are, they also come with huge weaknesses. Those make it easy for foreign propaganda to influence the public and hence run the countries from outside. Thanks to The Great Firewall and the CCP rule, China is mostly immune to foreign propaganda. At the same time, China is using a lot of effort to affect countries with democracy and free speech, like India and the U.S. China is obviously not alone in using propaganda to influence the politics of other countries. All big countries and corporations use it in their countries of interest all the time... in fact, they have been doing it for much longer. Everything from bribes to politicians to "human rights organizations", "foreign aid organizations" to social causes in universities... everything is used to undermine national interests and put pawns for outside powers in governments. Citizens of many democratic nations have been feeling this for a very long time... which explains nationalist sentiments rising in many countries... but that's another story. China is in a unique position in that it limits or prohibits foreign press, foreign media, foreign internet services, foreign aid organizations, human rights organizations... i.e. anything and everything that it can to stop foreign influence... but it uses a lot of those against its rivals. The only defense against it is following China's footsteps. India has recently banned several Chinese apps and websites. It has also kicked out Amnesty International. Other countries will have to do the same if they want to protect their national interests.

tehjoker 6y ago
Seeing free speech as an impediment to nationalist competition is rich. Nationalist competition appears to corrode every civil liberty and thing that makes life worth living that we have. What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? I guess certain business people would not make as much money.
- jml7c5 6y ago
  >What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? I guess certain business people would not make as much money. Cooperation is hard because of the prisoner's dilemma etc. You don't need "certain business people" to malevolently prevent international cooperation.
- andrekandre 6y ago
  > What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? competition is at the heart of our economies at a deep level, both within and without... i suspect this wont change until internally our economies are more cooperative than competitive (im not holding my breath)
  - tehjoker 6y ago
    This is why I am not a philosophical adherent to capitalism.
- AntiImperialist 6y ago
  >Nationalist competition What do you mean by nationalist competition? Nations competing against each other? >What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? Cooperation for what? Different people value different things. Different cultures even more so. You cannot have cooperation unless everyone is on the same side of every issue in the same degree. If we had that level of agreement, we would not survive, not for long anyway. Let me explain: Almost all of politics (or religious sects for that matter) is about how we use the resources we have. If there are multiple ways of using the resources, there have to be people who disagree and want different ways of using the resource. That slows us down, which helps us understand the cost/benefits of different ways of doing things. That also keeps options open... so if we find problems with the prevalent way, we won't have to start over. Other groups will already have understood the alternative ways and made some progress that others can join... once they sacrifice the leader who led them the "wrong way", of course. Nations are just another level of doing this thing on a global scale. Nations should do things differently, so that the world as a whole is more robust. >I guess certain business people would not make as much money. Ironically, it's certain business interests which have tried to make the world homogenous. That helps them scale their business in the most efficient way. They value efficiency more than robustness. George Soros, founder of the Open Society Foundations, is an example of a person who religiously believes in removing all inefficiencies due to nation states... and has been using his billions of dollars for that cause. I think that is dangerous. It's not different from finding "superior people", inbreeding them and killing everyone else for being inferior. That wouldn't make them superior. That would make them fragile. It's the same for nations.
jsnk 6y ago
> Those make it easy for foreign propaganda to influence the public and hence run the countries from outside. Foreign propaganda is a problem. But it's tiny compared to propaganda by domestic actors. There's huge amount of disinfo, gas lighting, demoralizing perpetuated by mainstream media, big tech, and intelligentsia. If you are concerned about propaganda, you have to mention the elephant in the room. Or else, you yourself are propagating and amplifying the dangers of foreign propaganda and minimizing the huge blame mainstream media, big tech, and intelligentsia should get.
- AntiImperialist 6y ago
  But it's tiny compared to propaganda by domestic actors. All foreign propaganda is peddled by domestic actors. Otherwise, it wouldn't be effective.
peacefulhat 6y ago
> Other countries will have to do the same if they want to protect their national interests. 2030: EU bans Google
MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
> The only defense against it it following China's footsteps. Is that the point you were trying to make?
yeetman21 6y ago
The US runs propaganda on its citizens and the citizens of other countries as well. China's propaganda arm prays every night to be as competent as the US' one day since most people dont even recognize it as propaganda while even Chinese citizens can tell their propaganda from a mile away.
scottlocklin 6y ago
Anyone who actually use the excuse of "foreign interference" for totalitarian censorship basically basically doesn't believe in the concept of democracy. "Foreign interference" has been going on from day 0 in the United States. It very obviously got us into WW-1 (the British -a largely untold but very obvious info ops campaign for something that served no US national interest), it got us into the middle east (nothing the US does there happens but for foreign interference from Saudis, Emirates and Israelis, who overtly bribe our think tanks and politicians), and it fairly obviously got us our "free trade" policies which gutted the US manufacturing capabilities to the point we can't make enough surgical masks in the US to protect our people (thanks, China). None of the above happened because of dipshits saying things on twitter or facebook or sharing Russia Today articles. None of the above will go away if the CIA, the political center and the tech oligarchs censor the internet to protect us from meaningless internet bugaboos. It's a naked power grab, and anyone who supports it because of "muh democracy" is a collaborator with tyranny.
- zozbot234 6y ago
  > to the point we can't make enough surgical masks in the US to protect our people Fake News. The U.S. used to have a huge stockpile of surgical and N95 masks as part of their pandemic preparedness plans. The stockpile was gradually depleted and not replenished adequately. It was pure complacency on the part of government; please let's not blame trade openness for this.
- AntiImperialist 6y ago
  "Foreign interference" has been going on from day 0 in the United States Agree. Not as effective as today. But yes. Anyone who actually use the excuse of "foreign interference" for totalitarian censorship basically basically doesn't believe in the concept of democracy. Agree. I think Democracy has failed because the tools of propaganda have become very effective. Democracy died in the U.S. a long time ago... the Deep State was formed and it had a monopoly on propaganda, not only for keeping the citizens in line but also using it to control many other countries. The major competitor was Soviet Union, which wasn't very successful for long. Fast forward to today, there are many countries which are powerful enough and have competitive tools for propaganda. While many countries are well equipped for offence, only China has very good defense against it. If other countries don't take actions to strengthen their defense, it's going to be very difficult for them.

tehjoker 6y ago

Seeing free speech as an impediment to nationalist competition is rich. Nationalist competition appears to corrode every civil liberty and thing that makes life worth living that we have. What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? I guess certain business people would not make as much money.

jml7c5 6y ago
>What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? I guess certain business people would not make as much money. Cooperation is hard because of the prisoner's dilemma etc. You don't need "certain business people" to malevolently prevent international cooperation.
andrekandre 6y ago
> What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? competition is at the heart of our economies at a deep level, both within and without... i suspect this wont change until internally our economies are more cooperative than competitive (im not holding my breath)
- tehjoker 6y ago
  This is why I am not a philosophical adherent to capitalism.
AntiImperialist 6y ago
>Nationalist competition What do you mean by nationalist competition? Nations competing against each other? >What if we had international cooperation instead of a death match? Cooperation for what? Different people value different things. Different cultures even more so. You cannot have cooperation unless everyone is on the same side of every issue in the same degree. If we had that level of agreement, we would not survive, not for long anyway. Let me explain: Almost all of politics (or religious sects for that matter) is about how we use the resources we have. If there are multiple ways of using the resources, there have to be people who disagree and want different ways of using the resource. That slows us down, which helps us understand the cost/benefits of different ways of doing things. That also keeps options open... so if we find problems with the prevalent way, we won't have to start over. Other groups will already have understood the alternative ways and made some progress that others can join... once they sacrifice the leader who led them the "wrong way", of course. Nations are just another level of doing this thing on a global scale. Nations should do things differently, so that the world as a whole is more robust. >I guess certain business people would not make as much money. Ironically, it's certain business interests which have tried to make the world homogenous. That helps them scale their business in the most efficient way. They value efficiency more than robustness. George Soros, founder of the Open Society Foundations, is an example of a person who religiously believes in removing all inefficiencies due to nation states... and has been using his billions of dollars for that cause. I think that is dangerous. It's not different from finding "superior people", inbreeding them and killing everyone else for being inferior. That wouldn't make them superior. That would make them fragile. It's the same for nations.

jsnk 6y ago

> Those make it easy for foreign propaganda to influence the public and hence run the countries from outside. Foreign propaganda is a problem. But it's tiny compared to propaganda by domestic actors. There's huge amount of disinfo, gas lighting, demoralizing perpetuated by mainstream media, big tech, and intelligentsia. If you are concerned about propaganda, you have to mention the elephant in the room. Or else, you yourself are propagating and amplifying the dangers of foreign propaganda and minimizing the huge blame mainstream media, big tech, and intelligentsia should get.

AntiImperialist 6y ago
But it's tiny compared to propaganda by domestic actors. All foreign propaganda is peddled by domestic actors. Otherwise, it wouldn't be effective.

peacefulhat 6y ago

> Other countries will have to do the same if they want to protect their national interests. 2030: EU bans Google

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago

> The only defense against it it following China's footsteps. Is that the point you were trying to make?

yeetman21 6y ago

The US runs propaganda on its citizens and the citizens of other countries as well. China's propaganda arm prays every night to be as competent as the US' one day since most people dont even recognize it as propaganda while even Chinese citizens can tell their propaganda from a mile away.

scottlocklin 6y ago

Anyone who actually use the excuse of "foreign interference" for totalitarian censorship basically basically doesn't believe in the concept of democracy. "Foreign interference" has been going on from day 0 in the United States. It very obviously got us into WW-1 (the British -a largely untold but very obvious info ops campaign for something that served no US national interest), it got us into the middle east (nothing the US does there happens but for foreign interference from Saudis, Emirates and Israelis, who overtly bribe our think tanks and politicians), and it fairly obviously got us our "free trade" policies which gutted the US manufacturing capabilities to the point we can't make enough surgical masks in the US to protect our people (thanks, China). None of the above happened because of dipshits saying things on twitter or facebook or sharing Russia Today articles. None of the above will go away if the CIA, the political center and the tech oligarchs censor the internet to protect us from meaningless internet bugaboos. It's a naked power grab, and anyone who supports it because of "muh democracy" is a collaborator with tyranny.

zozbot234 6y ago
> to the point we can't make enough surgical masks in the US to protect our people Fake News. The U.S. used to have a huge stockpile of surgical and N95 masks as part of their pandemic preparedness plans. The stockpile was gradually depleted and not replenished adequately. It was pure complacency on the part of government; please let's not blame trade openness for this.
AntiImperialist 6y ago
"Foreign interference" has been going on from day 0 in the United States Agree. Not as effective as today. But yes. Anyone who actually use the excuse of "foreign interference" for totalitarian censorship basically basically doesn't believe in the concept of democracy. Agree. I think Democracy has failed because the tools of propaganda have become very effective. Democracy died in the U.S. a long time ago... the Deep State was formed and it had a monopoly on propaganda, not only for keeping the citizens in line but also using it to control many other countries. The major competitor was Soviet Union, which wasn't very successful for long. Fast forward to today, there are many countries which are powerful enough and have competitive tools for propaganda. While many countries are well equipped for offence, only China has very good defense against it. If other countries don't take actions to strengthen their defense, it's going to be very difficult for them.