4 ms·

I can't believe official government resources are designated to this kind of stuff. It sounds authoritarian to me. No matter how you disprove the selected "eu

I can't believe official government resources are designated to this kind of stuff. It sounds authoritarian to me. No matter how you disprove the selected "euromyths". This action itself just directly prove the broader point: EU has an overarching government. Wow. Got tons of downvotes. By the end of the day, the simple logic is that the false reports do not hurt truthful reports. If the truthful reports prove their point, no matter how many false reports exist, the truth is the truth. So this action itself is purely propaganda to prove a false point with a false logic.

jonathanstrange 6y ago
There is nothing authoritarian about dispelling myths. These were not about opinions, they concerned literally false claims about EU directives and regulations.
- temp8964 6y ago
  Lol. EU doesn't have NGO can do this? The government has to be the one to run the Truth department?
  - cinntaile 6y ago
    But what exactly is authoritarian about this? It's not like this is the only truth?
  - jonathanstrange 6y ago
    Every large institution rectifies blatant misrepresentations about themselves in press conferences, including all governments of the world and all companies. It's weird to assume they shouldn't.
  - wormik 6y ago
    If it would be EU sponsored NGO doing this, you would argue it's a department of truth proxy wouldn't you?
    - temp8964 6y ago
      Of course. I assume there are concerned citizens in the EU can do this. Why does the government need to get involved in this?
      - oblio 6y ago
        You're being silly. To take an extreme scenario, if the KGB is financing entities spouting non-sense in various publications, you expect the US/CIA to just take it lying down? :-) It's part of intelligence/counter-intelligence, you have to control the narrative because the average citizen isn't well informed enough and will just end up believing what the other party tells them... because they're the only ones saying anything. Private individuals can do this, but governments have been doing this too, since the beginning of time (and of governments).
        temp8964 6y ago
        So the Brexit to EU is like KGB to US? Why do you want to keep UK inside EU then?
        oblio 6y ago
        I'm not keeping anything, anywhere. The UK can do whatever it wants, as far as I care. I was just doing a reductio ad abusrdum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum) to show you that your logic was faulty.
        temp8964 6y ago
        You didn't. I proved your RU-US example did not fit in the context of UK-EU.
        oblio 6y ago
        You proved how? Why would the EU not be allowed to publish things proving that what the UK newspaper articles are false? Is there some sort of legal principle I'm missing that says that government entities are not allowed to defend themselves from lies?
  - La1n 6y ago
    I don't see a difference in paying the salary of people to do it in your name, or funding a NGO and indirectly paying the salary of the people who do the work.
    - temp8964 6y ago
      The difference is whether the government gets involved.
      - 13415 6y ago
        This was just a blog as part of regular press work by the European Commission in the UK. Every organization does that in publications and press conferences. It's normal to publish press releases to correct misunderstandings or point out the view of your organization/company. The UK government does the very same, for instance.
- 987yghj 6y ago
  Selectively taking incorrect statements from one side is a way of technically being truthful while pushing one sided information, i.e. it's propaganda.
  - oblio 6y ago
    At least be fair about it. It's counter propaganda. The garbage thrown about by those British publications is propaganda. Day in, day out, from many-many more publications, not just a puny web page.
  - Jonnax 6y ago
    "The website, which offers officials in Brussels a chance to rebut media accusations of meddling, features hundreds of reports that are based on inaccurate or misleading information." So it was made for officials to rebut lies printed in the media about the EU. I take it that you don't mind "journalists" printing lies as long as they're lies that support your point of view?
    - temp8964 6y ago
      Shouldn't the website also list factual reports proving their point that EU is over-regulated? No matter how many reports got wrong, they don't hurt the reports are factual and correct.
      - Jonnax 6y ago
        Nope. Why would they? They're refuting British lies.
oblio 6y ago
> No matter how you disprove the selected "euromyths". This action itself just directly prove the broader point: EU has an overarching government. The EU can only do what its member state government delegate to it, and the same EU also has a fraction of the employees a regular state government has. France has about 65 million citizens and about 2 million state employees. The entire EU has something like 50k employees, for the whole group of 450 million people.

jonathanstrange 6y ago

There is nothing authoritarian about dispelling myths. These were not about opinions, they concerned literally false claims about EU directives and regulations.

temp8964 6y ago
Lol. EU doesn't have NGO can do this? The government has to be the one to run the Truth department?
- cinntaile 6y ago
  But what exactly is authoritarian about this? It's not like this is the only truth?
- jonathanstrange 6y ago
  Every large institution rectifies blatant misrepresentations about themselves in press conferences, including all governments of the world and all companies. It's weird to assume they shouldn't.
- wormik 6y ago
  If it would be EU sponsored NGO doing this, you would argue it's a department of truth proxy wouldn't you?
  - temp8964 6y ago
    Of course. I assume there are concerned citizens in the EU can do this. Why does the government need to get involved in this?
    - oblio 6y ago
      You're being silly. To take an extreme scenario, if the KGB is financing entities spouting non-sense in various publications, you expect the US/CIA to just take it lying down? :-) It's part of intelligence/counter-intelligence, you have to control the narrative because the average citizen isn't well informed enough and will just end up believing what the other party tells them... because they're the only ones saying anything. Private individuals can do this, but governments have been doing this too, since the beginning of time (and of governments).
      - temp8964 6y ago
        So the Brexit to EU is like KGB to US? Why do you want to keep UK inside EU then?
        oblio 6y ago
        I'm not keeping anything, anywhere. The UK can do whatever it wants, as far as I care. I was just doing a reductio ad abusrdum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum) to show you that your logic was faulty.
        temp8964 6y ago
        You didn't. I proved your RU-US example did not fit in the context of UK-EU.
        oblio 6y ago
        You proved how? Why would the EU not be allowed to publish things proving that what the UK newspaper articles are false? Is there some sort of legal principle I'm missing that says that government entities are not allowed to defend themselves from lies?
- La1n 6y ago
  I don't see a difference in paying the salary of people to do it in your name, or funding a NGO and indirectly paying the salary of the people who do the work.
  - temp8964 6y ago
    The difference is whether the government gets involved.
    - 13415 6y ago
      This was just a blog as part of regular press work by the European Commission in the UK. Every organization does that in publications and press conferences. It's normal to publish press releases to correct misunderstandings or point out the view of your organization/company. The UK government does the very same, for instance.
987yghj 6y ago
Selectively taking incorrect statements from one side is a way of technically being truthful while pushing one sided information, i.e. it's propaganda.
- oblio 6y ago
  At least be fair about it. It's counter propaganda. The garbage thrown about by those British publications is propaganda. Day in, day out, from many-many more publications, not just a puny web page.
- Jonnax 6y ago
  "The website, which offers officials in Brussels a chance to rebut media accusations of meddling, features hundreds of reports that are based on inaccurate or misleading information." So it was made for officials to rebut lies printed in the media about the EU. I take it that you don't mind "journalists" printing lies as long as they're lies that support your point of view?
  - temp8964 6y ago
    Shouldn't the website also list factual reports proving their point that EU is over-regulated? No matter how many reports got wrong, they don't hurt the reports are factual and correct.
    - Jonnax 6y ago
      Nope. Why would they? They're refuting British lies.

oblio 6y ago

> No matter how you disprove the selected "euromyths". This action itself just directly prove the broader point: EU has an overarching government. The EU can only do what its member state government delegate to it, and the same EU also has a fraction of the employees a regular state government has. France has about 65 million citizens and about 2 million state employees. The entire EU has something like 50k employees, for the whole group of 450 million people.