4 ms·

You don't have to compare the steps they took, you have to think about what the US would do if Russia gets involved in elections in Mexico or Canada.

throwaway894345 5y ago
Why? The US doesn't get involved in European elections (so your hypothetical doesn't even make sense), but that's besides the point. What does the US have to do with whether or not Europe gets its energy from Russia? Europe doesn't have to choose to put its energy supply in the hands of Russia or US, there are other suppliers and diversification is a really good alternative.
- LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
  They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    I skimmed your link, but I didn't see anything damning or undemocratic. Where are the Lukashenko-esque dictators that the US installed in Europe? Which dissidents have the US assassinated on EU soil?
    - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
      Are you dumb, or what? I've written they don't need to because they have other means, which at the end of the day amounts to 'the same shit, but different' for the influenced vasall states.
      - throwaway894345 5y ago
        You wrote: > They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks. Which clearly says that the US has "undemocratic institutions" influencing Europe, but the link doesn't support the idea that the A-B is antidemocratic (there's nothing inherently "antidemocratic" about fostering international partnership and cooperation).
        LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        Look...I may be naive, but if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes, via whichever circles, then this is undemocratic, or otherwise called 'framing', 'setting the goal posts' to 'game' the rules into your favour. Or cheating, or fraud, or whatever. Which means candidates prepared that way, and then presented as the only option(s) to give the deceived masses the illusion of choice is simply a lie. edit: Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k?
        throwaway894345 5y ago
        > if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes There's nothing in your article that suggested that the organization in question was some sort of propaganda arm of the US government, and there's nothing undemocratic about advocating for one's interests. You might not agree with the advocacy, but "democracy" doesn't demand agreement. > Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k? I don't buy this at all. There are nations with actual propaganda departments, state-run censorship, bot nets, etc who actually directly attempt to influence elections. Like all other countries, the US does advocate for its own interests abroad--this is called "diplomacy" and it's generally the least-bad kind of advocacy. However, unlike other countries, the US does possess a lot of clout (the world depends on America in large part for security and prosperity, however loath we are to admit that America or Americans serve a useful purpose).
  - Lammy 5y ago
    At least they didn't call it Atlantikjugend
    - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
      'They' got that covered via proxy of the World Economic Forum via proxy of Swiss trust as Young Global Leaders, former The Global Leaders of Tomorrow Community (GLT) ;-> (Anything else? Would you like to have fries with that?)
scythe 5y ago
Why go as far as Mexico? Russia has influenced, and continues to influence, elections in the United States.

throwaway894345 5y ago

Why? The US doesn't get involved in European elections (so your hypothetical doesn't even make sense), but that's besides the point. What does the US have to do with whether or not Europe gets its energy from Russia? Europe doesn't have to choose to put its energy supply in the hands of Russia or US, there are other suppliers and diversification is a really good alternative.

LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  I skimmed your link, but I didn't see anything damning or undemocratic. Where are the Lukashenko-esque dictators that the US installed in Europe? Which dissidents have the US assassinated on EU soil?
  - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
    Are you dumb, or what? I've written they don't need to because they have other means, which at the end of the day amounts to 'the same shit, but different' for the influenced vasall states.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      You wrote: > They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks. Which clearly says that the US has "undemocratic institutions" influencing Europe, but the link doesn't support the idea that the A-B is antidemocratic (there's nothing inherently "antidemocratic" about fostering international partnership and cooperation).
      - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        Look...I may be naive, but if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes, via whichever circles, then this is undemocratic, or otherwise called 'framing', 'setting the goal posts' to 'game' the rules into your favour. Or cheating, or fraud, or whatever. Which means candidates prepared that way, and then presented as the only option(s) to give the deceived masses the illusion of choice is simply a lie. edit: Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k?
        throwaway894345 5y ago
        > if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes There's nothing in your article that suggested that the organization in question was some sort of propaganda arm of the US government, and there's nothing undemocratic about advocating for one's interests. You might not agree with the advocacy, but "democracy" doesn't demand agreement. > Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k? I don't buy this at all. There are nations with actual propaganda departments, state-run censorship, bot nets, etc who actually directly attempt to influence elections. Like all other countries, the US does advocate for its own interests abroad--this is called "diplomacy" and it's generally the least-bad kind of advocacy. However, unlike other countries, the US does possess a lot of clout (the world depends on America in large part for security and prosperity, however loath we are to admit that America or Americans serve a useful purpose).
- Lammy 5y ago
  At least they didn't call it Atlantikjugend
  - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
    'They' got that covered via proxy of the World Economic Forum via proxy of Swiss trust as Young Global Leaders, former The Global Leaders of Tomorrow Community (GLT) ;-> (Anything else? Would you like to have fries with that?)

scythe 5y ago

Why go as far as Mexico? Russia has influenced, and continues to influence, elections in the United States.