4 ms·

I personally have never heard of this and I doubt this event is constantly in the mind of the public zeitgeist of the article's OP. Such a general phrase as "to

I personally have never heard of this and I doubt this event is constantly in the mind of the public zeitgeist of the article's OP. Such a general phrase as "to be disappeared" is not monopolized for any harrowing event - it's on par with saying you were "brainwashed" despite the CIA nor other intelligence groups being involved.

majormajor 5y ago
"Being disappeared" doesn't call to mind any specific event to me but definitely is an idiom for like law enforcement or intelligence removing people seen as troublesome. Just google it!
- michannne 5y ago
  I know what "being disappeared" has meant historically, and I don't see why the same phrase would be problematic here. Again, I see this the same way as complaining about the term brainwashing being used in contexts that don't involve intelligence agencies
  - majormajor 5y ago
    Sure, let's compare a third party removing their archives of my stuff with people being detained, tortured, etc.... can't see any issue! Brainwashing, for better or worse, has already been weakened. So someone using that term today is using it in a very different context. Time and context matters.
    - michannne 5y ago
      Why be so disingenious about this? Being "disappeared", at least in Western society, conjures the image of being quietly whisked away from society in an unmarked van for expressing views that a powerful body does not like. That is the article's OP felt happened - they were removed quietly from a platform because their views went against theirs. Now, you add in things like torture and detainment. I mean, whatever. Feel free to die on this hill. My post's point is that the vast majority of society does not think of the Dirty War, or any sort of violence, when they hear the phrase "I was disappeared".
      - joe_the_user 5y ago
        The thing is, Chris Hedge is still a well known commentator. I have a book of his on my shelf. I'm pretty sure he can get interviews in a number of places other than RT. This blog post of his is on the front page of HN, a large site. Hedges hasn't been literally "disappeared", made invisible, any more than he's been a victim of what "to be disappeared" has come to mean.
      - bccdee 5y ago
        > Being "disappeared", at least in Western society, conjures the image of being quietly whisked away from society in an unmarked van > Now, you add in things like torture and detainment I'm sorry, where do you think the unmarked van is going? "Now you add in detainment" — detainment at least. If somebody disappears, it's either because they're being kept somewhere secretly or because they've been killed.
p1necone 5y ago
Being disappeared definitely has connotations of political prisoners and actual government censorship to me. Not a private company deciding not to host your videos for free any more.
- michannne 5y ago
  But brainwashing doesn't? I really don't see the issue here. "Carted off", "Political assassination", there hundreds, if not thousands, of phrases that are used that have innocuous meanings far beyond any singular event and are used regularly by people of all backgrounds in many contexts. And I don't see why the usage being applied to video hosting somehow detracts from a completely unrelated event
noduerme 5y ago
To anyone as allegedly historically literate as the author, especially one who's focused on the crimes of US imperialism and foreign interference, there is no question they would be familiar with what that term specifically refers to - the dirty war in Argentina (though also applicable to Chile and Uruguay). I too thought it was going to be about a literal black bagging, like what happened to protesters in Portland last summer who were manhandled into unmarked government vehicles by plainclothes officers.
- michannne 5y ago
  "there is no question they would be familiar with what that term specifically refers to - the dirty war in Argentina" The only way you could justify a statement like this is by ignoring at least two events that both hit closer to home to Americans - the kidnappings done by the Gestapo in the 30s and the Mafia in the 20s. I stand by my statement that the Dirty War in Argentina is not something that comes to mind for most Westerners when someone uses the phrasing of being "disappeared"
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > The only way you could justify a statement like this is by ignoring at least two events that both hit closer to home to Americans - the kidnappings done by the Gestapo in the 30s and the Mafia in the 20s. Both of those predate the invention of the particular use of “disappear”, a passive voice construction implying an active voice transitive use with an animate direct object (the active voice form of which was not actually in use yet, but is sometimes seen since), which was invented in the late 1970s specifically in reference to the Dirty War in Argentina. It has been used since somewhat more broadly, but only because it invokes the intense coverage (including in the American media) of the Dirty War. While certainly for a large number of young and/or particularly historically ignorant Westerners the specific referent may not be immediately recognized, the upthread comment that “ To anyone as allegedly historically literate as the author, especially one who's focused on the crimes of US imperialism and foreign interference, there is no question they would be familiar with what that term specifically refers to - the dirty war in Argentina” is absolutely correct.
Spooky23 5y ago
You may have been ignorant of the history and term, but the author deliberately selected that title. The protagonist here chose to be a useful idiot to help the Russian state attract self-described dissident voices to a Russian propaganda outlet. If you chose to make your living that way and care about your work, embracing backups is a good idea. Unlike his kremlin patrons, western society doesn’t generally “disappear” people like him, we just ignore.
- michannne 5y ago
  What is your point? My point is that if, at some point in the last 40 years, the phrase "being disappeared" became synonymous with the Dirty War in Argentina, most Americans did not get that memo. Whether or not I myself was ignorant of the connection is a moot point, the post I replied to claimed that the article's author should have been aware of the connection - to which I say, if that's the hill you choose to die on, be my guest, but I can assuredly say I'm not alone neither is the article's OP in being ignorant of such a connection.
  - sdoering 5y ago
    I see from other comments that you don't seem to understand that the commenters here argue that the author himself not only "got the memo" but also the he used the term conscious of the fact what it means to a lot of people in a lot of places. He deliberately compared the deletion of his stuff by YouTube to people being captured, detained, more often than not tortured and too often killed. He wanted to invoke this image to paint YouTube in as bad a light as possible. In doing so he not only compared apples to oranges but also showed quite strongly that he is missing empathy and a sense of proportion. I strongly suggest that he slept in a real bed last night. Ate a good meal. Did not get hurt by prison guards. Wasn't punched in the gut, starved, electro-tortured, got his fingernails ripped out, had to stand on a box with his underpants over his face while wires hung from his hands fearing electrocution. And so on. I doubt that the victims of being disappeared (nor their families) would see what happened to him and his spinning of the story and say: 'Oh yeah. There is someone who had the same fate as we.' It actually doesn't matter that you or others did not get the reference. Making this reference is the problem, even if not a single one of his audience would miss it. He intended it and devalued the horrible experiences of real victims to blow his felt victimhood out of proportion and generate more enragement.

majormajor 5y ago

"Being disappeared" doesn't call to mind any specific event to me but definitely is an idiom for like law enforcement or intelligence removing people seen as troublesome. Just google it!

michannne 5y ago
I know what "being disappeared" has meant historically, and I don't see why the same phrase would be problematic here. Again, I see this the same way as complaining about the term brainwashing being used in contexts that don't involve intelligence agencies
- majormajor 5y ago
  Sure, let's compare a third party removing their archives of my stuff with people being detained, tortured, etc.... can't see any issue! Brainwashing, for better or worse, has already been weakened. So someone using that term today is using it in a very different context. Time and context matters.
  - michannne 5y ago
    Why be so disingenious about this? Being "disappeared", at least in Western society, conjures the image of being quietly whisked away from society in an unmarked van for expressing views that a powerful body does not like. That is the article's OP felt happened - they were removed quietly from a platform because their views went against theirs. Now, you add in things like torture and detainment. I mean, whatever. Feel free to die on this hill. My post's point is that the vast majority of society does not think of the Dirty War, or any sort of violence, when they hear the phrase "I was disappeared".
    - joe_the_user 5y ago
      The thing is, Chris Hedge is still a well known commentator. I have a book of his on my shelf. I'm pretty sure he can get interviews in a number of places other than RT. This blog post of his is on the front page of HN, a large site. Hedges hasn't been literally "disappeared", made invisible, any more than he's been a victim of what "to be disappeared" has come to mean.
    - bccdee 5y ago
      > Being "disappeared", at least in Western society, conjures the image of being quietly whisked away from society in an unmarked van > Now, you add in things like torture and detainment I'm sorry, where do you think the unmarked van is going? "Now you add in detainment" — detainment at least. If somebody disappears, it's either because they're being kept somewhere secretly or because they've been killed.

p1necone 5y ago

Being disappeared definitely has connotations of political prisoners and actual government censorship to me. Not a private company deciding not to host your videos for free any more.

michannne 5y ago
But brainwashing doesn't? I really don't see the issue here. "Carted off", "Political assassination", there hundreds, if not thousands, of phrases that are used that have innocuous meanings far beyond any singular event and are used regularly by people of all backgrounds in many contexts. And I don't see why the usage being applied to video hosting somehow detracts from a completely unrelated event

noduerme 5y ago

To anyone as allegedly historically literate as the author, especially one who's focused on the crimes of US imperialism and foreign interference, there is no question they would be familiar with what that term specifically refers to - the dirty war in Argentina (though also applicable to Chile and Uruguay). I too thought it was going to be about a literal black bagging, like what happened to protesters in Portland last summer who were manhandled into unmarked government vehicles by plainclothes officers.

michannne 5y ago
"there is no question they would be familiar with what that term specifically refers to - the dirty war in Argentina" The only way you could justify a statement like this is by ignoring at least two events that both hit closer to home to Americans - the kidnappings done by the Gestapo in the 30s and the Mafia in the 20s. I stand by my statement that the Dirty War in Argentina is not something that comes to mind for most Westerners when someone uses the phrasing of being "disappeared"
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The only way you could justify a statement like this is by ignoring at least two events that both hit closer to home to Americans - the kidnappings done by the Gestapo in the 30s and the Mafia in the 20s. Both of those predate the invention of the particular use of “disappear”, a passive voice construction implying an active voice transitive use with an animate direct object (the active voice form of which was not actually in use yet, but is sometimes seen since), which was invented in the late 1970s specifically in reference to the Dirty War in Argentina. It has been used since somewhat more broadly, but only because it invokes the intense coverage (including in the American media) of the Dirty War. While certainly for a large number of young and/or particularly historically ignorant Westerners the specific referent may not be immediately recognized, the upthread comment that “ To anyone as allegedly historically literate as the author, especially one who's focused on the crimes of US imperialism and foreign interference, there is no question they would be familiar with what that term specifically refers to - the dirty war in Argentina” is absolutely correct.

Spooky23 5y ago

You may have been ignorant of the history and term, but the author deliberately selected that title. The protagonist here chose to be a useful idiot to help the Russian state attract self-described dissident voices to a Russian propaganda outlet. If you chose to make your living that way and care about your work, embracing backups is a good idea. Unlike his kremlin patrons, western society doesn’t generally “disappear” people like him, we just ignore.

michannne 5y ago
What is your point? My point is that if, at some point in the last 40 years, the phrase "being disappeared" became synonymous with the Dirty War in Argentina, most Americans did not get that memo. Whether or not I myself was ignorant of the connection is a moot point, the post I replied to claimed that the article's author should have been aware of the connection - to which I say, if that's the hill you choose to die on, be my guest, but I can assuredly say I'm not alone neither is the article's OP in being ignorant of such a connection.
- sdoering 5y ago
  I see from other comments that you don't seem to understand that the commenters here argue that the author himself not only "got the memo" but also the he used the term conscious of the fact what it means to a lot of people in a lot of places. He deliberately compared the deletion of his stuff by YouTube to people being captured, detained, more often than not tortured and too often killed. He wanted to invoke this image to paint YouTube in as bad a light as possible. In doing so he not only compared apples to oranges but also showed quite strongly that he is missing empathy and a sense of proportion. I strongly suggest that he slept in a real bed last night. Ate a good meal. Did not get hurt by prison guards. Wasn't punched in the gut, starved, electro-tortured, got his fingernails ripped out, had to stand on a box with his underpants over his face while wires hung from his hands fearing electrocution. And so on. I doubt that the victims of being disappeared (nor their families) would see what happened to him and his spinning of the story and say: 'Oh yeah. There is someone who had the same fate as we.' It actually doesn't matter that you or others did not get the reference. Making this reference is the problem, even if not a single one of his audience would miss it. He intended it and devalued the horrible experiences of real victims to blow his felt victimhood out of proportion and generate more enragement.