4 ms·

> How can you establish at least doubt in the other person's mind? Someone must be open to this in the first place. You can't change a closed mind, and there

by noodle 5y ago

> How can you establish at least doubt in the other person's mind? Someone must be open to this in the first place. You can't change a closed mind, and there are many reasons why a mind might be closed. They kind of have to arrive at their doubt on their own, at least in my personal non-expert opinion. The most you can do is express your opinion in a relatively non judgmental way (because if you're too harsh they won't return to you later to discuss) and be available if they want to discuss.

ShivShankaran 5y ago
The western media also runs rampant propaganda. The director of policy for reddit is an ex-nato person (no one know why reddit hired a non tech person for it) and one reason why reddit is extremely inundated with russia-ukraine war with heavy tilt for how awesome nato is. Note that even Jeremy Corbyn was a target of heavy propaganda by the media and especially reddit since he is anti-war. Anyone anti-war in the western media is quickly character assassinated. There is a reason why someone who is a real people person and how is really best suited to be president: bernie sanders lost against a rambling senile dude. TLDR: it's impossible to have an anti-war mindset or politician in the west. The propaganda will quickly destroy them.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  I think that you can be "anti-war" to the extent of saying that NATO should not directly be at war with Russia (if possible). I think you can get away with that position without being cancelled. If you're "anti-war" to the extent of saying "we shouldn't supply Ukraine with arms", or even worse, "Ukraine should just surrender", I think that most people rightly find those positions to be abhorrent. That looks far too much like Neville Chamberlain's politics (and morals) for most of our taste. And if you're "anti-war" in the sense of "this is all NATO's fault; Russia was right to invade", you get cancelled very quickly, because you have become indistinguishable from a Russian propagandist, and we know that there are plenty of Russian propagandists trying to influence the west's cultural mindset. If you have a thoughtful, considered reason to hold one of the positions I labeled problematic, you can probably express it on HN. You'll get argued with, you may get yelled at and downvoted, but you probably won't get banned. In the wider culture... no guarantees.
  - native_samples 5y ago
    "we know that there are plenty of Russian propagandists trying to influence the west's cultural mindset." The interesting thing about this claim is the question of whether this is also propaganda. There have been an enormous number of high profile claims of Russian propaganda or interference in western affairs in the past decade, as far as I'm aware they always ended up collapsing, though sometimes people aren't aware of that. Hunter Biden's laptop story was claimed to be Russian propaganda and the New York Post's Twitter account was frozen for it. Nobody could even reshare it or link to it privately. The rest of the media united in claiming it was Russian propaganda. Now, years later the NYT admits that the contents are authenticated. For years people claimed Trump's election was due to Russian propaganda and electoral interference. A massive investigation followed, in which it turned out the primary evidence for this was made up. Then they tried the same tactic with Brexit. Nobody ever found any proof for this; the idea was absurd on its face and was quickly abandoned outside of only the most loony Remainer establishments. Then there were the claims of Russian hacking of electrical grids. Wrong. Russian servers being pinged by Trump's campaigns. Wrong. Dozens of other claims about Russian propaganda that I'd have to look up, but I know they've been made, always wrong. Then Russia invaded Ukraine, claiming it needs to be de-Nazified. Immediately described as Russian propaganda, until people start remembering about the unquestionably neo-Nazis battalions that have been fighting as an official part of the Ukrainian military for years and that, uh, this is actually true. The Russian soldiers actually are fighting Nazis. That doesn't mean the invasion was right! It does raise interesting historical/moral questions though, given the mention of Chamberlain. Would the Allies have been morally right to invade Germany and take out the Nazis before they invaded anywhere else? Or were the Allies correct to wait for them to make the first strike? I don't know and the question only just occurred to me to ask, but it seems relevant here. Now in fairness you made a weaker claim above, about "Russian propagandists" trying to "influence the cultural mindset", a claim worded sufficiently vaguely that it could mean almost anything. But this impression of pervasive Russian propaganda has come from somewhere. If not the endless run of false claims about the prevalence of Russian propaganda then from where?
  - ShivShankaran 5y ago
    Russia and Putin should and will die for what's it worth. However my opinion has always been of cowardice: There is nothing more valuable than human life. There is no "courage" in fighting an idiotic war especially since all russia wanted was nato out and more especially since ukraine and russia are almost the same people. Holding on to donbas and similar russian territories have absolutely zero value. End the suffering, agree to what Russia wants, get NATO out and end the war. Zelenksy is a master actor and he played the role well. It's time he stopped crying on global platform 24x7 and drag the rest of the world into his war.

by noodle 5y ago

ShivShankaran 5y ago

The western media also runs rampant propaganda. The director of policy for reddit is an ex-nato person (no one know why reddit hired a non tech person for it) and one reason why reddit is extremely inundated with russia-ukraine war with heavy tilt for how awesome nato is. Note that even Jeremy Corbyn was a target of heavy propaganda by the media and especially reddit since he is anti-war. Anyone anti-war in the western media is quickly character assassinated. There is a reason why someone who is a real people person and how is really best suited to be president: bernie sanders lost against a rambling senile dude. TLDR: it's impossible to have an anti-war mindset or politician in the west. The propaganda will quickly destroy them.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
I think that you can be "anti-war" to the extent of saying that NATO should not directly be at war with Russia (if possible). I think you can get away with that position without being cancelled. If you're "anti-war" to the extent of saying "we shouldn't supply Ukraine with arms", or even worse, "Ukraine should just surrender", I think that most people rightly find those positions to be abhorrent. That looks far too much like Neville Chamberlain's politics (and morals) for most of our taste. And if you're "anti-war" in the sense of "this is all NATO's fault; Russia was right to invade", you get cancelled very quickly, because you have become indistinguishable from a Russian propagandist, and we know that there are plenty of Russian propagandists trying to influence the west's cultural mindset. If you have a thoughtful, considered reason to hold one of the positions I labeled problematic, you can probably express it on HN. You'll get argued with, you may get yelled at and downvoted, but you probably won't get banned. In the wider culture... no guarantees.
- native_samples 5y ago
  "we know that there are plenty of Russian propagandists trying to influence the west's cultural mindset." The interesting thing about this claim is the question of whether this is also propaganda. There have been an enormous number of high profile claims of Russian propaganda or interference in western affairs in the past decade, as far as I'm aware they always ended up collapsing, though sometimes people aren't aware of that. Hunter Biden's laptop story was claimed to be Russian propaganda and the New York Post's Twitter account was frozen for it. Nobody could even reshare it or link to it privately. The rest of the media united in claiming it was Russian propaganda. Now, years later the NYT admits that the contents are authenticated. For years people claimed Trump's election was due to Russian propaganda and electoral interference. A massive investigation followed, in which it turned out the primary evidence for this was made up. Then they tried the same tactic with Brexit. Nobody ever found any proof for this; the idea was absurd on its face and was quickly abandoned outside of only the most loony Remainer establishments. Then there were the claims of Russian hacking of electrical grids. Wrong. Russian servers being pinged by Trump's campaigns. Wrong. Dozens of other claims about Russian propaganda that I'd have to look up, but I know they've been made, always wrong. Then Russia invaded Ukraine, claiming it needs to be de-Nazified. Immediately described as Russian propaganda, until people start remembering about the unquestionably neo-Nazis battalions that have been fighting as an official part of the Ukrainian military for years and that, uh, this is actually true. The Russian soldiers actually are fighting Nazis. That doesn't mean the invasion was right! It does raise interesting historical/moral questions though, given the mention of Chamberlain. Would the Allies have been morally right to invade Germany and take out the Nazis before they invaded anywhere else? Or were the Allies correct to wait for them to make the first strike? I don't know and the question only just occurred to me to ask, but it seems relevant here. Now in fairness you made a weaker claim above, about "Russian propagandists" trying to "influence the cultural mindset", a claim worded sufficiently vaguely that it could mean almost anything. But this impression of pervasive Russian propaganda has come from somewhere. If not the endless run of false claims about the prevalence of Russian propaganda then from where?
- ShivShankaran 5y ago
  Russia and Putin should and will die for what's it worth. However my opinion has always been of cowardice: There is nothing more valuable than human life. There is no "courage" in fighting an idiotic war especially since all russia wanted was nato out and more especially since ukraine and russia are almost the same people. Holding on to donbas and similar russian territories have absolutely zero value. End the suffering, agree to what Russia wants, get NATO out and end the war. Zelenksy is a master actor and he played the role well. It's time he stopped crying on global platform 24x7 and drag the rest of the world into his war.