4 ms·
> Actually it is obviously inconsistent. What the hell are you talking about? That’s like saying it’s inconsistent for a basketball team to try and score point
by philwelch 2y ago
> Actually it is obviously inconsistent.
What the hell are you talking about? That’s like saying it’s inconsistent for a basketball team to try and score points while also trying to prevent the opposing team from also scoring points. It’s certainly adversarial, but so was the geopolitical relationship between the Soviet Union and the West.
> I think you meant to say…
Don’t patronize me. I meant to say exactly what I said.
- aguaviva 2y agoThe basic messaging ("Nuclear power is good for me, but not for thee") is plainly and obviously inconsistent. I'm genuinely at a loss to understand why you would contest this. The hypothesized messaging, that is. There's no evidence of such a propaganda campaign from Soviet side in those years (cover or overt), so this entire discussion is moot anyway.
- philwelch 2y agoIt would be inconsistent if the Soviet Union took that line in their own public messaging, but no one is alleging that.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- aguaviva 2y agoThere's no need to "allege" that they did. There was tons of propaganda to that effect in 1950s/1960s (just as there was in the U.S. at the time, though this has been largely forgotten). For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/k4iggr/atom_for_peaceful_purposes_soviet_poster_1960/#lightbox https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/k4iggr/a... It's also why the Chornobyl facility was officially named the V.I. Lenin Nuclear Power Plant, and so on. The only thing they didn't do was "promote anti-nuclear propaganda in the West".