4 ms·
I also wonder: if roles were reversed and (say for example) the US government was blocking parts of the internet to stop rampant CCP propaganda during a war wit
by ifwinterco 6mo ago
I also wonder: if roles were reversed and (say for example) the US government was blocking parts of the internet to stop rampant CCP propaganda during a war with China - would "NetFreedom Pioneers" be advocating for ways for Americans to get around the block so they could continue to consume CCP propaganda because "muh freedom".
I expect not to be honest.
Not saying the cause is wrong necessarily but let's just call a spade a spade - this is aimed to help one side and one side only, "freedom" has nothing to do with it
- tgma 6mo agoIt appears they do receive funds from US government so while I cannot directly answer your hypothetical question, I imagine they would lose at least some of their fundings. The author of the IEEE article is receiving compensation as Executive Director. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/455274850#:~:text=Net%20income%20($),1%2C511%2C563 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/455... That said, I'm sure CCP is spending more than enough to make sure Americans get its propaganda, so I wouldn't be too worried if I were in your shoes.
- vrganj 6mo ago"Freedom" as used by American politicians has always been a euphemism for "the interests of the American ruling class".
- yubblegum 6mo ago[flagged]
- iamnothere 6mo agoYes, I should be able to consume content from anywhere to build a more accurate picture of reality regardless of military conflicts. Because of “muh freedom.” Truth is the first casualty of war, yet truth is required to operate a democracy effectively. Responsible citizens will do their best to see through the fog of war by aggregating multiple perspectives. I acknowledge governments do not see things the same way.