347
Disinformation Is Tearing America Apart
(time.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
347 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19087 readers
3288 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Not just the right.
Yeah but mostly.
Kinda irrelevant though. The Democratic party is our only real opportunity to defeat the Republican party. If the behavior of establishment Democrats, the ones who control the party, is knee capping our ability to do that it must be addressed.
Well yeah I totally agree there, I’m not a love it or leave it type. We should hold the people we support to the highest standard and be openly critical of issues, hypocrisy, and injustice. But it is mostly the other guys doing those three things be a pretty wide margin :P
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Wasn't it shown that e.g. Russia is targeting our side just as heavily?
The left don't fall for it as easily and they don't spread it as virulently, and when they do it's for what? Policies that generally benefit and are agreed on by enormous majorities of real people.
Did I miss the left not falling for Hunter Biden's laptop was not genuine? Or maybe the Steele dossier? Or maybe cloth masks will protect us from Covid?
I have not seen a single actual real left-leaning person who gives even half of a shit about Hunter's laptop, I think the most I heard about the Steele dossier was basically "we should look into that and see if it's legitimate or not," and cloth masks were never supposed to be a COVID killer, just a reasonable step to reduce transmission, much like the masks surgeons wear in surgery, and they remain even today a reasonable step to reduce airborne pathogens.
Did you just pop in from Bizarro-world?
edit: To be clear, we on the left do fall for misinformation and are coerced effectively constantly, but you chose terrible cases of this as examples.
Seems like maybe you missed the press about the Biden laptop being Russian disinformation, or the President himself calling it that during the debate?
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276
The fact that the NY Post's Twitter account was suspended, and Twitter did not allow the link to the article shared on the platform even via DMs. While FB deamplified the news may have had an effect on the election. So obviously some left leaning individuals cared about it very much and wanted the news about it shut down prior to the election.
Conflating the actions of "left-leaning" politicians and political agents with left-leaning voters is disingenuous. I'm sure those up to their ears in the muck care about what's happening in the swamp; those of us on dry land only care about what leaves the swamp, not most of what happens in it. I have real-world conversations about politics with people frequently; I have never once heard the laptop come up in these real-world conversations with left-leaning friends and colleagues as anything more than footnote. I'm sure mileage varies, I won't claim to speak for everyone, but personally I doubt my experience in this regard is uncommon.
Liberals too, yeah.
Rational people don't go into politics.
People that believe in liberty have to go into politics if we are to maintain any of our liberty. Get your propaganda out of here.
"People that believe in liberty"
Like I said, rational people don't go into politics.
Liberty is not an obtainable goal but an ideal, defined as "the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views".
This idealistic principle is fundamentally incompatible with Democratic Society, because my liberty to breathe clean air is an oppressive restriction to those who want the liberty to pollute it and vice versa.
Any political idealist who promises to support "liberty" without clarification should be treated with suspicion, as that sort of rhetoric is only useful for distracting from more specific policy goals.
Eh, there's a difference between believing in liberty, and believing in all the liberty.
Hence, the need for clarification. "Liberty" is a meaningless buzzword unless the person using it is specific about whose liberty to do what.
I dunno, I think it's pretty clear that it's basic freedoms within the law. Words like Libertarian takes over after that, going into dismantling a lot of the existing laws.
It's all over the writings around the founding of our country, at any rate, so it's not going anywhere no matter how much people fuck around with it.
Seems to me like the founders had a very specific kind of liberty in mind and a very narrow fraction of the population it would apply to..
Pretty much, yea. Things like that are why we have an amendment process though.
Sure, but the amendment process is predicated upon broad agreement between the dominant political parties and hasn't been used in 30 years, for an amendment about congressional salaries that took over 200 years to be ratified.
As justice delayed is justice denied, I don't think we can rely on constitutional amendments as sufficient. It took almost 200 years to finally ban poll taxes despite this country's constant rhetoric about liberty and justice being for all.
I don't think justice was much in the founder's minds as much as self-determination. The two are not the same at all. Justice is a more recent value.
I believe in Liberty above all else. I also believe you cannot be moral and a politician, and that voting is an immoral act.
I sympathize with your view, but cannot buy in to it
Liberty to what and for whom?
For everyone. I give no fucks who you are, live your life as you see fit.
That's not Liberty, that's not even Anarchism.
What you're describing is the Law of the Jungle.
Always easy to tell when people are commenting in bad faith.
Right? Saying they're for "Liberty" without offering a clue as to what they mean by such a vague term.