Fallacy is immediately implying anything created by Russia is propaganda meanwhile the U.S is boosting Radio Free Asia and multiple other outlets to coup and influence politics in third world countries.
So what? Can you actually point out any flaws or why they’re wrong? Or are we doing the same shit conservatives like to do?
it sounded like cfgaussian was saying this documentary was truthful just because the USA funds untruthful propaganda, I never said anything about the truthfulness of any specific piece of media
I can’t speak for the intended point by cfgaussian. However, in context, I think an underlying point here is that, at least for westerners, most of their distrust of Russia comes from US imperialist lies, so it is an important contrast to bring up the lies of the US empire. In other words, if it were the case that most things the west has said about Russia are false, what is there left as far as automatically distrusting their word goes? There are undoubtedly fair and reasonable ideological disagreements with modern day Russia from a communist standpoint, considering they are a far cry from USSR days now (thus “critical support” for them insofar as they are anti-imperialist). But in terms of speaking truthfully, I’ve not come across major reasons to think they have a habit of spinning elaborate lies. This isn’t to say they aren’t biased (all sources are to an extent) but there’s a distinction between that and going to great lengths to fabricate entire narratives in great detail. So whether they are de facto trustworthy is sort of beside the point. The point is that (again, at least for westerners, can’t speak for elsewhere) it would seem most of the reason to assume dishonesty from them comes from western imperialist lies about them. Westerners would not tend to make the same assumptions about, for example, a French documentary, in spite of its colonial history and part in imperialism.
Fallacy is immediately implying anything created by Russia is propaganda meanwhile the U.S is boosting Radio Free Asia and multiple other outlets to coup and influence politics in third world countries.
So what? Can you actually point out any flaws or why they’re wrong? Or are we doing the same shit conservatives like to do?
it sounded like cfgaussian was saying this documentary was truthful just because the USA funds untruthful propaganda, I never said anything about the truthfulness of any specific piece of media
I can’t speak for the intended point by cfgaussian. However, in context, I think an underlying point here is that, at least for westerners, most of their distrust of Russia comes from US imperialist lies, so it is an important contrast to bring up the lies of the US empire. In other words, if it were the case that most things the west has said about Russia are false, what is there left as far as automatically distrusting their word goes? There are undoubtedly fair and reasonable ideological disagreements with modern day Russia from a communist standpoint, considering they are a far cry from USSR days now (thus “critical support” for them insofar as they are anti-imperialist). But in terms of speaking truthfully, I’ve not come across major reasons to think they have a habit of spinning elaborate lies. This isn’t to say they aren’t biased (all sources are to an extent) but there’s a distinction between that and going to great lengths to fabricate entire narratives in great detail. So whether they are de facto trustworthy is sort of beside the point. The point is that (again, at least for westerners, can’t speak for elsewhere) it would seem most of the reason to assume dishonesty from them comes from western imperialist lies about them. Westerners would not tend to make the same assumptions about, for example, a French documentary, in spite of its colonial history and part in imperialism.