Social Biden Ushers in the Ministry of Truth era

[So Fresh]

The biggest liars and criminals in the country determining what is or isn't disinformation? Lol

Trump lost

 

[Letssnuggle]

What? I didn't say propaganda isn't real, just that it does not change whether an election is fair. Fairness in an election has to do with valid voting, not that some people are swayed by false information.

Your position that government propaganda does not circumvent democracy is really weird.

Liberals are simply lost, twisting themselves into knots with this shit. I mean, if a position such as this can't be common ground that's insane.

 

[MoparOrNoCar]

You haven't read what I've been writing apparently. I don't think what the Biden admin is doing with the board is a good thing. On the contrary I've been very explicit about my dislike for it, both because they are too biased, untrustworthy and incompetent to direct any board regarding to misinformation, as well as it just furthering mistrust between voters and fueling conspiracy theories. My issue is not with you disagreeing with the board, it's with the radicalism attached to it and the complete inability to see what's happening to yourself (not necessarily you in particular).

Re-read my posts and then your reply again, and think about what I said with lines drawn not being able to view anything objectively. The idea that the Biden admin is a radical left wing administration, outside of their woke pandering, is far removed from their actual policy platform.

I don't have time to go back and reread all your opinions but I don't care if the most centric admin of all time takes over in the next election, I don't want the government governing over anything that has to do with speech.

There are no trustworthy fact checking agencies out there. They're all biased in one way or another. You put dollar signs in front of people and they become even more biased. Every single one of our politicians are bought and paid for and so will this new agency. Same with the FDA. It's why most people don't trust any of them anymore.

The Biden admin tried to strong arm most companies and businesses to force their people into vaccination under authoritarian rule. They constantly got up on that podium and lied to the American people about covid. Don't tell me that they aren't radical. This is the most radical admin I've seen in my lifetime.

 

[brothir]

Your position that government propaganda does not circumvent democracy is really weird.

Liberals are simply lost, twisting themselves into knots with this shit. I mean, if a position such as this can't be common ground that's insane.

Well, I don't grant you that government propaganda has been verified here, so I don't go along with the rest of the argument. But the government having to engage in propaganda and being unable to just fabricate election results outright is a far preferable position to be in than the other way around. In general, an administration having opinions on something doesn't invalidate an election in terms of being free and fair.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Well, maybe you could help me. My understanding is that this Board has been planned since the latter part of Trump's presidency, it's under the DHS, and they seem to have as a priority to address misinformation from the outside of the US. If they, against all reason, tried to shut down any media or "cause suffering", whoever targeted would say "nuh uh" and point to the constitution, and it would cost the DHS a hefty sum. Is any of that incorrect?

No, I don't think so (i.e., I think that's right). There's no indication that that's what's planned. I think it's pure hysteria.

 

[Jack V Savage]

So if the government isn’t altruistic — how can we trust them to be the arbitrators of truth? Does it not follow logic they would claim things to be “disinformation” that were politically unfavorable to them?

The arbitrators of truth? You're allowed to say if you think something is false. Does that make you the arbitrator of truth? And anyway, the answer is no. The logic is missing a few steps.

Your argument is that this is no more institutionalized than Trump spouting “fake news”.

No, having a process is better than just having someone spouting off. In terms of teeth, it's the same, though.

I argue that it is for obvious reasons. You claim that you wouldn’t have batted an eye if Trump established a “fake news” wing of the DHS. Which is obviously not how you’d react.

Of course it is. Don't project your petty partisan concerns onto people who don't share them. If I think that anyone is claiming something is untrue when it is true, I will disagree with that. But I don't deny that anyone should have the right to tell the truth to the best of their ability and get it wrong.

 

[brothir]

No, I don't think so (i.e., I think that's right). There's no indication that that's what's planned. I think it's pure hysteria.

So the obvious conclusion seems to be that Bald1 can't actually refute anything I said. That's to be expected based on another recent experience I had with him. I've been mostly gone for 3 years or so, and the Russia's war on Ukraine brought me back. Some weeks ago in relation to the killings in Bucha, Carlson had a segment where he asked if the corpses there were planted, and Bald1 approved that line of questioning. I tried to point out that the logical conclusion of that question made no sense, and he called me uncharitable, a retard and that I was working within my limitations.

I agree, I don't think I'll get an answer to my question, thousand pages or not.

 

[Sano]

Well, maybe you could help me. My understanding is that this Board has been planned since the latter part of Trump's presidency, it's under the DHS, and they seem to have as a priority to address misinformation from the outside of the US. If they, against all reason, tried to shut down any media or "cause suffering", whoever targeted would say "nuh uh" and point to the constitution, and it would cost the DHS a hefty sum. Is any of that incorrect?

I think that's a tad too nuanced for the "Ministry of truth" storyline.

 

[hansolo]

Here's a wake up call for the libs. If Trump or Desantis get elected in 2024, they get to decide who fills this role.

 

[brothir]

I think that's a tad too nuanced for the "Ministry of truth" storyline.

I hope not, because it's not like I have any deep understanding of it. If anything the "Orwellian" angle would need to be more nuanced by comparison, as there's no direct facts that point to this Board being able to distort facts as far as the average American could access media, so there would have to be supposed some chilling or intimidating effect indirectly. Making that argument would require a lot of ifs and subjective interpretation, whereas I think this case and the facts are fairly simple, dry and unexciting.

 

[Sano]

I hope not, because it's not like I have any deep understanding of it. If anything the "Orwellian" angle would need to be more nuanced by comparison, as there's no direct facts that point to this Board being able to distort facts as far as the average American could access media, so there would have to be supposed some chilling or intimidating effect indirectly. Making that argument would require a lot of ifs and subjective interpretation, whereas I think this case and the facts are fairly simple, dry and unexciting.

I think you lost them after "Orwellian".

I'm of course in step with what you're saying here and it's a very rational way to look at it. Or rather, a way more aligned with reality. Problem is I bet few in here will engage you in conversation and address the point, outside of something about the election being stolen, globalist cabal etc.

I still think this was a bad move by the Biden administration precisely because of how it's fueled the conspiracy theories, and how untrustworthy they are, but reading about it more I jumped the gun and gave too much credence to how it was portrayed by TS.

 

[brothir]

I think you lost them after "Orwellian".

I'm of course in step with what you're saying here and it's a very rational way to look at it. Or rather, a way more aligned with reality. Problem is I bet few in here will engage you in conversation and address the point, outside of something about the election being stolen, globalist cabal etc.

I still think this was a bad move by the Biden administration precisely because of how it's fueled the conspiracy theories, and how untrustworthy they are, but reading about it more I jumped the gun and gave too much credence to how it was portrayed by TS.

I have to disagree on viewing it from that lens in terms of being a mistake or not. The process for creating the Board started during Trump's presidency, so this could be like it was with Afghanistan where Biden is handed a live hand grenade, and he either passes it on or rightfully says that it's gonna explode and it has to be dealt with. And regardless of how he would've done it, how many would've been won over if it hadn't been established? It's not a fair game of "Biden does X and I'm unhappy; doesn't do X and I'm happy", but "Biden does X and I'll take the opportunity to say I'm unhappy; doesn't do X and I'll wait for next time to be unhappy".

 

[Bald1]

So the obvious conclusion seems to be that Bald1 can't actually refute anything I said. That's to be expected based on another recent experience I had with him. I've been mostly gone for 3 years or so, and the Russia's war on Ukraine brought me back. Some weeks ago in relation to the killings in Bucha, Carlson had a segment where he asked if the corpses there were planted, and Bald1 approved that line of questioning. I tried to point out that the logical conclusion of that question made no sense, and he called me uncharitable, a retard and that I was working within my limitations.

I agree, I don't think I'll get an answer to my question, thousand pages or not.

Aaaw, this is cute.

Of course you should be questioning any narrative that can motivate people to extremes. To do otherwise is irresponsible. Kinda like how many Russian people bought Putin's lies hook line and sinker. Therein lies the answer to your question.

You do realize what my opinion is on Russia's invasion of Ukraine, right?

 

[brothir]

Aaaw, this is cute.

Of course you should be questioning any narrative that can motivate people to extremes. To do otherwise is irresponsible. Kinda like how many Russian people bought Putin's lies hook line and sinker. Therein lies the answer to your question.

You do realize what my opinion is on Russia's invasion of Ukraine, right?

But if that questioning leads to blatantly illogical answers, you then have to question what or who prompted those questions to begin with. Your failure to do so, and your unpleasant way of responding to those who pointed it out to you, is not excused by generally being in favor of Ukrainians. Do you know what being uncharitable means?

 

[fedorthegoat777]

Worst idea that any President has ever had. If fully implemented, it destroys America and leads to a totalitarian state. Just move to China if you want to live in something like that.

 

[Bald1]

But if that questioning leads to blatantly illogical answers, you then have to question what or who prompted those questions to begin with. Your failure to do so, and your unpleasant way of responding to those who pointed it out to you, is not excused by generally being in favor of Ukrainians. Do you know what being uncharitable means?

My unpleasant replies reflected your own abrasive way of reacting to me being open to more information and not automatically shouting down those asking questions. Once it was clear that Russia was indeed commiting war crimes I dropped it. Correct?

Charitable discourse goes both ways, right? Don't expect me to treat you with kid gloves if you come out swinging. Like in this condescending post of yours.

 

[sickc0d3r]

I think you lost them after "Orwellian".

I'm of course in step with what you're saying here and it's a very rational way to look at it. Or rather, a way more aligned with reality. Problem is I bet few in here will engage you in conversation and address the point, outside of something about the election being stolen, globalist cabal etc.

I still think this was a bad move by the Biden administration precisely because of how it's fueled the conspiracy theories, and how untrustworthy they are, but reading about it more I jumped the gun and gave too much credence to how it was portrayed by TS.

It’s yet another example of the democrats Mr. Magooing themselves into an image dilemma with well intended action.

 

[Cherry Brigand]

alright, so what kind of power and authority is this ministry of truth going to hold? will they be able to construct concentration camps, and put all of the chuds in there after they keep repeating the same lies and misinformation on twitter about how the 2020 election was stolen, how eating deworming agents kills covid, and the rest of their fairy tales?

hey. whatever they gotta do to keep dishonest people from spreading their harmful and manipulative bullshit around, then power to the people i guess. build those cages joe!

Bet you never thought the straight line of gay marriage to teaching third graders about trans sex was a thing either.

 

[sickc0d3r]

The answer is obviously not, but it's an inane question because the logic of the answer still doesn't lead to any meaningful limitations. Is your argument that, for instance, federal prisons should all be dismantled because the federal government is not perfect? How about taxes?

They are literally locking people in cages for what they consider to be “illegal”. It’s Orwellian!

 

[brothir]

My unpleasant replies reflected your own abrasive way of reacting to me being open to more information and not automatically shouting down those asking questions. Once it was clear that Russia was indeed commiting war crimes I dropped it. Correct?

Charitable discourse goes both ways, right? Don't expect me to treat you with kid gloves if you come out swinging. Like in this condescending post of yours.

Unfortunately, you "being open to more information" led to you being open to deceitful questions aiming to spin a very serious issue. That's not trivial, and you can't excuse yourself from that in terms of being open-minded. I also think you horribly misread the level of abrasiveness, and calling me a retard is certainly an escalation.

Regardless, if you truly had the rational view of it, you could've just explained it calmly. Instead I think you deflected heavily in refusing to engage with certain points, and that your hostility was more to dissuade people from pushing further. And of course I'm being condescending to you now: you called me uncharitable, a retard and that I was working within my limitations. Hello?

By the way, after you called me uncharitable I asked for a return to charitable discussion, which you never answered. Similarly, in this thread I asked you why you said I was flat out wrong, and you haven't responded to that either. Kind of a pattern. Nastiness instead of answers, rather than nastiness and answers.