Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
Mike_L wrote:
Thanks also for the posting of the video: The Alt-right Playbook: How to Radicalize a Normie
(http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2766098.html)
Mike_L wrote:I've watched it all the way through and found it very worthwhile. I have definitely seen each of the following in multiple videos:
* the 'repetitive' and 'mantric' nature of the arguments (very true)
* the reliance on "affect" / delivery style over fact-based content (very true)
* "stressful, even while calming" (very true)... "every emotion is converted into anger" (very true)
* contradictory conspiracies (very true)
Not an exaggeration to call the Innuendo Studios vid a thoroughly refreshing watch.
I will set aside time for more of their videos.
Seabass wrote:Well Mike, I'm glad Spearthrower was able to get through to you. There's still an elephant in the room though, and its name is RT. I understand wanting news sources that do not have a pro-West bias, but RT is definitely not the answer.
AP News, Reuters, AFP, DW News are some objective, non-biased news sources that I'd recommend. They're all Western based though. Perhaps some others might have non-West recommendations.
Do you think you would be able to let go of RT, or are you too attached to it? When I see people get attached to propaganda like RT, Fox News, Young Turks, etc., from the outside looking in, it almost looks like an addiction.
Over the last four years I've felt at times like I've become addicted to anti-Trump media. I've tried to unplug from it only to find that everyone else is also obsessed with Trump and that it is impossible to remain connected to other humans and not have someone bring him up eventually. I cannot wait for him to be out of office and out of my head...
Seabass wrote:Well Mike, I'm glad Spearthrower was able to get through to you. There's still an elephant in the room though, and its name is RT. I understand wanting news sources that do not have a pro-West bias, but RT is definitely not the answer.
AP News, Reuters, AFP, DW News are some objective, non-biased news sources that I'd recommend. They're all Western based though. Perhaps some others might have non-West recommendations.
Do you think you would be able to let go of RT, or are you too attached to it? When I see people get attached to propaganda like RT, Fox News, Young Turks, etc., from the outside looking in, it almost looks like an addiction.
Over the last four years I've felt at times like I've become addicted to anti-Trump media. I've tried to unplug from it only to find that everyone else is also obsessed with Trump and that it is impossible to remain connected to other humans and not have someone bring him up eventually. I cannot wait for him to be out of office and out of my head...
Mike_L wrote:It's RT.com. They host writers with a diversity of views: left-leaning (George Galloway, Finian Cunningham, etc.), right-leaning (Mitchell Feierstein, Guy Birchall, etc.), centrist (Damian Wilson), transgender (Sophia Narwitz), etc. Anonymous pieces are probably written by Kremlin-linked writers.
The_Metatron wrote:
What you guys were talking about a bit earlier about being made angry, I can confirm that was happening to me, too. It was the facebook algorithm that had me in a positive feedback loop of fucking anger. This wasn't even part of the bad guys' playbook, it was the way these platforms work. They just feed you more and more of whatever it is you read or watched. Even if it's actual news, the constant bombardment makes you see craziness everywhere.
Spearthrower wrote:I would never go to RT, Fox, Young Turks, The Daily Mail (or other British rags), or Breitbart - to name some better known ones - because their spin is practically an art form where every word is curated for most visceral effect leaving little remaining untreated facts. I'm nearly immune to social media thanks to refusing outright to partake in any form of social media at all, including any type of YT 'news' shows, and the only time I ever see it is when it's posted on a forum like this, or someone for some reason emails it to me. I will very rarely view places like CNN or the Guardian because too much of the news is coloured by opinion, and even when I share that opinion, I don't need it reinforced.
felltoearth wrote:
Personally, I think it’s a terrible idea from a cultural standpoint. So a bunch of white people in the past decided skin colour was a thing and sorted people out. As a result, especially black people in 50s to now have culturally coalesced around blackness. Now when finally faced with what race means some white people say “I don’t see colour”* and decide they want that all to go away and again deny their cultural identity.
Not my decision TBH.
*a statement my wife has heard on more than one occasion.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Hermit wrote:I love being terminally curious - and sceptical.
Hermit wrote:
Understood. Through personal choice and material circumstance I just have a lot more time than you to trawl the vast internet. I also gain what I regard as useful material from even the weirdest sites.
Mike_L wrote:I have been addressed as "mlungu" (pronounced "m-loongoo") a couple of times here in SA.
It was long understood that the word was a pejorative, meaning "white scum" or "white froth off the sea" (a reference to the fact that European settlers arrived in ships).
However...
...concluding that it is not a derogatory word.
In my case, it was used neutrally toward me in the one instance, and insultingly/angrily in the other. So I'm still not quite sure...
Hermit wrote:Mike_L wrote:I have been addressed as "mlungu" (pronounced "m-loongoo") a couple of times here in SA.
It was long understood that the word was a pejorative, meaning "white scum" or "white froth off the sea" (a reference to the fact that European settlers arrived in ships).
However...
...concluding that it is not a derogatory word.
In my case, it was used neutrally toward me in the one instance, and insultingly/angrily in the other. So I'm still not quite sure...
Not quite sure of what?
Not being a mind reader, I don't know where you are going with this, so I'll merely suggest that being addressed as mlungu is not evidence that homo sapiens sapiens can be divided into objectively existing separate human races.
Spearthrower wrote:...
Ironically, I've been called names and had it inferred that I'm a racist for that by members of supposedly progressive circles.
...
Mike_L wrote:I have been addressed as "mlungu" (pronounced "m-loongoo") a couple of times here in SA.
It was long understood that the word was a pejorative, meaning "white scum" or "white froth off the sea" (a reference to the fact that European settlers arrived in ships).
However...
...concluding that it is not a derogatory word.
In my case, it was used neutrally toward me in the one instance, and insultingly/angrily in the other. So I'm still not quite sure...
'Would the honorable out country person be needing a knife and fork?'
Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest