Scathing critique of the US propaganda machine that is aimed at narrative creation and control, and operates through the various Internet platforms and the corporate media as a whole.
CaitlinJohnstone.comHow Much Are We Prepared To Sacrifice To Help The US Win A Propaganda War Against Putin?
Caitlin Johnstone
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2022/04/16/how-much-are-we-prepared-to-sacrifice-to-help-the-us-win-a-propaganda-war-against-putin/
Consortium News
PATRICK LAWRENCE: The Great Acquiescence — Glory to Ukraine
See also
Different style but a similar message.
PATRICK LAWRENCE: The Great Acquiescence — Glory to Ukraine
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/04/16/patrick-lawrence-the-great-acquiescence-glory-to-ukraine/
23 comments:
We don't have to sacrifice anything... our rights will simply be taken away.
Not paying attention to the MSM is a blessing.
Johnstone is great. Just too bad hardly anyone listens to her.
To be brutally honest, I’ve never thought much of Johnstone. In actual fact, I don’t like her. To me, she looks a bit too much like an opinionated crazy cat lady, with a big mouth and half baked ideas.
But I have to give her credit for pointing out earlier something that I myself discovered independently much later: there is no longer even the pretence that ideas are to be judged by their truth or falsehood; now ideas are openly supported by whom they benefit, regardless of their truth content.
So a truth that benefits the bad guys (and their adversaries are necessarily bad guys) must be opposed by hook or by crook; a falsehood benefiting the good guys (and they are always the good guys) must be defended as unquestionably true, come what may.
It’s not that I never suspected that, quite to the contrary. But I never had seen anyone putting it explicitly, in black and white, publicly. The Admiral and the BBC episode Johnstone highlighted has an independent confirmation in this article (penned, irony of ironies) by a ABC (Oz) fact-checker:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-14/putin-disinformation-fake-war-ukraine-syria/100988412
In a nutshell: we have to cover whatever warts on the Ukrainian face and deny any scrap of reason assisting the Russian side, because what’s important is to build a straightforward, clear-cut narrative of Ukraine as David versus Russia as Goliath. NATO as good.
Thus Ukraine has no Nazi problem at all.
Well maybe they are anti-war and therefore have to takes sides with the attacked rather than the attacker,,,
iow if you are antiwar you have to take the Ukraine side..
Johnstone old art degree hypocrite paradox cat lady… not antiwar… although she writes at a place called “antiwar”…
“ Thus Ukraine has no Nazi problem at all.”
Who cares? If you are anti war it wouldn’t matter…
Don't be stupid Matt.
I am antiwar and I want the truth be told.
You are supposed to be an Xtian. Don't you people are supposed to want peace and truth?
Can your brain not understand that? Do you need a picture?
Johnstone is great. Just too bad hardly anyone listens to her.
Yet. I hope she is just one of a rising cadre of dissent that is neither left, nor right, nor center, but rather no BS.
Scott Ritter is also emerging in that light. Interest in him on YouTube is exploding.
We saw this happen before in the Sixties and Seventies, when getting an audience was even more difficult since this was prior to the Internet and the corporate media was even more closed than it is now. In fact, they are trying their best to return to those days. But the result was the creation of an alternative "underground" culture that eventually competed with and influenced the conventional culture of that time, even though it was co-opted to a degree. Still, it was a win of sorts. Now, MMT is part of that underground that can be viewed as a rising wave obscured by the wave that is cresting and breaking, eventually to recede.
satyameva jayate nānṛtaṃ — Truth alone triumphs, not falsehood
— Mundaka Upanishad, 3.1.6
satyameva jayate is the national motto of India.
our rights will simply be taken away.
About half of America is saying, over my dead body.
Well what does it do to your antiwar position if it was known that they have some Nazis there?
So if they have Nazis then it’s ok to be pro war?
It’s like you are saying “Ukraine is Nazis!”…
When then Ukraine has elections and elects TWO JEWS TO RUN THE WHOLE FUCKING PLACE!
LOL!
What all you guys are is if you are anti anything is anti US…
Just drop the whole charade with all this nazi bs and antiwar bs …
“Truth!” Bs…
Just admit it there is no shame in it…
Just say “ I’m biased antiUs”… just be straight with people…
Or just say “I’m biased anti Nato..” from international perspective.,
Matt doesn't do nuance.
The assertion of neo-Nazism has been set forth previously in posts and comments, with documentation. If one wants to object coherently, then object to the documented evidence.
For the record, I am anti-US establishment, including both parties, not "anti-US."
I am anti-NATO now that the reason for the existence of NATO, that is, the USSR, is no more, as well as being opposed to using NATO to further Western-dominated and US-led neoliberalism, neoimperialism, and neocolonialism that seeks to subordinate the Global South/East to the Global North/West permanent and also to the US using NATO as tool to cement hegemony. NATO served its purpose should be disbanded rather than being repurposed the way it is.
I am anti-Zionist and anti-apartheid, not anti-Semitic. Many Jewish people are anti-Zionist. Anti-Zionism doesn't imply anti-Semitism, although it is possible to be both. Do the Venn diagram.
I am also opposed to those that obscure the nuance involved here and equate criticism of US leaders and leadership with being "anti-US." It's the fallacy of confusing the part with the whole. Same with anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. The assertion that being anti-NATO implies being pro-Putin is also invalid since it is possible to be anti-NATO in the sense of anti neoliberalism, anti imperialism and anti colonialism without having any particular attitude toward Putin or Russia. It is an example of overextension of a concept beyond its scope.
For the umpteenth time, Caitlin Johnstone is not taking sides in the war.
Not taking sides is not an antiwar position…
I’m not taking sides (neutral) but I am not antiwar .. imo sometimes warfare is required…
She is not antiwar…. I know some antiwar people they are appalled at the whole thing…
She is taking the side of Russia…
“ Matt doesn't do nuance. ”
I don’t do paradox…. You’re conflating nuance with paradox…
She is not taking the side of Russia and as far as I know, she is antiwar.
Perhaps you're conflating an antiwar stance with pacifism.
If a foreign military were invading Australia, I wouldn't be surprised if she advocated war in defense of her homeland. Few people are willing to maintain a pacifist approach in sucha circumstance.
Pacifism is inactivity…. Active/Passive
That would be passivity.
Post a Comment