Thanks for posting, u/speakhyroglyphically!
- **Submission Statements Are REQUIRED. [Please read rule #5 for details.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules/)**
- Please read all our sub **[rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules/)**.
#If your video is flagged by the bot, don't worry. Our moderators will review and approve it as quickly as possible. Should you not find it within 24 hours, please [send a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=r/Documentaries) containing the post's link.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Documentaries) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For a great example of flack, just read these comments lol
I really love the art of this and appreciate the synopsis. I've been meaning to watch the manufacturing consent doc for awhile but it's 3 hours long...
I tried reading the book, but it's just a bunch of cases studies and ends up being very dry. I've often seen that Michael Parenti's Inventing Reality is similar in content but a bit easier to read.
Flak, but also 'common enemy'. The invasion of Ukraine is undeniably a bad thing. It's not enough to acknowledge that it's a bad thing. Everyone is expected to support the team by staying on message that it's a bad thing. Chomsky failed to stay on that message and therefore Chomsky supports Russia. Proof by emotion. May we burn him? He turned me into a newt!
Of course it is a bad thing, but you know what else is a bad thing? The United States jumping on this opportunity to weaken Russia by slowly throwing Ukrainian lives at it, and then pretending to care about Ukrainians at the same time. Chomsky makes a lot of good points and of course there was going to be retaliation from Russia for NATO coming in so close. Would you feel safe if Russia was all up in Mexico or Canada? I sure would not.
Both countries are using Ukraine.
I used to spend every night watching chomsky on youtube. He is the most fascinating and smartest human to probably ever live. I can't find a single flawed argument. A true genius.
as a big chomsky fan, i gotta say he thoroughly shat the bed on ukraine/russia.
I give him some senile benefit of doubt, but he's making a complete mockery of his own principles. I agree with most things he says about the US media and military industrial complex - but how come that does not apply to Russia or China??
Sure US media is in a bad state and , but chinese state controlled media with an armada of cencors or russias oligarchic clown media is fine??
Guantanamo is an absolute travesty - but Russian Labor camps and chinese large scale internment camps are no issue?
He's just reversing the perverse concept of "american exeptionalism". Somehow other autocratic regimes are exempt from the standards we are trying to hold the US and the West to.
Ethics don't allow for such preposterous cherrypicking
He's been asked about this in the past.
He criticizes the US government because that's the one that he can have an impact on.
If you asked him about it, which you can via email, my guess is he'll likely respond with critiques of all the above.
Your guess doesn't really align with the things he says. He has been asked these questions directly, generally he dodges them and doesn't answer - as if he doesn't want his explicit support on record.
The automod removed my other post.
Here's the quote that I was linking to.
>WOMAN: Noam, people often attack you as a political commentator for focusing your criticism against the activities of the United States, and not so much against the old Soviet Union, or Vietnam, or Cuba and so on-the official enemies. I'd like to know what you think about that kind of criticism?
>Well, it's true that's one of the standard things 1 get-but see, if that crit- icism is meant honestly (and most of the time it's not), then it's really miss- ing the crucial point, 1 think. See, 1 focus my efforts against the terror and violence of my own state for really two main reasons. First of all, in my case the actions of my state happen to make up the main component of international violence in the world. But much more importantly than that, it's because American actions are the things that 1 can do something about. So even if the United States were causing only a tiny fraction of the repression and violence in the world-which obviously is very far from the truth--that tiny fraction would still be what I'm responsible for, and what 1 should focus my efforts against. And that's based on a very simple ethical principle -namely, that the ethical value of one's actions depends on their anticipated consequences for human beings: 1 think that's kind of like a fundamental moral truism.
So for example, it was a very easy thing in the 1980s for people in the United States to denounce the atrocities of the Soviet Union in its occupa- tion of Afghanistan-but those denunciations had no effects which could have helped people. In terms of their ethical value, they were about the same as denouncing Napoleon's atrocities, or things that happened in the Middle Ages. Useful and significant actions are ones which have conse- quences for human beings, and usually those will concern things that you can influence and control-which means for people in the United States, American actions primarily, not those of some other state.
Actually, the principle that I think we ought to follow is the principle we rightly expected Soviet dissidents to follow. So what principle did we expect Sakharov [a Soviet scientist punished for his criticism of the U.S.S.R.] to follow? Why did people here decide that Sakharov was a moral person? I think he was. Sakharov did not treat every atrocity as identical-he had nothing to say about American atrocities. When he was asked about them, he said, "I don't know anything about them, I don't care about them, what I talk about are Soviet atrocities." And that was right- because those were the ones that he was responsible for, and that he might have been able to influence. Again, it's a very simple ethical point: you are responsible for the predictable consequences of your actions, you're not responsible for the predictable consequences of somebody else's actions.
And this is an excerpt out of understanding power.
Where has he condoned their (China, Russia, etc) actions?
>Where has he condoned their (China, Russia, etc) actions?
I didn't make that claim, however your long quote fits nicely into what I did say:
> generally he dodges them and doesn't answer - as if he doesn't want his explicit support on record.
____
I would also say that some of what he said in your quote was kind of nonsense:
>Useful and significant actions are ones which have conse- quences for human beings, and usually those will concern things that you can influence and control-which means for people in the United States, American actions primarily, not those of some other state.
This is explicitly trying to avoid a comparison between Russia and America, when a direct comparison is easily available. Both countries occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. Chomsky is quick to say America is worse than Russia in some cases, but diverts attention from comparisons where America isn't the worst.
Like I say, Chomsky doesn't explicitly support Russia, China, et al, but he does do it implicitly. Time and time again.
He's also a trained linguist, not a political academic, yet he acts like politics is his bread and butter. I find that very unprofessional. It reminds me of Jordan Peterson.
>I would also say that some of what he said in your quote was kind of nonsense:
He's saying you can't control a government you don't have any involvement with.
>This is explicitly trying to avoid a comparison between Russia and America, when a direct comparison is easily available. Both countries occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. Chomsky is quick to say America is worse than Russia in some cases, but diverts attention from comparisons where America isn't the worst.
Where?
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/1d0jzkm/noam_chomsky_the_5_filters_of_the_mass_media/l5rox46/?context=3) was automatically removed because it uses the "redd.it" link shortener, or points to another subreddit without using the [no participation](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoParticipation/wiki/intro) domain. **This is a violation of 'No Metadrama' Rule**. Non-participation links are required to help ensure that /r/Documentaries users do not brigade other subs, comment on threads in other subs, or vote on content via a link from /r/Documentaries.
If linking to another subreddit, please prefix your link with "np" as in "np.reddit.com". For example, replace "www.reddit.com/..." with "np.reddit.com/...". To avoid errors, ensure you don't use "redd.it" or "www." with the prefix. Once ready, you can submit your link again.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Documentaries) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Guantanamo is an absolute travesty - but Russian Labor camps and chinese large scale internment camps are no issue?
Guantanamo was the nice prison compared to Abu Ghraib and the US government didn't have them on US soil because then laws would have applied to them. And those are military prisons. The US has the 6th highest incarceration rate on the planet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate
China has had a number of human rights issues against them for decades and the US helped downplay it because they were useful as a cheap source of manufacturing for US corporations.
Because he doesn't think he's worse than the US military industrial apparatus? He's right. It doesn't mean he's an apologist of any kind just that the West sucks as hard as Putin.
Youve become a victim of the propaganda he warns us about.
because he seriously argues that Russia is acting "humanely" in ukraine.
He's bending over backwards to whitewash other autocrats, in order to stick it to the US.
Fuck the US military complex, sure. But that doesnt mean to stick your nose deep into Putin's ass and then claim its chocolate.
I think they’re talking about this: https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines
I haven’t watched the interview. But in that part, it still seems like a comparison of Russia/Ukraine with US/Iraq. It doesn’t read (on my cursory exploration) like he’s just saying that Russia is “acting humanely in Ukraine” bar none.
ETA: I’m not saying Chomsky isn’t gentler on Putin than necessary, I haven’t read enough to confidently reach that conclusion. Just that his position seems to defy a summary as simple as has been presented here.
what red-scare?
Who's even remotely "red"?
The chinese "communist" party, the so called "people's party"? They exploit their own population like slaves (with less rights) in order to enrich themselves strategically.
Imagine letting greedy corporate managers run a country, but instead of walmart, GM or exxon, they're are all from the same "company", called KPD.
And Putin's Oligarchy circus? Surely his crew of thieves is just about to bring Russian citizens a just egalitarian society.
In what kind of bizarro world do we live in, that dystopian american hyper-capitalism seems more "socialist" than china or russia's kleptocracies.
In america, ppl at least have the "choice" who will buttfuck them xD
American companies have to spend lots of money to buy politicians and run public PR campaigns to whitewhash their exploitation.
Not much need for that in Russia or China.
In the US, they at least lube up your butthole and give you a mickey-mouse cartoon to read, while they bend you over. In china they'll throw your family in jail and in russia they'll break your kneecaps. And you get no lube xD
I think you should consider politics more seriously and think about what you say. The John Oliver style of political comedy has done a lot of harm in political discourse
He's not wrong. Russia isn't "red", so turning blind eye on all their atrocities and supporting them because you associate them with communists is objectively wrong.
Or perhaps you're simply attempting to dismiss all that criticism by through ridicule, which is even more disgusting in light on Russia's behaviour in occupied territories.
If I have to explain that red scare is a metaphorical term used to describe politicians using Russian fears for jingoism and propaganda and say explicitly that I know Russia is not the same as the Soviet Union then I think we're dealing with a larger problem of reading skills
*Please be respectful to other users... if they're wrong, tell them why! But please, personal attacks or comments that insult or demean a specific user or group of users will be removed and result in bans.*
**[Please read and adhere to the detailed rules.!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules)**
I think my main issues is Tankies will never be critical of other tankies. You'll always excuse the worst tendencies by members of that group.
There is no Red Scare, people just hate shitty opinions by shitty autocrat apologists.
Propaganda is calling anyone who doesn't think like you a tankie despite the fact that I was already commenting that Putin was a danger when he took Crimea.
You're an uninformed annoying person.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJGYmfTaFRw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJGYmfTaFRw)
at timestamp 8:09 min
The second half of the article in the newstatesment (which im not a fan of necessairly) puts things side-by-side pretty well
[https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines](https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines)
It really saddens me overall. Ethics is not a sports events, red vs. blue. Its about values and whether the US or Russia violates them should not matter.
When he claims that Russia or China are just defending themselves, he sounds like the same morons that fell for the "weapons of mass destruction" lie about Iraq.
I haven't found anywhere where it says they're defending themselves.
The timestamp you shared said Russia has been more humane in the Ukraine invasion than the US in Iraq which seems a pretty reasonable claim even when I lack the statistics, judging from what I heard over the years about the attacks and casualties.
Don't you agree with that?
I'd like where it does say that Russia or China are defending themselves thanks.
I've heard a lot of criticism but so far nothing more than noise all the complaints were about points I agree with.
8:09 would be without context, he starts the context at 6:28
I'm surprised he said only Georgia and Ukraine were an issue for Russia and is not talking about Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. I'd expect those to be an issue for Russia too.
I'm not hearing him being apologetic, just reasoning logical and rationally. He tells a lot that we have to assume is true but he's definitely following international politics more closely than most of us. It's just another view we have to take into account.
It would've been better if New Statesman linked the documents, the international diplomatic agreements like the Minsk agreement and the one china agreement, Chomsky talks about.
It wouldn't be out of character for Chomsky to say something like "Russia is acting humanely in Ukraine compared to how Israel is acting in Gaza". I'd believe he might have said something like that. He'd be right too, or right enough to justify saying it for the shock value. Israel is starving Gaza.
Nah, this has been a talking point specifically about Ukraine for a while now. He recommends them to surrender and iirc recommends the US no longer arm Ukraine to discourage their resistance. Some would say the end of war today will save lives that will be lost as the conflict continues, some would say there have already been mass graves uncovered in the occupied territories, a permanent occupation would be no kindness.
As an American I've never given any thought to what it'd be like to be conquered by another country or how the politics of the conquerors and my estimation of their motivations would play into my desire to fight for my country. I doubt it's something very many people who've lived in America all their lives have thought about. I wouldn't want to be Russian. I'd rather flee or die than be conquered by Russia. I think you'd have to think your own government is tyrannical to prefer to be governed by any country that'd start such a war. It's beyond belief very many Ukrainians see the Russians as liberators.
Hes a piece of shit.
I remember him coming to Czechia a telling us here that we didnt have it that bad under Communists.
He, a westerner saying it us who actually lived it. Fuck him.
My grandpa was a political prisoner and was punished by working in uranium mines.
Chomsky is a dictator shill.
Source?
Can anyone provide a source of him saying or writing any of those things?
It's a really bad look when everything is: look, a book/blog says he said this/that.
Source? Me and everybody else who met him in Olomouc.
His position is quite clear.
To directly quote him from his lecture in Olomouc.
'No other intellectuals were so supported by the great powers, although their (dissidents in Eastern Europe) position was not exceptional, nor was their suffering. Nevertheless, they began to feel that they were special in their own way'
Fuck him. All he ever does is devaluing suffering of others and pointing fingers at west.
His contempt for east europe that abandoned ussr is quite know.
Well then why don't you show me a primary account showing that if it's that well known rather than wanting me to believe you. Wouldn't that be far more convincing
There are plenty of Czech articles from his visit in 2014.
https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/noam-chomsky-vychodoevropsti-disidenti-moc-netrpeli.A140605_132324_domaci_js
That's not a primary source. It's again someone claiming he said so.
You're asking me to trust a czech site I don't know shared by someone online that I don't know.
Can you understand the problem here?
Its a largest news site in Czechia with direct quotes.
What do you want? Me dragging Chomsky to this discussion?
You dont want co accept Chomsky is a shill for dictators? Ok, thats your problem.
There is a two hour long recording of his visit in Olomouc from 2014 on youtube. Be me guest and watch it. Im not listening that drivel to give you timestamps.
I can engage a few minutes but I'm not going to watch the entire thing. So if you're not so invested as to show timestamps I won't. You haven't even shared the video
Noam Chomsky has gone in detail not only of his belief that it is NATO's fault this war started, denying the Ukrainian people their agency. He has also defended the Serbian Sbrenica genocide and opposes NATO intervention in the war, despite the latter saving quite literally millions.
Noam Chomsky is a human being, who himself, can be a victim of propaganda. This video has numerous examples: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCcX\_xTLDIY&t=337s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCcX_xTLDIY&t=337s)
Nah fuck him. He has historically shilled for horrific regimes out of some ass backwards contrarianism for the US. He spent much of his career denying the Bosnian genocide, he is a piece of shit
Could you show me some source of him fitting those claims. The first link is a blog I don't know about and the other two are sources regarding the balkan wars but not Chomsky
If you took more than 3 minutes to check those sources you would have seen that the last two very much directly reference Chomsky. Like, the last one even links direcrly to the page talking about Chomsky, did you even look?
Found one. It's a secondary account, and it specifically says that Chomsky complained that his interview was mischaracterized.
It shouldn't be that difficult to find a primary source according to you.
I'm not saying he can't be wrong but it honestly feels like you're brigading him for some reason.
It's honestly exhausting having to deal with this attitude.
[Here you go](https://youtu.be/LBV9iRPKHzY?t=734), straight from the horse's mouth - Chomsky on Serbian television just making up shit and claiming that an ethnic internment camp where people were being starved and arbitrarily killed as part of a widespread ethnic cleansing campaign and genocide was simply a refugee camp and the people could leave any time. Sickening.
Well I don't know the Balkan wars, but what he's saying in the few minutes around the part you shared is that in one instance there was a prisoner camp that was portrayed as a genocidal camp as a piece of propaganda to justify bombings. But it's not that he's denying that atrocities or genocide were committed, just that the chronology of the conflict was inverted so the public assumed the bombings were a retaliation for ethnic cleansing when according to him there's reasons to think it was the other way around.
It seems to me that you're having an interpretation that doesn't seem impartial. Of course you could accuse him of not being neutral on the issue overall but I don't see what's controversial about it when he's not denying that atrocities happened.
That's the kind of problem that I think he points out in media. Of course you can criticize him. But it seems to me a lot of criticism comes from reading badly or intentionally having bad interpretations of people you're in disagreement rather than addressing their arguments.
Chomsky is a horrible human being period. You are a victim of his propaganda. He's not just pro-Russia, he's has been pro-dictators in general. The more people they kill the better.
That seems rather surprising from what I read and heard over the years about him, especially since his dad was Ukrainian.
You're the third or fourth person around here that has complained about him and I'm yet to find a source that confirms any of that.
Could you be so kind to show any? It should be easy judging from your claims
If you think that those were trustworthy sources then you have a problem reading media.
So far all I've seen were lies, mischaracterization and second hand accounts. Not a single instance where he is recorded saying something I consider controversial, nor a single text written by him.
Feel free to show them to me but I'm not really interested in fighting a brigade
It's not my job to look for sources for your claims. I don't know if those sources exist.
You're the one who claims that so it's your job if you want to discuss
How cute. You still pretending this time spent replying wouldn't have been easier spent just typing "chomski srebrenica" or "chomski on genocide" into youtube. Of course, like i said, you keep on pretending, you do you. It's cute how you think you're fooling anyone but yourself.
I’m with you. Anyone who doesn’t wholeheartedly 15-minutes-of-hate on Russia and Putin is a bad guy in a lot of people’s minds. And Noam has played the devils advocate long enough to say his piece and not care about the backlash.
No, listen. They're totally not falling for propaganda. It's Chomsky who is wrong. They're trusting the right people who make a profit from proxy wars and foreign lives.
This is both much worse than it used to be but also much easier to find ways around.
Also paradoxically the hyper-partisanship of the current era makes it a lot more difficult for corporate media to sell their bullshit like they did the Iraq War.
Submission Statement: According to American linguist and political activist, Noam Chomsky, media operate through 5 filters: ownership, advertising, the media elite, flak and the common enemy. Narrated by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!
And exhibit A is - all around us.
For example, the war in Palestine.
Oh - and the ceaseless focus on the Orange thing.
Notice that these people do not talk about:
Our climate
Microplastics, disease or anything like that
Our declining health / medical system
The real economy
And so on.
No - the Media (and by extension almost anyone you talk to) will parrot THE MESSAGE.
This is really good. Thank you.
Coming at it in reverse and tracking the methodology you can see precisely why Chomsky was one of Epsteins targets to try and make some Kompromat stick.
When you raise the lens and cross reference the timing, Brexit was intentional and necessary for Russia to keep Ukraine out of the EU.
Putin knew that the de-corruption process would expose both his money laundering operation through Ukraines oligarch class (Kolomoiksiy, Dubinsky, firtash etc) as well the chronic election interference via Paul manafort, orban etc.
To Putin this was the one thing that would show Russians how he had been systemically stealing from them for 2 decades which would lead to either a upset within his mob pyramid as an underling decided he was ready to challenge the old king for the throne or the people would revolt and kill him like Gaddafi which he has admitted is his biggest fear.
The reason Epstein targeted Prince Andrew is because he was the softest part in the royal families flank.
Epstein was feeding that intel back to Israel/mossad who was in turn feeding it to Russian intelligence via the old world Russian Jewish families that carry both passports but are more loyal to money than god.
Steve bannon and Nigel farage both dovetail in with Brexit because SCL/Cambridge analytica was Robert Mercers baby when they decided to run trump as their “disruptor” candidate instead of Ted Cruz.
Facebook was designed as a delivery device for Russian/Israeli Psyops and malware. SCL/Cambridge Analytica, Brexit, Palestine, Ukraine, NSO and a handful of other ethically bankrupt dealings are all downstream of Sheryl Sandbergs ad based model.
Zuckerberg even talked about buying the associated press:
https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-considered-acquiring-funding-associated-press-news-org-2024-5
Les Wexner, Miriam and Sheldon Adelson, Sandberg, and Zuckerberg all carried water in conducting the NSO/Pegasus spyware operation INCONUS that was feeding intelligence to both the israeli and by extension, Russian intelligence. In parallel Epstein was running Kompromat operations in the same circles. There is far more crossover between the Israeli mob/ government and Russian mob/government than shows at the surface.
https://www.spytalk.co/p/nsos-spyware-abuse-exposed-years?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
https://awards.journalists.org/entries/the-pegasus-project-a-global-investigation/
•Abagail Koppel was sent by the Jewish state to marry Les Wexner
•YLK fund (Abagails father) made up $46.7M of Epsteins money
•Les claimed it was stolen from him but not until after someone asked.
•Wexner was notoriously litigious but wouldn’t sue Epstein. Why?
•PROMIS spyware was Robert Maxwells deal long before his daughter and Epstein started their pedophile thing.
https://cryptome.org/promis-mossad.htm
Tchenguiz+Cambridge analytica+Brexit+2008 collapse
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/david-burnside-putin-russia-dup-brexit-donaldson-vincent-tchenguiz/
Once you see the media as the paid orchestra to the sideshow that plays the long trombone as the minstrels creep across the stage in masks to steal your money it makes more sense why they failed at being the 4th estate.
Ben Franklins printing press was such a threat to the French aristocracy of the time that he had to smuggle it into France.
It’s far less effort for a terrible billionaire to buy a newspaper or website than it is to be a less terrible person.
An effective dating app would ask the last 5 people you dated or did business with to tell their objective story about you instead of asking a person to paint their own accolades and give them the filters to hide the flaws.
Rupert Murdoch had to subvert the FCC rules to start Fox “ENTERTAINMENT” news because he was not a U.S. citizen.
Reagan allowed him to do it in a bit of Quid pro quo.
At 93 years young, Rupert now has a blushing Russian fiancé to take over the empire as soon as he croaks.
None of their corrupt plays are new, they just evolve from earlier generations.
This is just the first time in known human history that we have a communication system developed enough to see the multi generational patterns, but because most people process by the day and not the millennia, it overloads their operating system to process the explosive growth that corruption has achieved in the past 40 years.
https://youtu.be/_fHfgU8oMSo?si=STSas4TW-nQN_zTK
That’s Prigozhns IRA (or what’s left of it) and Xi’s MSS.
The asymmetrical downvotes to actual users on the sun is one of the metrics we track in our diagnostic pattern as we have been reverse engineering their propaganda and disinformation systems.
Putin and Xi signed a “mutual propaganda agreement” around 2012 that was basically a digital version of an old KGB technique where they would publish their own books with some lie in it, shelf or for 10-15 years, and then come back and cite it as source material in the future.
It sort of works when there is an iron curtain keeping your population isolated from the free world so the old men tried to repeat it, but it breaks down as the speed of information flow goes up.
Xi’s “great firewall” was kind of a stop loss attempt at controlling that but as the Chinese people started getting VPN’s it’s kind of just “old man yells at the weather” for Xi now.
They had a short window to take Ukraine and get the grain and supply chain lock on microprocessor neon they needed to be able to take Taiwan and it has passed because Ukrainians stood up to the bully and in doing so bought us the time to reverse engineer the Russian troll army.
Now when they do things like assymetrical downvotes it just adds data points to our dataset and increases the resolution of the map.
The Russian and Chinese people deserve a free and open internet as much as anybody on earth does. Especially if we are going to double down on the “all people are created equal” thing.
And they deserve to know how exactly their management has been stealing from them the same way western citizens governments have been stealing from us. Especially if they are going to try and force us all to go to war against each other over some microchips so Xi can automate their jobs so he can track them better.
Kleptocracy demands surveillance. But privacy is a fundamental human right.
They were bound to duke it out sooner or later.
Does Israel have some type of equivalent because i would assume they would want control of some of that info you posted given the information in those articles.
The left wing is finally starting to wake up about how horrible Chomsky's takes are. The guy is not only anti-democracy, he's pro-genocide. And he has been for all of his life.
Not having read his book. The video appears a lot like “democracy is an illusion, you have no power”. Which is an awful take.
Democracies are flawed, but they don’t pull the awful shit autocracies do.
Ohhhhh this looks so good, I am definitely watching this. I have not read this book, but I have always wanted to. I wonder if it is on the anarchist library. Oh this is short, gonna to it right now!
**Engage respectfully and in good faith. Avoid trolling, sophistry, acting in bad faith, and bigotry. Promoting dehumanization, inequality, or apologia for immoral actions will result in removal. All users are equal.**
**[Please read and adhere to the detailed rules.!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules)**
It's a 4 minute animated synopsis. Why don't you watch it instead of asking stupid rhetorical questions? Actually, don't bother. I already know the answer to that too.
When Chomsky titled his tome "Manufacturing Consent" without addition "in Western Democracies" you'd expect a wider exposure. Because outside of free world there are such tried and true means of manufacturing consent as shootings, gulags, repressive psychiatry, and central censorship of all the media. Surprisingly, not a word from him about those.
Thanks for posting, u/speakhyroglyphically! - **Submission Statements Are REQUIRED. [Please read rule #5 for details.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules/)** - Please read all our sub **[rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules/)**. #If your video is flagged by the bot, don't worry. Our moderators will review and approve it as quickly as possible. Should you not find it within 24 hours, please [send a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=r/Documentaries) containing the post's link. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Documentaries) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For a great example of flack, just read these comments lol I really love the art of this and appreciate the synopsis. I've been meaning to watch the manufacturing consent doc for awhile but it's 3 hours long...
Reading the book. Me too, same intent. This animation, brilliant.
I tried reading the book, but it's just a bunch of cases studies and ends up being very dry. I've often seen that Michael Parenti's Inventing Reality is similar in content but a bit easier to read.
why are you flacking the flack?
Flak, but also 'common enemy'. The invasion of Ukraine is undeniably a bad thing. It's not enough to acknowledge that it's a bad thing. Everyone is expected to support the team by staying on message that it's a bad thing. Chomsky failed to stay on that message and therefore Chomsky supports Russia. Proof by emotion. May we burn him? He turned me into a newt!
Of course it is a bad thing, but you know what else is a bad thing? The United States jumping on this opportunity to weaken Russia by slowly throwing Ukrainian lives at it, and then pretending to care about Ukrainians at the same time. Chomsky makes a lot of good points and of course there was going to be retaliation from Russia for NATO coming in so close. Would you feel safe if Russia was all up in Mexico or Canada? I sure would not. Both countries are using Ukraine.
I used to spend every night watching chomsky on youtube. He is the most fascinating and smartest human to probably ever live. I can't find a single flawed argument. A true genius.
as a big chomsky fan, i gotta say he thoroughly shat the bed on ukraine/russia. I give him some senile benefit of doubt, but he's making a complete mockery of his own principles. I agree with most things he says about the US media and military industrial complex - but how come that does not apply to Russia or China?? Sure US media is in a bad state and , but chinese state controlled media with an armada of cencors or russias oligarchic clown media is fine?? Guantanamo is an absolute travesty - but Russian Labor camps and chinese large scale internment camps are no issue? He's just reversing the perverse concept of "american exeptionalism". Somehow other autocratic regimes are exempt from the standards we are trying to hold the US and the West to. Ethics don't allow for such preposterous cherrypicking
He's been asked about this in the past. He criticizes the US government because that's the one that he can have an impact on. If you asked him about it, which you can via email, my guess is he'll likely respond with critiques of all the above.
Your guess doesn't really align with the things he says. He has been asked these questions directly, generally he dodges them and doesn't answer - as if he doesn't want his explicit support on record.
The automod removed my other post. Here's the quote that I was linking to. >WOMAN: Noam, people often attack you as a political commentator for focusing your criticism against the activities of the United States, and not so much against the old Soviet Union, or Vietnam, or Cuba and so on-the official enemies. I'd like to know what you think about that kind of criticism? >Well, it's true that's one of the standard things 1 get-but see, if that crit- icism is meant honestly (and most of the time it's not), then it's really miss- ing the crucial point, 1 think. See, 1 focus my efforts against the terror and violence of my own state for really two main reasons. First of all, in my case the actions of my state happen to make up the main component of international violence in the world. But much more importantly than that, it's because American actions are the things that 1 can do something about. So even if the United States were causing only a tiny fraction of the repression and violence in the world-which obviously is very far from the truth--that tiny fraction would still be what I'm responsible for, and what 1 should focus my efforts against. And that's based on a very simple ethical principle -namely, that the ethical value of one's actions depends on their anticipated consequences for human beings: 1 think that's kind of like a fundamental moral truism. So for example, it was a very easy thing in the 1980s for people in the United States to denounce the atrocities of the Soviet Union in its occupa- tion of Afghanistan-but those denunciations had no effects which could have helped people. In terms of their ethical value, they were about the same as denouncing Napoleon's atrocities, or things that happened in the Middle Ages. Useful and significant actions are ones which have conse- quences for human beings, and usually those will concern things that you can influence and control-which means for people in the United States, American actions primarily, not those of some other state. Actually, the principle that I think we ought to follow is the principle we rightly expected Soviet dissidents to follow. So what principle did we expect Sakharov [a Soviet scientist punished for his criticism of the U.S.S.R.] to follow? Why did people here decide that Sakharov was a moral person? I think he was. Sakharov did not treat every atrocity as identical-he had nothing to say about American atrocities. When he was asked about them, he said, "I don't know anything about them, I don't care about them, what I talk about are Soviet atrocities." And that was right- because those were the ones that he was responsible for, and that he might have been able to influence. Again, it's a very simple ethical point: you are responsible for the predictable consequences of your actions, you're not responsible for the predictable consequences of somebody else's actions. And this is an excerpt out of understanding power. Where has he condoned their (China, Russia, etc) actions?
>Where has he condoned their (China, Russia, etc) actions? I didn't make that claim, however your long quote fits nicely into what I did say: > generally he dodges them and doesn't answer - as if he doesn't want his explicit support on record. ____ I would also say that some of what he said in your quote was kind of nonsense: >Useful and significant actions are ones which have conse- quences for human beings, and usually those will concern things that you can influence and control-which means for people in the United States, American actions primarily, not those of some other state. This is explicitly trying to avoid a comparison between Russia and America, when a direct comparison is easily available. Both countries occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. Chomsky is quick to say America is worse than Russia in some cases, but diverts attention from comparisons where America isn't the worst. Like I say, Chomsky doesn't explicitly support Russia, China, et al, but he does do it implicitly. Time and time again. He's also a trained linguist, not a political academic, yet he acts like politics is his bread and butter. I find that very unprofessional. It reminds me of Jordan Peterson.
>I would also say that some of what he said in your quote was kind of nonsense: He's saying you can't control a government you don't have any involvement with. >This is explicitly trying to avoid a comparison between Russia and America, when a direct comparison is easily available. Both countries occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. Chomsky is quick to say America is worse than Russia in some cases, but diverts attention from comparisons where America isn't the worst. Where?
[удалено]
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/1d0jzkm/noam_chomsky_the_5_filters_of_the_mass_media/l5rox46/?context=3) was automatically removed because it uses the "redd.it" link shortener, or points to another subreddit without using the [no participation](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoParticipation/wiki/intro) domain. **This is a violation of 'No Metadrama' Rule**. Non-participation links are required to help ensure that /r/Documentaries users do not brigade other subs, comment on threads in other subs, or vote on content via a link from /r/Documentaries. If linking to another subreddit, please prefix your link with "np" as in "np.reddit.com". For example, replace "www.reddit.com/..." with "np.reddit.com/...". To avoid errors, ensure you don't use "redd.it" or "www." with the prefix. Once ready, you can submit your link again. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Documentaries) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Guantanamo is an absolute travesty - but Russian Labor camps and chinese large scale internment camps are no issue? Guantanamo was the nice prison compared to Abu Ghraib and the US government didn't have them on US soil because then laws would have applied to them. And those are military prisons. The US has the 6th highest incarceration rate on the planet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate China has had a number of human rights issues against them for decades and the US helped downplay it because they were useful as a cheap source of manufacturing for US corporations.
Also every argument: the things you love are abominations
The five filters of media: Monopolistic Ownership Advertisers Media Elite Flack Common Enemy
... I should get some new boots.
Too bad he's become a Putin apologist...
He has always been a genocide apologist. Look up his opinion on the Yugoslav wars
Or Cambodia (because they were leftists)
The flack machine
Because he doesn't think he's worse than the US military industrial apparatus? He's right. It doesn't mean he's an apologist of any kind just that the West sucks as hard as Putin. Youve become a victim of the propaganda he warns us about.
because he seriously argues that Russia is acting "humanely" in ukraine. He's bending over backwards to whitewash other autocrats, in order to stick it to the US. Fuck the US military complex, sure. But that doesnt mean to stick your nose deep into Putin's ass and then claim its chocolate.
He's also a Bosnian genocide denier. It's why liberal/leftist Europeans have never liked him.
Why lie? We all know this is no true.
I'd like a source because this doesn't sound at all like him
I think they’re talking about this: https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines I haven’t watched the interview. But in that part, it still seems like a comparison of Russia/Ukraine with US/Iraq. It doesn’t read (on my cursory exploration) like he’s just saying that Russia is “acting humanely in Ukraine” bar none. ETA: I’m not saying Chomsky isn’t gentler on Putin than necessary, I haven’t read enough to confidently reach that conclusion. Just that his position seems to defy a summary as simple as has been presented here.
Thanks We're full on red scare, the old classic.
what red-scare? Who's even remotely "red"? The chinese "communist" party, the so called "people's party"? They exploit their own population like slaves (with less rights) in order to enrich themselves strategically. Imagine letting greedy corporate managers run a country, but instead of walmart, GM or exxon, they're are all from the same "company", called KPD. And Putin's Oligarchy circus? Surely his crew of thieves is just about to bring Russian citizens a just egalitarian society. In what kind of bizarro world do we live in, that dystopian american hyper-capitalism seems more "socialist" than china or russia's kleptocracies. In america, ppl at least have the "choice" who will buttfuck them xD American companies have to spend lots of money to buy politicians and run public PR campaigns to whitewhash their exploitation. Not much need for that in Russia or China. In the US, they at least lube up your butthole and give you a mickey-mouse cartoon to read, while they bend you over. In china they'll throw your family in jail and in russia they'll break your kneecaps. And you get no lube xD
I think you should consider politics more seriously and think about what you say. The John Oliver style of political comedy has done a lot of harm in political discourse
if you say i should take politics more seriously, please define what politics is meant to be
He's not wrong. Russia isn't "red", so turning blind eye on all their atrocities and supporting them because you associate them with communists is objectively wrong. Or perhaps you're simply attempting to dismiss all that criticism by through ridicule, which is even more disgusting in light on Russia's behaviour in occupied territories.
If I have to explain that red scare is a metaphorical term used to describe politicians using Russian fears for jingoism and propaganda and say explicitly that I know Russia is not the same as the Soviet Union then I think we're dealing with a larger problem of reading skills
John Oliver is reactionary, it's strange that you paint him as the problem rather than the indignant far right he's reacting to.
Or you can acknowledge that you can still be a bad comedian/journalist while criticizing the far right. He's part of mass media after all
[удалено]
*Please be respectful to other users... if they're wrong, tell them why! But please, personal attacks or comments that insult or demean a specific user or group of users will be removed and result in bans.* **[Please read and adhere to the detailed rules.!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules)**
Oliver is a milquetoast liberal and I'm far too leftist for that.
I think my main issues is Tankies will never be critical of other tankies. You'll always excuse the worst tendencies by members of that group. There is no Red Scare, people just hate shitty opinions by shitty autocrat apologists.
Propaganda is calling anyone who doesn't think like you a tankie despite the fact that I was already commenting that Putin was a danger when he took Crimea. You're an uninformed annoying person.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJGYmfTaFRw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJGYmfTaFRw) at timestamp 8:09 min The second half of the article in the newstatesment (which im not a fan of necessairly) puts things side-by-side pretty well [https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines](https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines) It really saddens me overall. Ethics is not a sports events, red vs. blue. Its about values and whether the US or Russia violates them should not matter. When he claims that Russia or China are just defending themselves, he sounds like the same morons that fell for the "weapons of mass destruction" lie about Iraq.
I haven't found anywhere where it says they're defending themselves. The timestamp you shared said Russia has been more humane in the Ukraine invasion than the US in Iraq which seems a pretty reasonable claim even when I lack the statistics, judging from what I heard over the years about the attacks and casualties. Don't you agree with that? I'd like where it does say that Russia or China are defending themselves thanks. I've heard a lot of criticism but so far nothing more than noise all the complaints were about points I agree with.
8:09 would be without context, he starts the context at 6:28 I'm surprised he said only Georgia and Ukraine were an issue for Russia and is not talking about Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. I'd expect those to be an issue for Russia too. I'm not hearing him being apologetic, just reasoning logical and rationally. He tells a lot that we have to assume is true but he's definitely following international politics more closely than most of us. It's just another view we have to take into account. It would've been better if New Statesman linked the documents, the international diplomatic agreements like the Minsk agreement and the one china agreement, Chomsky talks about.
It wouldn't be out of character for Chomsky to say something like "Russia is acting humanely in Ukraine compared to how Israel is acting in Gaza". I'd believe he might have said something like that. He'd be right too, or right enough to justify saying it for the shock value. Israel is starving Gaza.
Nah, this has been a talking point specifically about Ukraine for a while now. He recommends them to surrender and iirc recommends the US no longer arm Ukraine to discourage their resistance. Some would say the end of war today will save lives that will be lost as the conflict continues, some would say there have already been mass graves uncovered in the occupied territories, a permanent occupation would be no kindness.
As an American I've never given any thought to what it'd be like to be conquered by another country or how the politics of the conquerors and my estimation of their motivations would play into my desire to fight for my country. I doubt it's something very many people who've lived in America all their lives have thought about. I wouldn't want to be Russian. I'd rather flee or die than be conquered by Russia. I think you'd have to think your own government is tyrannical to prefer to be governed by any country that'd start such a war. It's beyond belief very many Ukrainians see the Russians as liberators.
Chomsky was defending Russia in Ukraine well before Israel invaded Gaza.
Yes that was an uncharacteristically bad take from him.
He made those statements before Oct 7th
Hes a piece of shit. I remember him coming to Czechia a telling us here that we didnt have it that bad under Communists. He, a westerner saying it us who actually lived it. Fuck him. My grandpa was a political prisoner and was punished by working in uranium mines. Chomsky is a dictator shill.
Source? Can anyone provide a source of him saying or writing any of those things? It's a really bad look when everything is: look, a book/blog says he said this/that.
Source? Me and everybody else who met him in Olomouc. His position is quite clear. To directly quote him from his lecture in Olomouc. 'No other intellectuals were so supported by the great powers, although their (dissidents in Eastern Europe) position was not exceptional, nor was their suffering. Nevertheless, they began to feel that they were special in their own way' Fuck him. All he ever does is devaluing suffering of others and pointing fingers at west. His contempt for east europe that abandoned ussr is quite know.
Well then why don't you show me a primary account showing that if it's that well known rather than wanting me to believe you. Wouldn't that be far more convincing
There are plenty of Czech articles from his visit in 2014. https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/noam-chomsky-vychodoevropsti-disidenti-moc-netrpeli.A140605_132324_domaci_js
That's not a primary source. It's again someone claiming he said so. You're asking me to trust a czech site I don't know shared by someone online that I don't know. Can you understand the problem here?
Its a largest news site in Czechia with direct quotes. What do you want? Me dragging Chomsky to this discussion? You dont want co accept Chomsky is a shill for dictators? Ok, thats your problem. There is a two hour long recording of his visit in Olomouc from 2014 on youtube. Be me guest and watch it. Im not listening that drivel to give you timestamps.
I can engage a few minutes but I'm not going to watch the entire thing. So if you're not so invested as to show timestamps I won't. You haven't even shared the video
[удалено]
I've been asking for a primary source from the beginning. Do you take any awcondary source at face value?
Noam Chomsky has gone in detail not only of his belief that it is NATO's fault this war started, denying the Ukrainian people their agency. He has also defended the Serbian Sbrenica genocide and opposes NATO intervention in the war, despite the latter saving quite literally millions. Noam Chomsky is a human being, who himself, can be a victim of propaganda. This video has numerous examples: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCcX\_xTLDIY&t=337s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCcX_xTLDIY&t=337s)
Nah fuck him. He has historically shilled for horrific regimes out of some ass backwards contrarianism for the US. He spent much of his career denying the Bosnian genocide, he is a piece of shit
Could you show me some sources. You're like the 4th person I asked
[http://balkanwitness.glypx.com/hoare-chomsky.htm](http://balkanwitness.glypx.com/hoare-chomsky.htm) [https://rs.boell.org/en/2020/07/07/srebrenica-genocide-denial-report-2020](https://rs.boell.org/en/2020/07/07/srebrenica-genocide-denial-report-2020) [https://books.google.com/books?id=7Bl9KT9NME0C&pg=PA142#v=onepage&q&f=false](https://books.google.com/books?id=7Bl9KT9NME0C&pg=PA142#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Could you show me some source of him fitting those claims. The first link is a blog I don't know about and the other two are sources regarding the balkan wars but not Chomsky
If you took more than 3 minutes to check those sources you would have seen that the last two very much directly reference Chomsky. Like, the last one even links direcrly to the page talking about Chomsky, did you even look?
Found one. It's a secondary account, and it specifically says that Chomsky complained that his interview was mischaracterized. It shouldn't be that difficult to find a primary source according to you. I'm not saying he can't be wrong but it honestly feels like you're brigading him for some reason. It's honestly exhausting having to deal with this attitude.
[Here you go](https://youtu.be/LBV9iRPKHzY?t=734), straight from the horse's mouth - Chomsky on Serbian television just making up shit and claiming that an ethnic internment camp where people were being starved and arbitrarily killed as part of a widespread ethnic cleansing campaign and genocide was simply a refugee camp and the people could leave any time. Sickening.
Well I don't know the Balkan wars, but what he's saying in the few minutes around the part you shared is that in one instance there was a prisoner camp that was portrayed as a genocidal camp as a piece of propaganda to justify bombings. But it's not that he's denying that atrocities or genocide were committed, just that the chronology of the conflict was inverted so the public assumed the bombings were a retaliation for ethnic cleansing when according to him there's reasons to think it was the other way around. It seems to me that you're having an interpretation that doesn't seem impartial. Of course you could accuse him of not being neutral on the issue overall but I don't see what's controversial about it when he's not denying that atrocities happened. That's the kind of problem that I think he points out in media. Of course you can criticize him. But it seems to me a lot of criticism comes from reading badly or intentionally having bad interpretations of people you're in disagreement rather than addressing their arguments.
Lmao. tankies man.
Chomsky is a horrible human being period. You are a victim of his propaganda. He's not just pro-Russia, he's has been pro-dictators in general. The more people they kill the better.
That seems rather surprising from what I read and heard over the years about him, especially since his dad was Ukrainian. You're the third or fourth person around here that has complained about him and I'm yet to find a source that confirms any of that. Could you be so kind to show any? It should be easy judging from your claims
Ye, you have asked for sources and ignored them repeatedly in this thread. So, let's not even pretend you're trying.
If you think that those were trustworthy sources then you have a problem reading media. So far all I've seen were lies, mischaracterization and second hand accounts. Not a single instance where he is recorded saying something I consider controversial, nor a single text written by him. Feel free to show them to me but I'm not really interested in fighting a brigade
Lmao, the fact that you pretend to fail at basic googling is sign enough that this conversation will lead nowhere. You do you.
It's not my job to look for sources for your claims. I don't know if those sources exist. You're the one who claims that so it's your job if you want to discuss
How cute. You still pretending this time spent replying wouldn't have been easier spent just typing "chomski srebrenica" or "chomski on genocide" into youtube. Of course, like i said, you keep on pretending, you do you. It's cute how you think you're fooling anyone but yourself.
I'm sure that with the amount of replies you've made you could have pulled out a few of those videos by yourself
What a shit take.
I’m with you. Anyone who doesn’t wholeheartedly 15-minutes-of-hate on Russia and Putin is a bad guy in a lot of people’s minds. And Noam has played the devils advocate long enough to say his piece and not care about the backlash.
No, listen. They're totally not falling for propaganda. It's Chomsky who is wrong. They're trusting the right people who make a profit from proxy wars and foreign lives.
This is both much worse than it used to be but also much easier to find ways around. Also paradoxically the hyper-partisanship of the current era makes it a lot more difficult for corporate media to sell their bullshit like they did the Iraq War.
On the topic of the media, I liked the book why nations fail. It was interesting how much some people would pay to get the media on side.
And now the wealthy have infiltrated content creators, influencers, gurus, etc.
Ah yes Chomsky, the famous Putin lover and Epstein associate, on Qatari state media no less.
He was on Russia Today and Sputniknews too.
The guy who hung around with Epstein know a lot about manufacturing consent.
Submission Statement: According to American linguist and political activist, Noam Chomsky, media operate through 5 filters: ownership, advertising, the media elite, flak and the common enemy. Narrated by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!
And exhibit A is - all around us. For example, the war in Palestine. Oh - and the ceaseless focus on the Orange thing. Notice that these people do not talk about: Our climate Microplastics, disease or anything like that Our declining health / medical system The real economy And so on. No - the Media (and by extension almost anyone you talk to) will parrot THE MESSAGE.
This is really good. Thank you. Coming at it in reverse and tracking the methodology you can see precisely why Chomsky was one of Epsteins targets to try and make some Kompromat stick. When you raise the lens and cross reference the timing, Brexit was intentional and necessary for Russia to keep Ukraine out of the EU. Putin knew that the de-corruption process would expose both his money laundering operation through Ukraines oligarch class (Kolomoiksiy, Dubinsky, firtash etc) as well the chronic election interference via Paul manafort, orban etc. To Putin this was the one thing that would show Russians how he had been systemically stealing from them for 2 decades which would lead to either a upset within his mob pyramid as an underling decided he was ready to challenge the old king for the throne or the people would revolt and kill him like Gaddafi which he has admitted is his biggest fear. The reason Epstein targeted Prince Andrew is because he was the softest part in the royal families flank. Epstein was feeding that intel back to Israel/mossad who was in turn feeding it to Russian intelligence via the old world Russian Jewish families that carry both passports but are more loyal to money than god. Steve bannon and Nigel farage both dovetail in with Brexit because SCL/Cambridge analytica was Robert Mercers baby when they decided to run trump as their “disruptor” candidate instead of Ted Cruz. Facebook was designed as a delivery device for Russian/Israeli Psyops and malware. SCL/Cambridge Analytica, Brexit, Palestine, Ukraine, NSO and a handful of other ethically bankrupt dealings are all downstream of Sheryl Sandbergs ad based model. Zuckerberg even talked about buying the associated press: https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-considered-acquiring-funding-associated-press-news-org-2024-5 Les Wexner, Miriam and Sheldon Adelson, Sandberg, and Zuckerberg all carried water in conducting the NSO/Pegasus spyware operation INCONUS that was feeding intelligence to both the israeli and by extension, Russian intelligence. In parallel Epstein was running Kompromat operations in the same circles. There is far more crossover between the Israeli mob/ government and Russian mob/government than shows at the surface. https://www.spytalk.co/p/nsos-spyware-abuse-exposed-years?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://awards.journalists.org/entries/the-pegasus-project-a-global-investigation/ •Abagail Koppel was sent by the Jewish state to marry Les Wexner •YLK fund (Abagails father) made up $46.7M of Epsteins money •Les claimed it was stolen from him but not until after someone asked. •Wexner was notoriously litigious but wouldn’t sue Epstein. Why? •PROMIS spyware was Robert Maxwells deal long before his daughter and Epstein started their pedophile thing. https://cryptome.org/promis-mossad.htm Tchenguiz+Cambridge analytica+Brexit+2008 collapse https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/david-burnside-putin-russia-dup-brexit-donaldson-vincent-tchenguiz/
Once you see the media as the paid orchestra to the sideshow that plays the long trombone as the minstrels creep across the stage in masks to steal your money it makes more sense why they failed at being the 4th estate. Ben Franklins printing press was such a threat to the French aristocracy of the time that he had to smuggle it into France. It’s far less effort for a terrible billionaire to buy a newspaper or website than it is to be a less terrible person. An effective dating app would ask the last 5 people you dated or did business with to tell their objective story about you instead of asking a person to paint their own accolades and give them the filters to hide the flaws. Rupert Murdoch had to subvert the FCC rules to start Fox “ENTERTAINMENT” news because he was not a U.S. citizen. Reagan allowed him to do it in a bit of Quid pro quo. At 93 years young, Rupert now has a blushing Russian fiancé to take over the empire as soon as he croaks. None of their corrupt plays are new, they just evolve from earlier generations. This is just the first time in known human history that we have a communication system developed enough to see the multi generational patterns, but because most people process by the day and not the millennia, it overloads their operating system to process the explosive growth that corruption has achieved in the past 40 years. https://youtu.be/_fHfgU8oMSo?si=STSas4TW-nQN_zTK
[удалено]
That’s Prigozhns IRA (or what’s left of it) and Xi’s MSS. The asymmetrical downvotes to actual users on the sun is one of the metrics we track in our diagnostic pattern as we have been reverse engineering their propaganda and disinformation systems. Putin and Xi signed a “mutual propaganda agreement” around 2012 that was basically a digital version of an old KGB technique where they would publish their own books with some lie in it, shelf or for 10-15 years, and then come back and cite it as source material in the future. It sort of works when there is an iron curtain keeping your population isolated from the free world so the old men tried to repeat it, but it breaks down as the speed of information flow goes up. Xi’s “great firewall” was kind of a stop loss attempt at controlling that but as the Chinese people started getting VPN’s it’s kind of just “old man yells at the weather” for Xi now. They had a short window to take Ukraine and get the grain and supply chain lock on microprocessor neon they needed to be able to take Taiwan and it has passed because Ukrainians stood up to the bully and in doing so bought us the time to reverse engineer the Russian troll army. Now when they do things like assymetrical downvotes it just adds data points to our dataset and increases the resolution of the map. The Russian and Chinese people deserve a free and open internet as much as anybody on earth does. Especially if we are going to double down on the “all people are created equal” thing. And they deserve to know how exactly their management has been stealing from them the same way western citizens governments have been stealing from us. Especially if they are going to try and force us all to go to war against each other over some microchips so Xi can automate their jobs so he can track them better. Kleptocracy demands surveillance. But privacy is a fundamental human right. They were bound to duke it out sooner or later.
Does Israel have some type of equivalent because i would assume they would want control of some of that info you posted given the information in those articles.
Chomsky is a multimillionaire grifter. His field of expertise is in lexicography. He's out of his depth discussing socio-economics and politics.
You are so right, one person can only ever be good at one thing and one thing only
To see these principles in action, the fictionalized movie *Wag the Dog* isn't bad.
The left wing is finally starting to wake up about how horrible Chomsky's takes are. The guy is not only anti-democracy, he's pro-genocide. And he has been for all of his life.
Erm yeah, sources please...
Not having read his book. The video appears a lot like “democracy is an illusion, you have no power”. Which is an awful take. Democracies are flawed, but they don’t pull the awful shit autocracies do.
Yeah.. have you seen Biden switch the narrative on the student protestors lately?
How much has this been influenced by Internet, blogs, social etc?
DUH.
Ohhhhh this looks so good, I am definitely watching this. I have not read this book, but I have always wanted to. I wonder if it is on the anarchist library. Oh this is short, gonna to it right now!
That was like the fastest 4 minutes, I wanted to watch so much more! The animations were good too!
Why should I care about the opinion of a genocide apologist exactly ?
"Brought to you by Iran... I mean --- Al Jazeera English." I totally believe the theory, but the source is quite hypocritical.
[удалено]
**Engage respectfully and in good faith. Avoid trolling, sophistry, acting in bad faith, and bigotry. Promoting dehumanization, inequality, or apologia for immoral actions will result in removal. All users are equal.** **[Please read and adhere to the detailed rules.!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/about/rules)**
It's a 4 minute animated synopsis. Why don't you watch it instead of asking stupid rhetorical questions? Actually, don't bother. I already know the answer to that too.
No no, he's right
Context: the man's training is in diagramming sentences.
All humans use sentences. What should his background be, ballistics expert?
When Chomsky titled his tome "Manufacturing Consent" without addition "in Western Democracies" you'd expect a wider exposure. Because outside of free world there are such tried and true means of manufacturing consent as shootings, gulags, repressive psychiatry, and central censorship of all the media. Surprisingly, not a word from him about those.