MultigrainCerealista [he/him, comrade/them]

  • 0 Posts
  • 148 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 28th, 2023

help-circle








  • Why?

    Why even is getting a man on the moon important?

    And if it was important why did we stop?

    The value of manned missions was propaganda which is why the Apolo mission was cancelled when it stopped getting TV ratings. Because getting humans on the moon didn’t actually deliver anything of much importance except those TV ratings.

    “First game of golf on the moon” good job USA you did it meanwhile the USSR landed on Venus.



  • What I find the most interesting about propaganda is that it’s not a bad word in the USSR and China (and likely other AES countries) at all!

    In fact it wasn’t a bad word in English either until the First World War which is when it acquired its sinister implication since that is what the German ministry of information was called, so “according to the ministry of propaganda…” became equivalent to “fake news because it’s the Germans saying it.”

    The German ministry of propaganda vs our ministry of information.

    For example, the Irish ministry of propaganda was renamed the ministry of publicity in 1921, and then especially since WW2 it has become uncommon in non-English speaking countries as well since they want to avoid the sinister connotation it invokes in the English language.


  • I think it’s ok to keep using the term Indian because many within the Native American community have indicated a preference for it.

    Also “Native American” is a kind of sterile word made up in the 1970s by coastal libs and so some within the Native American community feel it’s too clinical and empty of meaning.

    It’s true that Indian is colonial and hilariously inaccurate but it’s been used for centuries and so becomes imbued with meaning and identity through so much use.

    Ideally you use the specific tribal name since they aren’t a single people, like it’s a false category since it isn’t a singular identity anyway except for being defined in contrast to non-indigenous Americans. So where possible avoid the collective noun anyway but when the collective noun is required then the general consensus within the Native American community is that either “Indian” or “Native American” is acceptable, with some taking strong exception to “Indian” due to it being inaccurate but also many equally taking exception to “Native American” for being clinically dehumanizing and equally imposed by white colonizers.

    I think the best is to defer to the preference of current company but the idea that the term “Indian” at least has been imbued with a strong cultural identity makes sense to me.









  • Qatar, and by extension of cash money also Al Jazeera, is very anti-Iran.

    I’m not seeing any news of this at all in Iranian media, which actually is fairly tabloid and weight lifting is a big thing in Iran. Even if you want to tell yourself the regime has absolute control over information, which isn’t true, they’d still need to provide a cover story due to the high profile nature of it and I don’t see one.

    Also Iranian social media is vibrant and also I don’t see anything in Persian but maybe I’m using the wrong search terms?

    All I see are the bbc and the telegraph and cnn etc etc etc repeating almost exactly the same story word for word.

    It seems like fake news to me. The classic case of one biased journalist writing a story, sending it to AP, and the entire western media just repeating the thing word for word because it’s free news inches and posting propaganda of this nature is oddly enough free in our modern system of journalism.

    It seems unlikely to actually be true to me. It seems more likely that it’s being syndicated without any critical enquiry because it agrees with the establishment narrative about Iran.