SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Guardian has an interesting article describing how Robert Mercer, Steve Bannon and Nigel Farage used techniques developed within the military to influence Britain's vote to exit the EU. Although it appears that the companies involved (AggregateIQ and Cambridge Analytics) are private companies, they have deep roots within the military.
The article describes Britain as a "managed democracy", with major decisions controlled by a US Billionaire.
[ n1: The article is an interesting read, including a reference to how in 2013, Google Founder Eric Schmidt's daughter Sophie suggested Cambridge Analytics get in touch with Palantir, Peter Thiel's data mining contractor for the GCHQ and many US military and intelligence agencies. Sophie currently works at Uber. According to a former employee, in 2013 Cambridge Analytics was just a "psychological warfare firm [...] before we became this dark, dystopian data company". ]
It was with AggregateIQ that Vote Leave (the official Leave campaign) chose to spend £3.9m, more than half its official £7m campaign budget. As did three other affiliated Leave campaigns: BeLeave, Veterans for Britain and the Democratic Unionist party, spending a further £757,750. “Coordination” between campaigns is prohibited under UK electoral law, unless campaign expenditure is declared, jointly. It wasn’t.
[...] The Electoral Commission has written to AggregateIQ. A source close to the investigation said that AggregateIQ responded by saying it had signed a non-disclosure agreement. And since it was outside British jurisdiction, that was the end of it. Vote Leave refers to this as the Electoral Commission giving it “a clean bill of health”.
[...] I asked David Banks, Veterans for Britain’s head of communications, why they spent the money with AggregateIQ. “I didn’t find AggegrateIQ. They found us. They rang us up and pitched us. There’s no conspiracy here. [...] Their targeting was based on a set of technologies that hadn’t reached the UK yet. A lot of it was proprietary, they’d found a way of targeting people based on behavioural insights."
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 15 2017, @05:28AM
Guess what Facebook and their addicted human drones do..
(Score: 5, Interesting) by takyon on Monday May 15 2017, @05:40AM (2 children)
Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Alphabet Inc., has a daughter who works at Uber? The company that is being sued big league by Alphabet subsidiary Waymo?
Sounds like the makings of an article right there.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @09:14AM (1 child)
Not really. In silicon valley everybody knows everybody, especially at that level.
Companies are all interconnected by people, in part because non-competes are barely enforceable.
So labor moves around very freely.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @10:48PM
Its stupid mods like that -1 Troll which remind me how much this site needs meta-moderation.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Monday May 15 2017, @05:49AM (23 children)
Sounds like the author still can't come to grips with the idea that a majority of people might disagree at least temporarily with them on an important issue. The obvious rebuttal here is that the other side has access to similarly effective techniques as well despite the heavy marketing advertised wholesale in the story. They might not sound as cool as "psychological warfare" or "data analytics", but the usual political machinery works pretty well to get the message out and people motivated.
The huge thing missing from this report is any evidence that this network works any better than the techniques applied by the opposition. It's blaming various, supposedly sophisticated techniques and whatnot for the defeat rather than the poor argument (and an extraordinarily complacent attitude) of the "Remain" side. A similar situation shows up in the US elections where the Trump side was outspent significantly by the Clinton campaign and still won.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by kaszz on Monday May 15 2017, @06:08AM (10 children)
The problem is that non-transparent and non-elected billionaires interferes with the democratic process. They might in fact be declared enemy of the state.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 15 2017, @07:39AM (3 children)
The problem is that non-transparent and non-elected billionaires interferes with the democratic process.
How? All the stuff mentioned so far has been quite within the democratic process. As usual with these things, I think the problem is rather that you don't understand what a democratic process is.
They might in fact be declared enemy of the state.
Sounds promising to me. Not seeing the alleged downside here.
(Score: 2) by jimshatt on Monday May 15 2017, @10:07AM
Of course, gray area and quite hard to prove. But still.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Monday May 15 2017, @02:36PM (1 child)
The UK doesn't have a first amendment.
Because money is not considered free speech, there are laws limiting expenditures on campaigns.
But to answer your question: democracy requires transparency. This was anything but transparent.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:02AM
But to answer your question: democracy requires transparency. This was anything but transparent.
The obvious rebuttal to that is the secret ballot.
Let us note here that no one has the power or authority in a democratic society to determine what you are thinking, particularly not to punish you for those thoughts. So the human brain is another black box which is required in this land of transparency.
The UK doesn't have a first amendment.
Because money is not considered free speech, there are laws limiting expenditures on campaigns.
We already know that the UK's lack of a first amendment is anti-democratic. So that doesn't go far in any argument about the preservation of democracy.
And my view is that laws limiting expenditures are similarly anti-democratic. We can see that in the story where various wealthy parties apparently have found ways around these laws. Sure, there is considerable speculation that this is illegal behavior, but I doubt anyone will be punished for it (which is the standard of whether something is actually illegal). And when the rules and enforcement change to make the latest generation of such manipulations illegal, they'll evolve new strategies to work around these obstacles. So ultimately such rules are merely ways to tilt the political field to the advantage of the wealthy. But that is the point of democracy right? /sarc
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @10:56AM
That's enough about the EU!
Certainly an enemy of nation states, those in the 3rd world trapped in poverty by protectionist trade policies and any foreign entity having to collect EU purchase tax when they sell to EU consumers. Anyways - that's enough about the EU!
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @01:51PM
Yes, let's declare George Soros enemy of the state. Send in Seal Team Six, and put one between his droopy eyes.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 15 2017, @02:59PM
I generally agree with you, and the influence of business interests within many western democracies is getting out of control.
On the other hand, there's definitely some significant "spin" here -- just look at the headline: "Military... Techniques" -- ooh, scary authoritarian stuff! "Psychological Techniques" -- ack, I won't even know if I'm being influenced?! Are they hypnotizing me?
Here's the reality (as weirdly noted by Runaway in a post below): there have been coalitions between corporations and governments and psychologists for at least the past 75 years. Almost all advertising today -- political or otherwise -- uses "psychological techniques." I'm sure some of them were developed in military sources, but I'm not sure what that adds to this story other than a greater chance of incompetence. (Recall that PSYOP crap dealing with ESP and all sorts of other weirdness was intensively pursued by military "psychological" research for decades.)
I'm not at all saying this isn't a significant story. But the story is perhaps who did was using influence, how much they were investing, etc. -- NOT that there were (spooky! scary!) "military psychological techniques" involved.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @03:50PM (1 child)
exactly how is this different from every election / referendum ever held? Is it just because it went the opposite way to your liking?
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 15 2017, @05:05PM
The problem is that they are non-transparent and have no democratic legitimacy. Some of these people don't even live in the country nor are they citizens.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16 2017, @07:36AM
Suppose I tell a few friends on Facebook to BREXIT. Have I interfered with the democratic process?
What if I carefully select ethnically British people who seem to be in danger of losing their jobs?
To what extent have I interfered with the democratic process? How much of an enemy of the state am I? Do I have to influence a million people to qualify? Might 42 be enough? Does it matter if BREXIT wins or not?
If I'm a billionaire (eh, thousand millionaire?) spending 5 million pounds to stop BREXIT, am I an enemy of the state? What if I spend it in favor of BREXIT? What if the other side has 10 people each spending 7 million pounds, for a total of 14x what I'm spending, so I haven't even managed to even things up?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by takyon on Monday May 15 2017, @06:11AM (1 child)
I think this says it all:
‘Dude fires people’: How the chaotic Trump news cycle confuses and misinforms the public [washingtonpost.com]
Shady billionaire-owned companies did help Trump win. Whether they did so wittingly or wanted him to win is a case-by-case consideration [theintercept.com], but if the President delivers on some of his promises, they might warm up to him:
The Clinton outspending of Trump is very interesting in that context. Ultimately futile, amounting to almost nothing of value for Democrats, but still pocketed by media outlets nonetheless. Advertisements are basically psyops, and the massively increased ratings for CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc. allowed them to charge more for the Doritos and fluoride toothpaste-selling psyops.
Fear of Trump has likely benefited media outlets [cnbc.com] as well, during what was a tough transition period from print to digital with many lamenting the death of traditional journalism. Perhaps the election of President Trump has saved journalism?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 15 2017, @06:20AM
Trump saves journalism in the same manner as a bankruptcy saves the priorities of a corporation ;)
Do right or vanish.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @07:00AM (1 child)
But but but I thought it was the Russians? :p
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 15 2017, @08:22AM
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @09:29AM (3 children)
The obvious rebuttal
Ah, I've been gettin thirsty!
Every time khallow says "the obvious rebuttal" everybody takes a shot.
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=18434&cid=478065 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=18366&cid=476441 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=17682&cid=459450 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=17682&cid=459851 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=17243&cid=448302 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=16849&cid=437967 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=13985&cid=358591 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15453&cid=400343 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15259&cid=395330 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15168&cid=393131 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=9968&cid=247750 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=16319&cid=422041 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=16518&cid=427099 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=10407&cid=257984 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15451&cid=400237 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=6171&cid=146540 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15790&cid=409076 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=13861&cid=354825 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15899&cid=412132 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=10156&cid=252378 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=16621&cid=430615 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=16024&cid=414867 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=14796&cid=382957 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=14796&cid=382957 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=12649&cid=319100 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=17028&cid=442427 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 15 2017, @10:06AM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @10:46PM (1 child)
lolwut?
You are now bragging about your narcissistic tic and think its a dis to say someone hasn't been reading enough of your posts to realize how often you actually engage in narcissism.
Is that like narcissism on roids?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 16 2017, @01:41AM
(Score: 3, Troll) by aristarchus on Monday May 15 2017, @10:23AM (2 children)
Disinformation! khallow is a spook? Sent here to "perception manage" us all? Suddenly, it all makes sense. I thought he was just crazy, or paid by petro companies who never bothered to evaluate what they were getting for their money. But Information Warfare, Message targeting, Perception management, attacking the people who pay taxes to support your budget, because if they knew, they would not: yeah, makes total sense you would "deploy The Khallow". Which leaves us to wonder, is the stupidity and total ineffectiveness actually part of the plan? What are they trying to make us think? Maybe the USA should depart from the UK? I am all for it, but now I am not really sure why. . . .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @12:44PM
A spook? My money's on useful idiot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @02:52PM
Nope, just a Rayntard.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jelizondo on Monday May 15 2017, @11:34PM
As others pointed out, there might have been laws broken and rule of law if the very foundation of democracy.
Both Mercer and Bannon are not UK citizens, therefore they should not have played any part on a national referendum.
If Putin does it, big scandal. If Mercer does it, it’s just the democratic process… and people don’t understand the process. No my friend, ditching the rule of law by powerful individuals leads to tyranny, not democracy.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by GungnirSniper on Monday May 15 2017, @06:27AM (12 children)
Is it really these slandered men who are subverting democracy, or the whispering whiners who hold the lower classes in disdain for voting the wrong way?
Maybe if the British people did not feel it was EU policy to displace them via uncontrolled migration both from within and outside of Europe, they wouldn't have have said to hell with it all. But the unelected servants of the ownership class refused on behalf of their masters to take any action that might put native Europeans over profits, nor let Britain have a sovereign say over such matters lest they vote the wrong way.
The next war in Europe will be like the last two, with all of the unrestrained savagery of a clash of race, faith, and civilizations. All because the short term profit-focus on labor costs. Monarchies may not be looked at with approval, but they sure desired longer-term stability than governments that can fall to a petty debating club's confidence vote.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @09:22AM (3 children)
Is it really these slandered men who are subverting democracy, or the whispering whiners who hold the lower classes in disdain for voting the wrong way?
Oh grow up with that "whispering whiners" bullshit.
There was an enormous amount of bald-faced lying from the brexit camp [brexitlies.com] - not just standard political wishy-washy vagueness to let people fill in the blanks with their hopes, but out-right lies of substance. By the time the liars are held accountable for their lies the damage will be done and they will be off living in Mallorca.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @12:15PM (1 child)
Sources for lying?
That page you link to only contains predictions about the future, and predictions can only be lying when you are the one in control of that future (and the brexit camp neither was nor is in control of the EU buerocracy).
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @12:20PM
> That page you link to only contains predictions about the future,
Literally the very first entry on the list is the lie about NHS funding.
The rest of your analysis is equally shoddy.
(Score: 4, Informative) by rleigh on Monday May 15 2017, @07:07PM
The "camps", either remain or leave were an irrelevance. The only thing that ultimately mattered was the box you crossed on the ballot paper, and the result of the referendum. All the promises and threats were so much noise. It was a giant fuss around the answering of a straightforward question (albeit with far-reaching consequences).
I found both campaign groups quite awful, and certainly didn't base my choice on any of the rubbish they were spouting. I researched the history and organisational structure of the EU in detail, properly informing myself about the subject matter, and ultimately voted to leave. I looked hard at reasons to stick with the status quo, but overall didn't find the cost/benefit worth it over the long term. I'm definitely not alone in voting based upon what is likely going to happen in the short to medium term, and felt we would be better off out sooner rather than later.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @10:23AM
>who hold the lower classes in disdain for voting the wrong way?
Try to use your brain for something, instead of romantic fantasies. Do you REALLY believe Theresa May and her party were pro-EU in any meaningful way? See all the happy rush to a police state since Brexit vote, and think again.
With both teams playing for the same goal, the result was cut and dried, with the voters or without. "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." -- Joseph Stalin
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @11:17AM
No, the artificial migrant crises means unskilled, uneducated and illiterate people being ferried into Europe en-mass. These individuals are unemployable, they will live out their lives on state welfare, vote for the big state and destroy the cultural identities of Europe's nation states. None of which explains the real reason for these imports - debt slavery. Millions being imported for the sole purpose of taking on debt to support the continued existence of the central banking ponzi scheme. Curious that the left attempt to emotionally manipulate and guilt trip people by perverting the history of the slave trade when the left themselves are modern day slavers.
This is a good thing, liberal democracy is the best form of government we have.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 15 2017, @12:34PM (1 child)
My post, currently the second entry on page three, might be of interest to you. The Powell Memo talks about those whispering whiners.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @11:49PM
My post, currently the second entry on page three,
You attempt to flatter yourself, Runaway! There is no page three! I only see one page! Do you think, as you think about the world, that everyone sees the same SoylentNews you see? No wonder you so often flatten your own self.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @02:02PM
The next war Europe fights is going to wipe out the muslims. England and Germany on the same side, fighting a real war? The other poor bastards don't have a chance.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @04:17PM
Call me an elitist whispering whiner if you want. Trump is making me a lot of money and I warned the unwashed masses about him and got called a whiner and a crybaby every time.
I won't feel so much compassion when you slime are scrubbing my shitter and your grandchildren are paid to wipe my ass.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @05:02PM (1 child)
Is it really these slandered men who are subverting democracy, or the whispering whiners who hold the lower classes in disdain for voting the wrong way?
I'm reminded of the story of the The Ant and the Grasshopper [wikipedia.org]. It's not disdain for voting "the wrong way," as your strawman puts it. It is the fact that people were told incorrect things, believed them despite the ability to find the truth with casual searching, and voted according to misinformation.
For example, how much money does the UK send to the EU each year? We could save $350m pounds [theguardian.com] a week by leaving the EU! That could all go to the NHS! Except that number isn't even close to right, and it couldn't all be spent on the NHS. Just look how fast they backpedaled that promise once they actually won the referendum.
I could go on with pretty much every argument for Brexit: How are laws made in the EU imposed on the UK, the number of refugees the UK has been "forced" to take, the ability to continue free-trade without free movement of people, etc.
It's not disdain for voting the "wrong way," it's disdain for the willful ignorance for voting for somebody who promises to, "lower taxes, lower debt, increase social services, and increase military spending. I can do it because I'm a winner." I think it's very reasonable for the Ant to be angry at the Grasshopper for being shocked that Winter came again this year when the Grasshopper comes demanding food and shelter.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Wednesday May 17 2017, @04:10AM
There you go with describing the lower classes as idiots who believe untruths.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by turgid on Monday May 15 2017, @07:20AM (11 children)
There's also a very enlightening article about the influence, Paul Dacre [theguardian.com], has on the UK government and democratic system, and the Daily Mail's historical support for the far right. The turkeys will vote for Christmas.
With a bit of luck, Scotland will vote to break away from this corrupt dictatorship in the next few years. Maybe Northern Ireland will too, and reunify with Eire.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Monday May 15 2017, @08:05AM (7 children)
Maybe Northern Ireland will too, and reunify with Eire.
How about no? We can't afford to support Northern Ireland's lack of employment. We have enough of our own money problems.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Monday May 15 2017, @08:08AM (1 child)
Maybe the EU could help out? You never know.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Monday May 15 2017, @08:17AM
Well, we've got 7 years [wikia.com] to work out the details then.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @09:27AM (4 children)
Is there any advantage that gives a sufficient return on investment to keep North Ireland under British control? sounds like a economic disaster and no geostrategic advantage.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by choose another one on Monday May 15 2017, @02:07PM
Is there any advantage that gives a sufficient return on investment to keep North Ireland under British control? sounds like a economic disaster and no geostrategic advantage.
Nope, well possibly some territorial waters advantages, but not a lot else.
It used to provide a very very good counter-insurgency/occupied-territory training ground for our armed forces, but it doesn't any more, and in any case there are dozens of other places round the world to do that now.
Main problems are probably political (remember the Tories are officially the "Conservative and Unionist Party") and the issue of what the mainland would do with a million or so refugees who are economically useless but think they are qualified for jobs by virtue of not being catholic.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Monday May 15 2017, @02:40PM (2 children)
Its not about economic advantage.
It's about loyalty to the majority population in NI. Note that the majority in NI want it to remain part of the UK.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by turgid on Monday May 15 2017, @08:11PM (1 child)
The demographics of Northern Ireland have changed some since the last time they were asked. The proportion of Republicans has increased. Also, they voted (narrowly) to stay in the EU, so Brexit may tip the balance in favour of reunification, so that they can stay in the EU by being part of Eire.
The EU does a far better job of investing in the poorest parts of the UK than our own Home Counties-obsessed perpetual Tory governments do. One of the many fantasies peddled by the pro-Leave people was that being out of the EU we'd have more choice of what we did with our own money, implying that the less rich regions could get more investment. Historically, that has never happened. Why should things be any different now? They Tories are still Tories (Conservative and UKIP). The money stays in and around London, in the hands of the Establishment. The rest of us get the crumbs from the table.
What we are witnessing just now is the Establishment, in the form of the Conservative Party, and its propaganda mouthpiece the Daily Mail, doing a very effective psychological campaign to keep control, to silence dissent (May doesn't do debates and she doesn't do serious interviews) and to keep the United Kingdom together at all costs. Are there any reasons other than sentimentality for keeping the UK together?
If the UK breaks up, it will be sad, but Brexit is going to be very painful. I believe it will be better for those who can to save themselves and to get out while they can.
Brexit means Brexit. There is no turning back. Strong and stable.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Whoever on Monday May 15 2017, @08:45PM
Yes, the proportion of Republicans has increased, but I don't think that it has reached 50% yet.
I don't think there is a strong desire in England to keep NI in the UK if the majority population of NI wants to leave. That will happen (higher birth rate among Catholics), but it hasn't happened yet.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @09:02AM (2 children)
Statements like that are the actual problem. Daily Mail is a tabloid that is sold en masse to... mass. You know? - The blue collar workers and fast food restaurants. The branding of this poor class as 'far right' to facilitate suppressing of their voice, is how polarization starts (or how it started).
I am commenting as AC, because I don't really blame the middle class either. Just like there are people who want to regulate education because they are afraid a larged pool of educated poor class will take away their jobs, there are people who don't like to read and hold education in contempt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @09:26AM (1 child)
> I am commenting as AC, because I don't really blame the middle class either.
lolwut?
Are you afraid "the middle class" is going to hunt down your nic and spam it or something?
Its bizzaro logic like that which confirms that anything else you wrote is also highly suspect.
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Monday May 15 2017, @01:55PM
>> I am commenting as AC, because I don't really blame the middle class either.
>lolwut?
Says another personality shard of AC...
>Are you afraid "the middle class" is going to hunt down your nic and spam it or something?
Not until they legalize hunting again...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 15 2017, @09:00AM (7 children)
Tells how propaganda and advertising were married during WW2
https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/World%20War%20II%20and%20Propaganda.htm [stanford.edu]
More of the same, circa WW1
http://www.bl.uk/world-war-one/articles/commercial-advertising-as-propaganda [www.bl.uk]
This one is peripheral to my main point - "brag ads"
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/269075 [jhu.edu]
Wiki discusses "psychological operations", or propaganda, and it's effects on the US public.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_in_the_United_States [wikipedia.org]
A look at how propaganda and advertising along with rationing changed the American psyche, and people's expectations
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/wwii-food-america_n_1398132.html [huffingtonpost.com]
(I'm amused that the Roosevelt White House was known for it's poor food, and/or menus.)
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 15 2017, @09:04AM (5 children)
Lest you think that you are somehow immune to propaganda, you should familiarize yourself with the Powell Memo:
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/ [reclaimdemocracy.org]
But what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America. We are not dealing with sporadic or isolated attacks from a relatively few extremists or even from the minority socialist cadre. Rather, the assault on the enterprise system is broadly based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.
Sources of the Attack
The sources are varied and diffused. They include, not unexpectedly, the Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system, both political and economic. These extremists of the left are far more numerous, better financed, and increasingly are more welcomed and encouraged by other elements of society, than ever before in our history. But they remain a small minority, and are not yet the principal cause for concern.
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most of these groups the movement against the system is participated in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate, the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 15 2017, @02:37PM (4 children)
It's interesting that someone modded you "troll" for an extended quotation from a future Supreme Court justice, from a memo that basically created an agenda for the modern conservative movement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @02:43PM
Do you hear that? It's the sound of snowflake melting:
"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Monday May 15 2017, @05:37PM (2 children)
It's interesting that someone modded you "troll" for an extended quotation from a future Supreme Court justice, from a memo that basically created an agenda for the modern conservative movement.
I think the trollish bit is where he tries to blame the left for the actions of a Nixon appointee.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday May 16 2017, @12:15AM (1 child)
I think the trollish bit is where he tries to blame the left for the actions of a Nixon appointee.
??
Seriously, I'm confused by your post. I'd appreciate clarification. With the exception of the first sentence of the post (which talks about the effect of propaganda), the entire rest of the post is a quotation from Powell's memo from the link.
Exactly where does Mr. Runaway (with whom I very rarely agree) "blame the Left" for Justice Powell's actions? He quotes Justice Powell's own views, which blame the Left for various propaganda efforts -- and, frankly, while we can disagree with the extent to which Powell was correct, his viewpoint was very influential on the conservative movement. And there certainly is a lot of truth to the history of psychological propaganda used by both the Left and the Right. Powell was legitimately noting the appropriation of psychological techniques within leftist political ideology in the 1960s, which was subsequently appropriated by the Republicans in the 1970s (partly in response to things like Powell's memo), ultimately leading to things like the Reagan revolution.
It's a lesser-known part of history. But I still don't understand the "troll" mod for this particular post. Clearly other people do, since they have modded you "insightful." If I'm missing something, please explain it.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:04AM
It's a lesser-known part of history. But I still don't understand the "troll" mod for this particular post.
Athanasius! Do not try to understand the troll. That is impossible. Only try to understand the truth: there is no troll. There is just Runaway, who is a troll. Does it all make sense now? (Wasn't my mod, by the way.)
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 15 2017, @02:46PM
To this list, I might add the BBC documentary The Century of the Self [wikipedia.org]. While there's stuff in there that will likely be criticized by liberals and conservatives alike, it points to a fundamental shift in propaganda over the 20th century that has influenced consumerism, politics, concepts of "mental health," etc.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by choose another one on Monday May 15 2017, @01:00PM (4 children)
I've read this, I get the connections, I see the possible exploitation of grey areas in electoral funding rules, but what I don't see is the all important WHY. The article does not enlighten on this.
Shady secret billionaire business cabal influencing democracy? Got it. File alongside "illuminati" and "world government" until proven, but maybe something in it...
Same cabal backs Trump? Got it. Makes sense, a large part of the business world were pro-Trump, some sectors for obvious self-interest reasons. Possibly even a majority of them, and the markets like him so far, yep, could be.
Same cabal backs Brexit vote? Er. WTF? WHY? The vast vast majority of the business world were (allegedly) pro-remain, and practically all the "establishment", all the "experts", very few were pro-Brexit. Essentially the remain campaign's entire basis was "voting brexit will screw up the economy, break the city and be bad bad bad for big business". It was the foundation for project fear. It was probably the reason many of the poorer (or "less well educated" if you are neoliberal elite) parts of the UK voted out - screw big business (won't happen - the little guy will always get shafted either way, but whatever).
So either big business secretly influences a referendum to get a result that all the experts said would be really really bad for big business (again - wtf, why?), or the entire remain campaign was a con job and brexit will actually be good for big business - in which case remain damned well deserved to lose anyway.
The biggest thing that doesn't stack up, however, is the inherent assumption in the article that the leave campaign won it. They didn't, they had a poor campaign full of lies. The remain campaign lost it, threw it away, dumped a massive poll lead with the dumbest political campaign I have ever seen. Who influenced that, and why?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @01:57PM (2 children)
The Guardian is a joke, and the article is a shit-show. I love their info-graphic. I'm sure they have one, or several, discussing the Trump campaign ties to Russia as well.
What a joke that "news outlet" has become, if it ever had any serious journalistic integrity to begin with (I am not a Brit so I am not sure).
I am living in a glorious time, where conservatism and global-skepticism is the new cool. Keep crying lefties, your tears will cure even "climate change."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @02:52PM (1 child)
Yes it did, it was started as the Manchester Guardian shortly after The Peterloo Massacre. [wikipedia.org] In the late 20th Century it became known jokingly as the Grauniad, after cut-backs to copy editors let basic spelling mistakes appear in print. More recently; Well researched and well written pieces have given way to ill-informed, leftist opinion pieces and editorials. It became more or less unreadable about 5 years ago, coincidentally when anybody sane began abandoning 'the left' due to their embrace of social justice and fake victim culture.
The article that finally finished it for me was this one. [theguardian.com] Unrepentant, murderous psychopaths are the victims here? It is but one step from the Soviet policy of putting 'oppressed' criminals in charge of the gulags. Fuck that disgusting, loony publication!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @05:33PM
Yes, that article just points out how some people are either straight up "trolling" with their nonsense, or they genuinely cannot apply logic to normal concepts.
Shit like "Well that type of speech does hurt, it hurts feelings" where the hurt argument has to do with inciting violence... you know the real kind of hurt, not your feelz.
They put feelings on the same level, and dare I fear even on a higher level than actions. Which is total and utter nonsense. Then they use labels to discredit their opposition when their BS is throw back at them.
"Well he maybe murdered 5 White people, but he was oppressed his whole life and White people are racist so it's OK! Please feel pity for him, he may go to jail for life!"
Total absolute cancer. And I hope this cancer can be cured soon, even thou I would love to see all cancer cured, not just the ideological kind.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Tuesday May 16 2017, @02:07AM
The EU provides more protections for ordinary citizens than UK law will.