this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
139 points (88.4% liked)

Political Discussion and Commentary

1110 readers
2 users here now

A place to discuss politics and offer political commentary. Self posts are preferred, but links to current events and news are allowed. Opinion pieces are welcome on a case by case basis, and discussion of and disagreement about issues is encouraged!

The intent is for this community to be an area for open & respectful discussion on current political issues, news & events, and that means we all have a responsibility to be open, honest, and sincere. We place as much emphasis on good content as good behavior, but the latter is more important if we want to ensure this community remains healthy and vibrant.

Content Rules:

  1. Self posts preferred.
  2. Opinion pieces and editorials are allowed on a case by case basis.
  3. No spam or self promotion.
  4. Do not post grievances about other communities or their moderators.

Commentary Rules

  1. Don’t be a jerk or do anything to prevent honest discussion.
  2. Stay on topic.
  3. Don’t criticize the person, criticize the argument.
  4. Provide credible sources whenever possible.
  5. Report bad behavior, please don’t retaliate. Reciprocal bad behavior will reflect poorly on both parties.
  6. Seek rule enforcement clarification via private message, not in comment threads.
  7. Abide by Lemmy's terms of service (attacks on other users, privacy, discrimination, etc).

Please try to up/downvote based on contribution to discussion, not on whether you agree or disagree with the commenter.

Partnered Communities:

Politics

Science

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com 66 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Bad theory. Russia isn't to blame for everything going wrong in the west. We've done much of it to ourselves. A lot of current day problems can be directly traced back to the economic era ushered in by Reagan and Thatcher. Nothing works anymore.

[–] Steve@communick.news 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

They're faning the flames of the fire we built.
I'd give them 15% of the credit.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

They got trump elected, I give them 80% credit.

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

If Russia magically stopped existing before 2016, we'd still have Trump. He's a homegrown phenomenon. There was and still is lot of resentment of establishment politics since the '08 collapse. Almost all the "recovery" from that was concentrated in the top 20% of income earners.

Trump is a crook helping himself and his rich friends, but he presents himself on television as anti-establishment. Gameshow Host President plus the American Public. You really need 80% foreign intervention to do the math on that one?

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean they can both be true. The collapse of American education and media laid the groundwork for Trump. For him to even come anywhere close to power reveals a stark and horrifying collapse of everything that's supposed to keep us understanding reality and keep the whole train on the rails. But, also, Russia's formidable power at narrative-shaping in Western countries is a factor is the proximate cause of how bad it is. We haven't even really got our heads around the nature of how bad it really is, having the whole top levels of government hollowed out and destroyed like they currently are being. We'll find out the next time there is an actual crisis.

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Do you really think Russia has done more to "shape the narrative" than Rupert Murdoch has? I'm sure they've got battalions of soldiers on Facebook or Tweeting tweets or whatever, but that's got to amount to chump change when compared against 24 hour Fox News.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

If Russia magically stopped existing before 2016, we’d still have Trump

That's because the campaign to get him, or someone like him, electable started in the 80s.

That's one of the things the West still can't wrap its collective head around - russia doesn't operate like western countries. Its long-term goals are not "how can we bring plumbing and indoor toilets to our citizens in the next 40 years", but rather "how can we sow misinformation and discontent in the West to divide nations and cause them to tumble into chaos".

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So the plot to get Trump elected started in the 80's, under the Soviet Union? Lmao. Yeah, I'm sure they maintained that plot consistently through the entire collapse, through the massive changes in leadership structure and everything.

At a certain point, this shit is just racist. I'm sorry, you can say, "I just hate the government, not the people," but it you hate every government they've ever had, even when it's gone through drastic, fundamental changes, then it's not really about the government anymore, is it? It sounds like you're trying to argue that the Russian people are inherently duplicitous and evil.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Steve@communick.news 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I blame the Democrats for that.
They were so stupid, the last several cycles, I can't blame anyone else.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Of course you do.

Once we isolate key people, we look for people we know are in their upstream -- people that they read posts from, but who themselves are less influential. (This uses the same social media graph built before.) We then either start flame wars with bots to derail the conversations that are influencing influential people (think nonsense reddit posts about conspiracies that sound like Markov chains of nonsense other people have said), or else send off specific tasks for sockpuppets (changing this wording of an idea here; cause an ideological split there; etc).

The goal is to keep opinions we don't want fragmented and from coalescing in to a single voice for long enough that the memes we do want can, at which points they've gotten a head start on going viral and tend to capture a larger-than-otherwise share of media attention.

(All of the stuff above is basically the "standard" for online PR (usually farmed out to an LLC with a generic name working for the marketing firm contracted by the big firm; deniability is a word frequently said), once you're above a certain size.)

https://archive.is/PoUMo

from Bannon:

“The opposition party is the media,” Steve Bannon, who helped run Trump’s 2016 campaign, told PBS Frontline five years ago. “And the media can only — because they’re dumb and they’re lazy — they can only focus on one thing at a time.”

So the solution, per Bannon? Overwhelm them.

“All we have to do is flood the zone,” he said. “Every day we hit them with three things. They’ll bite on one, and we’ll get all of our stuff done, bang, bang, bang. These guys will never — will never be able to recover. But we’ve got to start with muzzle velocity.”

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/07/nx-s1-5289315/trump-week-in-review

The best defense is to call them out on it and then walk away. They'll downvote the shit out of you, but who tf cares about upvotes and downvotes. If someone is getting downvoted heavily, read what they said carefully before piling on.

[–] Steve@communick.news 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't know what you're trying to say with those quotes.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There’s a few turbo libs who refuse to accept Dem accountability and think everyone saying anything negative about them is a Russian/Chinese troll.

[–] Steve@communick.news 5 points 3 weeks ago

Now I get it... I think.

But yah. I've gotten a lot of shit from my own team, since they railroaded Sanders in 2015.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 weeks ago

I completely agree with this statement and is my theory as well. Everything has been going down the shitter since then. Reagan/Bush Sr. + Thatcher + Mulroney set the foundation upon which everything is collapsing right now.

[–] Addv4@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Plus a lot of the good social policies beforehand seem mostly to have been urged by a fear that Socialism/Communism might spread if the US was seen as having bad systemic problems by their citizens. Notice how Reaganism and Thatcher basically instituted their policies around the fall of the USSR.

[–] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Not to mention that Russia didn't stop in the 90s. They had the Chechnya wars, they kept Transnistria, they sold off all of their assets to a handful of oligarchs, and they never embraced democracy. It's the same ol', same ol' with them.

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 3 points 3 weeks ago

Russia has had their hand in the pot since the 80s. Are they the sole cause? No, but they're absolutely involved.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Russia may not be to blame but the lack of the USSR certainly made citizens of NATO nations so relieved after the petsistent fear of a nuclear exchange of either side screwed up relations.

I'd say the good times were over after 9/11 made people aware that just because there was no enemy "superpower", didn't mean there's no risk.

[–] finitebanjo@piefed.world 32 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

I'm gonna interpret this libs as libertarians cuz theres no fucking liberals who support Russia.

[–] Hubi@feddit.org 25 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

It was the librarians all along

[–] alaphic@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Librariatarians

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Russia support is definitely on the conservative/MAGA side.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Even Biden, perhaps the most turbo of libs, hated russia. Hell, one of the big things .ml criticized him for during his term was being "disgustingly biased" against russia. Where the hell are they finding these pro-russian libs?

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 25 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Cross post this to an .ml community.

[–] Luci@lemmy.ca 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago

After all, it was rule 1

[–] yakko@feddit.uk 7 points 3 weeks ago
[–] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago

How do you tag yogthos?

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

There is a kernel of truth to this. After the cold war ended, it really did feel like the world was finally at peace, for a little while. There were still conflicts and wars going on, but they seemed manageable by comparison.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

I believe one of the spy museums in DC even wrote that after the fall of Russia, the US was considering ending it's intelligence groups. That was scaled back, especially after Bush's monumental failure in 2001. But it was interesting to see the optimism at the time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

western libs

Whatchu talkin' bout, Boris?

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 11 points 3 weeks ago

Everyone's focusing on the whole Russia thing. What the fuck, though, the 90s were not good. Reagan had just got done declaring war on the entire American working class and fucking up their lives quite a lot, and Clinton pretty much continued the program, just at about 50% strength.

Listen to any of the media of the time, that's when Rage Against the Machine got their start, it was the backdrop for Fight Club. It's all hopelessness and anger. The money started coming back once the circa-2000 tech boom started, and things were still riding high a little bit off the 20th century before times, but the 90s weren't fucking good. It was latchkey kids because both parents had to work for the first time, Rodney King, Fox News starting to take over people's brains, layoffs, the battle of Seattle, shipping jobs overseas, corporate mergers, the steady death of a lot of the institutions everyone had been depending on up until then.

[–] Larry@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Why did Russia offshore my job, cause the 2008 global financial crisis, attack Iraq and Afghanistan under Bush, and tattoo me under my foreskin? Damn Russians

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Yeah this is all Russia's fault or something. Definitely not the consequences of a system that prioritizes profit over human lives and rewards immense selfishness and greed. We are naturally great and pure of heart, all of our flaws are because of those damn foreigners. You're falling for the same shit the Republicans are.

[–] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

I automatically subtrack 50 IQ points for anyone who uses the word "libs" as a pejorative because it's ALWAYS either some brain dead Marxist or conservative.

No liberal is pro Russia, they're the one most vocal about their actions. The only ones who support them are Marxists and conservatives.

[–] psygod@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

If you think Russia has to do with the direct quality of American living, positive or negative you are a fully hypnotize good ol American.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

90s were good because the economy grew a lot and that growth impacted most everyone positively.

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago

If anything, making a singular country the world's global factory has had a hell of a lot more impact than the USSR dissolving in the 90s, IMO.

load more comments
view more: next ›