The reposts and expressions of shock from public figures followed quickly after a user on the social platform X who uses a pseudonym claimed that a government website had revealed “skyrocketing” rates of voters registering without a photo ID in three states this year — two of them crucial to the presidential contest.

“Extremely concerning,” X owner Elon Musk replied twice to the post this past week.

“Are migrants registering to vote using SSN?” Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, an ally of former President Donald Trump, asked on Instagram, using the acronym for Social Security number.

Trump himself posted to his own social platform within hours to ask, “Who are all those voters registering without a Photo ID in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Arizona??? What is going on???”

Yet by the time they tried to correct the record, the false claim had spread widely. In three days, the pseudonymous user’s claim amassed more than 63 million views on X, according to the platform’s metrics. A thorough explanation from Richer attracted a fraction of that, reaching 2.4 million users.

The incident sheds light on how social media accounts that shield the identities of the people or groups behind them through clever slogans and cartoon avatars have come to dominate right-wing political discussion online even as they spread false information.

  • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It makes sense. What’s the first thing you’re going to do when you arrive in a foreign country, when you have no money, don’t speak the language, don’t know what you’re going to do tomorrow, have been through hell after literally walking thousands of kilometres?

    Register for voting in the local presidential election of course! You still have your napkin that your communist contact gave you with a quick scribble: “Beeden, good; Troomp, no good”.

    • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Unfortunately it’s not only the right. A lot of people from all walks of life are jumping on misleading articles because they aling with their views and don’t bother fact checking them. You see it plenty on Lemmy.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    This. This right here, people, is why the community rules exist and why I’m happy to see them consistently enforced.

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Oh, cool, a well researched article on right-wing disinformation campaigns. Can’t wait to watch the Lemmy liberals accuse leftists of being a part of this without any evidence.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Can’t wait for these supposed “leftists” who-are-totally-not-righties-hiding-behind-anonymity to take for granted literally all the historical and modern day progress that came through none other than — you guessed it — the liberal legislature and liberal Justices.

        From child labor laws to the civil rights act to same sex marriage — thank a liberal.

        (Disclaimer: I’m further left than liberal on the political spectrum)

        • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Lmao, yeah, thank the well known liberals and liberals only, like MLK and Malcolm X, for civil rights they were forced to acknowledge or face race riots.

          Definitely wasn’t the liberal establishment that assassinated them either. And liberal is the opposite of conservative btw 🤣

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Don’t bother, I just wasted a full day arguing with this guy on exactly this topic, and he just kept doubling down. I even quoted the portion of Letter from a Birmingham Jail about white moderates and his response was, “But then white moderates passed the Civil Rights Act a year later! How curious!” There is no amount of information that will convince him that moderate Liberals weren’t responsible for the victories of the Civil Right movement.

            • lennybird@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              This confidently-incorrect fellow, who:

              • Increasingly deflected,
              • resorted to more personal attacks and,
              • ultimately ran away from the discussion after I started citing primary sourced quotes like:

              the biggest headaches for Democratic leader Mike Mansfield often came not from Republicans but from the conservative bloc of his own party caucus

              and:

              Dominating the GOP caucus, many conservatives believed the civil rights bill represented an unprecedented intrusion by the state into the daily lives of Americans.

              and:

              You had a battle with the conservatives on the committee, the southern Democrats, conservative Republicans, but you had just as tough a battle with the liberals. Their position was the old story of the half loaf or three-quarters of a loaf, and [now they were saying] “we’ll settle for nothing less [than the whole loaf.]” . . . We shared their views, and we’d love to do it their way.

              From Senate.gov and Archive.gov

              For which he could not even respond to let alone refute — Truly believed the 1963 Birmingham letter was some smoking-gun when — checks notes — those same white moderates MLK Jr. was talking about wound up passingthe Civil Rights Act 1 year later.

              Smh.

              Don’t tell him which ideology such surviving activists from John Lewis of the Edmund Pettus Bridge march or Jim Clyburn, both of the civil Rights era joined under.

              • pjwestin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Exactly. Every time Liberals yield to pressure from leftists, these chuds want to credit the Liberals.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Isn’t it funny that civil rights activists of the time from John Lewis to Clyburn joined the liberal Democrats?

            But yes two things can happen simultaneously: there can be activists, and then there can be liberals who actually passed the Civil Rights Act. You know, liberals.

            Sure wasn’t confederate conservatives now was it?

        • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Can’t tell if you’re saying Liberals are good or if Same Sex Marriage and Civil Rights are bad… not comfortable either way

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m really happy with all the fucking porn bans and want more, yes please daddy, go through everything I"m doing and punish me for everytime I didn’t kiss the America Flag

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, I did notice this article had a weirdly anti-anonymity undertone, as though corporate algorithms designed push conflict and sensationalism weren’t the driving force of disinformation.

    • Well, the types of misinformation will vary but anywhere people gather and have discussions is bound to have some bullshit floating around that gets spread around. It’s a fault of humanity, not of any particular persuasion. But there is a far cry from rumors about how to find the Triforce in Ocarina of Time to shit like “vaccines cause autism” and such.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yeah, but there’s a tendency online in liberal circles to think that any criticism from left right-wing or foreign interference. I’ve seen a lot of people in the political groups here claim that the leftists they’re arguing with are part of hostile disinformation campaigns, which is just silly; online propagandists make Facebook Groups and Pages to create memes and articles, and hundreds of sock-puppet accounts to disseminate them. They don’t waste hours writing dozens of replies to a single account on a small, niche website.

        • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          In the brave new world of LLMs, it no longer takes hours to write comments and replies all day in favour of some political or commercial view. The whole process can be automated! Cool, right?

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Well, I’ve never used an LLM to argue with strangers online, but I would imagine that it would take a lot of effort to keep getting coherent responses to every comment. But even if it is fast and easy, are you really suggesting that right-wing or foreign trolls are concentrating on individual arguments on niche communities? I’ve heard of fake news outlets, astroturfed hashtags, propaganda memes, reply spam, and other broad influence campaigns, but I’ve never heard of troll farms being used for individual arguments, especially on small websites. It seems like, even did take minimal effort, it would also have minimal influence. Do you have any evidence this is happening?

    • juicy@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I have it on very good authority from several Lemmy libs that I’m a Russian troll.

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Some of these are clearly wedge-driving divisive trolls posing as leftists. Especially those touting voting 3rd party or not voting.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      This is absolutely rampant on .ml and it drives me nuts that their predictions for stupid campism causes them to not just allow, but actively protect right wing trolls.

    • Pendulum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Exact same arguments are made to minimise right wing extremists, “has to be a left wing false flag”.

      Both are possible. The enemy is extremism, regardless of leaning.

    • Hamartia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Some of these are clearly wedge-driving divisive (sic) trolls posing as moderates. Especially those hectoring voters that vote with their conscience now that attitudes toward a current genocide is making it impossible to vote for either of the frontrunners.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Found one

        Y’all reuse the same tactics too: when accused of something, copy/paste it but change a couple of words around. EPIC WIN!!

        It’s boring, do something different.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago
        • What’s funny is I’m not even a moderate
        • I’ve just done the comparative analysis in knowing that (a) the election outcome is inevitable where 1 of these 2 candidates will be in office whether you vote or not, and (b) one would commit MORE genocide than the other guy.
        • You thus can still vote your conscience.
        • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          You thus can still vote your conscience

          Not if my conscious isn’t ok with voting for a genocide-doer at all

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Then you risk letting the person who will commit genocide even more.

            How is more genocide better than less genocide for your conscience?

            • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Then you risk letting the person who will commit genocide even more.

              Wrong, as I don’t live in a swing state. You know, like the majority of Americans?

              I can safely not vote for either knowing that my state isn’t going to go to Trump. I even personally know 2 people who voted Trump last election who are going third party this time around, so I’m DOUBLE-covrred.

              I just love seeing people online automatically assume people are in swing states (or that the EC doesn’t exist) and try to guilt trip people. It’s hilarious

              • lennybird@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Wait, was it your conscience or is it because you don’t live in a swing-state…? Because you dodged the question:

                How is more genocide better than less genocide for your conscience?

                • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Can’t read, or unfamiliar with how US elections work?

                  Because I don’t live in a swing state my lack of voting for Biden does not support Trump

                  So my vote is for no genocide but my state will force it to become some genocide through the EC

                  If you want to pretend like a Californian not voting Biden is somehow giving the election to Trump: that’s a you problem and I find it hilarious

                  But Republicans love this messaging

                  And? Maybe the Dems shouldn’t put forth garbage options then. don’t blame voters for the DNCs inability to do basic shit to win elections.

        • Hamartia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Let me crystal clear. I do not think that your position or attitude are moderate either. Haranguing people to vote against their conscience is a bad look. Big genocide, small genocide, both are genocide. If that overloads some people’s ‘election calculus’ it’s a reasonable and engaged reaction. If anything talking down to them is more likely to turn them off voting at all.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Normally I’d agree to each their own but I truly cannot grasp how anyone can come to the conclusion that when the two options are inevitable, they would choose more genocide over less genocide. It quite literally means less people dying. It’s the only logical and ethical choice.

            • Hamartia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Voting for big genocide or voting for small genocide is irreconcilably voting for genocide for some people. It’s a morally cognizant choice for some to not want to put the endorsement of their vote on either.

              • lennybird@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                I’ll never not believe that is logically and ethically-flawed thinking, sorry. A vote doesn’t mean “I Endorse Genocide,” it just means, “I am doing the thing between two inevitable choices whether I vote or not that will help Palestinians, Ukrainians, and women’s rights more than the other option.”

                If merely one less child dies, then it is clearly worth it to vote — right?

                • Hamartia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It is ‘rational’ attitudes such as this that MLK bemoaned in his Birmingham jail letters. Order above justice. An order in which the boot is not on your neck. So you minimize its dehumanizing brutality in relation to the maintenance of the day-to-day comforts you enjoy.

                  Hypothetically: if Biden was sending weapons and financial support to Russia in support of their war efforts but mildly denouncing Putin when pressed; and Trump was pledging full throated support of Putin and offering to nuke Kyiv; would you still feel so enthusiastic about voting for Biden or for your moral calculus? Might you lament the electoral system that has put this decision before you. Might you protest this mockery of democratic choice. Even if you internally still cede to moral calculus, might you continue to make your displeasure known and apply whatever pressure was within your purview as a voter to make. Might you be offended by people demanding you not only vote for Biden regardless your rightful concerns about Putin and the sovereignity of Ukrainians but also try to insinuate that you are part of some foreign operation to undermine the election for voicing your concerns?

    • Wooki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You know electoral system is truely garbage when voting for 3rd party is considered “bad”. Not a lot of freedum going on in the US.

      Additionally have you also considered some people dont agree with your political view, so not everything has to be a conspiracy

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yep I do agree it’s bullshit. The FPTP combined with Electoral College has utterly fucked our country. I really wish we could vote for independents or 3rd party and not totally fuck everything. Unfortunately that won’t happen until changes most probably comes through Democrats as it has historically worth most other issues.

        To your second point, don’t know, it just seems extremely self-defeating to the point that one has to wonder…

  • muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think the cult of ignorance is just as prevalent across all political ideologies the left is not better than the right is no better than etc etc. Its all just idiots arguing with idiots about things they don’t know or are purposefully ignorant of.

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Asimov: *nails it*

    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.

    The bad guys since high school and in countless tales and yet still in governments and corner suites and at pulpits: *weaponizes it*

    You know who you are: *treats it all like team sports* *thinks is player* *is ball*

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think this is a great comment and I extend the same thinking to the bullshit/ magical thinking people engage in around science/ medicine denial-ism, new age mysticism, and conspiratorial thinking/ I’d rather believe a good story modes of thinking.

      100% its a part of our political system, but as Asimov states, its in our cultural life as well, and I have no patience for it. I call it out when I see it and if that makes me the ass hole, so be it. Its a burden I’ll bear to have conversations grounded in reality or not at all.

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I mean, okay. But that’s not specific to right-wing stuff.

    I’m pseudonymous – “tal” isn’t my given name or surname. I like participating in forums under a pseudonym. I’m not really enthusiastic about forums – like Google Groups – that tried forcing users to use their real names.

    Like, if the issue is with use of pseudonyms in general, I don’t think that that’s gonna work, because I would bet that people generally like using forums under pseudonyms.

    Pseudonyms reduce use of reputation compared to systems where a real-life identity is involved, because someone can always get a new one.

    There are ways to still leverage reputation in pseudonymous environments. So, okay. I’m a pretty prolific commenter. I bet that there are people on here who have learned to recognize “tal”. You can build a reputation associated with a pseudonym, and then people can trust pseudonyms based on the reputation they build.

    One thing you can do is to have the software make reputation statistics more-visible. Like, Reddit Enhancement Suite tracked your upvotes and downvotes, and would tell you, next to usernames how many times you’d upvoted or downvoted someone in the past, so that each person had the computer helping you track what you generally thought of their comments in the past.

    You could maybe do something like get “expensive” identities that aren’t linked to a real identity. Like, say I need to pay $100 to buy a pseudonym from someone (“12954881241221@100-dollar-id.verisign.com”). I generate a public/private keypair. I send Verisign the public key and money, and and they cryptographically sign it. At that point, I can be “tal”, but have bans and reputation linked to that underlying ID, and if I get banned or something, it’d cost me 100 bucks to get a new identity. Could have multiple identities, different costs. The problem is that the cost there may not be sufficient to deter someone running a dedicated disinfo campaign. I mean, okay, so say an identity is $100. I buy a thousand, that’s $100,000. If you want to run a disinfo campaign, that’s probably not a lot of money.

    Note that with enough money, you can also attack the above “reputation” route, either by paying people to build up an identity – as was probably done to build reputation associated with the “Jia Tan” group’s attack on xz that was in the news recently – or by simply buying accounts from legitimate users who are willing to sell their account.

    • OpenStars@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It is not about being anonymous. We all are that way here, and we value that.

      It is about them weaponizing this totally normal thing, abusing it to cause problems irl. i.e. one person making multiple accounts to act as if something is more popular than it really is.

      • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        abusing it to cause problems irl. i.e. one person making multiple accounts to act as if something is more popular than it really is.

        The biggest issue as I see it is “trusted” known people, like Musk or Greene amplifying and rebroadcasting disinformation as fact. In a world that made more sense people who engender some level of public trust wouldn’t speculatively rebroadcast suppositions or outright lies/fabrications. Imagine if I posted something on an anonymous Twitter account about extraterrestrials having a base inside the moon, then NASA making a post on their social media that said “Who are these extraterrestrials operating their clandestine Moon base, and what is their intent???”. Nobody would give two fucks about me posting the initial content, but NASA would lose literally all credibility within the entire scientific community. The issue as I see it is “credible” known persons treating these anonymous accounts as vetted, verified sources, which over time has led to a sad amount of people losing their ability to self-assess sources of information they read, now to them every anonymous account is potentially speaking truth regardless of what they’re saying.

        I guess this would generally fall under the weaponization you mentioned, but it’s far more insidious than that. I totally believe Musk knows what he’s doing when he makes comments like that mentioned in the article. Does Trump? I think he does, I think it’s been sufficiently proven at this point that Trump is aware of his bullshit and putting on an act to rally his supporters, to sell the character he portrays himself as. Does Greene? I don’t know, she seems kind of fucking unintelligent, I could believe she was one of those people that lost that ability to self-assess and just believes bat-shit, unhinged theories. This is why it’s insidious, it creeps up then bootstraps itself into this self-sustaining engine once you get the initial believers into the power structure. Once that happens how do you separate attacks on disinformation from attacks on the political party itself?

        • OpenStars@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Jon Stewart spent most of his entire career railing against the Fox News, as he called it, “bullshit mountain”, and there is very much evidence that its founder came from Russia with the express intention of making it that way. Or if not, then like Tucker Carlson, at least did not turn away free money when it was offered to him to act in a certain particular manner.

          Though what I will point you to instead, b/c you seem like you will REALLY enjoy it, is the video series from Innuendo Studios called “The Alt-Right Playbook”, which contains essentially the material from a college-level course in this exact subject matter, yet expressed in extremely accessible language by anyone willing to put in the effort to think it through. You should LOVE it!:-P It’s entirely free too, though hopefully people donate to help him make more of such fantastic material.

          Anyway, imagine if you will: a bird does not “know” how to build a nest, they just do it. If asked, a bird cannot explain the matters of structural integrity, materials resiliency, and so on, even if it somehow could speak (or like if you could read its thoughts). Even so, it manages to accomplish the task b/c of the instincts built into it - i.e., as Daniel Dennett explains (famous atheist apologetics philosopher, here I refer to his book Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, though the following is my paraphrase not direct quote), “Nobody is arguing that design work was not done, the question lies rather in who did that design work - a God or the blind natural forces of millions of years of evolution.”

          In short: conservatives can be quite effective, even without having the slightest clue of what precisely they are doing or why, as in they (or imagine another hypothetical example of a con-man or -woman) may not know the details of the underlying processes by which it works, yet they still recognize what works vs. does not, and act to exploit what they see. Those January 6th protesters, despite being traitors who tried to perform literally treasonous and fully murderous acts within Congress and the White House, at the same time also thought of themselves as “patriots” who were there to “defend the Constitution” - despite most never having read the actual primary document, or how incongruous those two thoughts would seem to anyone who gives the matter even 10 seconds of rational thought, yet despite that they literally believe both at the same time, and others who were not there choose to believe that it was “peaceful”. The Alt-Right Playbook series explains how this can be accomplished, but even from what I have said so far, you can see that it works.

          Another quick peek into it is that few people believe all the crazy stuff, nor is the goal (of those putting it out in the first place, e.g. many of the material has been directly traced to Russian interference e.g. anti-vax memes) even to get someone to truly believe even a single one of them. Rather, the goal is to foment distrust in the overall systems. Which let us be frank: the government truly is corrupt - the conservatives do not have to lie about that much at least - and so then that creates an opening with which they can further widen the divide, maybe even getting them to do something more drastic like secretly tamper with COVID vaccine stocks even in the midst of the pandemic. And then in the meantime, they vote Republican, which has the effect of halting aid to Ukraine, which furthers the Russian agenda - so despite the fact that whatever happens to us here in the USA may even be mostly irrelevant, still we (the general populace) have been used to further an agenda that is not our own. Yet, as time marches on, it might become so, and we may one day form an alliance together with Russia, rather than act to repel it, if Trump gets elected again. Russia is using a quite brilliant strategic maneuver there - what boggles my mind is that it is working. But, we (Americans) are weak as we have faced no true aggressors in most of our lifetimes - even Boomers grew up after WWII, and Korea and Vietnam were somewhat far-off affairs, as too was the Gulf War. We could not imagine a nation (Russia) wanting to literally eat us alive. So we seem to have not truly feared its influence over us anywhere close to the degree that we should have.

          And that video series explains in large part why: b/c of the onion-layer effect whereby people get sucked in by the more inoffensive material, even while being groomed to be brought deeper in to the more insidious stuff later on, but only when they are ready do they finally start to realize that all their “joking” previously (like: “it’s the fault of the Jews!:-P”, which they did not truly believe… at the time) has, at first, a grain of truth inside of it, and then later, that it was never a joke to begin with at all. However, if they were to have been presented with the full Nazi/fascist agenda all at once, they would have turned it away, yet like a frog in a cooked pot (a false analogy btw - frogs are smart enough to jump out, it is people who are that dumb as to not!!) they continue to be changed by marinating in the shallower stuff, until as they get deeper and deeper over time, one day they finally are ready to accept the whole reality. Or not, but even so, them remaining in the shallower regions still helps further the agenda overall - e.g. in voting, and in being able to use those people like a magic story’s mage or a necromancer uses a “meat shield”: to deflect attention away from those who truly do believe.

          Getting back to what you said: does Musk, or Trump, truly believe in what they are saying and doing? I would rather rephrase the question to be instead: does the authenticity of their belief systems even matter, when they are acting effectively in the services of the facists either way? At what point do they need to cross over to become a “true believer”, when all along their actions were operationally indistinguishable from one anyway? Then, as you say there are people such as Greene, who regardless of their “true beliefs”, are nonetheless useful to the cause.

          I applaud your asking these questions - so few people do it seems. True answers are difficult to come by, requiring many hours (and days/weeks/months, maybe years?) of thought, though fortunately there are resources that can help speed that along, and yet how does one even find such things in this era of enshittification where you cannot trust half 90% of what you see & hear - but even so, I maintain that some things like that video series have the “ring of truth” about them, and that once you see the logic behind it, you can never go back to not knowing ever again. Enjoy it!:-)

            • OpenStars@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Thank you - I do try to make shorter replies but when there is much to be said, I don’t want to shirk from it either! And those videos are PACKED with info, so hopefully a peek at the content first helps tantalize learning the full depth of what they offer:-).

    • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It may come as a shock, but IRL, I’m not an admiral. lol

      I think the takeaway here is to be more critical of what’s presented as fact rather than whether it comes from someone (pseudo)anonymous.

      • roguetrick@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        IRL, I’m not an admiral. lol

        Butt I asked you if you were really an admiral and you said it was a stupid question! How could you ever be so deceptive?

        • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          LOL. I never said I was, and it was a stupid question. You just saw my outfit and made certain assumptions. xD

          (This probably sounds hostile to someone scrolling by who doesn’t know the character lol)

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    X did not respond to a request for comment, which was met with an automated reply.

    I’m pretty sure that automated reply was just 💩, since that’s what he does with all of his other companies.