this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2307 readers
16 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (11 children)

With all due respect these are two completely perpendicular axes. His analysis of the Ukraine conflict and the US's new Cold War against China are one thing and his takes on vaccines and global warming are another thing entirely. Obviously we won't post any videos of his on the latter two subjects because as you say it's likely to be BS. There are many anti-imperialists with bad takes on vaccines and global warming, does that mean that everything else they say is also wrong? Conversely, there are countless liberals who are right on vaccines and GW but completely and utterly delusional when it comes to geopolitics.

People can be wrong about one thing and right about another. If a piece of analysis is correct then it is correct regardless who it comes from. Obviously we should be careful to not spread reactionary propaganda, and when it comes to right wing sources that means we need to vet a piece extra carefully before we share it, but also it's frankly lazy and not very educational to automatically dismiss something without engaging with it simply because it comes from a source we don't agree with on other topics. If something is BS then i'd like to believe that we are smart enough to realize it, or if not to at least have our comrades point it out for us by dissecting the piece and showing how and where it is wrong.

In fact doing this can often be more educational than just engaging with content that we already know we will 100% agree with. It is a good exercise to engage in critical analysis of a piece, understand what the biases of the author are and identify where their analysis falls short as a result. Obviously this isn't worth doing with just any old reactionary garbage, something has to have at least a minimum level of coherence and connection to reality, else we're just wasting our time, but i don't think this falls in that category.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (10 children)

You seriously have no qualms sending clicks and fans to a guy who used to write for Infowars? There no one else that we can post??

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

What did he write for Infowars? Do they exclusively publish lies or is their barrier to entry just low? I've found Brian Berletic to use sources well, be transparent and make logical conclusions with few or reasonable leaps.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As I posted in the top comment, some pretty right-wing Alex Jones level, anti global warming, "globalist", anti vaccine level shit. They're still on his page. He's never once self-crit over them. And lot of the bad takes have been very recently. I'm actually very happy to have this line of discussion. Please, ask me for more info.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hi ButtBidet. Do you have more examples? Especially interested in bad arguments, rather than bad takes.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

If I can copy/paste a previous conversation that I had with a mod:

Global warming is in fact a scam perpetrated by globalists to control every aspect of human industry, population, consumption and demographics, as declared in the United Nation's Agenda 21 report and conclusions drawn at the globalist Club of Rome forum. After decades of uncontested propagandizing, the globalist agenda began to slow under the scrutiny of skeptics able to propose their objections en-mass via the Internet.

Under increasing pressure, exposing inconsistencies and bold faced lies, globalists themselves have literally conceded that their "irrefutable research" on all fronts is "flawed," (read: lies). [link ]

Another article:

t's not entirely accurate to call the Belfer Center merely a big oil representative that forms the spearhead of promoting the theory of anthropogenic global warming and the resulting Ponzi-scheme environmental policies proposed to deal with it. [link ]

On his page, although written by Paul Joseph Watson:

As we have previously documented, the manufactured threat of man-made global warming is being used as a tool of neo-colonialism in the third world, not only through the seizure of land and infrastructure, thereby preventing poor nations from using their resources to develop, but by literally starving poverty-stricken people to death. [link]

If you want bad arguments instead of bad takes, I'll have to find the text of a struggle session from over a year ago. You want to see it?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 weeks ago

If you're willing. When I say bad arguments, I mean misrepresenting a source or bad quality sourcing, or drawing conclusions that aren't supported by the data he cites.

Thank you for these 3 links as well.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)