My mother, born, raised, and still lives in Norway, was anti-mask during COVID and refused to take the vaccine because of micro-robots (and the scary 5G towers), so we all know where she stands in certain topics. She also believes that Zelenskyy is the reason for Russia invading Ukraine…
Anyhoo, I was talking to her then other day, and she told me that I need to stop reading anti-propaganda. I laughed and asked if she could explain it, which she, of course, could not, but she said it’s a wording being used online all the time. I don’t frequent the sites she does, and I’ve known she’s been reading conspiracies for at least 10 years, but anti-propaganda? Does words not have meaning anymore?
If you ask me, anti-propaganda is facts, but hey, I might be wrong, considering English is my second language.
Wait so the alternative to anti-propaganda is just plain propaganda. She wants you to read propaganda?
I started using anti-vaxx propaganda tactics satirically.
The goal is to show how the tactic is manipulative by applying it to something obviously not dangerous.
Water is easy, start insisting that “dihydrogen monoxide” is dangerous:
Celebrity just died? “They had dihydrogen monoxide before they died, maybe it killed them”
“All traffic fatalities in the last 5 years were link to people using dihydrogen monoxide”
“Dihydrogen overdoses kill people every year”
“Why is dihydrogen monoxide in everything? Why is big dihydrogen monoxide putting this in everything, what are they trying to do?”
“I bet Trump was on dihydrogen monoxide when he thought of his tariffs plan”
Etc
Did you know there are more hydrogen atoms in a single water molecule than stars in our whole solar system?
there are more hydrogen atoms in a single water molecule
Hydrogen atoms?! Didn’t they use that in the hydrogen bomb? And in the Hindenburg Disaster? OH THE HUMANITY!
Everything with a message is propaganda. If I tell you to where a mask to protect those around you it’s propaganda. Nobody is immune to propaganda.
Anti-propaganda would definitely mean factual information without bias or a message. It’s not a real thing though, so in their meaning they clearly just mean anything they disagree with.
I do think that we could give information without propaganda if we really mean it.
Or at least there are levels of propaganda.
My personal take is that propaganda is not true, like actual lies.
I know that “the best propaganda is true” and just excluding other information. But purposely giving just a small part of the information is a lie regardless, to me at least.
But if we were to give all the possible information on any matter I don’t think it could count as propaganda.
And, this is the funny part, this is my own propaganda, because one of my political beliefs is that we could make politics in a healthier way without using the “evil” tactics for a “good” outcome.
I managed to logic my parents out of one thing.
My parents actually asked me if it was possible that the vaccines contained 5G micro robots.
After taking a moment to maintain my composure and put on my “pretend I wasn’t asked a stupid question and answer seriously” face, I asked them to take out their phone.
When the phone was in their hand, I asked them to consider the fact that it must be charged every day to keep working, and that the vast majority of the size of the phone was taken up by the battery. Then I pointed out that a device small enough to be injected wouldn’t have enough power to still be on when it left the needle.
Luckily I didn’t have to go further than that.
I think that’s the only time I’ve had any success pounding logic into them. I think the problem is they can’t think of me as anything but a child, except where computers are concerned.
They paid for my computer science degree, and they know I’ve been working in IT for 32 years, and I answer all their computer questions. So, if the subject is computer-related, I’m their expert. Anything else and I’m just a deluded child.
I haven’t tried talking to my mom about the SSA COBOL AI rewrite yet. I’m not sure if she heard about it or if she did whether she understood enough to even be concerned enough to ask me.
“You cannot logic someone out of something they did not logic their way into.”
This is not true and I wish it wouldn’t be repeated ad infinitum.
I used to be a pretty hardcore christian and used logic to completely get rid of religion in my life.
I think there’s a disconnect here.
I also used to be a hardcore Christian and did the same thing. But the fact is, my own lived experience brought me out of it. No one could have sinply talked me out of my beliefs. It was literally all I knew. These were conclusions I had to come to on my own, because I was questioning them to begin with.
If I was not questioning the validity of it to start, I would not have looked for new amounts of information.
If people are not curious or open enough, they will stay in what they perceive to be their “truth”, with no amount of logic being able to sway them.
Basically, if they’re not searching for truth, presenting them with truth will not sway them.
It is not logical to take Christianity as a representation of all other religions.
For a debate about similarities and differences between the Abrahamic religions i can recommend to have a look at this informative and entertaining Panel.
Jews and Muslims also think many Christian concepts to be illogical, especially the concept of Trinity or Jesus as son of God, which we see in contradiction to the oneness of God.
The claim was that you can’t logic someone out of something that they didn’t logic themselve into.
I did not logic myself into having faith that christianity is true but I did logic myself out of it.
The thing is that there have to be an incentive to receive and accept that logic. Something beyond logic.
You can’t use logic against someone who is completely emotionally invested in a cause. They need to somehow be open to contradiction, which most cultists certainly aren’t.
So in that respect it could be said that you didn’t logic yourself out of it, because you had already accepted contradiction to your beliefs before you started using logic.
If she has accepted that she is pro-propaganda then maybe you need to link her to the Wikipedia page for the word.
“Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented”
I like the Oxford dictionary definition:
“The systematic dissemination of information, esp. in a biased or misleading way, in order to promote a particular cause or point of view, often a political agenda.”
So, it doesn’t matter what the bias is. It’s still propaganda. The opposite of that would be a balanced view without any bias. So, would that also imply restricting to just factual information?
This reminds me of the people that say they are anti-antifa.
"Anti-propaganda aims to undermine the effectiveness of propaganda by exposing its manipulative tactics, providing alternative perspectives, or offering factual information to counter biased claims.
I’d pick my battles and try to address the most harmful lines of thought first. Like anything medical for example. Deprogramming is a popular topic online so there are some resources out there.
Best of luck, it’ll be difficult until you find a foothold.
deleted by creator
In comics Anti-hero, is not a villain. It’s a hero, using same tools as villains would (Deadpool, Punisher, etc).
Anti-pripaganda. Is a propaganda with opposite vector. Same tools, different goal.
If propaganda is “USA is roten country with systemic oppression off all but 1%, that is comming for our freedom and our resources”, the anti-propaganda would be “USA is the greatest country in the word and things we do are good becouse we are ones doing it. What even is a Patriot Act? Only terrorist should worry about stuff like this.”
War is Peace, Peace is War.
Everyone should read 1984.Sur. But I personally think thay Brave New Word turned out to be much more relevant to westeners.
Perhaps she’s worried you might prefer her sister over her, because of you falling for aunti-propaganda?
Technically, no propaganda of any sort at all.
Counter propaganda or anti-propaganda is just differently angled propaganda. You cannot fix propaganda with more propaganda.
If you want to understand your mom, you need to see or read what she sees. Just telling her she is wrong is not going to help. Repeating that she is wrong is jot g9ing to help.
Plus as an adult that she is, you might not be able to dissuade her. Perhaps, you may have to simply not touch the topic when with her.
When I was younger, I naively used to think that if I had the facts or Academic papers or research to prove point XYZ on side l, that I would be able to argue valiantly against some people I used to know. Ha, I was so silly. I could literally point or give the proof to my arguments on a silver platter, down to page numbers or exact quotes, and people would simply not even bother to read them, because they were certain they were right. Some people just want to be Right, not Correct. Due to such worldviews being driven not by fact but by emotion. Fear, anger, bias, lies by omission, but usually peppered with some facts here and there, etc.
Trying to change them, will just end up in damaging your current bonds. Do you want to risk that? Maybe over time. But just focus mostpy on what you have and enjoy the time you have, over spending it arguing. Life is short enough as it is.
The Street Epistemology approach could be useful in situations like this
What’s that?
This looks genuinely great, thanks for mentioning it. Here’s their website, with free learning resources.
Going to start this course today actually, didn’t realise
Just a wild guess here but maybe she meant propaganda that mostly incites people to oppose tendencies or groups rather than to support their own?
Oh and facts can be propaganda too and often are… In a universe with infinite facts, the ones chosen to be presented vs the ones chosen not to, the way the fact is framed in discourse and what is being suggested by presenting it… That’s where propaganda lives.
It’s more comfortable to think propaganda is about lies. There are a lot of lies of course, but most important is what is assumed to be understood as common truth when sharing a message. Subtext is everything.
I guess this means that we’ve reached the point where folks have become so accepting of the bullshit they’re saturated in, that the idea of hearing the truth, is abhorrent to them.
that’s the entire basis for “news entertainment” like what rupert murdoch and vladimir putin pump out
there is this great televsion show that was an offshoot of _DR _WHO__called Torchwood that dealt extensively with this subject in their final series where the people who want to take over the world hire a media consultant to not change the message from language to language, just the tone, certain phrases which change the meaning of something by occluding it with something comfortable…classic advertising, but the point is the same, propaganda is ALWAYS intentional and directed, and some will ALWAYS be susceptible… thank you for coming to my propaganda for science fiction and especially DR WHO
…in addition, there is this great scene in the movie DAVE_ where the guy sits with the cabinet in front of cameras and makes them explain stupid budget choices to save a children’s shelter;propaganda dies when shown the light of truth and shames it away…
If she can’t define it, how should we. Maybe you should just spam her with scientific articles and links to ground news.
Slightly off-topic, but you might find the latest video-essay from Contrapoints, Conspiracy, helpful.
Mother has spoken
