Russia Sponsors UN Resolution Revoking Freedoms Of Speech, Assembly, And Association

originally posted by: Agent_USA_Supporter

By your response its clear that your supporting fascism as pointed here.

I don't see that at all.

Let's get something signed that condemns the atrocities committed by fascists and communist Russia.

I will sign that, will you?

We have seen a number of propaganda techniques illustrated in this thread. I will return with a summation this evening. In the meantime, I urge everyone to re-read the entire thread, paying attention to:

Ad hominem attacks
Evasion
Repetition
Failure to reference the actual text under discussion
Failure to define terms
Failure to present reasoned arguments
Failure to provide evidence for claims

a reply to: DJW001

You forgot the failure on your part to mention the real reason of the resolution was about getting the edge of off extremism and not about going against "Freedom of Speech."

It was also to prevent elements in the Ukraine to rewrite history as they now try to do...

Ukraine parliament to debate nationalist army role as WWII combatants

A bill recognizing the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) as warring combatants in the Second World War has been registered for debate in Ukraine's parliament.

The way is open for discussion in the Verkhovna Rada of activities by two organizations charged at the Nuremberg post-war trials for collaboration with the forces of Nazi Germany.

OUN was founded in western Ukraine in 1939 and allied itself with Nazi invaders fighting Soviet partisans. In 1943, the group was reorganized to become the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, notorious for mass executions among the population.

Source

It was to prevent other nations from writing a version of their own history that contradicts Russia's version. That is censorship, plain and simple. reply to: BornAgainAlien

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

This resolution would also condemn the Russian Orthodox Church for "collaborating with Nazis."

While churches were opened relatively quickly in land conquered from the Nazis, a long bureaucratic process was needed to open a church on Russian soil (taking up to three years and instantly derailed by anyone in the bureaucratic chain).[7] The hierarchs of the ROCOR condemned this new arrangement with Stalin, saying that the Moscow patriarch had “made an alliance with Satan.”[3]

The relationship between members of the ROCOR and the Nazis during World War II (when Germany turned against the USSR) has long been an issue addressed by both the Church and its critics. A 1938[8] letter written by Metropolitan Anastassy to Adolf Hitler, thanks him for his aid to the Russian Diaspora in allowing the building of a Russian Orthodox Cathedral in Berlin and praises his patriotism.

Source

What would that make Putin?

a reply to: DJW001

As I explained in the OP, the ultimate purpose of this thread was not to draw attention to the implications of the proposed resolution that Russia has placed before the UN, but rather, in keeping with the theme of this forum, to analyze the propaganda techniques used in support of the contention that it is a genuine "Anti-Nazi, anti-Fascist" measure.

The goal of propaganda is neither to inform nor persuade, but to create widespread belief. It does not use reasoned discourse or objectiv evidence, it relies on rhetoric and emotional manipulation. Two of its most powerful tools are the use of calumny and and graphic imagery because of the strong emotional response that these create.

Certain epithets carry an emotional charge so intense that they have as much impact as a boot smashing your face. "Nazi" is one such word, "fascist" another. So violent and reprehensible were these philosophies and the actions of their adherents,that to be branded with these labels creates an irrational response, both in the person so labelled and in the intended "target market" for the propaganda. People are so disgusted by what those words symbolize that they forget that these terms have actual definitions, and that these definitions may not apply to the person, group or actions that are being demonized by the term. This "name calling" is an attempt to control the discourse by using emotion to overwhelm reason.

Another tactic that can overwhelm reason is by the use of graphic visual imagery. There is an immediate emotional response to the visual, and an assumption that "seeing is believing." When we see a visual image we do not necessarily know its context, and intuitively create a story to explain it. A skilled propagandist can provide a false story to an image taken out of context, or even fabricate an image that is not a reflection of a real situation.

Here is an example of the former:



Here is an example of the latter:



When I have posted the first picture, I have never bothered to explore the context; I, myself, do not know under what circumstances it was taken. I am unfamiliar with the political philosophy the group expounds beyond the fact that they sure look like they are imitating the Nazis. I also do not how many people were actually at the rally, if it was a rally and not just a scene from some dystopian science fiction film. Why do I use it? When Russian propagandists trowel on the "Nazi Kyiv Junta" calumny they are attempting to use emotion to hijack the discourse; a counter-balancing emotionally evocative image is in order.

The second image was fabricated in order to provide "evidence" for Russia's claim that MH-17 was shot down by Ukrainian fighter jets. Since there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support this claim, other than contradictory testimony from self declared witnesses, the propaganda specialists in the Kremlin had to provide some. Seeing is believing.

In the post above, I combined a rational argument with an emotional appeal.The rational argument is that a strict interpretation of this "Anti-Nazi" resolution would criminalize the Russian Orthodox Church for its co-operation with and praise for Nazi Germany. (This is, incidentally, strong evidence that Russia never really wanted the resolution implemented. China is the only permanent member of the Security Council who would not be forced to veto it.) I then added a barb directed at Putin, who has cynically used the Russian Orthodox Church in his own propaganda and appropriated one of his own images to drive the emotional impact home.

Note that my conscious use of propaganda techniques in that post does not invalidate my reasoned argument, just as the use of facts for propaganda purposes does not make them untrue.

Propagandists use similar techniques across various platforms; just as they provide only one point of view in traditional media, or at least distort the opposing points of view, so they attempt to control the discourse in interactive media, such as on social media or forums like this one. I will get more specific about on-line propaganda techniques in my next post, then provide examples from this very thread in the post after that. In the mean time, I will pause to allow other members to dispute what I have said in this post. It's only fair....

a reply to: DJW001

No need to dispute, just go on with explaining what you do.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: DJW001

No need to dispute, just go on with explaining what you do.

Ad hom attacks are the crudest form of propaganda. Judging by the star your joke got, someone really likes ad hom attacks around here. We all know who, and documenting this misbehavior will begin soon enough.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: DJW001

No need to dispute, just go on with explaining what you do.

Ad hom attacks are the crudest form of propaganda. Judging by the star your joke got, someone really likes ad hom attacks around here. We all know who, and documenting this misbehavior will begin soon enough.

You don`t even see the irony in that your own post was one long ad hom attack against posters who in your mind are pro-Russians...you can put lipstick on a pig, but it`s still is a pig.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

You don`t even see the irony in that your own post was one long ad hom attack against posters who in your mind are pro-Russians...you can put lipstick on a pig, but it`s still is a pig.

My post defines propaganda and explains techniques propagandists use. Are you saying that certain pro-Russian posters use these techniques?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

You don`t even see the irony in that your own post was one long ad hom attack against posters who in your mind are pro-Russians...you can put lipstick on a pig, but it`s still is a pig.

And no matter how many times you say it...Russia didn't invade Ukraine, it doesn't make it true.

And do you really think your in a position to talk about someone and an ad hom attack against poster who don't see Russia as the world leader?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

You don`t even see the irony in that your own post was one long ad hom attack against posters who in your mind are pro-Russians...you can put lipstick on a pig, but it`s still is a pig.

My post defines propaganda and explains techniques propagandists use. Are you saying that certain pro-Russian posters use these techniques?

I`m saying you want to make the impression to forum members that this is happening.

You`re trying to influence forum members their minds because the facts which have been emerging about what's been going on doesn`t suite what you want to let people think is going on.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

I`m saying you want to make the impression to forum members that this is happening.

That's because it is happening.

You`re trying to influence forum members their minds because the facts which have been emerging about what's been going on doesn`t suite what you want to let people think is going on.

No, I am trying to get them to realize who has been lying to them. Since you have not challenged my definition of propaganda, I assume you agree with it. You have also not commented on the propaganda techniques I have explained. Good. Time to open your eyes.

The propagandist thrives on misdirection, lies and repetition. Their objective is to repeat a lie so often that it begins to seem like common knowledge. A good example of this is the way Russian propagandists always referred to the provisional government in Kyiv, and continue to refer to the newly elected government as a "fascist junta," despite the fact that less than 5% of the government are members of far right wing parties, roughly the same as in Putin's Russia. Neither was it a "junta," as they were all civilians who were elected to their positions before the President caused a constitutional crisis by defecting to Russia. Nevertheless, the lie has been repeated so often that many people simply believe it.

When facts are presented that contradict the lies, the propagandist must evade. One way of doing this is to attack the credibility of the person or organization presenting the disturbing facts; this leads to ad hominem attacks. The more these attacks are repeated, the more threatened the propagandist feels.

My next post will demonstrate a perfect example. To avoid potential T&C violation, I will not link to the original posts so the identity of the member is partially shielded.

So the next time you actually After my first post, this was the response:

I have a question is this your daily job as a propagandist for the state department? i had to ask your UN link is misleading. Just like your thread as always.

RT calls it anti-Nazi, I call it pro-censorship.

I had no idea some here in ATS actual had supported the fascists but seeing this thread just raises the suspicion. So In truth the bill was not anti-Nazi but censorship?

This is coming from the same American whom has being defending Kiev's government since the EU protests had started, its comical.

Three ad hom attacks in a single post. This member did not dispute my statements at all, because he dared not! If he drew attention to the actual resolution, it would be obvious that I was right, so he chose to defame me instead. Unlike the member who attacked me, who supports censorship, I have always condemned fascism; genuine fascism.

edit on 3-12-2014 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

You`re trying to influence forum members their minds because the facts which have been emerging about what's been going on doesn`t suite what you want to let people think is going on.

No the facts that are emerging are showing what he is posting about, although you and a few are trying to show that Russia is the innocent one in this conflict, yet the world see's through the BS coming out of the Kremlin.

And you can try all you want, but the truth has come out and Russia is not looking as innocent as you want other's to believe.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

After my first post, this was the response:

I have a question is this your daily job as a propagandist for the state department? i had to ask your UN link is misleading. Just like your thread as always.

RT calls it anti-Nazi, I call it pro-censorship.

I had no idea some here in ATS actual had supported the fascists but seeing this thread just raises the suspicion. So In truth the bill was not anti-Nazi but censorship?

This is coming from the same American whom has being defending Kiev's government since the EU protests had started, its comical.

Three ad hom attacks in a single post. This member did not dispute my statements at all, because he dared not! If he drew attention to the actual resolution, it would be obvious that I was right, so he chose to defame me instead. Unlike the member who attacked me, who supports censorship, I have always condemned fascism; genuine fascism.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Of course, he then repeats the lie. Over and over:

I am quite surprised to see a small number of users in here supporting fascism while doing so avoiding what the fascists did in WW2 and WW1. defend fascists why dont you look up to there history of war crimes and ethnic cleanse which they have committed eh?

By your response its clear that your supporting fascism as pointed here.

What you people here have being doing is basically not only defending the fascists but also making claims that Putin is Stalin then Hitler and backwards without any evidence.

Really now? so people whom want to ban fascists actually means advocating Banning freedom of expression? since when is supporting fascism and fascists an freedom of expression?

But not surprising your defending fascism.

Why are you defending fascism and Hitler?

Some people defending fascists and fascism in general.

I am not the one here defending fascists. But seeing this thread and how your the one claiming that anyone attacks fascism is therefore trying to curb freedom of expression gives me quite a laugh.

Germany knows what glorying the fascism is and thus have supported it the same way in Greece i guess your also supporting the fascists in Greece to then.

That is about all that this member contributed to the thread. At no point did he try to make a reasoned counter-argument; all he did was repeat the calumny, hoping that the lie would morph into "common knowledge."

Even though this propaganda pusher has probably violated the decorum provisions of T&C, I implore the Mods not to ban him. Although he has been consciously abusing it, he still has a right to express himself. This isn't Russia.

a reply to: DJW001

Of course, he then repeats the lie. Over and over:

Well some people think the more you say it then it will eventually be believed.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: DJW001

Of course, he then repeats the lie. Over and over:

Well some people think the more you say it then it will eventually be believed.

I believe that the more you run your mouth off, the more foolish you look. That's the brilliant part of freedom of expression... eventually everyone actually expresses their true self.

a reply to: DJW001

That's because it is happening.

It happens in your mind, as I have said many times before.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: DJW001

That's because it is happening.

It happens in your mind, as I have said many times before.

Did you simply not read my three posts, or are you in denial?