The United States on September 13 said the Russian news outlet RT is taking orders directly from the Kremlin and working with Russian military intelligence to spread disinformation around the world to undermine democracies.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the United States has gathered new evidence that exposes cooperation between RT and four other subsidiaries of the Rossia Segodnya media group, and it intends to warn other countries of the threat of the disinformation.

In addition to RT, Rossia Segodnya operates RIA Novosti, TV-Novosti, Ruptly, and Sputnik, but the announcement on September 13 focused largely on RT. The outlet, formerly known as Russia Today, has previously been sanctioned for its work to allegedly spread Kremlin propaganda and disinformation.

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

    Don’t let online discourse influence you too much. Our people tend to be fairly content with portions of the leadership, with most people having their favorites and disliking all the others. I never did actually highlight that people’s voices don’t seem to matter, our votes very much choose these people.

    You wouldn’t know it here with Lemmy’s natural lean, but the average American is roughly centered on neoliberalism, most Lemmings find that somewhat upsetting and prefer to ignore the fact. Even with Biden being the oldest pres in our history, and with such unpopular things as Gaza on his record, he’s maintained a 30-40% approval rate. That’s a percentage of total Americans that approved of his Presidency. Obama, with slightly more right-leaning policies, was around 50%.

    Ultimately, it’s more moderate, suburban parents that pick our leaders. They’re not as excited about change as the more progressive folk you’ll find here, they like stability, decorum, they don’t rush to judgement, they are not overly focused on foreign policy, stuff like that. They do not generally believe the country is in any sort of dire straits, they tend to underestimate global warming, they don’t particularly like people like Greta Thunberg, Just Stop Oil or pro-Palestinian protestors. They do not spend that much time on social media.

    On the whole, I’d recommend not listening too much to the rhetoric of politicians or political operatives. Words are cheap, its actions once in office that tell the story. Do they cut taxes for the wealthy? Do they add or remove environmental regulations on business? Do they try to enact policies that will benefit people? The track records do vary tremendously, anyone who says its some uniparty is just spewing propaganda. They’re very, very distinct, both interparty and especially between the parties. You wouldn’t necessarily notice if you just listened to their words though, you do have to watch for actions. They do end up trying to have their cake and eat it too, and are more than willing to rhetorically dance around to try to avoid displeasing as many people as possible. They still have to vote on things though.

    • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Who keeps down voting you? It’s weird. It’s not me. But I noticed someone seems to keep down voting you. I upvoted your post to try to counter act that. That’s annoying since they obviously even part of our conversation. Anyway, I hear you and what you’re saying. The problem is I don’t see it. Let’s take tariffs for example. I’m opposed to tariffs because it’s a market distortion, and we’ve always known that. Which party do I vote for to stop tariffs. And not just on China but in general. We should be promoting free trade, after all that’s what made USA great to begin with. Yet now that our manufacturing isn’t up to snuff we decide that the solution is tariffs? Look at what happened to the Russian Lada. In the end the only way to keep that company running was to stop the tariffs and start buying foreign products into their production.

      But that’s just one example. Obviously the cease fire is another and so on and so forth. Yes, there are minor differences in policies, but none of the ones that I really care about, save abortion (I can’t even believe that’s a thing right now). But the problem is the parties use these tiny differences to pretend that they’re different. Where’s the policies to support small business? What about giving small businesses a tax break so they can catch up?

      I’m sure we can all find those pet issues that they do fight over, but that’s their trick. They go out of their way to force you to focus on the small things and ignore the bigger issues. It’s not new, but OMG is it spreading like wild fire.

      We are a nation based on trade. If we destroy our trade, we destroy the fabric of the nation. And everyone is so focused on destroying trade.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m not too worried, I seldom pay too much attention to small vote tallies, especially in long back-and-forths. Longform discussions of political nuance are also minefields, especially during an election year. lol

        Yeah, the tariffs irritate me a good bit. I suspect that foreign policy is largely what is driving them, but that makes me fear that more China-hawkish types are being a little too successful in pushing their opinions. I’m pretty sure they’re just a geopolitical weapon though, as opposed to domestic protection. Trump wanted a trade war, he was seeking to punish China for intellectual property theft, currency manipulation, etc. Not that shit wasn’t happening, but I don’t think trade war was a good answer, nor do I think it’s too late to reverse course instead of doubling down. Global economics aren’t really my strong suit though, so I do have to admit I could be mistaken on something. Still though, I do believe that trade helps secure peace, and peace is the preferable state of affairs. So trade should be encouraged on that alone, not discouraged.

        Not just minor differences, higher vs lower taxes is pretty huge. So is business regulation in this era. I have no interest in living in an actual oligarchy, by some actual council of billionaires. What the communists like to claim, but literal and overt, instead of billionaires merely having an outsized degree of influence due to the power of mass media technologies and how money can influence mass perceptions. The perceptions are still what directly controls our government, the necessary middleman between billionaires and govt that prevents them from getting everything they want. At a sufficient degree of wealth and power, they can get rid of that middle man via a transition to a different form of government, which I have no interest in seeing. Reducing their wealth is becoming a necessary precaution, we’ve reached a point on par with the Gilded Age, and we need to deal with our robber barons. Fortunately, we do have candidates and politicians desiring to do this. An unrealized capital gains tax would be a very heavy blow to capital. Biden pushes 35%, Harris is a little weaker at 28%. Both could be higher, but these are significantly better than our current 0%.

        It’s funny you mention small business too, Harris just recently started running on a 50k tax credit for new small businesses. Which I think is fair, so long as other taxes can be implemented to cover the shortfall. Really it’s higher taxes that I’m most in favor of though, personally. I dislike how strong the business sector has become in American life, and taxes are a good way to attack that.

        And election reform, but that’s the hardest thing to do, since you require a filibuster-proof majority to get even one step anywhere. Probably the only thing harder than fixing immigration. When we have one party driven primarily by slowly vanishing demographics like religious affiliation, they’ve realized democracy is no longer a viable path for them. Consistently losing the popular vote each election is a pretty clear harbinger of things to come, yet they can’t switch their policies because those are core and faith-based, soooo… we’re in deep shit. lol

        • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          You bring up a great point. I do wonder about Kamala’s small business exemption. I do hope that passes, but I’d bet money it’ll go the way of Obama’s healthcare plan. Which is it’ll pass in a horrible form that won’t help anyone. Oh god, just remembering that makes me upset. The Republicans claimed that they wanted to protect the free market healthcare system and the ONLY THING they removed was the free market part of Obama’s plan. That still gets under my skin.

          I realize, you have the same opinions as I do, except you don’t seem to be as terrified of the outcomes as I am. AND I’ll say, perhaps you’re right. And even if you’re not, perhaps I need to stop fretting about it as a whole, not exactly much that I can do.

          So a bit of my own background. I’m Taiwanese American. This China hawk stuff scares the ever loving shit out of me. For reasons that has nothing to do with China. I fear the racism that this can create or has already created. The average American doesn’t know the difference between Taiwan and China and the hate just spreads from there. Don’t forget, Chinese people used to have to wear shirts in California that said don’t spit on me I’m Chinese.

          Ultimately, I as many Taiwanese people agree believe that USA needs to stay the fuck out of it. They create issues and problems that they do not understand. The Taiwanese vote actually shows that, though you’ll never see it reported in a US newspaper. Taiwan voted in a Pro-US president and a Pro-China congress. We want stability and standing in the middle we believe is our best bet. But it would be super nice if USA stopped focusing on us. ESPECIALLY because the US politicians mostly just use it to enrich themselves rather than actually helping us.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Yeah, I’m keeping my fingers crossed. Harris has been fairly successful with small dollar fundraising, so she’s a little more insulated from having to rely on big doner money as a typical politician. She does have room to pivot on Gaza and implement a few tough policies if she can wrangle the legislature. That’s the steepest hurdle though, and she doesn’t have Biden’s half century of experience and saved-up political capital in the Senate. She’ll need to be bolder, I think, but the Byzantine nature of legislative wrangling is getting a bit outside my ken.

            I think people tend to misunderstand East Asian cultures in general. There’s a patience present in most of them, that I know anything about anyway, that is less present in West European cultures. Xi seems to exemplify this, and has seemed to be in no rush to make bold moves when they’re unnecessary and carry a significant degree of uncertainty. Where a westerner sees the naval buildup and might be inclined to see it as a massive red flag, I see a man keeping his options open. Having a tool is one thing, it allows flexibility. Using that tool puts you on a course from which you cannot return. I suspect he understands this, so I don’t foresee any immanent attacks on Taiwan. Especially given the rugged Taiwanese geography and having their fabs in such an easy-to-destroy state.

            Hawks gonna hawk though. While our MIC isn’t the major power it was in the Cold War era, it does still carry some influence. Though personally I’d be happier if we simply built our own navy up, perhaps in partnership with S Korean industry to help keep costs down, and otherwise adopted Teddy Roosevelts philosophy of “walk softly and carry a big stick”. If a country wishes to partner with us, like the Philippines for instance, that’s one thing, but we don’t need to posture and message so aggressively. Green Berets on Taiwan was a miscalculation, for instance, even if invited imo. Taiwanese soldiers could come here for specialized training if they wished, we didn’t need to deploy there.

            And yeah, we’re mostly all different shades of left and/or progressive on here. lol Personally I’m a progressive, and while I tend to take a detail-oriented view instead of trying to keep things exclusively at the much more accessible broad-strokes level, I think the majority of Lemmings all want the same general direction for the world. With some disagreement on how to get there. That’s healthy though.

            edit: Oh, and on the racism note … yeah. ~sigh

            • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              I consider myself center right actually. I’m sure you’ve noticed I’m very pro-business. Though socially far left as I think people should have the freedom to express themselves however they choose, that’s really none of my business. But perhaps that’s why you’re not as freaked out as I am. Because the reason I think I’m center left is because I’m pro-business. Watching the supposedly pro-business party light itself on fire and commit to incredibly un-business friendly decisions, especially based on personal feelings and worse anti-LGBTQ reasons it has put me into despair. Who’s here to protect businesses and make sure that the government doesn’t overreach? Our deficit spending is already almost 1 trillion dollars in payments a year, that’s insane. Cooler heads need to prevail and we need to get our economy back to normal. And part of to normal means normal trade with everyone. But who knows, like I said, maybe I’m over thinking it.

              China will never attack Taiwan. I don’t know why people think they would since they keep telegraphing what they’ll do if push comes to shove. In the event that Taiwan declared independence and only in that situation (and Taiwan wouldn’t, they just passed a law that states the president can’t make that declaration alone) would China blockade Taiwan. They would try to starve Taiwan out and they could because as an island nation it’s entirely dependent on imports. The question people actually need to ask is who would be willing to go to a hot war for that? Especially since China would make exemptions to let trade through anyway, that they would only have this blockade here until Taiwan submits. And then you’ll have another frozen stand off like the one you have now. Because that’s what China really wants. They don’t want change they want stability. As you’ve so aptly pointed out, they are a patient people who are in no hurry for things to change. And you know what’s really really sad? How the west had twisted Xi’s words to make it out that he wanted to declare war. When Xi said the Taiwan situation will be resolved in this decade, what he was saying is he thought the relationship was going so well that Taiwan would wish to return to China willingly. You see at that time trade between the two was at a high point. People from Taiwan were going to China to get educated and find jobs there. Then the US started saying those were fighting words and that it meant China was going to attack to reunify within the decade. That China was only building up it’s military to do this, the attack would come before 2027. I think you know what happens next.

              USA’s MIC is terrifying. They create scenarios and publish them and the news media gets ahold of them and suddenly fear is created everywhere. It just starts off as scenarios, they see one country has an advantage and then a torrent of articles will come out about it. Suddenly, now you have a new enemy. All China was doing was building up because as you said they’re building up because they’re wise. Well actually for sales, they really really want to be big in the arms market but that’s another thing entirely. And now we have what we have. This awkward stand off where there are no winners. And it’s all very sad really.

              • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, I admit I misjudged you based solely off of the server you’re from, which was rather immature of me. I imagine you’ve probably noticed that .ml has a high population of overt Marxist-Leninist folks on it, and is one of the hubs of leftism on Lemmy. That certainly doesn’t apply to everyone who signed up on it though. lol Centrist does make a lot more sense in hindsight. I doubt you can really call yourself center-right anymore though, in the American scale at least, simply due to how crazy the right has gotten in recent years. That Overton Window jumped like 5 notches rightward on us, and left a lot of people behind. You could be a fairly typical neolib, free-trade, privatization, etc. We have a community of them here on .world, they post a fair bit of news, you might find some like-minded people if you are.

                I agree wholeheartedly. The only places I’ve heard that extensively discussed are more serious geostrategic groups. CSIS most prominently. Most of the media plays into the more potentially … dramatic possibilities though. Much better as clickbait I imagine, for us peons.

                Regarding navy I’m not so sure. The scale of their fleet build up is very impressive. Generally, naval ships are not exactly a hot export market, especially when you’re considering the larger, more advanced blue water stuff. They’re pretty clearly moving towards global power projection capabilities. This does not necessarily indicate a future of aggression, though, as such a force also has a very important role in securing the sea trade that China relies so heavily on in addition to being a strong tool for diplomatic pressure. Look at how we use ours, after all. Naval power is also the sort of thing that needs to be developed over many years, you can’t just spin up the institutions and knowledge base necessary to effectively deploy to another hemisphere in just a few years, it takes decades. So I see it as a long-term investment and hedge against the future.

                • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  <CRY> You are absolutely right. I cannot rightfully call myself center-right anymore. The right has literally jumped off a cliff and I’m stuck here shaking my fists in anger at the sky. I probably am close to neo-lib. I would have used to call myself libertarian but whoo boy that went sideways. It’s a sad reality for me. Maybe that’s why I’m so upset about it all.

                  So here’s a surprising thing about China’s Navy. Besides small arms, naval ships are what China sells the most. There are a lot of weird political reasons for this, for example fighter jets and tanks are almost exclusively sold to close allies and allies just isn’t China’s thing. Just look what happened to Egypt’s purchases of SU-35s as they got hit by CAATSA. So China decided to focus on a niche to get the word out that they’re selling high end military equipment, not just small arms. Something that would go under the radar of many super powers (read USA) and would still be able to show off high end equipment. Secondly, you have to remember who China’s buyers are. SE Asia is mostly island nations, so they don’t go for the more conventional equipment that you’re thinking of. They’re islands, so they’re more likely to buy maritime equipment rather than ground assault equipment that you would see pretty much everywhere else on the planet.

                  I mean just recently you have Thailand and Cambodia both buying Chinese Naval warships. Here’s a super fun one, Malaysia is one of their customers. A country they’re having a spat with over the SCS. So you have Malaysia buying Chinese warships to protect Malaysia from China.

                  https://www.voanews.com/a/malaysia-buying-chinese-ships-to-protect-waters-from-china-others/3780026.html

                  That all said times they are a changing. Egypt just signed a deal for J-10CE fighter jets and Algeria is ready to buy VT-4 tanks. Both are abandoning Russia in favor of Chinese military equipment for very obvious reasons. This is likely one of the reasons China is in no hurry to see the end of the war. Watching Russia destroy itself and having all of it’s customer’s go to China doesn’t seem like it’s against China’s interests at the moment.

                  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Yeah, exporting some smaller craft is definitely not out of the question. It’s always nice when you can gather up additional buyers for your kit, that way you can leverage additional economies of scale to keep your own costs down. They are building large amounts of naval assets that won’t be suitable for export though. Patrol craft are one thing. Larger seagoing warships are another–most countries simply don’t maintain a very large fleet of them, as they’re very expensive to operate and not broadly useful during peacetime outside of certain niche situations. Since its the type of thing where a few countries would maybe buy a few every few decades, it’s never really going to be a big money maker for anyone.

                    That’s an interesting insight on moving into Russia’s export market. I hadn’t thought of that, but it actually makes a tremendous amount of sense. lol Aircraft are definitely a hotter export market. They’re just something you want in greater numbers, generally speaking, and have a much broader appeal.