The United States on Friday released a U.S. intelligence assessment sent to more than 100 countries that found Moscow is using spies, social media and Russian state-run media to erode public faith in the integrity of democratic elections worldwide.

“This is a global phenomenon,” said the assessment. “Our information indicates that senior Russian government officials, including the Kremlin, see value in this type of influence operation and perceive it to be effective.”

A senior State Department official, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said that Russia was encouraged to intensify its election influence operations by its success in amplifying disinformation about the 2020 U.S. election and the COVID-19 pandemic.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This isn’t the place for whataboutism.

    The US has done countless shitty things over the years, and more than its fair share during the Cold War, but it is not (currently) an authoritarian country that is making a broad and global propaganda and covert services push towards populist authoritarians and away from democratic norms in as many countries as possible. Russia is doing that now, and has been doing that since they got their feet back under themselves a bit in the late 90s.

    • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      The US is absolutely making global propaganda. What do you think CNN, FOX, and MSNBC are? The fake news media is actively trying to kill democracy, 8n service of their oligarch owners.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who in their right mind is watching CNN, Fox or MSNBC outside of Americans?

        Nobody, that is who.

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lol if you think the US is a true police state, then you have no clue what an actual police state is. In a real police state, you are disappeared almost immediately for critical statements about your government. While that can and does happen in the US on occasion, try that shit in North Korea or Myanmar or China. Be thankful you are allowed to have a dissenting opinion of the government, because there are actual police states in the world that will scoop you up if there’s even a hint of dissent.

        • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          We don’t have secret police, we call them undercover agents.

          Please tell the Black Lives Matters protestors who were routinely beaten to the curb and tear gassed for expressing a first amendment “right” that they aren’t under surveillance.

          Please tell the Portland protestors who were kidnapped by Trump-led federal agents they are living in a normal country.

          https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/04/bob-casey/sen-bob-casey-said-federal-agents-kidnapped-protes/

          I’m sure Snowden is thankful he’s able to live freely after exposing that an international spying agreement was gone, and didn’t have to go into hiding. Same for Chelsea Manning who 100% wasn’t put into solitary confinement and forbidden to talk to the public.

          If revealing the truth that your government is committing crimes is punished, you are being ruled by criminals.

          • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dude I’m not denying any of those are fucked up and outside of what our constitution provides for under freedom of speech, assembly, and press (many reporters were also arrested and had their footage destroyed). My point is that, despite these absolute abominations by the ruling class, the average person does not live under a constant state of surveillance and oppression in the same way that those in N Korea, Myanmar, Russia, China, etc do. Sure all of our online activity, communications, and movements are monitored, at least passively in a database, but unless we are actively causing major amounts of trouble we likely won’t have the good squad breaking down our doors and hauling us off for saying “fuck the government” online. It could be so, so much worse (and quite possibly could get there in our lifetimes, if we keep being apathetic about the state of our country).

            • spiderplant@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              There is no such thing as passive surveillance if all surveillance data can be automatically flagged or you have an army of agents trawling through it all. Both things America is doing.

              Saying fuck the US government online probably puts US citizens as well as global citizens on lists.

              America is notorious for embedding into and destroying movements. This happens to this day.

              Also hate to break it to you, if you’re in the US you’re physical movements are also most likely tracked.

              It’s pure cope to say you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide as you just did.

                • spiderplant@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This comment is unproductive.

                  We do disagree on a fundamental fact, that America is a police state.

                  bobs_monkey hypocritically excuses american actions when they would use the same actions committed by non aligned states as evidence that they are police states.

                  Countering this narrative is productive to my goal, even if I don’t convince bobs_monkey. It doesn’t let what is essentially american propaganda go unchallenged for future readers.

                  • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You really need to work on your reading comprehension and probably go outside, paranoia is not a healthy way of life.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If revealing the truth that your government is committing crimes is punished, you are being ruled by criminals.

            My guy what are you doing in your comment exactly? You’re pointing out illegal acts by the government. Do you expect punishment to come soon? Consider how often you’ve criticized the US, and how often you’ve been arrested or fined or disappeared for that criticism.

            The examples you mentioned aren’t the norm – and that’s precisely why we discuss them. If it were the norm we wouldn’t pay any attention to them. They’re only newsworthy because government suppression of our speech is news. It isn’t a common occurrence.

            To compare authoritarianism in the US to the rest of the world is absolute peanuts. People constantly complain about the government and make fun of officials. We could insult Trump to our heart’s content in 2016-2020, but are you aware of a single Chinese person who joked about Xi being Winnie the Pooh in that time period?

            Let’s put it this way, if you can complain about how bad your government is without worries of reprisal, your country isn’t as bad as you may think.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      41
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where is the place for whataboutism then? Never? When a narrative is being pushed in the media that is hypocritical, should we just accept it? People seem to think anyone critical of America is defending Russia/China or another country. I think it’s downright UN-American and negligent to never try to make the country you reside in live up to the standards it puts forth.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This isn’t the place for whataboutism.

        Where is the place for whataboutism then? Never?

        Well, you could start your own Lemmy post speaking specifically about the United States, instead of derailing this post talking about Russia.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              29
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Russia interfered. What’s the conversation to be derailed? No one is saying it didn’t happen. They are just pointing out the hypocrisy because America does it too. Claiming “whataboutism” suppresses dissent and promotes the state department narrative.

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                ·
                1 year ago

                They are just pointing out the hypocrisy

                They can point out that hypocrisy in their own post, instead of derailing this one.

                • BEDE@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Nah, this is just how a conversation works IRL. Points, counterpoints.

                  All parties just agreeing with each other staying on the same point is not a conversation.

                  Making a counterpoint can hardly be considered derailing the conversation .

                  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    13
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Making a counterpoint can hardly be considered derailing the conversion.

                    Whataboutism is not a counterpoint. A counterpoint would be disagreeing with the original point being made, not bringing up a new point.

                    One point at a time is what’s being advocated.

                    conversion

                    Might want to edit your comments to use the correct word.

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  17
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Fine. Carry on with the foreign hate, while ignoring America’s problems. Can you at least acknowledge that the US has interfered in foreign elections? Lol

                  • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    11
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Fine. Carry on with the foreign hate, while ignoring America’s problems.

                    I have no problem discussing that, at all. Create a topic I’ll be glad to add my opinion to it.

                    The only point I’m making is that you shouldn’t be discussing two distinct points simultaneously, take them one at a time.

      • Dran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The place is indeed “never”. Every action should be addressed in the vacuum of its own context. Whatabousims detract from the argument at hand and prevent a Socratic exchange from narrowing its scope sufficiently enough to reach a consensus of understanding.

        It’s not about deflecting hypocrisy, it’s about being able to have sane arguments in good faith.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Maybe have a Big Think?

          Protective mechanism

          Gina Schad sees the characterization of counterarguments as “whataboutism” as a lack of communicative competence, insofar as discussions are cut off by this accusation. The accusation of others of whataboutism is also used as an ideological protective mechanism that leads to “closures and echo chambers”.[98] The reference to “whataboutism” is also perceived as a “discussion stopper” “to secure a certain hegemony of discourse and interpretation.” Source

          • BEDE@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thank you. This is far more coherent than what i wrote. I’m tired of seeing conversations shutdown or railroaded by people crying whataboutism.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Whataboutism is like false choice and straw man combined. Not only is the suggestion that one needs to choose between being critical of Russia or US, that it’s either/or, but you’re also then implying that the person you’re replying to is making an argument in support of one of the things. That they can’t possibly believe both things to be bad.

        They are only talking about one BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT.

        It’s fallacious, so yes, its time is never.

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

              If this were rational you wouldn’t be giving it so much energy. The whataboutism would have been dismissed and people would have moved on and focused on the article. The fact that the whataboutism worked shows just how irrational this is. It proves that the whataboutism is a valid point.

      • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, never is the correct answer. It’s cheap, obvious and condescending as fuck as well as being a total waste of time. The correct thing to do with whataboutism is to call it out and then ignore. Like what I am doing with you right now.

    • Rocha@lm.put.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      41
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not doing a whataboutism, I’m just saying that when a state big enough wants to exert it’s influence all over the world, it’s hard to curb that.

      • Fades@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Uh, yes it fucking iswhataboutism because this thread is about Russian political intervention against democracy worldwide whereas the US would subvert governments to prop up democracies that would benefit them

        Big difference

        when a state big enough wants to exert its influence all over the world, it’s hard to curb that

        (Btw you used “it’s” which is “it is”, not “it’s” as in indicating ownership)

        This is simply MORE whataboutism, again we’re talking about Russian disinformation campaigns eroding public trust in democratic institutions and you’re over here telling people that it’s hard to change a big countries mind???

        Whataboutism or whataboutery denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation.

        Come on bud, you can do better than this