Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 140 posts

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#91

Post by jmye »

coldtea wrote: post #75
jltsiren wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interests are not immutable. For a long time, the US announced that it wanted a world order based on democracy, capitalism, and the rule of law. Countries that chose to support the same values often benefited greatly. And when other countries saw the outcome, they sometimes changed their priorities and chose to support the American world order.

> For a long time, the US announced that it wanted a world order based on democracy, capitalism, and the rule of law. Yeah, that was still bogus. It collaborated with dictators (they are good, as long as they serve it's interests, they're a "regime" when they dont), brought down democratically elected governments, funded orange "revolutions" and opposition parties, and of course bombed, invaded, etc sovereign nations…

> Further more, it's no place of any single country to try to build "a world order based on democracy, capitalism, and the rule of law".

So no country should do anything to interact with its neighbors and all diplomacy is a waste of time? I should never try to convince you that my opinion is right because what if you disagree? What a strange, insular way to approach international relations.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#92

Post by slater »

jmye wrote: post #91
coldtea wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For a long time, the US announced that it wanted a world order based on democracy, capitalism, and the rule of law. Yeah, that was still bogus. It collaborated with dictators (they are good, as long as they serve it's interests, they're a "regime" when they dont), brought down democratically elected governments, funded orange "revolutions" and opposition parties, and of course bombed, invaded, etc sovereign nations…

> Further more, it's no place of any single country to try to build "a world order based on democracy, capitalism, and the rule of law". So no country should do anything to interact with its neighbors and all diplomacy is a waste of time? I should never try to convince you that my opinion is right because what if you disagree? What a strange, insular way to approach international relations.

Maybe a better phrasing would be "impose their idea of a world order, with their ideas of democracy, capitalism, and the rule of their laws"

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#93

Post by ouilala »

mantas wrote: post #50
leptons wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America provides copious amounts of aid all over the world. That's soft power. It's not "propaganda", it actually helps people survive.

A lot of those money went to pushing US cultural wars themes worldwide. And many parts of the world don’t exactly share modern US (or democrats party voters) values. Then US soft power is closer to waging cultural war. Not exactly USAID, but similar topic. In my country US ambassador openly pushed for law that more than half of population is against for cultural reasons. That feels more like attempt of soft coloniali…

And yes, it might be an unpopular viewpoint....but neocolonialism is necessary.

Perhaps not the right choice of word but I mean the term 'neocolonialism' here in the sense of introducing peoples to our ways of life: democracy, capitalism, human rights.

The long and short of it is that, you can only get with the web of conflicting interests, pure monetary dealings, etc so far. You don't make any lasting alliance with a peoples and a system fundamentally opposed to you. If you isolate away, they will continue falling into the trap of systems like China and Russia who are quite happy to take your place and have completely opposite ideals to you. Eventually you will be left more and more alone on the world stage with no true allies if you let them keep doing it, and one day you will be finished off by soft or hard means when those entities, who kept expanding their outreach, became powerful enough.

Tldr; Defensive fire. Its not that you want to engage in neocolonialism, but you will have to do so as long as your enemies engage in neocolonialism. The logic is no different than that behind maintaining a traditional military power really.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#94

Post by jmye »

coldtea wrote: post #60
cassepipe wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever tried to be nice to people instead of threatening them to get what you want ? That's the idea

Doesn't work if what you want is against their interests. Hence "soft power" and, if that fails, "bombing for democracy".

Soft power is also building roads and hospitals in Africa (see: China) because you want the country to deal with you first (because they’ve you as a friend, even if you both know it’s a transactional relationship) when they go to sell resources they have. It’s not just trying to strong arm people into doing things they don’t want to do.

You have a deeply antagonistic view of all of this. Is there a reason? Do you think that the EU doesn’t employ soft power? That China doesn’t? Do you seriously see no difference between, for instance, seeing value in large numbers of people speaking some English and having a positive view of your country, and whatever “bombing for democracy” is supposed to represent?

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#95

Post by krapp »

freeone3000 wrote: post #90
krapp wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biden didn't do nothing. He stated firm support for Israel, to the point of declaring himself a Zionist, he sent billions of dollars in arms and aid to Israel, and the US under his leadership vetoed numerous UN resolutions calling for a ceasefire, as well as witheld funding to Palestinian relief organizations. He got the nickname "Genocide Joe" because of how enthusiastic he almost seemed to be about it. Utter disreg…

Sure, sure, but it’s one thing to genocide your enemies and another thing entirely to turn on your friends.

That's true.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#96

Post by jmye »

hoseyor wrote: post #34
hermitcrab wrote: post #2

The USA appears to be destroying much of the 'soft power' that it spent decades building. And it cost a tiny amount compared to the 'hard power' of the military. As an outsider, it seems very short sighted. The BBC is also cutting jobs in the BBC World Service, which seems similarly short sighted. But I don't think the cuts are as far reaching as the US ones: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpql1vvdn58o

What I find the most interesting is that to me at least it seems like there has been some strange inversion over the course of my adult life, where the same people that used to lament things like the COA VOA propaganda, warfare, instigating and stoking and orchestrating coups, subverting democratic elections, etc. are exactly the ones doing and supporting all those things they used to decry. I get the sense that I’ve…

> how the same “liberals” who decried the invasion and corruption of Iraq, cheer on and demand limitless warfare

This is an absurdly dishonest take on Ukraine, and why “liberals” (or whatever you’re trying to say) support it.

There isn’t a single, real, person who supports “war” above and beyond “Russia should stop invading and leave” and it is extremely difficult to believe that stating otherwise was done in good faith.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#97

Post by ouilala »

grandempire wrote: post #82
reaperducer wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a basic high school question. It serves no purpose other than to deflect the discussion. If you genuinely don't understand soft power, Google is your friend.

There are several different replies here and they are all very different. Some replies even say it is bad, but that it’s a kind of necessary evil. So no I don’t think I’m asking a leading question and no it’s not obvious. That’s a reply that’s used when you don’t want to test your answer. And why would we be so naive to think that Google would discern the intent of American political propaganda for us?

(copying another reply)

It might be an unpopular viewpoint....but neocolonialism is necessary.

Perhaps not the right choice of word but I mean the term 'neocolonialism' here in the sense of introducing peoples to our ways of life: democracy, capitalism, human rights.

The long and short of it is that, you can only get with the web of conflicting interests, pure monetary dealings, etc so far. You don't make any lasting alliance with a peoples and a system fundamentally opposed to you. If you isolate away, they will continue falling into the trap of systems like China and Russia who are quite happy to take your place and have completely opposite ideals to you. Eventually you will be left more and more alone on the world stage with no true allies if you let them keep doing it, and one day you will be finished off by soft or hard means when those entities, who kept expanding their outreach, became powerful enough.

Tldr; Defensive fire. Its not that you want to engage in neocolonialism, but you will have to do so as long as your enemies engage in neocolonialism. The logic is no different than that behind maintaining a traditional military power really.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#98

Post by jmye »

slater wrote: post #92
jmye wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Further more, it's no place of any single country to try to build "a world order based on democracy, capitalism, and the rule of law". So no country should do anything to interact with its neighbors and all diplomacy is a waste of time? I should never try to convince you that my opinion is right because what if you disagree? What a strange, insular way to approach international relations.

Maybe a better phrasing would be "impose their idea of a world order, with their ideas of democracy, capitalism, and the rule of their laws"

There is a vast difference between the word I responded to, “build”, and the word you substituted in, “impose”.

Hard power and violence “imposes”. Sending you TB vaccines and helping you build roads, well, “builds”.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#99

Post by Aloisius »

grandempire wrote: post #81
Aloisius wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because getting what you want through persuasion is cheaper and less bloody than through coercion.

Why is it inevitable that we if we didn’t have US propaganda we would just be shooting people instead? I just don’t follow that.

It's not inevitable. It is merely extremely likely if history is a guide.

That's not to say it will be the US doing the shooting. The natural state of the world is not one of peaceful co-existence.

Re: ‘Bloody Saturday’ at Voice of America and other U.S.-funded networks

#100

Post by xnx »

snovv_crash wrote: post #25
lkrubner wrote: post #7

Here in the USA we currently have a regime that is focused on destroying all forms of American power: they are destroying our economic power, they are destroying our cultural power, they are destroying our military power. They are destroying the idea called "America." They have gone to war against each of our traditions and values. Some critics ascribe this to rational motives, such critics claim that the goal here i…

Don't attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence.

It's both
Post reply on HN