#recognizing disinformation

[zentarablog]

Top 10 Realities Behind Pizzagate and QAnon (Understanding How Conspiracy Theories Evolve)

In today’s world, we get so much information from the internet, social media, and our friends. It’s awesome to learn new things, but sometimes, ideas spread online that aren’t true at all. These false ideas can be confusing, scary, and sometimes even cause real-world harm. They are often called conspiracy theories. A conspiracy theory is an idea that a secret group is planning something bad,…

[yuliasispin]

can’t believe Taylor was a lipnitskaya stan!1!!

[legallydistinctloolooland]

The HC of Husk being a war vet seems to be the kinda thing he says sarcastically once when someone is prying + then everyone takes it seriously from then on. Like "oh of course! THAT'S why he's like this", meanwhile he has moved onto another conversation, assuming his point was made. Then someone brings it up later, and he is like "what the fuck are you talking about"

[lacewise]

Hey, you! Yes: you! Random person on the internet! I need to talk to you about something.

Nearly everything on social media (yes, that thing too) (yup, so is that) (yes, especially me) is marketing. That’s a morally neutral statement. It’s not “good” or “bad” or even “morally grey”. It is the way we have organized the internet, especially platforms on the internet.

If people are fighting for attention, eyeballs, interest… you’re going to get marketing. In this truth, people have different goals: entertainment, education, money, etc. That’s all still morally neutral.

Where it gets morally bad is when you buy into the marketing without any research. Where it gets even worse is when people tell you if you fact check the information you see on social media, *you* are morally bad. Why don’t you just buy into the marketing? Why don’t you just accept the buzzwords? And a lot of it seems to be an updated redux of “tolerate my intolerance!” (Which evolved to, “Hey, I’m just asking questions” then to “What if it’s really true? What if [blank innocuous thing] is the root of all evil?” And now it’s, “We have to do something!!! There’s no time to fact check!!! If this is really happening, there’s no time!!!”) Which I should not have to explain… is bad.

Let me explain anyway though: the increase in urgency and making it time sensitive is meant to send you into a panic. That fear/anger/anxiety response tells you you need to do something, right now! But it’s so difficult to know what… don’t worry, don’t freeze, don’t think, they have the answer! Do this right now! You have to! There’s only a few seconds left! You NEED TO DO THIS YOU—oh you’ve done it. Phew, crisis averted! You’re our hero! Now make sure to tell all your friends or nothing you did matters and you will be d—ned for all eternit—thanks for sharing! We need more people like you!

The difference between this and something actually time sensitive is something that is legitimate will 1) often not work you into a panic, because they’re just trying to make you more informed/legitimately interested, 2) they will give you actionable steps and 3) the tone is completely different. Here’s another example:

Hey, everyone. I’m sorry to say this but [politician] has betrayed our [community]. We met with [politician] and they promised us they would fight for our [very specific purpose, usually with its own specialized vocabulary]. Today they voted against that. But we’re not giving up! Please, pressure [government body] to change their minds about [issue] and vote again in our favor! This would [specific impact]. We are also working on this [alternative solution]. Please donate here! We’ll keep you all updated and together, we will will achieve [favorable result]. We won’t back down! Thank for your support!

Even if the legitimate advocacy is angry, devastated, resigned, or scared, you will still see the elements of specific information and solutions pertaining to a specific situation, especially using jargon pertaining to the specific situation, urging you to learn more or ally with them without 1) centering yourself, 2) accidentally spreading bad information, or 3) accidentally harming other communities in solidarity with theirs. Learning more and supporting movements is supposed to be an *ongoing process* not a “winner-takes-all” sporting tournament, with you as the star and hero.

If people are telling you not to get a second opinion about something that isn’t easily verifiable (especially if there are no primary sources to consult), that’s morally bad marketing.

You may be wondering why I’m framing this as “morally bad marketing” instead of “propaganda” (which is literally correct). That’s *also* marketing. I’ve found that propaganda is a loaded word in most contexts, and if you tell someone they’ve fallen for it, they’ll get defensive. However, if I frame it as a scam and focus my attention on the people manufacturing the scam (whether that’s outrage, bigotry, etc) sometimes it jolts people into realizing how flimsy the premise actually is. Which is very!

If people aren’t using their own activism and infrastructure to gain acceptance and solidarity. If people are using other movements’ platforms to get attention to their own (like stealing hashtags), especially if they use *different phrases and jargon* to gain acceptance in different communities, and keep coming up with new rhetoric every time their ideas don’t penetrate the demographic they’re targeting—these are all red flags of a size that could blanket Texas. Discarding one marketing strategy for another takes time, especially with decentralized communications. If multiple strategies are being employed at once on a large scale: I highly doubt that’s decentralized at all. If it looks like a sales funnel, talks like a sales funnel, etc…

Further, if you see a sudden proliferation of accounts that don’t seem organic, or someone is selling One Weird Little Trick to complete your life, cure your ails, bring about World Peace! [Blank] hates it!

You need to flee. I need you to understand my *very* clearly on this—you need to *flee* immediately. The *best case* scenario is you are being tricked out of currency.

No one doing this is *ever* selling solutions. They are feeding you fear and self-loathing, then selling you the feeling of control. “You can do it! You can change the world! We can do it! We can do it together!” But never, ever once telling you what “it” is. At least not at first. It’s always a lifestyle, a thing, a movement. “Sure the world has gone to pieces [true] but you’re better than the last people who messed up [source?] you can fix it! Just let us tell you how [no, this is a cult, RUN]”

And, again, this can apply to anything, including: companies selling you ‘lifestyles’, companies selling you that one super niche product that will fix your life forever, up to and including literal propaganda campaigns.

The thing is: it’s not about you. It’s about what they can take from you, while you smile happily, feeling privileged (so, so proud) they took it. They let you market for them while they took your money, time, humanity, etc! And it’s all because you’re so wonderful! And brave! And subversive! And whatever else you want to see yourself as!

[vaspider]

Listen to me. Listen very carefully:

They are trying to wear you out.

They are trying to wear you out, and they own most major social media now, along with many major media outlets. The disinformation machine is cranking along. You are going to have to slow the fuck down and read things before you help them wear out other people, too.

So you just saw a post about a real scary bill, hunh? Republicans want to make it a capital offense to pet dogs and repeal The Sky Is Blue Act of 1793, declaring the new official color of the sky to be squant? Damn, that sounds scary.

Let's go look up this fictitious "Make The Sky Squant Again Act" on GovTracker* & on the official legislative tracker on congress.gov!

Well, let's see... GovTracker estimates it has a 1% chance of even getting out of committee and a 0% chance of being enacted, while congress.gov says this bill has 2 cosponsors who have been in the House and combined total of less than a month. The bill doesn't have any actual text, and it was referred to 5 different committees.

That fictitious bill and a hundred others like it are quite literally not worth your time, and more than that, continuing to wring your hands about it and tell other people about the scary scary squant sky bill only does their work for them. It scares people, it makes them spend time and energy on it, and it wears them out. It is a legislative Gish Gallop, meant to throw so many things at people that we can't keep up.

Even calling or messaging your Rep in this case means their staffer has to waste time responding to you and letting you know that Representative Buttzonheads definitely won't support making petting dogs a capital offense, a thing that will never, ever happen regardless.

Staying engaged in this environment is going to require protecting your heart and protecting your energy, yes, but also protecting the energy of others. This is why WWII propaganda posters also included ones taking people to task for spreading panicky rumors and undermining morale.

Do you know why most observant Jews don't eat chicken and dairy together, even though the ban is on red meat and dairy together bc you're not supposed to cook the calf in the milk of its mother?** It's not because we think that chicken might secretly lactate or Just Because. It's because the rabbis decided that if I'm sitting out in public and eating turkey and cheese together, someone might glance at the turkey and mistake it for red meat and think, "oh, well, I know that Spider is a good Jew, there must have been a change, or maybe I can just justify it to myself that if Spider does it, it must be permissible to bend the rules just that much." And I would then be accidentally leading my fellow Jew astray. We are responsible for being even more careful for the sake of others than we are for ourselves.

It's the same principle here. We need to really be careful about the information we are spreading and check things past reading a news site. Is it true? Is it relevant? Is it meaningful? Is the news site one I recognize? Can I find meaningful independent corroboration on another site, which is to say, if I find an article about it on a second site, is it just quoting or rephrasing this site?

Yeah, that is a lot. But that's how we keep them from using us to lead our fellows astray.

*GovTracker is an independent site. They explain their methodology in their About section.

**I cannot say enough how I am not at this time interested in going on a Jewish Side Quest About Dietary Laws on this post. Usually, I love it, but hold off this time, please, y'all. Let's stay on target this once.

[mercuryismygenius]

"Sixth, don't fall for the sop that this can all be solved by 'better education' or 'critical thinking.' . . . "Seventh, stop looking for facile solutions to the problem of disinformation. If this were easy, we would have solved it by now."

---Lee McIntyre, On Disinformation - steps to fight disinformation

[etz-ashashiyot]

All trolling and drive-by harassment aside, I do want to elaborate on the statement that the people harassing random Jews over Israel (and for that matter, the right-wingers harassing random Palestinians or Arabs over Hamas) absolutely do have a part in making this war worse and do need to take responsibility for it. (Will they? No. But those of us on the side of rationality, humanity, and peace need to hold them accountable.)

Here's the thing: when you pump out misinformation, disinformation, harass people who are not at the levers of control, deny proven atrocities, leverage people's cultural trauma against them, and/or gaslight them about any such behavior, you are actively participating in polarizing these communities against each other, when really we have a lot more in common than anyone seems to want to recognize.

Any legitimate peace process is going to be messy, requires nuance, a lot of grace, and overall is going to hinge on a lot of deeply traumatized and radicalized people letting go of and forgiving things no one should ever be asked to forgive. The more you polarize our communities, the more hatred you sow, the more you encourage and inflame outlandish maximalist ideas that are likely impossible and would require mass atrocities to accomplish in any event, the harder you make an already extremely difficult and delicate conversation.

And while I can't speak for anyone else, sowing hatred of Jews throughout the diaspora absolutely leads to people attacking us. Multiple people have already died because of this rampant, unchecked antisemitism. It is literally killing us.

So yes, if you engage in these behaviors, you do have blood on your hands.

[hindahoney]

I talk often about the history of Jewish genocide in Muslim countries, because people only ever know about the European genocides against us. No one acknowledges the Jews who were killed in Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, etc, or the horrific treatment that we endured. People need to know about them. But that does not mean that I think Muslims are our enemy, just as I don't think the Europeans killing us means Christianity is our enemy. Our enemy is antisemitism. Our enemy is extremism. Our enemy is disinformation. Too many people don't know the history of antisemitism so they can't recognize that the latest allegation against Jews is a 2,000 year old conspiracy theory rebranded.

[technofeudalism]

i've got one more wall of text in me for today. i'm sorry, but hopefully this helps more people than it annoys.

i understand the concerns people have about social media being captured to technofascist oligarchs and i share them.

however, and you can call me a boomer for this if you'd like, i am way more worried about the fact that we are watching a scarier replay of the 2016 hyper-normalization of Donald Trump already being carried out in mainstream/establishment news outlets.

Some political operatives on the right, who saw mainstream media coverage of Trump’s first term as overly hostile, say the way the press covered Trump’s first term unwittingly did him a favor.   “I do expect that the media coverage will be a little different in tone,” one national Republican strategist told The Hill this week. “Not because the media is all of a sudden planning on being more objective and less biased, but because they probably finally recognize that their over-the-top hysterical coverage has done nothing but help Trump politically.”  

there are many reason this freaks me out worse, but i can sum up a couple of them.

the rhetoric this time is a magnitude more insane and suddenly alarmingly expansionist. logic would suggest this would justify an even more critical evaluation from the media that they are seemingly neglecting to provide.

the public, thanks to total dereliction of duty by the Democrats, are far more geared up for fascist shit than ever, but are totally ignorant to how this is going to happen (concentration camps)

speaking of the Democratic party: following a series of humiliating, high profile L's, the party finds themselves leaderless and less popular than they've been in 30 years at the worst time. when asked to name the leader of the Democratic Party, 49% of registered voters couldn’t name a person or said “nobody.”

before i continue, i know that there has been a dramatic decrease in people who get their news from traditional media and instead rely on social media, podcasts and the like. that makes sense. people aren't watching cable news anymore, chiefly because fewer and fewer people under the age of 30 even have cable TV and they definitely aren't paying for a New York Times subscription.

but what people fail to consider is that the "news" people consume via social media is often rehashed or half-baked, word of mouth versions of reporting conducted by the mainstream media or the journalists who work for them. there are still journalists working for these publications who take advantage of the increased exposure podcasts provide and go on them to talk about their writing.

people hear the same stories at the end of the day, but the way the issue is initially framed when the story first "breaks" and how it is approached by other outlets who follow up on it is significant. it's a lot less work to have to clean up and suppress news on your platform when the news is already favorable to your cause.

think along the lines of a massive disinformation campaign emerging from one outlet, social media being thrown into a complete frenzy and the only journalist who knows the truth from another outlet hesitating to speak out because of threats from his publisher to keep outrage revenue high or, perhaps more ominously, to directly serve the interest of the fascists in charge.

the US media has always been servile to whims of corporate interests because... well... they are owned by the corporate interests.

but up until today, i was holding out some sliver of hope that even if the NYT, for example, wasn't taking up antifascist actions, they would hold onto a tiny bit of reliability as a further watered down version of itself. an increasingly rare, delicate weapon against misinformation on social media, as opposed to being another tool wielded by fascists on aforementioned social media to grow legitimacy and manufacture consent.

then i saw this. my feeling is now that if the New York Times can't even write a headline - with THAT photograph underneath it - that says in plain English "Elon Musk Makes Nazi Salute Twice at Trump Inauguration," then there is going to be a frightening decrease in quality journalism being funded by mainstream outlets coming.

if you are not sure what to do and you want to be well informed, i have two suggestions. the first and most important, most difficult one that is a skill hard to master, is to develop decent media literacy and an ability to derive context from history.

the second is to build a network of trustworthy local, national and global sources that you can count on. ideally, they would be completely independent and free from editorial oversight or corporate control.

here are some of my recommendations. all of them are flawed. never rely on one source. do not immediately accept something as the truth from any single source. everyone is capable of accidentally getting a detail wrong, or even deliberately misleading.

Dropsite News - ran by Ryan Grim, Jeremy Scahill

The Intercept - sadly running out of money, alleged CIA ties

Democracy Now! - more center-left, better domestically

Jacobin - wide variety, sometimes shitty takes, Alex Press is great

The Grayzone - this one is controversial (mainly just to liberals) and they make no qualms about being committed to reporting from an anti-imperialist view of the world

Black Agenda Report - perspective from Black leftists. founded by Glen Ford (RIP), a Black Panther and accomplished investigative journalist

Hasan Piker - hate him, love him, neutral, doesn't matter. he's the largest independent political commentator on the left (by far), covering news and misinformation 9 hours a day. you can think he has shit takes, but he's still a reliable source and has been insanely accurate with his opinions

The Majority Report - been around forever, Sam Seder & Emma Vigeland are amazing, once home to the incredible Michael Jamal Brooks (RIP)

Breakthrough News

Labor Notes

Ben Norton @ Global Political Economy

Caitlin Johnstone (AUS)

these are just what i could come up with but there are many more if you do a little bit of digging using these as a baseline. just remember that the source ultimately is irrelevant and will have it's own biases. it is up to you to separate fact and fiction.

[littleguymart]

hello friends! I'm going to talk a bit about the current events in Gaza, Israel, and Palestine.

I'm doing this not because I'm the most informed (my us-american perspective is going to be distorted) or can speak for anyone else. I'm doing it because I have a lot of followers on here.

I hope that a blog people associate with kindness & comfort saying something can prompt people to reflect & take action.

I want to address this post to folks in the US who struggle with scrupulosity & who get stuck in dread. It's understandable if you're overwhelmed by the amount of information coming out about Israel, Palestine, and Gaza.

The US was established & is perpetuated through genocide, land theft, and continued oppression of indigenous people. This reality is not spoken about by the majority of settlers in the US and contradicts US national identity/myth.

As a result, a lot of Americans (myself included), have been taught not recognize this kind of violence for what it is. This means we are not necessarily skilled at recognizing good-faith reporting from dogwhistles & propaganda & disinformation campaigns.

Our country's myth-- that its genocidal creation was justified-- relies on that kind of ignorance. Even when we can tell the difference, it can feel hopeless to do anything about, or like we as individuals are responsible for its entirety.

I don't have a blanket solution to this. Unlearning this type of thinking is a long process, but it begins with recognizing that violent colonial governments are at work, and doing what we can to stop those processes.

Please call or write an email to your representatives to demand a ceasefire and an end to military aid to the Israeli government, if you're able. Turn out to protests if you're able. Refuse racism, orientalism, and anti-Semitism.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jason Wilson at The Guardian:

In a December 2023 speech, JD Vance defended a notorious white nationalist convicted over 2016 election disinformation, canvassed the possibility of breaking up tech companies, attacked diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts and talked about a social media “censorship regime” that “came from the deep state on some level”.

The senator’s speech was given at the launch of a “counterrevolutionary” book – praised by the now Republican vice-presidential candidate as “great” – which was edited and mostly written by employees of the far-right Claremont Institute. In the book, Up from Conservatism, the authors advocate for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act, for politicians to conduct “deep investigations into what the gay lifestyle actually does to people”, that college and childcare be defunded and that rightwing governments “promote male-dominated industries” in order to discourage female participation in the workplace. Vance’s endorsement of the book may raise further questions about his extremism, and that of his networks. The Guardian emailed Vance’s Senate staff and the Trump and Vance campaign with detailed questions about his appearance at the launch, but received no response.

‘Congratulations on such a great book’

Vance’s speech was given in the Capitol visitor center in Washington DC last 11 December, according to a version of C-Span’s subsequent broadcast of the event that is preserved at the Internet Archive. The occasion was the launch of Up from Conservatism, an essay collection edited by Arthur Milikh, the executive director of the Claremont Institute’s Center for the American Way of Life. In his introductory remarks on the day, Milikh said the book “maps out the right’s errors over the last generation … on immigration, on universities, on the administrative state”.

The book, however, appears more directed towards supplanting an old right – seen as too accommodating – with a “new right” focused on destroying its perceived enemies on the left.

In the book’s introduction, Milikh writes: “The New Right recognizes the Left as an enemy, not merely an opposing movement, because the Left today promotes a tyrannical conception of justice that is irreconcilable with the American idea of justice … the New Right is a counterrevolutionary and restorative force.” Also in that piece, Milikh offers a vision of the new right’s triumph, which has an authoritarian ring: “We like to say that one must learn to govern, but a truer expression is that one must learn to rule.” In his speech, Vance first offered “congratulations on such a great book, and thanks for getting such a good crew together”, and then warmed to themes similar to Milikh’s. “Republicans, conservatives, we’re still terrified of wielding power, of actually doing the job that the people sent us here to do,” Vance said, later adding: “Isn’t it just common sense that when we’re given power, we should actually do something with it?”

Brad Onishi, author of Preparing for War, a critical account of Christian nationalism and the host of the Straight White American Jesus podcast, said: “Vance, many Claremont people, including some folks in this volume, and especially the ‘post-liberal’ conservative Catholics that he hangs out with, have advocated for a form of big government that will wield its power in order to set the country right.” He added: “And you may think, well, OK, that doesn’t sound so bad. But here the common good is rooting out queer people, making sure non-Christians don’t immigrate to the country and outlawing things like pornography that are currently a matter of personal choice. “You end up with this conservatism that promotes an invasive government conservatism rather than a small government.”

[...]

‘Free our minds … from the fear of being called racists’

In the book, commended by Vance, a series of authors take reactionary – or “counterrevolutionary” – positions on a number of social and economic issues. In one chapter, John Fonte writes of disrupting narratives of civil rights progress: “The great meaning of America, we are told, comes from liberating so-called oppressed groups and taming the power of privileged groups. Thus, our history is one of liberation: first of Blacks, then of women, then of gays, and now of the transgendered.” Fonte retorts: “Not only is this narrative false; it will take us further down the path of national self-destruction … On the questions of slavery, American Indians, and racial discrimination, the progressive narrative is not a historically accurate project designed to address past wrongs, but a weaponized movement to deconstruct and replace American civilization.”

Like other authors in the collection, Fonte offers policy recommendations. He proposes heavy-handed federal intervention into education: “[T]he US Congress should prohibit any federal funds in education to support projects … that promote DEI (“diversity, equity and inclusion”) and divisive concepts such as the idea that America is ‘systemically racist.’” In his chapter, David Azerrad tells readers: “We need to free our minds once and for all from the fear of being called racists.” The assistant professor and research fellow at rightwing Hillsdale College, and former Heritage Foundation director and Claremont Institute fellow, also claims that conservatives have been too conciliatory on race: “For too many conservatives, the goal is to outdo progressives in displays of compassion for blacks … yet blacks continue to vote monolithically for the Democratic Party and progressives have only ramped up their hysterical accusations of racism.”

Azerrad continues with white nationalist talking points on race, crime and IQ, writing: “It is not racist to notice that blacks commit the majority of violent crimes in America, no more than it is to incarcerate convicted black criminals … There is no reason to expect equal outcomes between the races … In some elite and highly technical sectors in which there are almost no qualified blacks, color-blindness will mean no blacks.” Elsewhere, Azerrad writes: “[C]onservatives will need to root out from their souls the pathological pity for blacks, masquerading as compassion, that is the norm in contemporary America … This is most obvious in the widespread embrace of affirmative action (the lowering of standards to advance blacks) and the general reluctance to speak certain blunt but necessary truths about the pathologies plaguing black America – in particular, violent crime, fatherlessness, low academic achievement, nihilistic alienation, and the cult of victimhood.”

[...]

‘Do not subsidize childcare’

Helen Andrews, meanwhile, offers “three things we could do right now that would put a big dent in the multiplying lies that have come from feminists for the last forty years about women and careers”. Her first proposal is to “stop subsidizing college so much”, since, according to Andrews, in the 22-29 age group, “there are four women with college degrees … for every three men. That is going to lead to a lot of women with college degrees who do not end up getting married.” “Second,” Andrews continues, “the Right can do more to promote male-dominated industries. Reviving American manufacturing and cracking down on China’s unfair trade practices isn’t just an economic and national security issue; it’s a gender issue.” Her third proposal is “do not subsidize childcare” – since the fact that “many working moms are struggling” with childcare costs “might actually be good information the economy is trying to tell you”. Andrews is the print editor of the paleoconservative magazine the American Conservative and has previously written sympathetically about white supremacist minority regimes in Rhodesia – renamed Zimbabwe after white rule ended – and South Africa.

Scott Yenor claims in his chapter that before the 1960s, America lived under a “Straight Constitution, which honored enduring, monogamous, man-woman, and hence procreative marriage. It also stigmatized alternatives”. Yenor is a political science professor at Boise State University and a fellow at the Claremont Institute. He then claims: “We currently live under the Queer Constitution”, which “honors all manner of sex”, and under which “laws restricting contraception, sodomy, and fornication are, by its lights, unconstitutional”. Yenor claims: “These changes in law are but the first part of an effort to normalize and then celebrate premarital sex, recreational sex, men who have sex with men, childhood immodesty, masturbation, lesbianism, and all conceptions of transgenderism.”

Yenor says the state should intervene in citizens’ sex lives: “In the states, new obscenity laws for a more obscene world should be adopted. Pornography companies and websites should be investigated for their myriad public ills like sex trafficking, addictions, and ruined lives. The justice of anti-discrimination must be revisited.” In a separate essay co-written with Milikh, the editor, Yenor advocates in effect destroying the current education system and starting again. The essay includes a recommendation for school curriculums: “Students could start building obstacle courses at an early age, learning how to construct a wall and how to adapt the wall for climbing … Students could learn to build and shoot guns as part of a normal course of action in schools and learn how to grow crops and prepare them for meals.”

The Guardian reports that Trump VP pick and Ohio Senator JD Vance promoted far-right extremist views from Arthur Milkh’s Up From Conservatism essay book.

[edenfenixblogs]

I recently received the following message from a (former?) friend of mine:

okay I am being so genuine right now: since you seem to have educated yourself on what is bothering jewish people about the pro-palestine movement, /what/ is it. I genuinely cannot see and have not interacted with any pro-palestine activists that have actively advocated for the murder of jewish people. I have seen Israelis who have justified the breaking of the truce to bomb Palestinians returning to north gaza. Note I said Israelis and not Jews.

I responded by essentially saying that there's a lot there and I'll need some time to compile and articulate.

I mention this in order to ask if you (or any of your followers/any Jewish tumblr users reading this) have anything specific you'd like to point me toward (search keywords/starting points, links, thoughts, interpret however) that's not already on the list of what i'm planning to discuss (included after this paragraph), anything you specifically want me to read, suggestions of where to place emphasis, or any stories or thoughts you'd like me to pass on to him directly.

current tentative list i'm planning on going over with him, in no particular order:

clarification of scope of conversation (specific to non-jewish western left rather than on the ground or from affected groups)

dual loyalty accusations and harrassment of random jews that have nothing to do with medinat israel

taking discussion of antisemitism in bad faith by default

opportunistic use of the issue by more active antisemites, broad failure to to recognize when that's occuring

uncritical sharing of dogwhistles, conspiratorial thinking

outsiders and newcomers attempting to speak on the matter with authority we don't have

neglect of fact-checking and widespread mis- and disinformation

tokenization of antizionist jews and "jews" - jvp in particular i need to look into more

glorification of hamas and disregard for israeli civilians

misuse, misunderstanding, and demonization of zionism

application of western frameworks of colonization when not applicable

binary good guys/bad guys framing, contrarianism, taking "sides"

might talk about bds e.g. the whole boston map thing but not yet confident on this one, need to do a lot more digging

denial of jewish history - focus on denial of eretz israel as the jewish homeland, holocaust inversion, treating absolutely anything but especially those as trivial or "so long ago"

treating or discussing jews and/or israelis as monolithic

double standards and singling out of israel, holding it as inherently more suspect or less legitimate than any other state

@faggotry-enjoyer Oh man! This is such a good ask!!!! I was going to wait until after work to answer, but your list is so good and so thorough that it relieves a lot of the work I’d have to do.

Some stuff I linked overlaps with your list but I wanted to provide links to these points when possible.

Another thing that bothers me in particular about the western leftist movements’ approach to pro-Palestine conversations (and more: I am critiquing their approach to supporting Palestine not their support itself):

The absolute inability for Jews anywhere to even discuss provocation from Hamas, the history of bombs coming into Israel out of Palestine, or any other act of aggression from Hamas. Anytime we try to discuss anything even remotely nuanced or historical we are told “there’s no excuse for genocide” or “I guess you just love killing Palestinian babies” when that’s not what we are saying at all. Or, more often, the assumption that we are flat out lying about Hamas’ tactics and use of human shields and Palestinian civilian suppression and their view of the disposability of Palestinian lives.

The blanket condemnation of Zionism without understanding that it is a complex philosophy with several movements and differing goals.

The complete lack of media literacy.

The specific dismissal of From the River to the Sea as a term stolen from a Palestinian civilians who desire to express hope in a fully free and equal future but people who use it explicitly to call for the death of Jews. And the weaponization of the phrase to make it a death threat to any Jew who points this out.

The lack of specificity in terms line “Free Palestine.” Yes, Palestinians deserve full and equal freedoms and representation in government. This is a wonderful thing that I support with my whole heart. But that doesn’t change the fact that many bad actors and antisemites are hiding within the Free Palestine movement who are specifically manipulating the phrase to imply free Palestine FROM JEWS—both in terms of their presence in the levant at all (which would entail yet another anti-Jewish ethnic cleansing) or simply the murder of the 7 million Jews who exist in Israel. So asking a Jew why they won’t shout “free Palestine!” At the top of their lungs is taken as a sign that western Jews don’t want Palestinian freedom. When actually it’s a refusal to call for their own deaths.

The assumption that western protest tactics are inherently useful in this conflict and the refusal to look to interfaith and intercultural organizations on the ground in I/P who have been doing this longer, better, and more effectively than western groups.

The focus of western efforts on naming one side a victor in this conflict rather than peace for all.

Not understanding how few Jews there are in the world. And relatedly, the dismissal of the fact that the destruction of the modern state of Israel with no solid plan for a shared Palestinian/Israeli solution would mean the loss of sovereignty for half the global Jewish population, which would indeed affect Jews worldwide.

Dismissal of Israeli leftist efforts to oust the Likud and Netanyahu, because it doesn’t fit the narrative of all Israeli Jews being evil.

The sharing of graphic content of 10/7 attacks, dead and injured Palestinian and Israeli children, and calling any victims martyrs without appropriate trigger warning and as a political tactic.

Mocking Jews (yes, even celebrities) who express feeling fearful for their personal safety as antisemitism rises worldwide.

The expulsion of Jews from their non-Jewish communities and friend groups.

Not understanding the magnitude of the Jewish diaspora and its affect on Jewish culture and voice during this conflict.

Other friends and Allies please add on with your own experiences and concerns!

[sophieinwonderland]

r/systemscringe with DID disinformation and the most despicable takes...

Let's jump into it!

Now, before I share the screenshot of what u/Competitive_Watch121 is complaining about, I want you to take that little nugget about the the system they know "somehow throwing their parents under the bus" and tuck it away for now. That's going to be important later!

To be completely fair, I can see that there are absolutely valid criticisms of how this was written. It comes off as very amateurish. I support them raising awareness of plurality and DID, but yeah... maybe edit it a bit better.

And I think u/frost_squash733 makes a sort of good point about OSDD-1b not technically being an official disorder, but I want to add a bit more nuance to this...

What's said above is mostly true. I would argue the subtypes still kind of exist though. They just aren't labeled as such. Here's the DSM-5:

These are not labeled as 1a and 1b, but OSDD-1 still encompasses both types. And it's just easier to say that you have OSDD-1b than to say "I have the variant of OSDD-1 with distinct alters and no amnesia."

I think it's important to remind people when you can that these aren't clinical terms. But they are still useful terms for differentiating between different presentations.

No! Please don't u/acceptable-box4996! I can count the number of times something intelligent and valuable has come out of your mouth on a closed fist!

I promise you that you aren't going to say anything intelligent this time either, and would highly advise you stop trying!

Even the diagnosed ones are faking! 🙄

Do you know just how ARROGANT you have to be to claim that not only are these strangers you don't know faking, not only do you know their mental state better than they know themselves, but you also have a better understanding of their mental state than the psychologists who are educated in the matter and have actually worked directly with the people in question to diagnose them.

There is something to be said of the sheer ego in making such a claim.

Especially when spreading active disinformation. Because "system" originated from the medical community.

Seriously. Just look up "system of alters" on Google Scholar and click some links. It's not hard to find!

And yes, people DID do refer to themselves using "we" pronouns too.

Here's one from a case study back in 1964.

This was before TikTok. It was before the system community formed online in the 90s. It was before the explosion of cases in the 80s. This was during a period where there were only about a hundred cases recognized worldwide.

DID systems have always talked like this!

What are you talking about???

This is completely wrong. DID treatment recommends building relationships between the parts. MANY articles talk about this, but here's a favorite of mine that discusses applying DID treatment to other types of voice hearing.

Notice that listening to the other parts is a key aspect of this treatment!

Ignoring what parts are saying worsens dissociative barriers!

You are supposed to talk to them. To validate them. To build connection!

Saying that treatment just focuses on the trauma and not the parts is misinformation.

And it's dangerous misinformation that will get people killed!

While the article has some minor inaccuracies, it's overall far more accurate than what you're claiming in this comment. I would be much more concerned about people believing you and others on your hatesub, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about while pretending to be experts and spitting lies that are completely contrary to reality and go against real treatment strategies used by experts!

And here (un)Acceptable-Box, whose own post was filled with dangerous lies, ends by recommending trying to get the DID awareness article taken down!

Yikes!

Yes, u/kosherginger, that about sums my thoughts up about (un)Acceptable-Box's post.

But somehow, it's still not as much as I want to smack the OP who I've been saving for last.

Haha... yeah... system oppression is just being grounded from VR Chat... /s

But seriously, I have a hard time believing that even this hate sub is THAT stupid!

Like surely, at a certain level, they HAVE to know that DID is a heavily stigmatized disorder. That there's a long history of fakeclaiming systems. Including accused child molesters like the False Memory Syndrome Foundation leading smear campaigns against their accusers to claim the accusers were making up their memories of abuse.

People with DID are treated as if they're crazy. They're dehumanized. Being 'out' with DID endangers your personal relationships. It endangers your career.

Beyond the typical ableism, alters of different genders tend to suffer the same type of oppression as trans people do, enduring the exact same stigma when they front and want to identify by their own name and gender identity. And sometimes having DID can make it more difficult to get gender-affirming care if you are a trans system.

When you tell me that people with DID aren't oppressed... I just have a hard time believing that even you could be that obtuse.

Now... remember that thing about the DID system "throwing their parents under the bus" that I told you all to tuck away at the beginning??? Well, now it's finally time to pull it out! Because we're about to get a huge piece of context!

Yeah! That's right!

The parents that u/Competitive_Watch121 defended in the first post because they "pay their kid's car insurance" were queerphobic pieces of shit, who kicked out their 14-year-old child for being queer!

And I mean, good for you, I guess, for taking in the kid. 🤷‍♀️

This whole thing gives heavy abuser vibes.

Like, legitimate abusers.

Normal, well-adjusted parents don't kick out their 14-year-old children for being queer. And it's well-known that DID often comes from childhood trauma. That alone makes me wonder what happened prior to them being kicked out.

I've only heard this one side of the story, but it paints a picture doesn't it?

A child is abused growing up and develops DID. Their parents, presumably religious conservatives, kick them out at 14 for being queer. The child is sent to live with other abusers who defend the queerphobic parents and fakeclaim the kid's DID.

I'm going to assume here that it wasn't JUST the DID being fakeclaimed either, but whatever abuse led to it. You can see that in how they accuse the child of "throwing their parents under the bus" while KNOWING their parents, at the very least, kicked them out for being queer. Of course if the child reported being abused, they would deny that too.

"Think of the poor innocent parents saddled with such an unruly and ungrateful queer child who tells nothing but lies about them." 🤮

And I'm sure they are helping pay for their kid's insurance. Because what better way for abusers to make sure that their secrets stay secret and their reputations stay intact that maintaining some financial control over their child into adulthood?

Abusers love to financially support their grown children because the money is a leash and a muzzle. It's something they can hold over them to maintain power and control.

It's not something done out of the kindness of their hearts. If they loved their child, they wouldn't have kicked them out for being queer.

Do you know what I think u/Competitive_Watch121? You were not "made a villain." You are the villain. You are a monster. At the very least, you defend despicable monsters who would kick out a 14-year-old child for being queer while portraying the parents as the victims.

That alone would be monstrous and indefensible!

But I would be willing to bet you've defended the parents from far worse than you've been willing to talk about in these posts.

And THEN you have the nerve to go and publicly mock this system online!

You, u/Competitive_Watch121, are a horrible piece of garbage! Shame on you!

[givemearmstopraywith]

quick palestine fact sheet:

there are nearly 7 million palestinian refugees globally

1.5 million individuals live in the 58 recognized palestine refugee camps around palestine (i.e. in gaza, syria, east jerusalem, etc) recognized by the unrwa

67% of gaza's population are refugees

there are 905,000 registered palestine refugee children: 635,000 in gaza and 269,000 in the west bank

palestinian refugees frequently cannot access public health insurance and are barred from many professions; some areas bar them from education and formal work

in gaza poverty rates are nearly 82% and the unemployment rate is some of the highest in the world at nearl 47% as of august 2022

one recent study showed that 88% of palestinian children show signs of war-related post traumatic stress disorder

37% of adults in the gaza strip qualify for diagnosis for ptsd; however, this number should be approached cautiously, accounting for preconceptions about mental health, access to diagnosis, and hermeneutic injustice: the number is likely far higher

48,000 people in gaza have some form of a disability: more than one fifth of this number are children

palestinians are not allowed, by israeli law, to have citizenship; they have no freedom of movement, and can be subject to forced evictions, detention, and torture.

the per capita gdp of palestine is US$3,678 as of december 2021; this is in comparison to a gdp per capita of USD$52,000 in israel

palestine does not have a formal military. the us stopped aid to palestine, around $60 million, in 2019. palestinian security services receives around $27 million from the national budget.

hamas, a separate entity from the pss, receives around $300 million per year. in comparison, israel spends in excess of USD$23.6 billion annually on their military.

in the midst of disinformation campaigns by global powers, fight facts with facts- and with protests, rallying, donating, elevating the voices of palestinians. keep showing up. keep educating yourself and others. never give up hope. palestine will be free.

[mariacallous]

The war unleashed by Russia almost three years ago in Ukraine is rightly recognized as one of the great crimes of the twenty-first century. Understandably, little attention has been paid so far to the impact the conflict is having on Ukraine’s international image. And yet amid the trauma and horror of Russia’s invasion, there are growing signs that the unprecedented media spotlight on Ukraine since 2022 is gradually helping to transform global perceptions of the country. As a result, Ukraine is now finally emerging from a prolonged period of international obscurity that has hindered the country’s progress for centuries.

International ignorance of Ukraine has been a feature since long before the country regained independence in 1991. Following the Soviet collapse, little was done to address this lack of outside awareness or strengthen Ukraine’s national brand in the global arena. This low profile helped set the stage for Russia’s disinformation efforts, with foreign audiences often prepared to believe all manner of outlandish lies about a country that was otherwise unknown to them. Thanks to the recent media focus on Ukraine, Kremlin propagandists are now finding that their distortions are not so readily accepted. This is an ongoing process, but it is already possible to identify a number of important facts about Ukraine that have taken root in the international consciousness since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

1. Ukraine is not Russia

The fact that Ukraine is not Russia may seem insultingly obvious when viewed from a Ukrainian perspective, but in reality this was the fundamental image problem facing the country in 2022. Indeed, it is no coincidence that on the eve of the full-scale invasion, Vladimir Putin published an entire essay denying the legitimacy of a separate Ukrainian state on the grounds that Ukrainians are actually Russians (“one people’).

Putin did not invent this narrative of Ukraine denial himself. His predecessors have been insisting that Ukraine is an inalienable part of Russia since at least the eighteenth century, and have ruthlessly manipulated the historical record to support their arguments. Throughout the Tsarist and Soviet eras, anyone attempting to counter this Great Russian narrative or highlight Ukraine’s long statehood struggle was treated as a dangerous heretic subject to the harshest of punishments.

For generations, Russia was able to impose its imperial propaganda on international audiences, with Ukrainians silenced and Ukraine misleadingly portrayed as an intrinsic part of Russia’s own historical heartlands. It was therefore understandable that when an independent Ukraine appeared on the map in 1991, many had trouble distinguishing it from Russia. This created much confusion and went some way to legitimizing subsequent Russian attempts to reassert its authority over Ukraine.

The full-scale invasion has changed all that. Since February 2022, international perceptions of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine have undergone a radical transformation as global audiences have witnessed the ferocity of the Russian attack and the determination of Ukraine’s national defense. The war unleashed by Vladimir Putin has killed hundreds of thousands and shattered millions of lives; it has also destroyed the myth of Russians and Ukrainians as “one people.” As the invasion approaches the three-year mark, it is now safe to say that anyone who continues to insist on the indivisibility of Russia and Ukraine is either acting in bad faith, or is so stunningly ignorant that their opinion can be disregarded.

2. Ukraine is huge

Prewar Ukraine’s low international profile encouraged many to imagine the country as an obscure and irrelevant statelet whose fate mattered little to the wider world. Meanwhile, very few people seemed to appreciate that Ukraine was in fact the largest country wholly in Europe. That is no longer the case. Throughout the past three years, the map of Ukraine has featured relentlessly in the international press. Even casual observers have grown familiar with the outline of the country, and cannot have failed to notice how large it looms over its European neighbors.

Media coverage of battlefield developments has also helped to underline the sheer size of Ukraine. Despite regular war reports of major offensives and record advances, the overall picture of the front lines has changed little since the first year of the war, underlining the comparative vastness of Ukraine. While Ukraine may still appear small when compared to Russia, it is a huge country by European standards. Growing awareness of this fact is helping to shape perceptions of Ukraine’s geopolitical significance.

3. Ukraine is an agricultural superpower

Prior to 2022, Ukraine was probably best known to many around the world as the site of the Chornobyl disaster. Associations with the world’s worst nuclear accident were particularly unfortunate as Ukraine is anything but a radioactive wasteland. In reality, the country’s real claim to fame is as the breadbasket of Europe. Ukraine’s fabled black soil is among the most fertile land in the entire world, making much of the country a giant garden of agrarian abundance.

Since 2022, Russia’s invasion has helped educate international audiences about Ukraine’s crucial role in global food security. Extensive media coverage of Russia’s Black Sea naval blockade has underlined the importance of Ukrainian agricultural exports, with disruption caused by Moscow’s interference leading to famine fears in Africa and price hikes on basic foodstuffs throughout the West. Growing awareness of Ukraine’s status as an agricultural superpower has undermined Kremlin efforts to portray the invasion as a strictly local affair, and has mobilized international opposition to the war.

4. Ukraine is an innovation hub

For decades, international perceptions of Ukraine were plagued by lazy cliches depicting the country as a terminally corrupt backwater on the vodka-soaked fringes of Eastern Europe. These deeply unflattering caricatures of Ukrainian stagnation were always misleading. They are now also hopelessly outdated. Since 2022, Ukraine has demonstrated that it is a sophisticated high tech nation capable of more than holding its own in the most technologically advanced war the world has ever seen. Ukraine’s ability to develop, deploy, and update its own domestically-produced weapons systems on an almost daily basis has done much to debunk the negative stereotypes of old and establish the country’s reputation as a leading innovation hub.

Ukrainian defense tech companies have been responsible for a string of particularly innovative battlefield solutions that have caught the eye of global defense industry giants and helped Ukraine even up the odds against the country’s far larger and wealthier enemy. For example, ground-breaking Ukrainian marine drones have turned the tide in the Battle of the Black Sea and forced Russia’s entire fleet to retreat from Crimea, while Ukrainian long-range drones routinely strike targets deep inside Russia. As a result, “Made in Ukraine” is now recognized as a stamp of quality throughout the international security sector. This image transformation is already attracting international investors and will shape Ukraine’s economic development for decades to come, with the country’s defense industry and broader tech sector set to be in high demand.

5. Ukraine is united

The full-scale invasion has seriously undermined longstanding Russian efforts to portray Ukraine as a country irrevocably split along geographical and ideological lines. The narrative of a divided Ukraine has been a mainstay of Kremlin propaganda since the Soviet era, and has been central to the disinformation that has accompanied the escalating Russian aggression of the past two decades. For many years, this crude oversimplification of Ukraine’s regional complexities proved superficially persuasive among international audiences, but it has been decisively debunked by Ukraine’s united response to Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Ukrainians across the country have overwhelmingly rallied in opposition to the invading Russians, with residents in supposedly “pro-Russian” cities such as Odesa and Kharkiv proving no less determined to defend themselves and their homes. This is not to say that regional diversity is no longer a feature in today’s Ukraine, of course. On the contrary, Ukraine remains just as subject to regional differences as any other large European nation. However, the Russian invasion has shattered the myth of a terminally divided Ukraine and proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the vast majority of Ukrainians bitterly oppose the idea of a Russian reunion.

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

Ever since October 7th, the amount of misinformation and disinformation about Jews, Israel, Judaism, and even just like, basic facts about reality have been so intense that it's really dredging up a lot of my gaslighting trauma.

(No, not in the memic sense that it's been distorted into, but the kind of gaslighting that leads you to detransition and think it was your choice despite drowning in dysphoria, the kind that warps and changes and erases memories, and makes it so that you dissociate for literal months at a time to escape the pain. That kind.)

And I recognized this because I keep finding myself arguing facts and trying to reason with people who say that they're part of the compassionate left and care about working on antisemitism but yet spew the kind of antisemitism that would be totally at home on Stormfront.

It's that first arguing stage of gaslighting, where the abuser keeps saying outrageous, untrue things and you're still fighting to try and get them to empathize with you and seek mutual understanding. This:

A gaslighter does not simply need to be right. He or she also needs for you to believe that they are right. In stage 1, you know that they are being ridiculous, but you argue anyways. You argue for hours, without resolution. You argue over things that shouldn’t be up for debate — your feelings, your opinions, your experience of the world. You argue because you need to be right, you need to be understood, or you need to get their approval. In stage 1, you still believe yourself, but you also unwittingly put that belief up for debate.

(bolding mine) (source)

This is a pattern I recognize in myself in personal relationships and even within communities, but what's happening right now is a lot bigger and more diffuse. It's not one abuser or even a shitty cohort of abusive people who are monopolizing a community space. This is being encouraged in a frighteningly large number of non-Jewish progressive spaces. In the same way that stochastic terrorism adds up very quickly, this type of cultural gaslighting and stochastic emotional abuse feels like a deluge.

But if you look at history, this is not new, for Jews. This is but the latest version of a very long game of Why Won't You Just Give Up and Assimilate or Die that Jews have thus far prevailed on at great cost to ourselves.

Anyway I'm done arguing with goyim about things that absolutely should not be up for debate: Jewish history, Jewish culture, what certain religious concepts in Judaism mean, Jewish lived experiences, what is and isn't antisemitism. If you aren't willing to engage in a genuine way that seeks mutual understanding, I'm not interested. I'm done.

You are engaging in violent behavior and lying to yourself about it and calling it activism. Well I am no longer going to participate. You can lie to yourself all you want, but you are a bad person and I don't forgive you, and you can do that alone.

You are acting from a mob mentality and a mob cannot be reasoned with. You are drunk on your tiny bit of power and social capital, and years down the line you'll lie to yourself and pretend that you cared about us.

You didn't. And deep down you know it, too.

Instead of arguing with people who refuse to see facts or reason and put our experiences up for debate, I am going to work on compiling a resource for people who want to actually learn.

Everyone else can fuck off.