> If someone thinks that living in democracy alone makes you immune to propoganda that just not the case.
I think more commonly what people do is see propaganda that is ineffective on them and inaccurately conclude that propaganda overall is ineffective on them. Often citing their intelligence. In reality you just weren't the target of said propaganda. We're all vulnerable to it, no matter your IQ. If one wants to demonstrate their intelligence they need to demonstrate their realization of their (intellectual) weaknesses. This is what I see happen with HN users a lot: "Well I'm not vulnerable to it, but others are." (often in context of ads and discussions of surveillance capitalism. But that's the same tool as in this discussion).
> it's crucial to keep political discussion alive even if society is really polarized.
Importantly that said conversation is done with good faith. Meaning we try our hardest as the listener to interpret the intent of the speaker's words (and vise versa). These people will sell simple solutions to complex problems. Unfortunately complex problems require complex solutions and nuanced discussion. Because of that, it is critical that we discuss from different points of views.
> Disclaimer: I am Russia citizen
The difference between you and me is smaller than the distance between us and our respective leaders. An old cold war hippy saying, but still true. It is our leaders who cause good men to go to war. To live through atrocities that need not be. Atrocities worse than hell. But in the end we are accountable because we are the power that they wield. A sheep tricked by a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a dead sheep. We can't always rely on the shepherd to keep us alive.
I honestly dont know real solution to this problem. It is easy to blame a nation, but even talking of people in opposition to regime things become weird when terrible happen. A lot of smart people stay passive and unable to protect themselves let alone resist. Propoganda did not make them support war and regime, but it was perfectly capable of breaking their will.
Honestly speaking I not even sure if political discussion alone is enough. I just wish more people understood this is the big problem for modern civilization. We need better education on these topics so average Joe is better suited to resist manipulation.
I think more commonly what people do is see propaganda that is ineffective on them and inaccurately conclude that propaganda overall is ineffective on them. Often citing their intelligence. In reality you just weren't the target of said propaganda. We're all vulnerable to it, no matter your IQ. If one wants to demonstrate their intelligence they need to demonstrate their realization of their (intellectual) weaknesses. This is what I see happen with HN users a lot: "Well I'm not vulnerable to it, but others are." (often in context of ads and discussions of surveillance capitalism. But that's the same tool as in this discussion).
> it's crucial to keep political discussion alive even if society is really polarized.
Importantly that said conversation is done with good faith. Meaning we try our hardest as the listener to interpret the intent of the speaker's words (and vise versa). These people will sell simple solutions to complex problems. Unfortunately complex problems require complex solutions and nuanced discussion. Because of that, it is critical that we discuss from different points of views.
> Disclaimer: I am Russia citizen
The difference between you and me is smaller than the distance between us and our respective leaders. An old cold war hippy saying, but still true. It is our leaders who cause good men to go to war. To live through atrocities that need not be. Atrocities worse than hell. But in the end we are accountable because we are the power that they wield. A sheep tricked by a wolf in sheep's clothing is still a dead sheep. We can't always rely on the shepherd to keep us alive.