We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
The technical term for it is: maskirovka Like so much electronic chaff dropped out of the back of a Tupolev bomber to confuse an incoming heat-seeking missile, the idea that there are multiple interpretations of the truth has become the founding philosophy of state disinformation in Putin’s Russia, designed to confuse those who would seek out the truth with multiple expressions of distracting PR chaff. The tactic is to create as many competing narratives as possible. And, amid all the resultant hermeneutic chaos, to quietly slip away undetected. It is a tactic straight out of Mr Putin’s KGB playbook from the 1970s. Generate a plurality of narratives, so the truth can be obscured.
– Guardian editorial. Yes I know, chaff only confuses radar-guided missiles, you need flares for heat-seekers, but hey, this is the Guardian after all. Mangled metaphor aside, this is a very good editorial that will enrage all the right people.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Quite so Perry.
Physics tells us that things are just possibilities until observed, so let’s choose what we want it to be! How about, he’s just sleeping in the back of the car?
This tactic is not only real, it is astonishingly effective. Especially when MH17 was shot down. The Russians seemingly got a handle on the gullibility of Westerners during the Cold War, and never forgot it.
The BBC’s Radio 4 had a piece about maskirovka recently, so the Guardian is repeating a theme from its unofficial radio arm.
I note the following:
The Guardian has never been comfortable with the truth if it did not serve its purposes. Is the Guardian really going for the truth, and rejecting relativism? Surely this is a tactic?
As for Pilate having ‘high-sounding Putin-like misdirection‘, none of the closest in time accounts of Pilate’s actions refer to Putin, is there something about the Botox One that is even more mysterious?
The sort of people who rake up theories about this would probably still be musing about the Night of the Long Knives and whether or not to say anything critical about Herr Hitler might be stereotyping Germans (and Austrians), were it not for a little inner voice warning them that it might be too fatuous to make their thoughts known.
The Soviets had a term for their supporters and sympathisers in the West, govnoed, which is translated into Victor Suvorov’s books as ‘shit-eaters‘.
Counting down to BS in 5… 4… 3…
“multiple interpretations of the truth has become the founding philosophy of state disinformation in Putin’s Russia, ”
Putin’s Russia?
Isn’t relativism, political correctness, multiculti, etc. the new religion of the “liberal” or “progressive” West ?
You can have your “multiple interpretations of the truth” as long as you don’t cast doubts on the eternal truth of the “progressives” – (a.k.a. commies).
The USSR was based from beginning to end on lies and nothing but lies. Purely, distilled lies and propaganda never marred by any grain of truth.
I don’t know about the “Guardian” but the leftie intellectuals of the West didn’t protest too much at the time, actually, they embraced all the lying enthusiastically, they “saw the Future, and it worked”. It’s quite odd that they suddenly “got religion” and embrace “The Truth”.
The Guardian has never been comfortable with the truth if it did not serve its purposes. Is the Guardian really going for the truth, and rejecting relativism?
Well it is today, so far that we praise it. Tomorrow, if it reneges, we will at least be able to point back to its own editorial in support of our criticism.
Don’t reject positive steps from those you distrust: welcome them, and demand more of the same.
Amen to that Mary! It is a great mistake to ignore the truth just because it emerges from the mouth of an enemy. But that does not make them any less wrong about other things.
As i said
Meanwhile, similar obfuscation in Argentina from their President over the killing of that prosecutor, Señor Nisman.
But virtually everyone seems to accept that the Argentine President is not telling the truth.
Same shit, different language.
Not the same shit. There are fifty shades of shit…
In America a similar tactic was used about the JFK assassination. It is still used today. It was not just the USSR.
Reported sightings of another Russian bomber over the UK, this time flying up the Thames Estuary, have been dismissed by the Ministry of Defence, who have assured the public, after consulting with the Met Office and the RAF, that the sightings were an optical Ilyushin.
Even as we speak, God is preparing to smite thee for that.
Missile quote got fixed.