EU Freakout: 'BAN Tucker Carlson Over Putin Interview!'

[Brian4Liberty]

EU Freakout: 'BAN Tucker Carlson Over Putin Interview!'

Showing their disdain for journalism and fear of losing control of the narrative, leading EU politicians are calling for a travel ban on journalist Tucker Carlson over an interview he will release with Russian president Putin. And the interview is not even out yet! Also today: Rare failure of Israel funding bill in the House and McConnell losing control of Senate Republicans.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

So much changed. In the 90's, growing up, I thought we had solved most stupid aspects of humanity to some degree, or at least were on the right way. Since I left school I figured out that it's just inherent to humans being humans. Especially in large groups.

What the fuck, wouldn't an interview with your 'enemy' be the most interesting thing? You may disagree with everything, but what is there to be scared about? That he may say things that sound reasonable? In that case, wouldn't that be a good opportunity for dialog and diplomacy? I guess that's not the goal then.

It's not that difficult to see what 'the goal' of TPTB is when you logically deduce it like the above. We are obviously in need of some more war.

 

[Occam's Banana]

[W]hat is there to be scared about? That he may say things that sound reasonable?

They are afraid of that, but they are even more afraid that other people may hear those things and think they sound reasonable - and that could be lethal to their anti-Russia propaganda.

The core purpose of propaganda is not to persuade and foster support for X, but to isolate and neutralize opposition to X (where X is the policy/position/etc. being propagandized). That is, the core purpose of propaganda is not to get you to agree with the propaganda (if that happens, it's just icing on the cake). Rather, the core purpose of propaganda is to make you think that if you disagree with it, then you are the only one who does (or one of the very few who do), and that it is therefore pointless and futile to oppose X.

For example, if all the "experts" agree about X, then who the hell are you to think or suggest otherwise? So if you disagree, it's best to just shut up about it, keep your head down, and go along with the crowd, or else "normal" people will think you are some kind of weird (and maybe dangerous) crank. Of course, many of those "normal" people might be thinking (or inclined to think) the same way you do, but they are also keeping their heads down for the same reason you are - and so the potential for significant and effective opposition to X is neutered, or at least greatly reduced.

Or so the propagandists hope. But if someone with a large platform (like Tucker Carlson, for example) uses that platform to publicize anything in opposition to X, more people will realize they are not the isolated "odd men out" after all. That's why the establishment media is freaking out so hard over Carlson's interview with Putin. It would not have been a problem back in the days before the "Wild West" of social media, when they were the gatekeepers who were able to effectively curate everything most people saw, heard, or read. Beck then, they had no problems interviewing all kinds of people - Sadaam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, et al. They could completely control the framing and presentation of those interviews, and thus control what content (and even more importantly, the context of that content) people ended up seeing, hearing, or reading.

They can't do that any more. As a result of social media, they've lost their former stranglehold over both content and context, and as a result, their propaganda is no longer nearly as effective as it used to be when it comes to isolating and neutralizing opposition.

And they have no idea what to do about it except to desperately scream "bloody murder!" or "treason!" or the like, and demand new and draconian laws and such.

 

[nobody's_hero]

And they have no idea what to do about it except to desperately scream "bloody murder!" or "treason!" or the like.

They know what to do about it.

When the propaganda stops working, governments don't just throw their hands up and say, "well, finally you got us, guys. Good game."

 

[Occam's Banana]

And they have no idea what to do about it except to desperately scream "bloody murder!" or "treason!" or the like.

They know what to do about it.

No, they really don't.

When the propaganda stops working, governments don't just throw their hands up and say, "well, finally you got us, guys. Good game."

As I said in the edit (just a few minutes before you quoted me, so you probably missed it):

And they have no idea what to do about it except to desperately scream "bloody murder!" or "treason!" or the like, and demand new and draconian laws and such.

Despite whatever draconian policies they try to implement, it still won't matter in the end. They are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. They are much closer to being "little Dutch boys" frantically trying to plug an increasing number of cracks and holes as they appear in the dike - or to use another metaphor, they are playing an endless game of whack-a-mole that requires perfect or near-perfect accuracy just to break even.

The Soviet Union, for example, had about as functional and well-oiled a propaganda machine as could be asked for, but it ultimately didn't matter - and ubiquitously inter-networked computers are many, many orders of magnitude more difficult to effectively regulate and control than the typewriters and mimeograph machines used by the producers and disseminators of samizdat.

https://twitter.com/michaelmalice/status/1318389049514655744

​

 

[osan]

They are afraid of that, but they are even more afraid that other people may hear those things and think they sound reasonable - and that could be lethal to their anti-Russia propaganda.

The "anti-Russia" position is what - an artifact left over from the cold war? Possible, but unlikely. Russia appears not to be toeing the globalist line. If those appearances are not just more theater, which they may be, then we have a very likely candidate reason for EU's violent opposition to all things Russian.

The core purpose of propaganda is not to persuade and foster support for X, but to isolate and neutralize opposition to X (where X is the policy/position/etc. being propagandized).

A couple of observations/points. Firstly and more generally stated, the core purpose of propaganda is to get what you want. Isolation/netralization is one tactic pursuant to the broader objective. There are several basic approaches to attaining one's goals, this being one of them.

For example, if all the "experts" agree about X, then who the hell are you to think or suggest otherwise? So if you disagree, it's best to just shut up about it, keep your head down,

And it works like a charm. Behold, the twentieth century meaner: more stupid, docile, and lacking in any self-respect than the "ignorant" peasant of the so-called "dark ages".

They can't do that any more. As a result of social media, they've lost their former stranglehold over both content and context, and as a result, their propaganda is no longer nearly as effective as it used to be when it comes to isolating and neutralizing opposition.

While ponly partly true, it is nonetheless a quantum step in a direction of which They are disapprove.

And they have no idea what to do about it except to desperately scream "bloody murder!" or "treason!" or the like, and demand new and draconian laws and such.

And the ultimate result of all this remains to be proven. In spite of the opportunities for self-enlightenment that the network has provided, an appalling plurality of humans have chosen the path of the idiot. After all, why think for yourself when it can be done for you? Why show any trace of self-respect and control, which is usually difficult, when you can choose that which is seemingly easy, no matter that you've turned yourself into the functional and moral equivalent of a heroin-addicted street whore in her full disease-regalia?

The mean man is a hopeless, filth-laden cur. This is the true legacy of so-called "civilization". Savages cannot become this way. They cannot afford to if they mean to survive reality beyond the idiocy-fostering gates of civilization. Freemen living in such conditions choose not to be that way. They do so because they understand the perdition to which it leads themselves, their families, their cultures, and their posterity. Our will to corruption dooms us, individually, and due to vast popularity, most likely as a species, and certainly as free beings.

Mortem tyrannis et obedientibus.

 

[osan]

Despite whatever draconian policies they try to implement, it still won't matter in the end. They are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. They are much closer to being "little Dutch boys" frantically trying to plug an increasing number of cracks and holes as they appear in the dike - or to use another metaphor, they are playing an endless game of whack-a-mole that requires perfect or near-perfect accuracy just to break even.

You seem to have ignored the fact that Theye have at their disposal technologies that when applied in the relevant ways, have the apparent effect of either gaining the compliance they seek, or of simply culling back the population in the billions. Do recall our ancient history lessons of the so-called "pandemic", a very clearly synthetic event wherein the vast majority of humanity complied with the most obviously and ridiculously absurd mandates. Do also hearken back to the fact that the fraud has been exposed quite neatly, and yet vast legions of the populations of men still cleave to the lies. Do note how Pfizer, for example, is now on aclarge-scale ad campaign reminding people to get the latest covid "vaccine", showing absolutely no tip of their hat to the rotten truth.

Further consider that Theye have made very public their views on issues of population, that they view us as "useless eaters" mostly, and then consider that Theye are treacherous beyond measuring. Threaten Theire agenda, much less their existence, and that treachery will manifest in God only knows what form. Theye are sufficient masters of Hegel's dialectic, as evidenced by world events such as Domino Theory, 9/11, and so on. Theye don't need us all, just enough. Short of a disruption event not of Theire making and beyond their ability to react against sufficiently, Theye have that critical mass and stand in the shadow of no clear and present threat. Theye don't have to be omniscient or even particularly high on the IQ scale. Theye only need sufficient resources, cleverness, and raw dedication to make real whatever horrors, grand or petit, that they resolve to foist upon us. Theye have the resources, and that fact alone should lead you to some significant indigestion.

And as to cleverness, let us be clear that even low-level intellects can be devilishly clever. My neighbor's daughter Lisa (may God bless and rest her soul in peace) was retarded due to insecticide poisoning as an infant (horrific story). She was incapable of ANY higher mental abstraction such as telling time, for example. And yet, she was indeed one of the most deviously clever children I'd ever known. I mention this only to drive home the fact that such capabilities to which I credit Themme do not perforce imply anything more than a rather low IQ underpinning. Treachery and determination speak for 99.99% of ability.

The Soviet Union, for example, had about as functional and well-oiled a propaganda machine as could be asked for, but it ultimately didn't matter - and ubiquitously inter-networked computers are many, many orders of magnitude more difficult to effectively regulate and control than the typewriters and mimeograph machines used by the producers of samizdat.

Au contraire, mon ami. The Soviets were embarrassingly ham-fisted where propaganda was concerned. Do not confuse pervasiveness and grim determination for polish. The rank and file soviet subject was well aware of the bullshit and that awareness is well nutshelled in the old quote, "we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us".

No no no... the real propaganda machine is right here in America. I will acknowledge that it is beginning to fail, but it is as yet unclear whether it will fail sufficiently. And if it does, Theye still have many options at hand.

As to how "nervous" Theye are, that remains a matter of pure speculation. Once again I feel compelled to remind ourselves just how fond Theye are of theater - so much so I fear we can trust little to nothing of what we behold. The cancer is deep, and it is metastatic.

Mors Themme

 

[WarriorLiberty]

EU said

The European Commission stated that they did not hear anything new in Putin's interview with Tucker Carlson.

A representative of the EU's foreign policy service also expressed regret that a platform was provided for this interview, which, in her assessment, contained "old false claims."

Its pretty much clear on whose running the EU then...

The US is.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/simonateba/status/1755670705675370821

https://twitter.com/jeffreyatucker/status/1755937966508142770

 

[Occam's Banana]

[If]someone with a large platform (like Tucker Carlson, for example) uses that platform to publicize anything in opposition to X, more people will realize they are not the isolated "odd men out" after all. That's why the establishment media is freaking out so hard over Carlson's interview with Putin. It would not have been a problem back in the days before the "Wild West" of social media, when they were the gatekeepers who were able to effectively curate everything most people saw, heard, or read. Back then, they had no problems interviewing all kinds of people - Sadaam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, et al. They could completely control the framing and presentation of those interviews, and thus control what content (and even more importantly, the context of that content) people ended up seeing, hearing, or reading.

They can't do that any more. As a result of social media, they've lost their former stranglehold over both content and context, and as a result, their propaganda is no longer nearly as effective as it used to be when it comes to isolating and neutralizing opposition.

And they have no idea what to do about it except to desperately scream "bloody murder!" or "treason!" or the like, and demand new and draconian laws and such.

↓↓↓​

https://twitter.com/WesternLensman/status/1755610042974581063

 

[Occam's Banana]

You seem to have ignored the fact that Theye have at their disposal technologies that when applied in the relevant ways, have the apparent effect of either gaining the compliance they seek, or of simply culling back the population in the billions. Do recall our ancient history lessons of the so-called "pandemic", a very clearly synthetic event wherein the vast majority of humanity complied with the most obviously and ridiculously absurd mandates. [...]

Further consider that Theye have made very public their views on issues of population, that they view us as "useless eaters" mostly, and then consider that Theye are treacherous beyond measuring. Threaten Theire agenda, much less their existence, and that treachery will manifest in God only knows what form. [...]

I haven't ignored any of that. It simply wasn't relevant to the particular point I was making.

Compliance enforcement and propaganda are separate (albeit often complementary) things.

The latter can make the former easier to accomplish, but they are nevertheless distinct efforts.

Compliance is effectuated by means of order-following goons with guns, not by means of propaganda.

Propaganda does not serve to enforce compliance - it is used to isolate, dishearten, "drown out", and neutralize opposition to compliance.

Do also hearken back to the fact that the fraud has been exposed quite neatly, and yet vast legions of the populations of men still cleave to the lies. Do note how Pfizer, for example, is now on aclarge-scale ad campaign reminding people to get the latest covid "vaccine", showing absolutely no tip of their hat to the rotten truth.

And yet, skepticism of and opposition to the official narrative was nevertheless not only endemic but also grew apace, much to Theire distress, dismay, alarm, and outrage, and despite Theire every effort to the contrary.

The fact that the greater mass of humanity is inert ballast that will go along with whatever is easiest for it to go along with does not signify. (That has always been the case since before human history even began, and it will always be the case for as long as humans remain recognizably human.) For example, the greater mass of people did not comply with COVID mandates because of COVID propaganda. They complied because they would be punished or otherwise disadvantaged if they did not. IOW: In the face of enforced mandates, compliance was the path of least resistance. But ceteris paribus, if there had been no enforced mandates, but only the propaganda, then the greater mass of people would not have complied, because that would have been the path of least resistance. The purpose of the propaganda was not to effectuate compliance (that's what the mandates were for) - the purpose of the propaganda was to suppress and undercut resistance and opposition to compliance. For this, it did not need to be persuasive, but only ubiquitous.

Au contraire, mon ami. The Soviets were embarrassingly ham-fisted where propaganda was concerned. Do not confuse pervasiveness and grim determination for polish. The rank and file soviet subject was well aware of the bullshit and that awareness is well nutshelled in the old quote, "we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us".

No no no... the real propaganda machine is right here in America. I will acknowledge that it is beginning to fail, but it is as yet unclear whether it will fail sufficiently. And if it does, Theye still have many options at hand.

No, they were not. As I have already indicated, propaganda has nothing to do with "persuasiveness". Soviet propaganda was not at all persuasive (nor was it particularly "polish[ed]"). It didn't need to be (and if it ever was, that was just "icing on the cake") - and it was never actually meant to be. Not really. Rather, it was meant to broadcast the party line and put everyone on notice as to what constituted proper and acceptable "goodthink", and thereby to smother all (publicly visible) criticism of or divergence from the party line. They didn't really care whether people believed it; they only cared whether people pretended to believe it (and then acted accordingly). In this, it was extraordinarily effective - and far, far more effective than anything the American regime has ever been able to accomplish. (The closet anything in America has come to being an exception to this is war-time jingoism.)

 

[acptulsa]

https://twitter.com/rustyrockets/status/1756001914150355028

 

[osan]

I haven't ignored any of that. It simply wasn't relevant to the particular point I was making.

Compliance enforcement and propaganda are separate (albeit often complementary) things.

Strictly speaking you may be right, but in practical terms they are effectively two closely tied means of achieving the precise same end.

The latter can make the former easier to accomplish, but they are nevertheless distinct efforts.

I see why you might view it that way. I'm of a more "holistic" view on that particular matter. The latter, when well accomplished, makes the former nearly irrelevant.

Compliance is effectuated by means of order-following goons with guns, not by means of propaganda.

Now there I must depart a bit. Consider the "pandemic". Few goons in evidence for the purposes of enforcement there. The terror campaign was quite sufficient, and I'd call it 99.9% so.

Propaganda does not serve to enforce compliance - it is used to isolate, dishearten, "drown out", and neutralize opposition to compliance.

This seems very much a distinction sans difference.

And yet, skepticism of and opposition to the official narrative was nevertheless not only endemic but also grew apace, much to Theire distress, dismay, alarm, and outrage, and despite Theire every effort to the contrary.

Agreed, but so far as I can see, this was the result of pooching the propaganda. For one thing, I think the campaign was ill-conceived in the first place due to the lies being so wildly outrageous that Theye were unable to keep lids on them. The truth got out, I would estimate, largely because those who at first may have been on board with the general plot, upon seeing that it was not what they'd initially thought, chose truth over being implicated in the lies that resulted in many deaths. I'm thinking that the lower echelon sorts who'd signed on only due to the deceit, decided at one point not to be further associated due to either moral issues or the fact that they didn't want to find themselves behind the cross-hairs in case it all blew up, which it basically has.

In time, even the relatively ill-endowed intellect of the meaner began in many cases twigging to the scandalous truths that were coming to light. I'd call the pandemic a grossly mismanaged affair, if appearances are to be taken as sound at their cores, which I cannot quite bring myself to do. But assuming it, Theye pooched this in a huge way, I assume not at the result so much of ineptitude, but of miscalculation based on a level of hubris no in line with the reality. It seems to me Theye got too big for their panties and assumed we, the useless eaters, would swallow anything they chose to place before us. It certainly went that way for a good year or more, but the truth has a funny way of leaking out. I think in this case it could not be contained, due in large part to far too many inconsistencies and other flaws. Stupid and corrupt as he may be, even the meaner has his limits, and I'm thinking Theye leapt and bounded right past that line at some point and the campaign failed.

As to the failure, I cannot quite accept the apparent story that it was just fuckup upon fuckup. If you recall, back in '19 or early '20 I speculated that what might be going on at that time was a grand setup to maneuver us into committing suicide en masse. My twisted idea was that the current situation was intended to make people so weary of the whole notion of the plague and to so utterly destroy any trust in institutions such as CDC, that perhaps several iterations down the road, people just stop listening. At that point, the real bug(s) is/are released and the nth wave of dire warning, a la Chicken Little, are issued with perhaps even real and actual vaccines now suddenly available for all. The billions fed up and in the regalia of full-throttle distrust ignore the warnings, refuse the treatments, and die off quickly and in vast legion. At the end of that day, Theire mouthpieces get to wag their fingers at the naughty disobedient who failed to do as commanded and nobody holds a plausible basis for blaming Themme. "Hey, you were warned and the remedy was there for your taking at no charge. This is 100% on you, so STFU and get lost before I loose the dogs on your stupid, worthless and sorry asses." It may all seem silly-contrived, but were it to prove out I would not be in the least surprised.

For example, the greater mass of people did not comply with COVID mandates because of COVID propaganda. They complied because they would be punished or otherwise disadvantaged if they did not. IOW: In the face of enforced mandates, compliance was the path of least resistance. But ceteris paribus, if there had been no enforced mandates, but only the propaganda, then the greater mass of people would not have complied, because that would have been the path of least resistance. The purpose of the propaganda was not to effectuate compliance (that's what the mandates were for) - the purpose of the propaganda was to suppress and undercut resistance and opposition to compliance. For this, it did not need to be persuasive, but only ubiquitous.

What you claim may be so, but it is undemonstrated in any conclusive way and the event is past and the opportunity to know lost, if ever it even existed.

All that said, it is clear that we speak of a stick and carrot game here, which is long and well proven to be greatly effective.

No, they were not.

I don't know how old you are or what your experiences may be. I just turned 66 on 2/1 and spent considerable time behind the "iron curtain", visiting family when I was a child. I can attest first hand to the ridiculous nature of soviet propaganda. It was so embarrassingly absurd, I hardly have the words to describe it. That's not to say it didn't have its effect, it did, but the efforts was a grand waste of energy IMO, especially when considered vis-à-vis the American propaganda machine, which operated with far greater subtlety and effect. The people of the communist bloc nations all knew the propaganda was bullshit and they rolled their eyes, however quietly, when in sufficiently safe quarters. Americans, OTOH, revelled in the utter bullshit of the distortions of what it meant to be an American. I grew up witnessing this before my own eyes and I know it to be so as the experience spanned many years and was not the product of a sample population of one.

The Chinese, by all appearances, were no better. Perhaps we are speaking the same language here and I'm just too thick to see it. The propaganda in these cases were the message to the people of what to think. The men with guns were the quality assurance instruments to ensure that that thinking was in evidence. This is a gross misapplication of propaganda effort. The real and proven goal there is to get people to get on board with your agenda so that you don't need to use your men with guns, which is always the riskier path forward. Once again I bid you examine our America as it now stands - hundreds of millions of corrupt blood who comply with damned nearly every fiat tossed at them, no matter how criminally absurd. It is testimony itself.

As I have already indicated, propaganda has nothing to do with "persuasiveness".

Ill-conceived propaganda brought forth by those who fail to understand the instrument follow the path you suggest. Those who do understand work on Madison Avenue or DoD, etc., and the people are left thinking that their world views are in fact their own.

Soviet propaganda was not at all persuasive (nor was it particularly "polish[ed]"). It didn't need to be (and if it ever was, that was just "icing on the cake") - and it was never actually meant to be. Not really. Rather, it was meant to broadcast the party line and put everyone on notice as to what constituted proper and acceptable "goodthink", and thereby to smother all (publicly visible) criticism of or divergence from the party line. They didn't really care whether people believed it; they only cared whether people pretended to believe it (and then acted accordingly). In this, it was extraordinarily effective - and far, far more effective than anything the American regime has ever been able to accomplish. (The closet anything in America has come to being an exception to this is war-time jingoism.)

The soviets lacked any subtlety. Their "leaders" were a raft of clumsy, but very cleverly treacherous vermin who mishandled propaganda precisely because they were so very obtuse. What strategy lacks can be compensated with sheer and utter terror. The problem there is that the moment you sail past a point with beating a dog, he loses his fear. Having nothing to lose, he starts biting. Granted, the soviet people were not quite at that point yet, they were heading there. Perhaps Gorbachev saw the writing on the wall. We will never know, but my surmise is that had they continued, the time may well have come when Revolution Part Deux would have erupted and those at the top would have enjoyed fates similar to those of the Romanovs. Perhaps Gorby baby saw this and was only endeavoring to save his own bacon. Maybe he loved his people and didn't want such a conflagration to beset them, having seen the reality of the past war. Who can say? But the bottom line is that the soviets misapplied propaganda in a grossly clumsy way such that the end of the Soviet Union was all but a foregone conclusion. Who, in that day, would have seen the end of the French aristocracy in 1789? Those at the top surely didn't, and I daresay the same would have inevitably bitten the soviets precisely because their propaganda failed them with such utter misery, along of course with the deformed nature of their socio-economic and political architectures.

I don't think we're that far apart in our views on the question and I'm not sure any of it really matters in any event. We're in shit to our eyelids and it is going to take nothing short of a miracle to get us out.

 

[acptulsa]

For one thing, I think the campaign was ill-conceived in the first place due to the lies being so wildly outrageous that Theye were unable to keep lids on them. The truth got out, I would estimate, largely because those who at first may have been on board with the general plot, upon seeing that it was not what they'd initially thought, chose truth over being implicated in the lies that resulted in many deaths. I'm thinking that the lower echelon sorts who'd signed on only due to the deceit, decided at one point not to be further associated due to either moral issues or the fact that they didn't want to find themselves behind the cross-hairs in case it all blew up, which it basically has.

In time, even the relatively ill-endowed intellect of the meaner began in many cases twigging to the scandalous truths that were coming to light. I'd call the pandemic a grossly mismanaged affair, if appearances are to be taken as sound at their cores, which I cannot quite bring myself to do.

I certainly can't.

These are eugenicists. Remember those rocks in Georgia. They don't want to wipe humanity out completely, they just want to cut it down to a downright lonely half a million. And they're eugenicists.

Now. Apply the model that the jab was an intelligence test and tell me what pieces of the puzzle don't fit. Cats could resist the psyop. Sheep couldn't.

 

[osan]

I certainly can't.

These are eugenicists. Remember those rocks in Georgia. They don't want to wipe humanity out completely, they just want to cut it down to a downright lonely half a million. And they're eugenicists.

Now. Apply the model that the jab was an intelligence test and tell me what pieces of the puzzle don't fit. Cats could resist the psyop. Sheep couldn't.

We do not disagree.