you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Really use your noggin for this one.

Why would the Russian and Chinese governments want to influence a small collection of web forums with no real influence on the wider world?

No, they're not here, they're on Reddit. As are the US and Israeli governments, for that matter. Online influence campaigns are carried out by governments in places where they'll be most effective, and by more than just your spooky oriental despotisms.

Now, why might .ml users, in general, be generally pro-china? The people who made Lemmy as a platform, and the folks who were first to adopt it (instances like Lemmygrad and Hexbear), were ideologically Marxist. Specifically, Marxist-Leninist. Marxist-Leninists, generally, support the existence of actually existing socialist States, as being socialist.

Contrast that with a Maoist position which rejects these States as not being socialist

You can take that ideological position or leave it, it doesn't really matter to me. But what's the more likely explanation here?

That the people who made, and first adopted, Lemmy as a platform tended to have a certain ideology, and so the early instances, like .ml, have people with a broadly shared opinion on a certain topic?

Or that the Chinese government, who probably had no damn clue what Lemmy is, is actively devoting money, and hundreds of people to influence a tiny speck of a Web forum where some nerds circle jerk about Linux, instead of focusing on influencing Facebook or Reddit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Why would the Russian and Chinese governments want to influence a small collection of web forums with no real influence on the wider world?

    Why wouldn't they? Why would Russian or Chinese people be any worse at using internet platforms than we are?

    Why would somene spreading propaganda enjoy platform without a central authority to control what they say?

    Hmm yeah, that's a tough one. A really really tough nut to crack. Just no answer.

    If only I got a euro for every time I read this general bullshit denial of propaganda and disinfo, "there's no propaganda on Lemmy", I'd be a rich man

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)

    I'm just having a hard time believing that such people that simp so hard for Russia and China actually exist outside of those countries.

    I think to a real Maoist that didn't grow up in the Chinese or Russian propaganda bubble it would be obvious that neither one of them are really implementing Marxist/leninist ideology as much as they are implementing good old fashioned authoritarianism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Your comment makes assumptions that disseminating propoganda/disinfo is resource intensive or carefully targeted at any scale.

    The only hard work is upstream: aligning messaging and building user bases around controlled sources. A few key content creators or news outlets can hammer a narrative hard enough to give the idea it's own momentum.

    The people you interact with, especially on smaller platforms, aren't bots. Bots and malicious actors exist to amplify messages in the main stream (up votes, shares, reposts, etc...) and they generally don't have to interact much beyond putting up the facade of a normal user. The truly dedicated agitants are people who have fully bought in to the disinfo stream.

    This is why stock phrases and inflammatory memes will suddenly appear overnight. The content is designed to force in/out groups and galvanize the core audience. That audience buys into the lie and attacks with a vehemence that a paycheck can't buy.

    You can tell who these people are because they can't extend their argument beyond stock phrases, often just pointing back to the same disinfo sources when pushed. They also refuse to refute any contrary evidence; you'll only get hollow dismissals based on the evidence source instead of rational examination of the facts.

  • source
  • parent