With a fairly massive amount of lies being peddled in western media about Russia and the Ukraine crisis, it’s always nice to find things that are a.) logical and make sense, and b.) not full of distortions, opportunistic translations and outright lies.
Another day, another piece of drivel passed off as journalism to the mindless masses.
Ben Judah and his gleeful “over-interpretations”
First we had Politico journalist — and I am using that term loosely here — Ben Judah deciding to go ahead and publish an article which quoted Radoslaw Sikorski as saying Putin had offered to split Ukraine between Poland and Russia. Continue reading →
It’s Sunday — and that generally only means one thing: I’m sitting on the couch reading through all the stuff I didn’t get time to read earlier in the week. This week, as is usually the case lately, it’s all about Russia.
Do you remember that time when NATO was like “what’s up Russia, don’t worry we totally guarantee we won’t move further east than Germany” and Russia was like “cool, that’ll prevent a lot of bad feeling down the line, thanks for being so respectful”.
And then do you remember the time after that when NATO was like “actually guys, that’s not really going to work for us, so we’ll take Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania…oh and Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Albania and Croatia…that cool?”
And then Russia was like “dude no, that’s not cool at all, you said it would end with Germany, what is going on?”
And then NATO was like “what are you talking about? we totally never said that”
I, and most of the people I know, were products of a lopsidedly liberal school and university education, which gave little time or weight to arguments that went against the accepted norm when it came to internal political debate — and, as is becoming ever more obvious to me — international relations and foreign policy.
In domestic policy, anyone who dared to have a conflicting opinion was seen as some sort of uneducated, backward betrayer of all things right and good.
In foreign policy, those who went against the grain were the conspiracy theorists and apologists for all things bad and evil.
America was good. The EU was good. They were friends and they would stop bad things from happening and that was good. Continue reading →
Combating motivated reasoning is exceptionally difficult, as it is often an evolved mechanism of “protecting” ourselves from the distress of cognitive dissonance. Perhaps rather than view conflicting concepts with apprehension, we should regard it with the exhilaration of discovery.Continue reading →