I wonder how many of them have commented here.
Somewhat more detailed list here:
Given that Russia/Pootin are in local focus rather infrequently, I wouldn’t guess many.
I also, would not guess many, comrade.
Given that in the US context anybody who’s left from center-right is classified as a Marxist, it’s pretty expected.
I’m really curious as to whether the same thing exists in the US sponsored by Koch Bros. and their ilk.
I go backwards and forwards on whether there is such a thing for climate change deniers and right wing types. Sometimes I think that there can’t possibly be people whose hobby is to search for climate change science and then create a comment account just to say something nonsensical. But then I meet some right wingers and think that maybe they are the type of person with exactly that hobby.
Does anyone here spend time reading and exploring Conservative web sites and then posting contrarian comments / opinions? Or is the flow only one way?
In the US even the centre right is Marxist, according to the reactionaries in the Tea Party.
Which is now known as Sean Jean Parti en Chine.
I’ll just leave this here, for discussion.
В сегодняшней России, форум комментирует вас!!
Ah-HA! You’re one of them, aren’t you? You’re with the Ministry of Truth!!!1!
As for the 463 papers, didn’t one of Stalin’s generals once say that quantity has a quality all its own…
I take it you don’t engage in legal scholarship or read law review articles?
Eh, people don’t need to be paid to be trolls.
I am sort of surprised, given government support for pro-Russian propaganda, that it achieves a creditable level of quality. The anti-Russian propaganda, which I take it mostly emanates from or is paid for by the US, has been pretty bad, often starting out with statements well-known to be contrafactual. This is often the case when governments seek out paid propagandists: the first people to sign up are racial and tribal fanatics whose only concern is which side you’re on. The Russians must have the advantage of being more cynical.
I don’t get the Marxist and Communist references. Putin is a right-wing nationalist, one might say a fascist.
Private, independent trolls, vandals, spammers, fools, propagandists, hobby-horse riders, and so on, are loose cannons in the opinion-making business. While there are a lot of them, and they’re free, they are not very useful.
Why do you assume this?
First of all, there is the general pattern of American geopolitics, which I am sure I need not describe; it creates a certain framework for the interpretation of events.
In this specific case, most of the commentary I have seen (admittedly, not a scientific sampling) has been in idiomatic, colloquial, even slangy American English. Certain peculiar themes seem to be repetitiously predominant, such as referring to Russian aggression, when in fact the present crisis in Ukraine was set off by a violent coup led by specifically anti-Russian groups, to which the Russian leadership subsequently responded – one might say Putin and company were playing black, to use a chess metaphor. For good propaganda, a different, less contrafactual construction of events would be preferable (to me, anyway). The present style strongly resembles the rhetoric attached to the adventure in Georgia in 2008, which was apparently initiated by Georgia (on some promise of external support) but was characterized as original Russian ‘aggression’ by the Western boss media. The rhetorical habits look familiar. There are alternative and more believable pretexts, so I take it this particular choice is a habit, possibly going back to the Cold War.
In general, paying people to write propaganda or advertising as ostensibly independent, unpaid commenters or forum participants goes back to the mid-90s, and maybe before on bulletin board systems and Usenet. It would be very odd if those with the means did not continue the practice. In fact, I’m surprised and thankful there isn’t more of it.
[quote=“starrygordon, post:19, topic:64003”]
when in fact the present crisis in Ukraine was set off by a violent coup led by specifically anti-Russian group[/quote]
Given that Russia doesn’t want an independent Ukraine, it would seem that any groups advocating for independence would be specifically anti-Russian.
I am loathe to advocate for sort of politics that could be construed as a third alternative, since that’s long been a staple of Fascist rhetoric, but there are certain important values nonexistent in Russian civil society such as “independent media”, adherence by politicians to the “rule of law”, and so on, that do not necessarily intersect with being part of the “Western hegemon”.