Wertheimer [any]

  • 131 Posts
  • 1.54K Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 27th, 2020

help-circle





  • NYT has an interview with María Corina Machado. The main photo is her staring wistfully through a window:

    Venezuela’s ‘Iron Lady’ Pleads With Trump to Save Her Country’s Democracy

    Now, with President Nicolás Maduro accused of stealing the election and his government threatening her capture, María Corina Machado, Venezuela’s wildly popular opposition leader, has gone into hiding — alone.

    In a series of rare, in-depth virtual interviews since she mobilized millions to vote against Mr. Maduro in July, Ms. Machado said she was holed up in a secret location somewhere inside her country. Because anyone who helps her could be detained — or might lead government agents to her — she said she has not had a visitor in months.

    Nicknamed the country’s “Iron Lady” for her conservative politics and steely resolve, Ms. Machado is, she admitted, “longing for a hug.”

    Her mother has urged her to meditate. She has not.

    The rest of the article is her begging Trump and the “international community” to coup her country, concluding with “But I am willing to do what has to be done,” she said, “for as long as it takes to assert the truth and popular sovereignty," and then somehow you can hear “SPEAK ABOUT DESTRUCTION” fade in.



  • What’s a topic where you know how to spot the propaganda at first glance? (Whether it’s because you’re personally involved in the issue, have done previous research, or have merely listened to a :citations-needed: episode.) Take that, and then use a recently published example of the propaganda in action to demonstrate to a general reader how to recognize the same techniques. If there isn’t a recently published example, you can probably just wait and pounce when one inevitably arrives.

    Or maybe just have some questions in mind whenever you read mainstream news, and then pick a topic based on whichever article makes you angriest -

    • Who benefits from the issue being framed this way?
    • Who isn’t being quoted here? (And what false binary are they introducing by making so-and-so the voice of the opposition on this topic?)
    • What obvious liar are they taking at their word here? What conflict of interest are they sweeping under the rug?






  • Here’s a paper:

    In 1845, Friedrich Engels identified how the living and working conditions experienced by English workers sent them prematurely to the grave, arguing that those responsible for these conditions – ruling authorities and the bourgeoisie – were committing social murder. The concept remained, for the most part, dormant in academic journals through the 1900s. Since 2000, there has been a revival of the social murder concept with its growth especially evident in the UK over the last decade as a result of the Grenfell Tower Fire and the effects of austerity imposed by successive Conservative governments. The purpose of this paper is to document the reemergence of the concept of social murder in academic journal articles. To do so we conducted a scoping review of content applying the social murder concept since 1900 in relation to health and well-being.

    The two most immediate stimuli for the return of the concept were the 2018 UK documentary Grenfell Tower and Social Murder and the 2019 academic article by UK academic Chris Grover Violent Proletarianization: Social Murder, the Reserve Army of Labour and Social Security ‘Austerity’ in Britain. The latter two received wide coverage in the UK mainstream media and stimulated its use in social media in the UK and elsewhere.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277953621007097 , which only gives snippets but maybe the bibliography will help.