I have a few lib family members who are well-meaning and actually open to challenges to their preconceptions. They consider themselves anti-war, even did anti-war activism during the Iraq war and state that their primary concern with respect to the Russia-Ukraine situation is for the well-being of the Ukrainian civilians. They even recognized the racism happening at the borders and were appalled by it. They are boomers, but they're actually not too bad as boomers go.
However, they are avid CNN-watchers and so that is their perspective on this conflict. I feel like it is my duty (whether that's true or not) to at least attempt to give them an accurate view of the truth about what's happening in Ukraine and some of the very important context around it. I would like to think I can get through to them, but I am terrible about talking about this kind of thing. I stumble, I completely forget everything pertinent, and instead of making a good case for my view, I end up making it look foolish instead.
I'm slightly better in writing, so I've decided to attempt to compile a very broad, general, absolutely NOT comprehensive list of the distortions, lies, and overall false narrative that the US/NATO and the West generally are pushing via CNN. The plan is to make a bulleted list of the overall major distortions and then populate each section with "sub-lists" that contain specific examples. I've started on a very very rough draft of the broad list that I'll put inside a spoiler tag at the bottom of this post. I have been saving a lot of what gets posted in the Russia-Ukraine megathreads, from links to important tweets, to links to articles, to some of the many examples of MSM suppression of info, to even quotes I liked from fellow Hexbears. But it's all just a jumbled mess right now, but that's why I'm going to try to make this list. You know how the megathread has the "Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict"? I want to do something like that, but on the much broader topic of "Examples of the false narrative being created and the actual realities contradicting it." I know it sounds like a massive undertaking, but I figure it's only a matter of how detailed it is.
I have a few questions for you all. First, are there any good web tools for making this list? I know I can make a personal wiki but I've never done that before. It looks like there are several options for this, so are there opinions here as to which one would be best? Or is using a wiki overkill? Maybe I should just do it in a document file.
But that leads me to my next question: Does anyone want to help? I don't mean to ask others to do my research work for me, but I also thought that some of you might enjoy working on something like this, and that maybe if it were a group effort (and not just my personal shitty compilation) it might even end up being a helpful resource for other people to use as reference or maybe even in their attempts to deworm the libs in their lives. Is this a silly request? I know there has been interest in doing something like this, and I would love to have the help. Actually here is a thread about that started by @MaoistLandlord a while ago in the R-U megathread and I see it come up often, I just happened to have that one bookmarked. So I'm just tossing this out here just in case anyone wants to use it as a jumping off point for something more comprehensive than my little project, but I don't mean to be presumptuous.
Obviously, if this were to be a group thing, it would be up to whoever was working on it to decide what kind of list or structure it would be. If it's just me, I'm not going to commit a ton of time to it, and it's going to be what I described above: just very basic list, with major bullet points of what CNN is not talking about for the sake of the false narrative, and some examples beneath each bullet point. It's only going to be a way to structure some of the stuff I've saved from the megathread and present it to my libs so they have a better view.
Here's what I have so far as the super rough draft I just typed up in 10 minutes of only the broad points and in no real order. What am I missing? What did I get wrong?
spoiler
Obviously there's a lot of overlap, but what can you do.
-
This is a proxy war between the US (NATO is essentially an alliance for the interests of the US) and Russia. It is not an invasion on the whim of a maniac.
-
The Ukrainian government is heavily infiltrated and influenced by literal Nazis and the military is lead by Nazis and made up of entire Nazi battalions that have been funded and trained by the US for years.
-
The violence now has been an ongoing issue ever since the US-backed coup in 2014 and the Nazi government and military have been shelling the eastern part of Ukraine ever since, as well as going in and committing hate crimes.
-
NATO (which was created as a military alliance against the USSR but did not disband when the USSR fell, but instead continued to treat Russia as a threat despite Russia's many capitulations) has repeatedly promised Russia it would not expand, has denied Russia's request to actually join NATO as well.
-
The Ukrainian military has been committing atrocities against its own people and blaming it on Russia, including shooting civilians who try to escape to safety instead of stay and fight. (a list of atrocities - as in, the types of atrocities being committed would be helpful here, of course a list of specific instances would end up being a book in itself) They are hiding themselves and arms in schools and hospitals and using civilians as meat shields.
-
The Ukrainian government has been putting out massive amounts of ridiculous propaganda in a bid to try to get the US/NATO to do more, despite the almost certainty that further US/NATO intervention would lead to a WWIII scenario. Sub list of some of the most ridiculous or egregious propaganda would be good - ghost of Kiev obviously.
-
The US and western media in general is parading this propaganda as truth to an astounding degree. More importantly, it is suppressing any information that remotely goes against the prevailing narrative for the purpose of manufacturing consent for its own support and gearing up for a new col war with Russia. (sub-list of egregious examples of suppression, perhaps even a sub-sub list of likely false flag events like the fire at the nuclear power plant - honestly I'm not sure what category to put that under, same with all the info about western volunteers going over there and the things that have been reported by them.)
-
Putin is not a Communist (he is a Capitalist through and through), does not want to reform the USSR, and Russia is not at all a communist country.
-
Zelensky is not a good guy but a war criminal for a number of reasons (again a sub-list here would be good) but includes not allowing men below the age of 60 to leave the country (hence the Nazi contingents murdering those who try), handing out weapons to everyone even when they don't know how to use them (leading to citizens killing each other both by accident/misidentification as well as outright murders of each other as in revenge killings and interfactional violence)
-
There has been shocking anti-Russian sentiment from violence to banning of ordinary innocent Russian people from participating in society throughout the West (another sub-list here) and it is being hailed as a good thing by western media.
-
While this fits under the propaganda parts, it's worth it's own big bullet point: Ukraine is NOT winning the war, Russia is NOT incompetent and doing poorly. Russia WILL absolutely win, no question, unless NATO decides to intervene further, and we should NOT want this to happen unless we want to edge close to and possibly cross the line into the annihilation of humanity.
-
It is also worth stating that “winning” and “losing” does not mean in reality how it is being portrayed, specifically considering what Russia’s goals actually are. It is almost certainly not Russia’s goal to completely occupy Ukraine or literally make it part of Russia itself, but 1. to ensure the sovereignty and freedom of the the former areas of Ukraine that have been under violent attack by the Ukrainian military since 2014, the LPR and DPR (aka Donbas region) as well as Crimea, 2. the demilitarizing (and “denazifying”) Ukraine and 3. The absolute prevention of Ukraine joining NATO. If those objectives are accomplished, Russia will have “won.”
-
Zelensky and the Ukrainian government have had multiple talks with Russia, each was an opportunity to do the right thing and surrender. This would save innumerable lives. Instead, Zelensky makes ridiculous demands and perpetuates the violence. Whether this is for vanity, for a (hopefully) misplaced idea that NATO will intervene and "save" him, or if he correctly or not thinks that surrender would mean the ultranationalist elements in his own government would assassinate him*, it is utterly selfish. (*include example of official who was shot in the head for supposedly potentially giving information to the Russians)
Congrats on the pin btw. Folks get in here and start posting the good stuff!
Something thats less of a factual correction and more of pointing out a moral failure. Every time Zelensky has opportunity to negotiate and surrender yet does not is a very selfish act. On that first negotiation, what only 3 days in? he should have surrendered. Negotiate all he wants thats his right, but at the end of the day to walk away from the table without a deal for peace is a deeply evil act.
You are absolutely right. I could have sworn I already had that in there, but I don't. I think I meant to put it in the "Zelensky is not a good guy" section but forgot. But this definitely deserves a bulleted point.
I edited the list to add that in (as well as well as @SeventyTwoTrillion's suggestion). I'm not wording things very well, but just trying to get it in there for now and word it better later.
I've thought about this quite a bit and decided to not bother with my family, but I think the approach is to outline some truths and attempt to clear a space to present facts outside of the 24hr media barrage of atrocity porn. It's impossible to try and address every lie that is being pushed, and maybe easier to let them see the contradictions for themselves. If they can't or won't do that then at least you aren't wasting so much of your time.
-
I would start by making sure they watch the John Mearsheimer video , because it comes with credentials that libs are likely to respect and be willing to listen to. It is historically sound and addresses many of your initial points.
-
Next, I think is an opportunity to quickly (lmao) reference the proven coups and regime changes done by the US, funding of terrorists and extremists for destabilization purposes. Give some of the statistics for funding to Ukraine, Zelenski implicated in panama papers, reference the BBC documentary on the right-wing militias+openly neo-nazi brigades.
-
Draw a comparison to the Cuban missile crisis. Make sure to reiterate that you don't support Putin or the invasion, but that it makes sense and is the logical outcome of factors that the MSM is ignoring.
-
After this foundation, then attempt to address the parts that should not sit well with anyone, the denial of the neo-nazi problem, that we are being told to celebrate forcing civilians to fight a war that is not possible to win, that Ukrainians are being used for the West geopolitical chess move.
Yeah I don't disagree with any of that. But making this list is still important to me. For me, this is a way of just having it all down somewhere that either I myself can refer to, or send them a link to the examples I'll be putting in the "sub-lists." If they were... combative about this, I agree it would probably be pointless. But I think they are actually open to the possibility that they are being lied to and there's a deeper truth than what CNN is telling them, and this is a way of just laying out the main ways that's happening.
I've also started a separate list of things to send that offer context, like the history of the situation and a broad overview of why this is happening. And the Mearshimer lecture is absolutely on that list. Well, there are only 4 items right now:
- The Mearsheimer lecture on youtube
- Empire Files: Ukraine: Questions for the Anti-war movement. (excellent podcast that stresses anti-war sentiment, good because my fam consider themselves anti-war)
- The 2 TrueAnon episodes on the situation (wow what a deep dive and great background, but I don't know how the style and humor will go over with boomers)
- Michael Hudson articles
- (Edit) Oliver Stone's Ukraine on Fire, (thanks @Mog_Pharou )
I don't want to inundate them with long videos and podcasts though. They won't go through and watch/listen to all of that. If I can get them to recognize the ways they're being lied to (hence my big list above) then maybe they will be curious and interested to learn more about the context. And actually, in the small amount that I have spoken to them about this already, I've said some of the things in your bulleted points. I did make the comparison to the Cuban Missile Crisis. I made absolutely sure they didn't think I was pro-Putin. And I did mention that Ukrainin civilians are just pawns for US/NATO. It's because they started being a bit receptive to this (after their initial shock that I had such a contrary view to what they'd been told) that I decided to try to make this list.
Awesome, a lot of people, myself included will appreciate something organized like this.
I was mostly just sharing my experience so far of talking with people irl who want to be told who's good/bad, and shut down when I start getting into the details that are crucial to understand. The situation is relatively complex while being morally in the grey, even for people who grasp the bigger picture.
Mostly, I think it comes down to a curiosity, and desire to get closer to truth and it sounds like the people you are hoping to educate are ready for some of the detail.
Very well said. I think more than half the battle, when it comes to convincing people they've been fed a false narrative, is just getting them to understand exactly what you said, that it is so vastly more complex than the movie-like plot they're being presented.
-
I think at the end, you need to make sure to really nail down what "winning the war" really means. Because to Russia (and the latest statements by the Pentagon agree), the focus has always fundamentally been on the Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples' Republics, not occupying or annexing Ukraine. Russia's goals are: a) the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine - and, as you say, there are legitimate, actual, genuine, I-want-to-slaughter-all-untermensch neo-Nazis in Ukraine; b) the freedom (NOT RUSSIAN OCCUPATION) of the LPR and DPR (and Crimea, though Russia already basically owns that whether the west/Ukraine admits it or not); c) Ukraine not joining NATO, for the reasons you stated above.
It would be easy to see Russia and Ukraine reaching some kind of peace deal and seeing Russia not getting away with annexing all of Ukraine and for people to go "Hooray, Putin's evil aggressive advance has been destroyed and we won!", when that was never the goal. If Ukraine's government never makes peace then that might be the goal in the future, but for now, Russia has not made any consistent push or narrative about annexing Ukraine or even necessarily putting it under a puppet government.
Excellent points. My thinking was more along the lines of how it is being presented in simplistic win/lose terms a lot (wrongly so) and that it is Ukraine that is doing the simple winning when that's not true. But you're absolutely right that that simplistic view needs to be corrected too. But it makes for a big single bullet point.
How about leaving it mostly as is but adding in (as another bullet point beneath maybe):
It is also worth stating that "winning" and "losing" does not mean in reality how it is being portrayed, specifically considering what Russia's goals actually are. It is almost certainly not Russia's goal to completely occupy Ukraine or literally make it part of Russia itself, but 1. to ensure the sovereignty and freedom of the the former areas of Ukraine that have been under violent attack by the Ukrainian military since 2014, the LPR and DPR (aka Donbas region) as well as Crimea, 2. the demilitarizing (and "denazifying") Ukraine and 3. The absolute prevention of Ukraine joining NATO. If those objectives are accomplished, Russia will have "won."
Specifically, this one guy pins a lot of the destruction and 'civilian casualties' (fascist death squad victims) on Azov and fascists, citing many examples of seeing swasticas, saying that he and others just want the war to end and that it doesnt because the nationalists are in power. I'm too lazy rn to type it all out so just go watch it and report your findings comrades o7
I will check it out, thank you for the link. Yeah, no need to type it all out, but these reports coming out from regular Ukrainian civilians who made it out are probably the most damning pieces of irrefutable evidence to break the bullshit narrative... if enough eyes can get on them despite the MSM's efforts.
Oliver Stone's Ukraine On Fire did the trick on my dad. At least in regards to Ukraine's little nazi problem and American influence in the 2014 coup.
personally I like to focus on how bad an idea getting involved would be instead.
Bonus points if you manage to work in interfering over a treaty with an imperial power attacking a small european nation being how Britain entered WW1
Kinda offtopic, but calling fascist propaganda a "false narrative" is like giving them a compliment - same as "manufacturing consent" and couple others quite popular in the west.
It is pretty euphemistic, yeah. Doesn't paint the reality of it in the kind of light it deserves. Though I wouldn't say it's inaccurate either. It's not on the same level as say "collateral damage" for example.
And in this case with my lib family, if I come out and tell these people who view themselves as kind-hearted, anti-war, and "leftwing," that they're just eating up fascist propaganda, I don't think they'll be as receptive as if I tell them that the news is presenting a false narrative.
Yeah i appreciate your patience and understand the situation perfectly, that's how we ended in this mousetrap - basically speak to them but don't speak to them.
Good idea for a thread, I'm like you in that I get my marbles all jumbled up in my head when I try to explain what i know (or think I know), but I'm also worried that I probably just ramble talking points at people without really engaging them.
I would add some background about Yanukovich and acknowledge that he was also corrupt af (need to look into it myself but someone here remarked that he was laundering great sums of money through Luxembourg and London, and holding out basic necessities at extortionate prices), and afaik that's partly what sparked the Euromaidan protests in 2013-2014.
I think that's important to acknowledge because people who defend Ukraine's government will use that to legitimize the putsch/coup/"revolution" that sort of sparked this whole thing.
But it's also important for a deeper reason and that is, it's consistent with the CIA/NATO intelligence establishment's color revolution playbook. The way that U.S. intelligence helped to steer the protest movement in the direction of a far-right takeover is consistent with the overall pattern of how they engineer color revolutions:
- seek out, or stir up, areas with political unrest that could threaten designated national enemies
- utilize existing connections with fascist paramilitaries and other ultranationalist organizations as well as capitalists/bourgeoisie (or cultivate new connections)
- provide political advising, information, tactical training, weapons, and other strategic supports to those groups
- launder that assistance through groups like the NED and furnish "freedom and democracy" narratives through the news media
- wait for an opportune moment for the fascist coalition to actualize the coup and install a new, friendlier and more pliable administration.
You could mention the infamous phone call in which Victoria Nuland named "Yats" as the guy who was picked to be the new prime minister, saying fuck the EU. Sure enough, "Yats" was the new prime minister after the fascists forced the election.
You could also draw parallels between the Iraq invasion and the Ukraine conflict regarding the narrative discipline of the news media. Your folks probably remember the narrative conformity of the corporate media when it came time to push for the invasion, WMD controversy notwithstanding. Well, compare news coverage of Ukraine before roughly a year ago with the coverage now. Big shift in messaging.
There's obviously a lot more to bring up and I'm still learning the background of these events but I know I have to locate the receipts. It's one thing to assert all of the above but if your folks are as open minded as you say they are then they will want to see the evidence.
Hi there, I use Obsidian.md for these purposes. What I have on the crisis looks like this: https://files.catbox.moe/n3zm18.png.
I am talking with another hexbear member about doing exactly this shared canon-building (a discussion you started with this comment actually). If you are interested in working with us, DM me and we can figure it out.
Awesome, thank you! That's right, I remember that conversation and I should have pinged you here. I am very interested (though afraid I may be a bit out of my element, that looks more daunting than a simple wiki). I have to leave for a few hours but I will be in contact for sure.
I don't see it in that image, but a long time ago on trueanon brace mentioned that there is a Ukrainian engine manufacturer, one of the only ones that can make jet engines for the next generation of fighter planes, and that China was making inroads into purchasing it. I haven't heard about this for a long time, but they mentioned then (with reference to the Hunter Biden stuff) that actions in Ukraine are part of the race between America and China to secure access to fighter jet engines.
I wonder if this war is even partially an extension to that (from America's viewpoint only - I'm not saying Russia is helping China).
Edit: Motor Sich https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Sich
