Minus Russian propaganda, what's the real story on the Ukraine?

[Random Rooster]

North Korea is no different to our (and the US) great ally Saudi Arabia. You should have added that to the hate list though to be fair Murdoch never does so you wouldn't be aware.

Well your views on the Ukraine conflict is pretty much the same as the views of Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson. ......even to the extent that Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov had praise for Fox’s coverage of the conflict. “If you take the United States, only FOX NEWS is trying to present some alternative points of view,”

That's ok, everyone has their views.....but you're very much in the Murdoch media camp on this one so it's a bit rich to be sarcastic towards anyone who does use Murdoch media as a news source.

[Paddo Colt 61]

Mmm...but I was referring to Saudi Arabia. I'm not a Fox viewer but my guess is that if there is a alternative being presented, Murdoch's intention is to further stuff Biden up for the coming mid terms.

[Random Rooster]

Mmm...but I was referring to Saudi Arabia. I'm not a Fox viewer but my guess is that if there is a alternative being presented, Murdoch's intention is to further stuff Biden up for the coming mid terms.

Well if you're right about this conflict, Fox News are stuffing up the midterms for Biden by presenting the truth behind Russia's invasion of Ukraine? It would first for Fox "The Bullshit Factory" News

[ism22]

I've explained the democratic nature of the CCP previously.

Substance always beats form. As noted, a feature of dictatorships is that they'll have a vote (and power will be promised to the people)... but you won't be allowed to support another party, run for it or write about it in the media. Thus, there's no valid democratic process.

[Paddo Colt 61]

Marx dismissed "Democracy" as being vulnerable to money and that's pretty obvious. Liberalism was/is the philosophy of the Middle Class that replaced the aristocracy as the new ruling elite in the 18th century. This wasn't/isn't the Mc Mansion middle "class" but what we would recognise as the 1%.

Hence you have capitalist A and B in the US, an historical US record of stifling Communist and/or Socialist governments world wide which is pretty much not "allowing people to support another party" as you put it. In the US that you so admire, 50% regularly decline to vote, is that a "valid" democratic process? Here, an unelected official can sack an elected Government with the support of a "free" media owned by one of the 1%. Further in the imaginary "market of free ideas" that you idealise, Murdoch can proscribe the Green Party (he declared war on the Greens several years ago) effectively discounting anything that we might see, read or hear on his media about the Greens - is that a contribution to informed decision making at your free elections?

With that situation no doubt in mind, Lenin thought that political parties merely represented competing capitalist class interests and money decided the result. He saw the Communist state as being classless and, therefore, the "democratic" model irrelevant.

[Paddo Colt 61]

[QUOTE=Random Rooster; Well if you're right about this conflict, Fox News are stuffing up the midterms for Biden by presenting the [I]truth[/I] behind Russia's invasion of Ukraine? It would first for Fox "The Bullshit Factory" News.

Don't know about that, I see Murdoch as using whatever s to hand. Fox spoke truth about the voting trends in the last elections - it called Arizona for the Democrats early to the agony of the Trumpster. Murdoch will use every device to stifle progressive opinion but he is always quick to flip when the writing's on the wall.

[mightyrooster]

Marx dismissed "Democracy" as being vulnerable to money and that's pretty obvious. Liberalism was/is the philosophy of the Middle Class that replaced the aristocracy as the new ruling elite in the 18th century. This wasn't/isn't the Mc Mansion middle "class" but what we would recognise as the 1%.

Hence you have capitalist A and B in the US, an historical US record of stifling Communist and/or Socialist governments world wide which is pretty much not "allowing people to support another party" as you put it. In the US that you so admire, 50% regularly decline to vote, is that a "valid" democratic process? Here, an unelected official can sack an elected Government with the support of a "free" media owned by one of the 1%. Further in the imaginary "market of free ideas" that you idealise, Murdoch can proscribe the Green Party (he declared war on the Greens several years ago) effectively discounting anything that we might see, read or hear on his media about the Greens - is that a contribution to informed decision making at your free elections?

With that situation no doubt in mind, Lenin thought that political parties merely represented competing capitalist class interests and money decided the result. He saw the Communist state as being classless and, therefore, the "democratic" model irrelevant.

Ok so it's all about the ideology and not what actually happens in practice?
I agree, the US political system is hardly 'democratic' when less than 50% of the population vote. I've always said that. Most Americans are apathetic about politics or are simply too poor / uneducated to actually care. Our system of compulsory voting is an improvement but is still dominated by the two main parties. Elections aren't rigged or voters aren't coerced to vote for one candidate over another.
And if you looked objectively at the Russian system you would see it has major flaws as well.
Same applies for China. So you think the Chinese socialist democratic system is perfect do you? No flaws whatsoever?

Then there's the media. So you think the Russian system where only Government sanctioned media is permitted to broadcast is actually superior to our system of grotesquely greedy Murdoch domination? I personally despise Murdoch too as you can tell from my emotional description of him (an emotional description I guess you will permit on this occasion), but people aren't put in prison for voicing an alternate view to Murdoch's propaganda. I certainly don't think the Kremlin (or Chinese) censorship of the media is in any way a better system, or outweighs the negatives of what we have here. If you can see the flaws in one 'system' you can surely see the flaws in the other.

[Random Rooster]

Don't know about that, I see Murdoch as using whatever s to hand. Fox spoke truth about the voting trends in the last elections - it called Arizona for the Democrats early to the agony of the Trumpster. Murdoch will use every device to stifle progressive opinion but he is always quick to flip when the writing's on the wall.

The 2 executives who called Arizona didn't last too long at Fox. However it was just a forecast- it didn't mean a thing in the scheme of things.

[Paddo Colt 61]

As Swift suggested in "Gulliver's Travels", all human organisation is flawed. Anyone who claims to see perfection is a fool but, clearly, some systems in practice are better than others as far as the interests of "the people" are concerned. I don't know what -ism means when he uses that term "the people" but I mean those who do not have any control over their work time or conditions (ie the majority of us).

"Our system is better"? Except that an elected government, deemed too progressive by a power elite, can be simply sacked. That that situation has not been rectified speaks volumes about who really holds power and it hasn't been rectified so that it might be used again.You must then get the feeling that there are limits on change in this country and it's possibly the reason that Australia is not highly ranked on the league table of functioning democracies worldwide. Elections here are rigged in the sense that the private mass media barracks for one side only and distorts and lies about the disfavoured side's policies. As an economist you must surely have blanched at the rubbish the media ran about Negative Gearing and Franking credit at the last election? When a progressive party is elected a media cacophony immediately starts up and ends with a "kick this mob out". Issues are beat up - pink batts, school halls, scandals like the Julia Gillard boyfriend corruption invention. Just take note when or if the Libs lose in May.

Re Russia. I presume that "people aren't put in prison" refers to Navalny? A Russian court found him guilty of defrauding his own political organisation. You seem to be a little stuck on the Cold War stuff, Russia is not Communist, it's capitalist and it has a diverse privately owned media (I think we've discussed wartime censorship previously).

I am not a Russiaphile but I do know something of its fascinating and, at times, tragic history. The Putin that we are conditioned to hate rose from deputy mayor of St. Petersburg to President and he did so when Russia was going through a turbulent period being literally preyed upon by the West following the transition from Communism (from where did the Russian Oligarch finance emanate? The West. Amid the economic chaos Putin reasserted government authority by the adoption of tyrannical powers which essentially saved the nation from implosion much to the resentment of the US. Why would such a person step up? Patriotic reasons seem more likely than wanting to become the richest man in the world. No allegation of that kind has reliable evidence to back it up, none of it is proven and given the hyperbolic way that Western propaganda operates it is probably safe to say that there is no basis for it other than a intention of regime change and a return to the 90s which were much more lucrative for Western corporations.

[Paddo Colt 61]

[QUOTE=Random Rooster; The 2 executives who called Arizona didn't last too long at Fox. However it was just a forecast- it didn't mean a thing in the scheme of things.

That's not the point RR. It was an early sign that Fox had abandoned its protege. Murdoch saw that despite his best efforts the pendulum had swung and he's quick to ditch a loser.

[Random Rooster]

That's not the point RR. It was an early sign that Fox had abandoned its protege. Murdoch saw that despite his best efforts the pendulum had swung and he's quick to ditch a loser.

Yes the point was that your views align very much with those of Carlson, Hannity and Fox News....and they very much do. In fact your admiration of Putin is shared by Donald Trump. However that's ok, it is what it is.
.

[ism22]

Just found a video of Paddo from an independent blogger. Enjoy mate... https://youtu.be/0HGgzK2yVX4

[Paddo Colt 61]

Sorry Ism but your point escapes me. News flash, China is Capitalist but Capitalists don't run the show as they do in the West.

My views are shared by many people Random. I acquire them from the most objective and reasonable sources that I can find. University taught me to think critically many years ago and it also taught me to be able to sort the wheat from the chaff. Needless to say my sources do/did not include the MSM. Groupthink is not truth. Emotion whipped up by a media that never explains anything is no encouragement to rational thought.

To be fair, even if there was a transformation and our MSM fairly and fully explained the ramifications of the full range of policies in the coming election, the sheeple would /could not be induced to read, understand and think. The great majority would still be influenced by whether a candidate has crooked teeth, is too pretty or the laughable "trust" factor - "Don't like the look of him/her" - the majority (85%) don't know or want to know. A democracy of ignorance that congratulates itself on some imaginary ideal of political participation. If the average Aussie knew the name of the PM it's a safe bet that they could not name any other member of the government nor would they have the remotest idea of our structure of government. Am I talking about you Random?

[Rooster1908]

Just found a video of Paddo from an independent blogger. Enjoy mate... https://youtu.be/0HGgzK2yVX4

Hahaha , gold

[mightyrooster]

As Swift suggested in "Gulliver's Travels", all human organisation is flawed. Anyone who claims to see perfection is a fool but, clearly, some systems in practice are better than others as far as the interests of "the people" are concerned. I don't know what -ism means when he uses that term "the people" but I mean those who do not have any control over their work time or conditions (ie the majority of us).

"Our system is better"? Except that an elected government, deemed too progressive by a power elite, can be simply sacked. That that situation has not been rectified speaks volumes about who really holds power and it hasn't been rectified so that it might be used again.You must then get the feeling that there are limits on change in this country and it's possibly the reason that Australia is not highly ranked on the league table of functioning democracies worldwide. Elections here are rigged in the sense that the private mass media barracks for one side only and distorts and lies about the disfavoured side's policies. As an economist you must surely have blanched at the rubbish the media ran about Negative Gearing and Franking credit at the last election? When a progressive party is elected a media cacophony immediately starts up and ends with a "kick this mob out". Issues are beat up - pink batts, school halls, scandals like the Julia Gillard boyfriend corruption invention. Just take note when or if the Libs lose in May.

Re Russia. I presume that "people aren't put in prison" refers to Navalny? A Russian court found him guilty of defrauding his own political organisation. You seem to be a little stuck on the Cold War stuff, Russia is not Communist, it's capitalist and it has a diverse privately owned media (I think we've discussed wartime censorship previously).

I am not a Russiaphile but I do know something of its fascinating and, at times, tragic history. The Putin that we are conditioned to hate rose from deputy mayor of St. Petersburg to President and he did so when Russia was going through a turbulent period being literally preyed upon by the West following the transition from Communism (from where did the Russian Oligarch finance emanate? The West. Amid the economic chaos Putin reasserted government authority by the adoption of tyrannical powers which essentially saved the nation from implosion much to the resentment of the US. Why would such a person step up? Patriotic reasons seem more likely than wanting to become the richest man in the world. No allegation of that kind has reliable evidence to back it up, none of it is proven and given the hyperbolic way that Western propaganda operates it is probably safe to say that there is no basis for it other than a intention of regime change and a return to the 90s which were much more lucrative for Western corporations.

With Navalny it depends on which version of events you choose to believe. Clearly you believe Putin and his inner circle whereas I am more skeptical.

As for our political system, yes the media has a big sway in influencing the masses. I’ve touched on this before. The fear of terrorists and being swamped by Asians or people arriving uninvited on boats (as opposed to planes), seems to strike fear into many Australians. Last election, the ALP actually had policies, and yet the Libs were returned on the back of practically zero policies. By having policies Shorten gave the media ammunition to attack The opposition. But it does happen on both sides of the fence. I seem to remember Hewson being ridiculed for trying to introduce a GST. Before Howard became our second longest serving PM, he was also treated with disdain by the media, even though Hawke and Keating pretty much adopted most of his economic policies from the time he was treasurer under Fraser.