[pm90]

Heh, I find it rather amusing when citizens of UK and the US are shocked, utterly shocked when a foreign actor interferes in their local politics when their respective govt. have been doing the same for centuries. Karma is a bitch, as someone likes to say.

[nbevans]

He was being sarcastic... He wasn't shocked; he was mocking the idea that Russia caused Brexit. They didn't. The UK citizens themselves voted for Brexit because they're fed up with all the shit the EU brings with it.

[kelnage]

Except that's a terrible argument (I wasn't swayed by Russian interference, therefore no-one was). Yes, the citizens of the UK voted (just) for Brexit - because it was a referendum - that's how they work (assuming no ballot stuffing etc). Would everyone have voted the same way without the (alleged) interference? Possibly not.

[dageshi]

There was no talk about russian involvement in brexit until after Trump was elected then suddenly it was jumped upon as another reason why brexit was obviously "unjust".

[nextweek2]

That is blatantly false. The weaponising of refugees was talked about before brexit:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=russian+bombing+syria+caus...

[nextweek2]

You were probably swayed by Russian influence. Let me explain how:

Russia unhappy with the EU, decided to join the Syrian war (after years). They bomb the crap out of civilians and trigger the largest refuge migration Europe has ever seen.

The numbers are so big that nobody is prepared, Germany decides to take the high ground and allow them in.

This triggered a fear in the UK that our borders are unchecked and other EU countries have control over them.

The fact is that Russia, the UK and the USA have been playing proxy wars like this for decades.

[nbevans]

There was no Russian interference though. Show us a microgram of evidence? Even Infowars-style speculative evidence would be permissable at this point?

[narrowrail]

While agree with you to some extent, do you think propagandists have somewhat recently realized how to exploit current communications tech to deploy their message(s)? If the financials of FB and GOOG tell us anything, it's that advertising on the internet is very effective, and advertising is just corporate propaganda. Most people just don't have the time/interest/energy to fact check, and many are just out to confirm their preconceived ideas/ whatever helps assuage their sense of guilt.

[malza]

It goes both ways though. The EU funds all sorts of groups, in particular NGOs. Those groups then do publicity stunts and pay for advertising during important events. There's so many players on the scene that there's little point blaming one single entity - doing so means you are just playing into the hands of the other guys. If the media start hyping something en mass then treat it with suspicion.

[narrowrail]

>If the media start hyping something en mass then treat it with suspicion.

We completely agree on that. I like to dig into sources and refine my opinions all the time. I'm glad to be /around/ other people that just have different conclusions and/or perspectives given the same set of facts.