[alkonaut]

I can see how certain aspects of US politics are interesting to russian botnets (assuming they too are politically controlled to some extent, which I think is safe to say). Foreign policy is very much dependent on who is president, and US foregin policy is amatter of billions of dollars for Russia.

But gun laws? What's the reasoning behind that? It doesn't add up. On the contrary, it would rather seem like some group in the US (Say a large gun rights organization of some form) would buy these services from the russians. The Russian twitter troll factories don't work for free, and in this case there doesn't seem to be a reason why Russia would pay for this?

Edit: another poster pointed out: there is one thing russia would gain from and that's political division and instability. Next up: pay someone to have a very public and very late abortion, for example.

[thousandautumns]

Its absolutely to sow division and partisanship. Other analyses of Russian-bot propaganda during the presidential campaign showed that while the majority of content was targeted at conservative leaning positions, there was pro-Clinton content as well.

Russia certainly was hoping for a weak-on-Russia Trump to win the election, but just as important to their aims is to create discord in American domestic politics. If a country is entirely preoccupied with issues and perceived enemies at home, they won't have the focus or political willpower to interfere with Russian plans on an international stage.

[croon]

One interesting piece of that puzzle is the book Foundations of Geopolitics from 1997 [1] by Aleksandr Dugin. It is basically a collection of strategies on foreign politics through intelligence arms of the government. There's no properly translated copy of the book available unfortunately, but there are excerpts [2]:

* Ukraine should be annexed by Russia..

* The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.

* Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

[2] https://www2.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/demokratizatsiya%...

[dictum]

Also notice the symbol in the book cover: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_of_Chaos

[allemagne]

I really don't think potential motivations are very mysterious if the Russian state is actually doing this of their own accord.

Like you said, sowing political discord in general over hot-button issues is a benefit.

But if they're really trying to tip the scales in favor of the pro-gun lobby then that makes sense too. Riling up the pro-gun voters is a way of meddling in the 2018 elections with a pro-Republican/Trump bias that we already saw in 2016.

In addition, it's conceivable that Russia believes that more permissive gun laws will help destabilize America.

[lawlessone]

>What's the reasoning behind that?

They want you to be at each others throats. Same reason they assisted brexit.

[m00g00]

Do you figure pro/anti-gun twitter posts from actual users are less likely to result in us being at each others throats? Really seems like pissing in the ocean.

[jacquesm]

To roughly the same extent that throwing burning matches around in an area plagued by drought isn't going to affect the outcome, yes.

See, it can take a long time before a fire erupts from a natural cause but if you are aiming for it the outcome is pretty much guaranteed.

[m00g00]

I think the analogy is more like trying to pin an execution on one particular member of the firing squad.

Everyone is throwing matches, at the same time, into an already burning dumpster fire.

[irickt]

No. It is an asymmetric strategy. One "side" wants chaos more than the other. That other is in fact all those interested basic democratic stability. The construct of "sides" is created artificially by these tactics in order to divide.

[m00g00]

Come on....do you really think there are no legitimate sides to contentious political issues like gun control? How about abortion? That "other side" you speak of, presumably actual US citizens, is not interested in "basic democratic stability", they just want their political argument to win out and become (or remain) law. That's where the division comes from, not conjured out of thin air by the Russians.

But the fact remains that whether you are an outside instigator looking to sow discord, a citizen participating in a political flamewar, a politician looking to whip up their base, or the mass media looking for clicks, the tactics are exactly the same. You could wrap a bubble around the United States and cutoff all outside communication and you would not see much difference.

If anything pours gasoline on this fire it is the detachment of social interactions on the internet. And that Twitter is such a hotbed of political "discussion" is a sad testament to the times, considering its very design precludes the possibility of respectful, informed discourse.

[throw1233212323]

I'm reminded of a quote from the show, "Peaky Blinders":

Tommy: "Why do you fuck with people when it serves no purpose?"

Tatiana Petrovna: "In Russia, because we were bored. In England, because we don't know how to stop."

Knowing a group of Russians (and calling them friends), this quote seemed so apt.

[username223]

"Political division" has been pretty clearly shown: "Newly released Facebook ads revealed Wednesday show that two Russian-linked Facebook groups organized opposing protests last year at the same time outside an Islamic center in Houston."

-- https://www.texastribune.org/2017/11/01/russian-facebook-pag...

[stmfreak]

More likely this story is designed to undermine natural pro-gun sentiment amongst U.S. Citizens who we can now dismiss as being influenced by Russian Twitter bots. This is the same tactic used to explain Trump's victory in the election.

[sparrish]

Certainly it's about sowing discord... but don't kid yourself, the US does the exact same thing to Russia on any controversial issue there. And don't think the US wasn't bringing its influence to bear during Russian elections. This is all same-old-same-old that's been going on for years.

[alkonaut]

US elections are at least superficially free and fair. Imho leaders that don’t hold fair elections also give up the expectation of other nations keeping out of them.

So while there is certainly back-and-forth here, I can’t see any moral issues with anyone meddling in Russian elections. It’s likely even necessary if the current regime is to be changed (which I think will be harder than in 1990).

The US obviously also meddle with more or less acceptable means in countries that do have free and fair elections but that’s a different topic.

[moltar]

Yep, the very foundational election of new Russia’s first real president - Yeltsin was fully sponsored by US and resulted in a disaster for the country that it’s still recovering from.