[corethree]

People who live in the US are usually less aware of how a lot of the international community perceives them as a bully. His view is very common and he finds it completely foreign that the US is even perceived this way.

A lot of people in the US view the US as the heroic peace keeper, and that all actions the US takes against China are for "world security" rather then an attempt to keep the top spot as the #1 economic and military super power.

It's weird because while there is freedom of the press in the US, many US citizens are still strangely misinformed and irrationally patriotic.

I'm not even clear about the mechanism at work here but there is a sort of strange form of control of information at play here. You can sort of sense it in US news. It's genius really how the media can be controlled despite amendments in place ensuring freedom of the press.

[foverzar]

For some reason I had a feeling they were referring to something different.

Anyway, I am aware of the whole bubble thing, although I don't think its unique for the US, at least no entirely.

It's quite similar to countries with their own sovereign media. That's why people often think that those other guys hand out talking points to their journalists, when it's actually all about hiring people with good political sense, who feel "the flow" and know what is politically correct.

The difference is that people with 3 digit IQ typically know how dive into foreign media (or even passively exposed to it), while people in the US dominated part of the world just kinda don't even care.

I wonder if it was different when the Fairness Doctrine was in place - probably not, cross-cultural fairness seems like something too complicated to scale well.

[antihipocrat]

News media are private businesses. Control the flow of money or buy the business and you control the narrative.

It's well known that advertising dollars influence decisions, and it's also well known that western news media is owned by only a few huge companies that often are advertising subsidiary companies on the same platform.

[corethree]

Right but a lot of the reporting in the US isn't done to serve business interests. There is something else at play here.

Litigation and defamation is probably one aspect of the control.

[SubiculumCode]

Perhaps when China stops their massive human rights abuses and begins to act like a mature world leader, but until then, its turning out to be another 2 bit authoritarian regime who cannot hold a candle to what the U.S.A achieves on the world stage.

[corethree]

China did this because of terrorism. It was reactionary.

It's not far off from what the US did in Guantanamo.

[foverzar]

> Perhaps when China stops their massive human rights abuses

How do you figure it's not empty propaganda and that it's actually more massive compared to the US "well that's just life" incidents?

Because it's definitely propaganda (even if not an empty one). It's no coincidence that it ramped up when China became an economic competitor to the US. Even the "Uyghurs camps" narrative surged in media just right along with ICE detention camps scandal. And given how muslims were treated by the US after 9/11, there is definitely zero moral high-ground.

Cracking down on dissidents? Capitol riots challenge was failed miserably and was hardly handled any differently than what gets so criticized in "authoritarian" countries.

> cannot hold a candle to what the U.S.A achieves on the world stage.

Jokes about participating in wars all over the planet aside, what did the US actually achieve on the WORLD stage? Not it's influence on European neighborhood and the small corner of North Atlantics, but the WORLD. Cuz IMO, the world is totally burning right now.

It's really hard to figure out what you're implying specifically when you talk in slogans and manifestos, instead of like a normal down to earth person. But I can't shake the feeling that you kinda treat the rest of the world as ochlos to American demos, with an inherent supremacism similar to how 20 century commies went about their global revolution that no one had asked them for.

[Eisenstein]

American exceptionalism is nothing new, and it isn't uncommon. However the approach that you are using to attempt to break through it is not going to be effective in the slightest.

For one, you can call literal propaganda for what it is, but propaganda isn't necessarily wrong on the facts. Pointing out that 'you didn't care about issue X until you did' is not going to get the self-reflection you hope for, because at the end of the day, the propaganda is pointing out a message that cannot be countered since what it points out is true.

Second, anything to do with 'one of your parties did a bad thing' is counterproductive and contrasting the legal ramifications of the riots is not even close to being on par -- the USA has a functioning (if sometimes overhanded and racist) justice system and the fact that the offending parties were prosecuted publicly and not taken to a secret camp and shot shows that even if the perps didn't get their just deserts, it was all above board and it was effective.

'The world' is, again, a dead end. You absolutely cannot win an argument that the USA was somehow not the stabilizing military factor in the west and didn't provide a large portion of the major world stage level achievements since the end of WWII. If it weren't for the $$$trillions/yr on patrolling oceans in carriers, flying sorties, launching sats, and just generally being the hall monitor and the bully, then a whole lot of things would be incredibly different. You can argue for better or worse, but hardly any American would argue that it is for worse, if they honestly accept that they like their modern lifestyle.

I suggest going the Socratic way next time.