[StanislavPetrov]

The total amount of direct evidence (evidence, not assertions of secret evidence by the US government, unproven and unsubstantiated allegations of hacking or superman Bernie memes by click farms based somewhere in Russia) that Russia has "interfered" with US politics that has been released by the US government in the last 10 years adds up to less than the evidence in this article on Israel alone.

Evidence aside, I personally think it is extremely likely that Russia, China and most other countries active on the world stage have tried to "interfere" in US politics to some degree, but nowhere near the amount that we interfere in the politics of other countries or that Israel interferes in ours.

[chipdart]

> that Russia has "interfered" with US politics that has been released by the US government in the last 10 years adds up to (...)

So you acknowledge that it's quite clear that Russia indeed is systematically interfering, and your only claim is to call "what about" some other country?

[StanislavPetrov]

No, I acknowledge that some interference by Russia and other countries is likely but not clear, since no clear evidence has ever been publicly offered. The only public evidence of clear, systemic, long-standing and ongoing interference we have is that of Israel.

[heroprotagonist]

Well, there are the indictments against 13 Russian nationals by the DOJ, and all the materials necessary for that.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/grand-jury-indicts-thirteen-r...

And there are reports from the intelligence services which are very clear as well, for example:

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

A brief search will come up with much more.

The only question is why you haven't found any of this evidence, haven't believed any of it, or why you would argue such an easily disproven position without ever taking a few minutes to find out if the position you argue is still true many years after you've formed it.

It's almost as if you heard an opinion once or multiple times, perhaps from people or political figures you trusted. Then you internalized that opinion and it took on the attributes of 'belief' and haven't ever questioned it since it was formed. This belief became bound up with other things you believe, and now the defense mechanisms your brain uses to support 'belief' are also supporting this opinion in contradiction to facts that have been proven over the past years.

These defense mechanisms exist in your brain for good reasons, but they are also a way that propaganda exploits your brain's natural tendency to behave. It's difficult for victims of this to see it for what it is, confront their 'belief' system and admit they've been tricked. They have to overcome the feeling that it's their own fault they were tricked and their brain was exploited, which many never do, even though it's really not their fault that the human brain works the way it does. Propaganda is insidious, and particularly treacherous in the way that it convinces people to argue on its behalf, and that the act of doing so reinforces the hold the propaganda has on the person.

[andrei_says_]

(Not the original poster)

Thank you for providing civil, factual, compassionate responses in this thread - it’s an inspiring example of discourse.

I’d like to add an informative and entertaining essay on the mechanics of belief and the reasons some beliefs are harder to change than others:

https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

[yesco]

Despite your smug attitude, the evidence you just linked is nothing new and does not contradict the person you were replying to, did you even read the report?

Well I did (again), so let's take it from the top:

- Russia hacked into various local & state election boards, scary right? But in the very same report we learn this from, it's detailed this had no influence on vote tallies.

- Russia's state media outlets preferred one candidate over the other and made efforts to promote them. This one shocked me the most since I'm sure everyone before now assumed Russia's state media outlets would never push Russian propaganda! Who would have thought? Guess I'll have to get all my completely unbiased news from Aljazeera, Xinhua and KNCA from now on.

- Finally Russia is credited with Guciffer 2.0 and DCLeaks. Which likely had the most impressive (relative) impact but are also the most likely to trigger an argument at the dinner table since the evidence crediting these hacks to them are highly dubious.

Not mentioned in the report, oddly enough, was the ad campaigns they ran on various social media platforms to promote fringe candidates to increase national discord. Sounds clever but these ads were pretty terrible, good idea bad execution.

Even if we credit Russia for the DCLeaks and Guciffer hacks, which I personally believe they are undeserving of, Russia's attempts at "interference" were rife with incompetence, much like anything Russia tries. It's noteworthy that one of your links detailed one of their failures as so dramatic it resulted in the arrests of 13 participants!

If you were to combine everything I've listed here and compare it with any single propaganda operation performed by Israel, would you truly consider Russia's attempts more impressive? Certainly not the person you were replying to, and certainly not me.

Not to mention China's attempts, which in both scale and scope eclipses anything Russia has tried:

- https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/20/technology/ch...

- https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/technology/china-facebook...

Lucky for you, I'm not some jackass who links a few things and then follows it up with any essay psychoanalyzing you. So I'll leave it implied ;)

[StanislavPetrov]

>Well, there are the indictments against 13 Russian nationals by the DOJ, and all the materials necessary for that.

>https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/grand-jury-indicts-thirteen-r...

These indictments contain assertions, not evidence. Indeed, when it came time to go to trial, the government dropped the charges rather than present the "evidence" they claimed they had.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/16/russia-election-jus...

>And there are reports from the intelligence services which are very clear as well, for example:

>https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

>The only question is why you haven't found any of this evidence, haven't believed any of it

There is an endless number of reports, findings, Senate Committee conclusions, all of which are filled with evidence-free assertions. You may choose to believe the government and their evidence-free assertions, I do not. No doubt you put great credence into the letter signed by 51 top intelligence officials, including 5 former heads of the CIA that the Hunter Biden laptop was "Russian disinformation" - many people continue to believe this despite the fact that the letter has been proven to be entirely false, and the laptop was introduced as evidence at trial by the DOJ this week, with its authenticity sworn to by the FBI.

>It's almost as if you heard an opinion once or multiple times, perhaps from people or political figures you trusted. Then you internalized that opinion and it took on the attributes of 'belief' and haven't ever questioned it since it was formed. This belief became bound up with other things you believe, and now the defense mechanisms your brain uses to support 'belief' are also supporting this opinion in contradiction to facts that have been proven over the past years.

Trust and faith are for children and priests. I don't trust the government, the DOJ, Russia, any politicians, or anyone else. I trust my ability to very carefully scrutinize and interpret information. When a claim is made, I look at the evidence offered to support that claim, no matter who makes it, or what the claim is. I suggest you read the above paragraph (the one that you wrote) and try to understand how it exactly describes your own beliefs.

>Propaganda is insidious, and particularly treacherous in the way that it convinces people to argue on its behalf, and that the act of doing so reinforces the hold the propaganda has on the person.

I could not agree more, and your post is a perfect example.

[heroprotagonist]

I would agree that my brain is definitely as susceptible as anyone else's to manipulation. I'm just as human as you, and subject to the same limitations.

I've made you defensive, and that wasn't my intent. At least you didn't go straight to irrational anger.

That said, I really don't see anything in your reply to change my assessment.

You're not engaging on the linked content other than to state disbelief, you seem to have applied some kind of category label to me as a believer in some kind of letter campaign(?), you have affirmed the extremely high level of certainty you have in your ability to assess information, and you've hyperbolized the level of rigor you use to assess all information claims you ingest from any source.

We're not going to take this discussion anywhere useful from here.

And that's okay. I tried, and now remember why most people don't. I don't hold any ill will towards you.

[muaytimbo]

But what about Donald Trump's conspiracy with Russia? Or the Russian Hunter Biden laptop disinformation op? Or the Russian spy whale?

Oh whoops I guess you're right, all of those were lies about Russian perpetuated by US govt and media.

Side note: Russia has an economy the size of TX. Are they really wasting all of their money convincing Americans which octogenarian to "rule"?

[lenkite]

The nation that systematically interferes to the maximum possible extent in other nation's internal affairs, including elections is the United States of America. Tens of billions of dollars are spent on propaganda, misinformation, sponsorship of civil disturbances, activist NGO's, paid-coups of elected leaders whose elections were EU observer verified, etc.

The U.S. has grandmastery level of expertise in this space. No other nation comes remotely close. ex CIA directors have even admitted this openly on TV - "election interference" for the "greater good" - to thunderous applause!

Russian efforts to interfere were small, laughable peanuts that the American experts pitied. Read the assessments written in 2023, when Anti Trump hysteria had lowered.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2023/1/20/23559214/r...

Other nations just grit their teeth and put up with the extraordinary American interference in their internal affairs - because what can they even do ? The U.S. is the Divine Icon of Sanctimonious Hypocrisy. Complain too hard and you will be openly threatened with sanctions. (Look at what is happening with Georgia nowadays)

[lostmsu]

> Tens of billions of dollars are spent on propaganda, misinformation, sponsorship of civil disturbances, activist NGO's, etc.

Only one item here really is explicitly illegal/immoral. Can you guess which one? How much evidence is there for US doing it?

[lenkite]

I thought they were all bad - according to the U.S itself when it is the target of such activities at the minutest level.

There is a lot of evidence, including open statements made by ex-CIA directors, published books by former military/intelligence agents, de-classified documents, news articles, interviews of EU ministers, etc. But most Americans hold your position - that direct or covert U.S. interference in other nation's affairs is completely fine. The only thing I complain about is the sanctimonious hypocrisy when actions reflect back.