What you think propaganda "implies" and what it actually is doesn't matter. The simple answer is YES. Those are all part of propaganda, intending to "inspire" is just you using flowery euphemismistic language to try to separate but they all fall under the propaganda umbrella. Here is a definition of propaganda for you.
"information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view."
"Ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause"
The answer is yes I was against all that propaganda. Let your actions speak of you not some fictional act that you project in front of you to get those who can't determine truth to just follow.
Cool she's actually in the field on a horse. AOC was actually in a parking lot at an actual fence and we made fun of her for it. This is no different. There is no one for her to catch out there so wtf. Fake doctor Phil did more than she has.
OK. If we can agree that propaganda is not inherently negative or corrupted, but is neutral, and can be used for both good and bad purposes, then I can accept your referring to this as 'propaganda'.
But way to make an argument, bro... "What you think .... and what it actually is doesn't matter" Kek. Powerful rhetoric, there, dude. Actually, it DOES matter to me. Not to you? Sure. OK. If it doesn't matter to you, your choice. But not mine, and you do NOT get to choose what does and doesn't matter to me.
hey, we all get it. You think its horrible, and you think its the same as AOC outside a non-wall (we all laughed because she stood 2 meters away from non-wall and pretended she was at a place where people were prevented from travelling because of a blocking wall. Plus, most of us highly suspected that the tears were feigned). Your choice.
I think it pretty darn clear what the majority of frogs here think of your opinion. Now, I'm not suggesting you should change your opinion because its unpopular. But you MIGHT like to consider the views of others as a form of feedback. But again, the choice is yours.
Me? I find your arguments as convincing as a limp noodle.
As for Noem, I think she's simply saying, I'm here, I'm on the ground, I'm engaging with the folks doing their job. It's a photo op, and I do not see this as "propaganda", personally.
Anyway, at least you're engaging with the board and (I assume) trying to make a contribution. Hope to see you around more.
These are the same tactics the other side used. Q said not to follow people. Look at what they do. Positive or negative propaganda is still propaganda.
Consensus doesn't make truth. Consensus on "the science" led many to doing things they otherwise wouldn't so the number of people that agree with me doesn't impact what I'm saying. Peer pressure is powerful but it's ineffective as a method of control for me. Frogs here are supposed to be different than those others who deal in those types of methods. These are frogs specifically because they saw something that others couldn't.
Regarding me being around, I am trying to contribute. I see deception and manipulation, positive or negative, as a bad thing overall because you don't give the receiver the opportunity to choose. We are presented a fake world to get us to actually support and it's just strange to me. Thank you for continuing to engage on it.
Thanks for the reply. I am sympathetic to your antipathy (eh?) towards what you see as propaganda. Personally, I have a powerful antipathy towards people on our side of the fence (one might say euphemistically) aka in the Awakening or "truth" sphere who are motivated to manipulate and exploit, either in the form of clickbait, or actual disinfo operations.
A lot of that sort of thing hinges on exploitation of emotional engagement. You can see numerous posts of mine on the topic if you search for "clickbait" in the [search community....] box.
As my awareness of the 5G warfare has grown, I have developed a view that does not see all forms of manipulation as inherently destructive. Deception is, if Sun Tsu is anything to go by (not to mention countless generals, marshals and warriors), a key part of warfare. Although I'm not saying that its OK for 'good guys' to deceive the people 'because their motive is good'. But the awakening does involve generating influence.
I actually thought that the Noem clip was cool. I liked it. Also, not because I'm being manipulated, in my view. Particularly if you have been heavily engaged with the psywar of the past 7 or 8 years, then there is a lot of war-weariness to throw off. Cool photo ops like this can have a beneficial effect, imo.
So, while we disagree on the effect or value of this particular case, I'm sympathetic to your attitude in general. At a minimum, offering a strongly contrastive view to the general perceptions as you have here, can be a real plus, as long as you can bring a solid argument or case. but often, it is only in the developing discussion that such value arises. Which is one of the big shortcomings of social media board like this where a certain number of the participants are more inclined to flippant one-off comments or judgments than they are to in depth discussion.
Fwiw, I really appreciate your reply. Looking forward to seeing you around.
By the way, any relation to Bogarde? Bwahahahahaha. Jk.
one, Q said "they think/though you will follow the stars" etc. That's more of an exposure of Enemy strategy than it is telling people to do something.
two, "Be careful who you follow" This was specifically in regard to agents attempting to mislead or undermine anon thinking, such as Alex Jones (at the time) or other disinfo operatives.
In fact, Q actuively encouraged us anons to follow certain people. Catherine Herridge, for example. "Follow the Pen".
Perhaps there is a sector of the public that will go after Kristi Noem on horseback in the way that some folks go after Beyonce in a speech for Harris, but I don't see them as the same thing.
What you think propaganda "implies" and what it actually is doesn't matter. The simple answer is YES. Those are all part of propaganda, intending to "inspire" is just you using flowery euphemismistic language to try to separate but they all fall under the propaganda umbrella. Here is a definition of propaganda for you.
"information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view."
"Ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause" The answer is yes I was against all that propaganda. Let your actions speak of you not some fictional act that you project in front of you to get those who can't determine truth to just follow.
Cool she's actually in the field on a horse. AOC was actually in a parking lot at an actual fence and we made fun of her for it. This is no different. There is no one for her to catch out there so wtf. Fake doctor Phil did more than she has.
OK. If we can agree that propaganda is not inherently negative or corrupted, but is neutral, and can be used for both good and bad purposes, then I can accept your referring to this as 'propaganda'.
But way to make an argument, bro... "What you think .... and what it actually is doesn't matter" Kek. Powerful rhetoric, there, dude. Actually, it DOES matter to me. Not to you? Sure. OK. If it doesn't matter to you, your choice. But not mine, and you do NOT get to choose what does and doesn't matter to me.
hey, we all get it. You think its horrible, and you think its the same as AOC outside a non-wall (we all laughed because she stood 2 meters away from non-wall and pretended she was at a place where people were prevented from travelling because of a blocking wall. Plus, most of us highly suspected that the tears were feigned). Your choice.
I think it pretty darn clear what the majority of frogs here think of your opinion. Now, I'm not suggesting you should change your opinion because its unpopular. But you MIGHT like to consider the views of others as a form of feedback. But again, the choice is yours.
Me? I find your arguments as convincing as a limp noodle.
As for Noem, I think she's simply saying, I'm here, I'm on the ground, I'm engaging with the folks doing their job. It's a photo op, and I do not see this as "propaganda", personally.
Anyway, at least you're engaging with the board and (I assume) trying to make a contribution. Hope to see you around more.
These are the same tactics the other side used. Q said not to follow people. Look at what they do. Positive or negative propaganda is still propaganda.
Consensus doesn't make truth. Consensus on "the science" led many to doing things they otherwise wouldn't so the number of people that agree with me doesn't impact what I'm saying. Peer pressure is powerful but it's ineffective as a method of control for me. Frogs here are supposed to be different than those others who deal in those types of methods. These are frogs specifically because they saw something that others couldn't.
Regarding me being around, I am trying to contribute. I see deception and manipulation, positive or negative, as a bad thing overall because you don't give the receiver the opportunity to choose. We are presented a fake world to get us to actually support and it's just strange to me. Thank you for continuing to engage on it.
Thanks for the reply. I am sympathetic to your antipathy (eh?) towards what you see as propaganda. Personally, I have a powerful antipathy towards people on our side of the fence (one might say euphemistically) aka in the Awakening or "truth" sphere who are motivated to manipulate and exploit, either in the form of clickbait, or actual disinfo operations.
A lot of that sort of thing hinges on exploitation of emotional engagement. You can see numerous posts of mine on the topic if you search for "clickbait" in the [search community....] box.
As my awareness of the 5G warfare has grown, I have developed a view that does not see all forms of manipulation as inherently destructive. Deception is, if Sun Tsu is anything to go by (not to mention countless generals, marshals and warriors), a key part of warfare. Although I'm not saying that its OK for 'good guys' to deceive the people 'because their motive is good'. But the awakening does involve generating influence.
I actually thought that the Noem clip was cool. I liked it. Also, not because I'm being manipulated, in my view. Particularly if you have been heavily engaged with the psywar of the past 7 or 8 years, then there is a lot of war-weariness to throw off. Cool photo ops like this can have a beneficial effect, imo.
So, while we disagree on the effect or value of this particular case, I'm sympathetic to your attitude in general. At a minimum, offering a strongly contrastive view to the general perceptions as you have here, can be a real plus, as long as you can bring a solid argument or case. but often, it is only in the developing discussion that such value arises. Which is one of the big shortcomings of social media board like this where a certain number of the participants are more inclined to flippant one-off comments or judgments than they are to in depth discussion.
Fwiw, I really appreciate your reply. Looking forward to seeing you around.
By the way, any relation to Bogarde? Bwahahahahaha. Jk.
Cheers.
PS.
That's not entirely accurate.
one, Q said "they think/though you will follow the stars" etc. That's more of an exposure of Enemy strategy than it is telling people to do something.
two, "Be careful who you follow" This was specifically in regard to agents attempting to mislead or undermine anon thinking, such as Alex Jones (at the time) or other disinfo operatives.
In fact, Q actuively encouraged us anons to follow certain people. Catherine Herridge, for example. "Follow the Pen".
Perhaps there is a sector of the public that will go after Kristi Noem on horseback in the way that some folks go after Beyonce in a speech for Harris, but I don't see them as the same thing.