Vox is a general interest news site for the 21st century. Its mission: to help everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help shape it. In text, video and audio, our reporters explain politics, policy, world affairs, technology, culture, science, the climate crisis, money, health and everything else that matters. Our goal is to ensure that everyone, regardless of income or status, can access accurate information that empowers them.
I think the guy who believes politics on Lemmy are “compromised” and needs to huddle under Bluesky moderation may be a little perturbed actually. The evil Russians are corrupting the website! Oh no. Can you stop any time you want? Because it seems possible to juggle you without a fight. I think I can stunlock you for the rest of your life. This is history, you can’t opt out of it any time you like. What you fail to understand about historical discussions is there is no last word, people die. Refusing to consider criticisms of your premises and resssuring yourself with tirades accomplishes nothing. You are only throwing off your own understanding of the world. All of the sources of your Wikipedia articles are addressed across these two books.
Funny that you accuse me of tirades when I’ve been nothing but measured and polite, while you spout stuff like:
I gave you your chance to explain yourself, in your own words. I know that takes some effort, no question, but if you really had confidence in your position, you’d be more than happy to at least briefly summarize. Instead you punted. It’s a common tactic, don’t think people haven’t noticed. Science communities deal with tough questions all the time, you see people try to explain, because they care and love their topic. They don’t just go “read two books, now shut up”.
In 2025 pseuds don’t demand to be read books aloud like you’re their mommy, they “give you the chance to explain yourself”. You’re not the only one who can make reference to a context outside the thread of conversation. To begin with, there is no reason for me to believe you read the first article I posted. If you can even make an attempt to attack one point made in the article, I will have a reason to believe it. You may not be aware of how ridiculous you come off to someone with a background in this.
Really? Because my initial, unedited comment includes a year (1922 if I recall) that I could have only gotten from reading the first article you gave me. So, this:
is just blatantly, provably, false. That said, this specific conversation is actually not about that, it’s about something else. Not that I expect you to care, unless it’s convenient for you.
Lastly, asking you to address one single point in your own words does not, and should not, require a book. That’s very disingenuous.
edit for grammar
Do you want some kind of award for remembering a number? There’s no indication that you know how to attack any of its points made, which would show you actually comprehended the piece. Calling a Vox article Russian propaganda is psychotic.
No, telling you to read is not disingenuous, you feel like you are owed something, there is no promise of you getting your shower conversations. it’s undesirable for you to have to read a book. Not my problem. Then you won’t know what’s in it and you can just sit here begging me to read it to you. You’ve presented stuff referencing material I’ve already read, without doing what you ask of me. Now I present you with extended refutations of that source material.
Of course, we both know you’re not actually capable of anything other than barking what your country’s officials told you to say. The books are useless to you for that reason
https://archive.org/details/VideoAlexeiNavalnyComparesMuslimsToCockroaches
Just pointing out one of your lies, that’s all. That specific year was mentioned in your article. Since I commented with it, I clearly read your first article. You saying you have no reason to believe I read your article is a blatant lie from you.
I think this is just an excuse for why you don’t want to defend your position with anything except book titles. Which is very convenient, by the way, but you’re not fooling anyone.
Go back and reread what you’re trying to make a pedantic point about - I said you haven’t even attempted to refute any of the articles claims. Here you still haven’t.
Yes, it is very convenient that some of us hide our secret knowledge in books where oafs like you cannot find them, like putting cookies on top of the refridgerator.
Because we are not arguing about the article. This thread is about the Katyn Massacre, not British funding for Mussolini, which was what your first article was about. I am not the one that needs to reread anything here, I can apparently remember this much better than you.
Probably because I’m not nearly as involved in numerous different attempts to spread my country’s propaganda like you are your country’s, I only have to worry about this one conversation, instead of many.
That’s an interesting way to cope considering that I’ve taught you a number of basic historical facts today. I live in Vietnam. Your singleminded devotion to spreading the propaganda of the people who appointed 3rd Reich criminals as their officials is disturbing. Are you perhaps being paid to waste my time? Or are you simply deranged?
Augh the app is shidding itself bc im replying too much augh