It's a hard one, though. I've found myself challenging someone who then avoids answering and making other similarly unsupported points... eventually you learn that it's a waste of time. Equally, you don't want to leave their comments out there unchallenged.
tenebrisnox
joined 2 years ago
How can you tell good faith from bad faith?
For instance, can you tell if this question is asked in good faith or not? These things seem very hard know.
Seems to me that's the point of it: to stop people asking questions in good faith and then persisting on challenging lies and disinformation.
You'll forgive me but that's not evidence of a "crank" (unless "crank" simply refers to anyone who doesn't share your views). You made the assertion that Murray's "been many many times more discredited than proven correct". As I said, I'm happy to have my opinion of Murray changed but you've not provided any evidence other than a Wikipedia page which doesn't seem to show he was "discredited" in the way you think it does. He has some opinions which many people don't share (Salisbury and Starmer come to mind) but, generally, he appears to me to have stood up for some righteous causes (Assange, Palestine, the influence of oligarchs on Brtitish politicians).
Can you give evidence for your "crank" assertion and that he's been discredited? I've followed Murray over the last 5 or so years and I've not noticed misinformation. He's pretty much on the other side of things than mainstream political opinion but usually what he asserts tends to be the case. But happy to corrected and informed by evidence.
Keep searching Youtube. It's been put up and taken down a couple if times already. It'll be put back up again.
Or - worse - Italian Brainrot creatures!
Needs a firebreak. Then return to its pre-2005 roots. Bobby Ewing its way out of the TARDIS shower.
Edit: Changed Bony to Bobby (though I love Bony Ewing as a Dallas character that never was).
Blue Labour are turning out to be a bit like Farage and Reform. The right-wing media will give them a platform out of all proportion with their actual support... until they've had so much coverage that their support catches up. Every time the govt say something they'll be a Blue Labour comment.
It's that old idea that you can build weapons in order to get yourself out of an economic crisis. Didn't seem to work in the run-up to 1914 or 1939 and I doubt it'll work this time either. But it'll distract the ordinary man or woman on the Clapham Omnibus from realising how shit everything is.
Great. More money flowing upwards into the pockets of the billionaire industrialists who own weapons manufacturing. Plus the joy of watching their media wind everyone up into hysteria about a war. If we're really lucky they'll then provoke a war and cause millions of us to die in the first blasts and then millions more in the radioactive wastelands afterwards.
That's one of the issues, isn't it? I recently found someone who only responded to comments about Margaret Thatcher, challenging negative comments about her. This person's history went back years and ALL of the comments (thousands!) only challenged negative ones about her. It could have been a bot, of course, but if real, it was a pretty weird way of engaging online. That goes beyond contrarianism, it's some sort of "distributed sealioning" maybe?