Being called “controversial” by journalists is one of the most meaningless and lazy efforts to delegitimise. “Controversial” means that there is strong public disagreement. It is a meaningless accusation unless we address how the current consensus was established. Did the consensus derive from open discussions, or are all facts and arguments that do not conform to government war narratives met with smears and censorship? Disagreeing with one's own government's war policies will always be “controversial,” as dissent will always be portrayed as treason; this is war propaganda 101. Do any politicians or journalists ever speak about the security concerns of rival states, or are such discussions necessary for peace smeared as “controversial”? If you disagree with your government's wars, do their stenographers in the media counter your arguments, or engage in personal attacks?
43件の返信を読む