Our copaganda never really had a chance to get going like that because for the longest time it was either produced by russians or for the russians. Because of that it was never associated with the Ukrainian police. Post-2014 and the police reform cop shows do their thing but the focus is about policemen being regular Joes like everyone else and the subjects of government corruption and especially corrupted judicial system and also loose cannon cops doing more damage than good are regular topics even for the most basic shows. Meanwhile the streaming shows either try to pull off a Columbo or Poirot style detective stories instead of regular cop show format.

See, the big problem in my opinion, is that they didn't convince people that the cops are great. They convinced people that the cops are mostly abusing the people they want to see abused.....

A big problem in that is the obvious and massive societal issue that so many people voted on, and seem to care about, above all else, whether or not the marginalized people they hate are being hurt.

Hanlon's Razor is an old adage that boils down to: when you think someone is intentionally trying to be evil and ruin something, take a step back and ask whether it's likelier they're trying to be intentionally malicious, or if they're just stupid/incompetent.

For example, you go to a restaurant and tell the waiter that you can't have dairy, so you order a pasta dish without cheese. They bring it out to you, but look, there's cheese. You can assume either that the waiter or the staff in the kitchen absolutely hate you and intentionally gave you cheese just to spite you...or that they just screwed up and forgot. The latter is probably likelier.

I was half-joking about potentially updating this idea to include an additional stipulation about AI bots online, which are good at looking like stupid people but actually are often malicious. Bots are used to sway political opinions. You have cases where they are trying to pass themselves off as real people to drown out legitimate discourse with a simulation of it, and cases like Musk's Grok AI where it's programmed to ignore truth and instead answer questions in ways that further his agenda or inflate his ego.

So sometimes when you see political posts that just defy all logic, or are ignoring a hard truth that is staring them in the face, you're inclined to ask "How can this person sincerely believe what they're saying right now?" And often the answer will be that they don't, because they're not a person, they're a bot just regurgitating propagandic talking points.

It's not perfect, but the basic idea is that assuming malice as default in every scenario will cause one to spiral into paranoia.

It's not saying "people are never malicious and always just stupid" but just asking someone to take a step back from the situation and ask which is likelier in context.

The post is also from 2022, and the tech has changed a bit since then.

Fuck you.

HGNUGH

Some of those that burn crosses Are the same that hold office

(from the show outside the DNC in 2000. Watch it if you haven't)

But what would happen if you dual-booted them?

That is a bit of a misnomer since figuring things out requires at least a double-digit IQ and I don't have one of those.

--TheGreatWhiteNorthFreePress

Yes; specifically an unmarried one.