this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
30 points (100.0% liked)
GenZedong
4599 readers
76 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"This doesn't pass the sniff test" isn’t overthinking, it's applying the minimum level of skepticism that should be applied to every story.
As for what really happened: I don't know, but it's also an assumption that the DPRK is who fabricated this story. Maybe Warmbier did, the DPRK had no way to disprove it, so they had him state it for the public. A college kid making a mistake and coming up with a dumb lie is probably the simplest explanation.
With all due respect, this is nothing more than "I am an independent thinker and I can be neutral" mistake in thinking.
"A college kid making a mistake and coming up with a dumb lie is probably the simplest explanation." isn't "the minimum level of skepticism that should be applied to every story", it's a specific bias toward believing that out of at least 3 different parties involved in the story (Otto, the DPRK, and anyone he knew in the US), he's exclusively the liar. And him coming up with a lie that elaborate is not a "simple explanation," it's a bizarrely specific story for anyone to invent, much less a seemingly random 21 year old. The kind of thinking you're applying here is not skepticism across the board or you wouldn't be reaching for your end statement explanation. What it suggests is an unwillingness to believe in certain capacities of the US and what kind of behavior can come out of it, not skepticism inherently, which I frankly don't understand because as ridiculous as some things can sound on the surface, we're talking about the country that actually did stuff like MKUltra. If it were anyone else, I would more understand being in doubt, but the story actually fits the plausible deniability gangster state character of the US and its history like a glove.
It's a bizarre story, period. When anyone comes to you with a bizarre story, you don't just take them at their word.
This is more of a "it comes from a country I generally support and is against a country I generally oppose, so I'm not going to look to closely" mistake.
Now you insist on a universalized principle that a story can be objectively recognized as bizarre and then one is supposed to be dismissive of it or there is something wrong with their thinking. This is more shallow pretense of neutrality that doesn't exist. I repeatedly bring up MKUltra because it is a perfect example of something that can sound hard to believe, but actually happened. Sometimes things that stretch our personal sense of credibility do occur and I say "personal sense of" because that is what it is in reality most of the time, not something universal. It might be shocking for a westerner, for example, to learn about the atrocities imperial Japan did to China. But for someone who has grown up being taught about it and being surrounded by people who are connected to its consequences, it would likely be less immediately shocking, being disseminated more gradually, while also being uniquely disturbing, being more personal. This is just one example of the relativity of perceptions of information and how people come in contact with it, and it is also why I emphasize the gangster state character of the US; another example of the relativity of perception is surrounding context. It would not be strange to hear that a geographical area that tends to be very cold has gotten snowed on. It would be strange to hear that a geographical area that is never cold enough for snow has gotten twelve inches of it. Universality exists, but is not something to be taken for granted lightly, contrary to what western thought tends to have people doing.
If you were to believe the MK Ultra story based solely on a well-rehearsed press statement from one single person, yes, there would be something wrong with your thinking. We believe MK Ultra happened because there's evidence of it beyond just the story. Without that evidence, skepticism is warranted.
We've already been over why you are not applying skepticism here and you aren't being impartial. When it's really broken down past the empty insistence on objectivity and universality, your argument amounts to "this didn't feel true to me, so I'm going to spend post after post trying to rationalize disbelieving after the fact." Skepticism is just doubt, that's it, it is not a position of asserting alternative positions of your own without evidence, such as you did in saying the likelihood is a "A college kid making a mistake and coming up with a dumb lie". It is not asserting garbage like "well-rehearsed press statement", as if you know without evidence that he was coached and are starting from that premise.
You're full of shit on this, is the nicest way I can put it right now. Having doubt alone would be fine, but you're twisting the meaning of having doubt to serve your own alternative narrative and that's BS.
I don't think you watched the video