Disinformation Expert Renée DiResta: We Have No Common Sense of Facts | ...

The War Criminals Trying to Prevent a Genocide

CIVILIZED ACADEMIC DEBATES

 

About IQ2US

A nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, Intelligence Squared U.S. addresses a fundamental problem in America: the extreme polarization of our nation and our politics.
Our mission is to restore critical thinking, facts, reason, and civility to American public discourse.

Learn More About IQ2US

America’s Debate Series

Let’s restore critical thinking, facts, reason, and civility to American public discourse. Join the debate and hear both sides of every issue.

Recent DebatesShould We Isolate Russia? | Debate | Intelligence Squared U.S. - YouTube
m.youtube.com › watch
iq2.org, should we isolate Russia? from m.youtube.com
Duration: 48:31
Posted: Jul 22, 2022

uld We Isolate Russia?

uld We Isolate Russia?

At the time Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, Russia supplied the European Union with some 40% of its natural gas, 25% of its oil, and nearly half of its coal. But as punishment for the war, most of Russia’s energy imports to Europe will be banned by the end of the year, along with sweeping sanctions that target banks, businesses, and oligarchs. Is that smart policy? Those who argue “yes” say Russia must be punished for its actions, democratic governments should be protected, and that accommodations only embolden Moscow. Those who argue “no” say isolating the Kremlin to this extent is a dangerous gamble, which could undermine Europe’s economies, push Russia further toward China, and lay the groundwork for an escalation. In this context, and in partnership with the German Marshall Fund, we debate this question, "Should we isolate Russia?"

Should We Isolate Russia? Research Brief

Should We Isolate Russia? Research Brief

Download the Brief Here

At the time Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, Russia supplied the European Union with some 40% of its natural gas, 25% of its oil, and nearly half of its coal. But as punishment for the war, most of Russia’s energy imports to Europe will be banned by the end of the year, along with sweeping sanctions that target banks, businesses, and oligarchs. Is that smart policy? Those who argue “yes” say Russia must be punished for its actions, democratic governments should be protected, and that accommodations only embolden Moscow. Those who argue “no” say isolating the Kremlin to this extent is a dangerous gamble, which could undermine Europe’s economies, push Russia further toward China, and lay the groundwork for an escalation. In this context, and in partnership with the German Marshall Fund, we debate this question, "Should we isolate Russia?"

Should We Isolate Russia? Research Brief

Should We Isolate Russia? Research Brief

Download the Brief Here

Main Points

For The Motion

• We cannot do nothing in the face of Russia’s unfounded war in Ukraine. We have a moral obligation to democracy and human rights to isolate on Russia in the strictest terms possible.
• Backing down from Putin will not have the desired effect. Putin views NATO and the United State generally as a threat to his power and will want to undermine democracy in neighboring countries to stabilize his own rule, regardless of the stance the transatlantic allies take toward Russian aggression.
• Isolating Russia will be difficult for many countries dependent on its oil and other resources. However, this is a window of opportunity to improve energy independence and usher in a wave of green energy.

Against The Motion

• By isolating Russia, we risk severe economic harm to ourselves and our allies as we work to wean ourselves off oil and other resources from Russia; a number of countries chose not to exercise sanctions for this very reason. 
• With all the energies of the transatlantic partners focused on isolating Russia, we lose sight of other areas of strategic importance, namely competition with China, space, and further development of global infrastructure.
• The harder the sanctions we impose on Russia, the harder it will be to find a peaceful resolution out of this, and the more hostile Russia will grow.

PRESENTED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:

German Marshall Fund

ABOUT THE DEBATERS

For The Motion

Michael McFaul

Former US Ambassador to Russia

Read bio

Radan Kanev

Member of European Parliament

Read bio

Against The Motion

Emma Ashford

Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council

Read bio

Jonas Shaende

Chief Economist of the Fiscal Policy Institute

Read bio

HOST AND MODERATOR

David Ariosto

Debate Moderator and Head of Editorial

Read bio

New Source: Media Manipulation Casebook

 The Media Manipulation Casebook is a digital research platform linking together theory, methods, and practice for mapping media manipulation and disinformation campaigns. This resource is intended for researchers, journalists, technologists, policymakers, educators, and civil society organizers who want to learn about detecting, documenting, describing, and debunking misinformation, disinformation, and media manipulation.https://mediamanipulation.org/

"President Trump is Calling Us to Fight:" What the Court Documents Reveal About the Motivations Behind January 6 and Networked Incitement

Research type:

Reports

Published on

July 20, 2022

Authors: Joan Donovan, Kaylee Fagan, and Frances Lee

Overview / Abstract

In this qualitative study, we analyze federal court documents related to the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol, in an effort to identify, categorize, and quantify the most frequently cited reasons for participating in the breach of the Capitol Building. We describe the beliefs, ideologies, fears, conspiratorial narratives, and other themes that most often contributed to the decision to participate in the attack, and present representative excerpts from court documents. In order to estimate the relative popularity of each motivation, researchers coded the contents of 469 charging and sentencing documents, representing 417 defendants. These excerpts provide a unique window into the defendants’ thinking and plans in the weeks and days before the attack, as well as in its aftermath. Our analysis reveals that the members of the Capitol riot were far from consistent in their reasons and goals, although most seemed to share a fear of sociocultural status loss. Some defendants describe a desire for “revolution” or “civil war,” while others describe the attack as a simple “flexing of muscles,” or a demonstration of their frustration with the status quo. We find that the largest fraction of defendants were motivated to come to Washington DC on January 6 by either their desire to support President Trump, their concerns about the integrity of the 2020 election, or some combination of both.

Download the working paper

Featured Definitions

Whether media manipulation tactics are used to sow distrust in social institutions, to destabilize relations of power, or to inflict harm on people and communities, we offer a common vocabulary for describing them.

Cloaked science

Featured Definitions

Whether media manipulation tactics are used to sow distrust in social institutions, to destabilize relations of power, or to inflict harm on people and communities, we offer a common vocabulary for describing them.

Cloaked science

DEPRESSION PHOBIA: Jordan Marsh has Revived Those Virtual Power Lunches...Why ‘The Great Deceleration’ of today’s economy is nothing to fear

Why ‘The Great Deceleration’ of today’s economy is nothing to fear

HUFFPOST HEADLINES: Trump Denier Rusty Bowers Fighting for His Extended Political Life

 Newly-created LD10 in East Mesa is reaping a whirlwind of national attention as two Conservative Mormon Republican contenders challenge each other in what is usually a low-voter -turnout Primary Election to gain a seat in the Arizona State Senate. Both Bowers and David Farnsworth has served two consecutive terms in the Arizona House entrenched "revolving-door' Mormon political machine. State legislative races are typically cheap, low-key affairs. But Bowers’ national profile from his House select committee testimony, as well as Trump’s imprint and heavy outside spending by groups like the pro-Trump PAC Turning Point USA, which is based in Arizona, make this contest unlike virtually any other on the map in 2022.

The Arizona Race That Reveals The Most About Trumpism And The 'Big Lie'

After telling the Jan. 6 House committee about pressure he faced to overturn the vote, Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers is fighting for his political life.

By 

Liz Skalka

Jul 30, 2022, 08:00 AM EDT

By the time the Jan. 6 House select committee had subpoenaed him to testify, Rusty Bowers was already careening toward a messy showdown with the Republican Party — the Arizona House speaker uneasy with his party’s embrace of election lies versus a growing number of Republicans who’ve fully bought into them.

The battle will culminate on Tuesday in Arizona’s statewide primary, with Bowers pitted against a Donald Trump-backed opponent, former state Sen. David Farnsworth, in his quest to move over to the Arizona Senate after being term-limited out of the state House. Although Bowers is the top Republican in the GOP-led chamber, his victory and his political future are anything but guaranteed.

If Bowers loses, it will likely happen amid a sweep of Trump-endorsed candidates: Kari Lake, the media-bashing former TV anchor vying for governor; Blake Masters, the venture capitalist with a history of embracing right-wing ideology running for U.S. Senate; and Mark Finchem, the conspiratorial state legislator competing to run elections.

But compared with those primaries — Lake is a firm election denier and opponent Karrin Taylor Robson, an attorney, has tried not to lean too heavily one way or another, labeling the election “unfair” ― the Bowers vs. Farnsworth contest draws a clear line in the sand on Trump. An undisputed prerequisite for a Trump endorsement, Farnsworth embraces both Trump and the “big lie.” Bowers, on the other hand, acknowledges Trump did some good things for the country while also telling The Washington Post, “I don’t want Donald Trump to be the next president.”

Read more >>

Cow-Girl On Top: South Dakota Governor Primed to Lead The Ducey Brigade

 IMAGES ARE EVERYTHING - wrapped in Old Glory is even better! Icons of the American West are convenient fodder for a new trooping of Trump apprentices ready to get into the media rodeo. Just a quick today to highlight another on-the-rise Conservative Republican who's also scored a newly published book.

Potential rival or running mate? Kristi Noem, the governor denying Trump a face on Mount Rushmore

South Dakota Republican says monument is ‘special just the way it is’, while speculation grows she is trying to broaden her national appeal

David Smith in Washington

Fri 29 Jul 2022 04.15 EDT

Last modified on Fri 29 Jul 2022 04.16 EDT

Donald Trump’s rough summer continues. Hammered by the January 6 committee, his influence ebbing and possible prosecution looming, now the former US president must face the death of a long cherished dream.

No, Trump’s face will not be carved into Mount Rushmore.

Kristi Noem, the Republican governor of South Dakota, home to the hallowed national memorial, has ruled out any additions to the 60-foot-tall (18-metre) faces of presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt.

Noem first told the story of Trump’s wish to be immortalized on Mount Rushmore in 2018. On Thursday, speaking with reporters in Washington, she recounted again her first meeting with Trump in the Oval Office when she was a member of Congress.

Trump photo with Rittenhouse reveals ‘Mount Trumpmore’ sculpture

Read more

“I said, ‘Mr President, I’m Kristi Noem, I’m from South Dakota. South Dakota is the home of Mount Rushmore. You should come visit it sometime.’ And he said, ‘Oh, did you know that it is my dream to have my face on Mount Rushmore?’ And I was surprised by that. We laughed and chuckled about it.”

But asked on Thursday by the Guardian if Trump’s dream of being carved into the monument could be realised even after his involvement in the January 6 insurrection, Noem replied: “I don’t think we’re adding any faces to Mount Rushmore any time soon. It is pretty special just the way it is.

“I don’t think anybody has ever claimed that any of our leaders were perfect. Every one of us has flaws but we still have leaders that led us through challenging times. Remembering that history is incredibly important.”

Noem is widely seen as a potential rival – or running mate – for Trump for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024. This week she published a memoir, Not My First Rodeo: Lessons from the Heartland, and delivered speeches to the Heritage Foundation thinktank and National Conservative Student Conference in Washington.

Noem, the first woman to hold the governor’s office in South Dakota and up for reelection this year, resisted significant lockdowns during the coronavirus pandemic and accused other state governors of having “overstepped their authority”. In her address to the Heritage Foundation on Wednesday, she also lambasted Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert.

“He, out of anybody in this country, should never be given one minute of airtime ever again for the devastation that he has wrecked on so many families,” she said. “He has wiped out their livelihoods, he has destroyed kids’ education – we have kids that forever will struggle because they’ve been forced to wear masks that has hurt their development. It is a tragedy what that man was allowed to do to the United States of America.”

Fauci, who is President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser, has repeatedly hit back at his rightwing critics in kind.

Last year he told the New York Times: “‘Fauci has blood in his hands’ – are you kidding me? Here’s a guy whose entire life has been devoted to saving lives, and now you’re telling me he’s like Hitler? You know, come on, folks. Get real.”

… we have a small favour to ask. Tens of millions have placed their trust in the Guardian’s fearless journalism since we started publishing 200 years ago, turning to us in moments of crisis, uncertainty, solidarity and hope. More than 1.5 million supporters, from 180 countries, now power us financially – keeping us open to all, and fiercely independent.

Unlike many others, the Guardian has no shareholders and no billionaire owner. Just the determination and passion to deliver high-impact global reporting, always free from commercial or political influence. Reporting like this is vital for democracy, for fairness and to demand better from the powerful.

And we provide all this for free, for everyone to read. We do this because we believe in information equality. Greater numbers of people can keep track of the events shaping our world, understand their impact on people and communities, and become inspired to take meaningful action. Millions can benefit from open access to quality, truthful news, regardless of their ability to pay for it.

Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Guardian from as little as $1 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you.

At the latter event she was accompanied by former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, apparently working for her again after a brief hiatus, and she held an informal conversation with reporters where questions included the supreme court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that guaranteed a woman’s right to abortion.