this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
1103 points (98.9% liked)
Microblog Memes
7316 readers
1653 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It’s always valid to say that everyone is susceptible to propaganda. That said, republican voters tend to be worse educated, more religious, and more likely to spread fake news than democrat voters. It seems reasonable to say that they’re more susceptible to propaganda, no?
Each group is susceptible to different types of propaganda. I dont think liberals are better because they are deceived in a different way.
I don’t think they’re better people, but I do think it’s generally possible for people to be more or less susceptible to propaganda than others. If I wanted to gauge that, I think education level, religiosity, and likelihood of sharing fake news would be pretty good data points.
The problem is this is all secondhand information. People have to trust something, which makes them susceptible to being manipulated. Some people choose to trust noone and others try to take in all sides and assume the truth is in the middle. Everyones acting on faith.
The point I'm making is that both sides seem to spend a lot of time arguing over each others propaganda, which is a huge waste of time. No understanding is furthered and no problem is identified or solved.
It sounds like you think that everyone is informed near exclusively through propaganda, which is reasonable- by some definitions all information shared between people is propaganda. In that case everyone would be equally influenced by propaganda. I wasn’t using that definition, but I also don’t disagree under it.
I think the larger the scale of something or the farther away from someone it happened, the more susceptible that person is to propaganda about it. Its why we think china is a third world country, and that america is a peace keeping force in the world.
Its a lot harder to put out propaganda about my extended family, because I'm actually a better source for information in that case due to proximity.
I guess I just mainly dont like the overconfidence people display, we still know so little about human limitations on a societal scale it seems.
It’s also why we think the US is an advanced country, and that’s pretty close for most Americans. I would be very surprised if nobody in your extended family was less religious/heterosexual/happy/in love with their partner than you realize. Every piece of information you receive from someone else is tainted by their perspective and intent in sharing it, including the actions you see them perform.
You are likely right but I also wouldnt put a lot of confidence in my assessment of how others feel, especially generalizing it over time.
If someone tried to convince me my mother was a secret Nazi though they'd need some strong proof for me to consider it.