What’s up with this straight up pro-china and pro-russia stuff on Lemmy lately?

It’s not even praising the people of China and Russia, but rather their gov directly.

Obviously the states have problems, and the EU to a lesser degree, but they at least have some human rights.

Is this some kind of organized disinformation campaign?

  • heatenconsumerist [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    I mean there are plenty of instances with isolation from the “pro-china and pro-russia stuff” if that’s such a negative thing for the OP to make a post about it.

    • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      OP got butt hurt after got his comment removed for still somehow believing the bullshit about COVID been a bioweapon so he made this post.

          • bobzer@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Jeffrey Sachs

            Is there a reason we would give more credence to an economist when discussing a pandemic rather than listening to the consensus of epidemiologists around the world?

            • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 hours ago

              The authority being highlighted wasn’t Jeffrey Sachs on his own, but The Lancet.

              • bobzer@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Fair enough. Though he was named directly and is still just an economist.

                Besides I’ve read the paper now. All it says is there there is still the possibility of the virus having been released due to a research related incident.

                That’s a far cry from “CIA bioweapon” like the OOP believes.

                • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  Though he was named directly and is still just an economist.

                  Well he’s a famous guy and knows a lot of important people, directly worked with the CIA and USA government before. And Davel wasn’t saying “The Lancet published this conspiracy” but that the guy that the Lancet - who is very trustworthy - trusts and says is qualified to weigh in, is independently pushing it. So Jeremy was borrowing his authority from having been associated with The Lancet, and he has some authority already from his celebrity-status and previous work, not necessarily from his hard skills (economics).

                  That’s a far cry from “CIA bioweapon” like the OOP believes.

                  Okay. I believe that. I haven’t read the article and don’t want to weigh in. I haven’t investigated the claim, anything I add can only be nonsense. I wasn’t pushing a Fort Detrick bioweapon conspiracy, I just wanted to clarify Davel’s comment because I didn’t feel your objection to it was fair, or if it was just a question with no position then I answered the question. Feel free to discuss the article with Davel since you have both read the article.