China Uncensored is a thrice-weekly satirical show on YouTube in the vein of The Daily Show or The Colbert Report, hosted by Chris Chappell. China Uncensored is highly critical of the current regime in China, raising issues relating to China's …
Fuck your ignorance and wikipedia. You wouldn’t know shit about Tibet or give a fuck.
Bullshit white supremacists dog whistle their asshole attitudes towards colored people by characterizing the “bad” countries as dangerous uncivilized inhumane societies. They always claim it’s only the government being criticized. Doesn’t take much for a racist to slip up and shit on the entire population: the slightest 30 sec tiktok vid will set them off.
No, Cayde is a CIA plant who is only pretending to hold those views to antagonize people who might be receptive to their arguments by acting rude, ignorant, and incompetent. I figured that out and called them on it. It’s pretty obvious in hindsight.
To be completely fair, I’m not 100% sure on this. The alternative is that Cayde is actually a rude, incompetent, and hypocritical liar. Regardless, there isn’t a difference to me between the two possibilities. If you’re a compulsively lying asshole who can’t articulate an argument, it doesn’t matter whether you agree with me or not; I want nothing to do with you.
It’s also likely that the account I just replied to is one of Cayde’s (or at least is another plant). Their comments read basically the same and if I hadn’t read the usernames beforehand I’d have assumed they were the same person.
When someone asks you “Hey, why do you think X? I looked at <insert resource here> and it didn’t add up” and you respond by insulting them and refusing to actually answer their questions, you’re more likely to get them to disagree with you than to agree with you. There’s therefore very little risk for a CIA plant to do that - nobody is going to be convinced by them, but they’ll fit into the community just fine.
Read over the conversations I had with Cayde and then ask yourself: if I came into the conversation undecided and largely uneducated about the topic, would the way Cayde engaged be at all likely to convince me? If not, what would my likely take-away be?
If people like me would, on average, be less likely to engage in the future, then that should answer your question.
Add to that the encouragement to edit the article. If members of this community are being watched by some intelligence orgs, seeing edits on the site could enable them to better link the activity, especially if someone used an account that they didn’t create fresh for their edits. That may sound like a bit of a reach but every little bit of extra information adds up, and that’s literally what surveillance orgs do.
Fuck your ignorance and wikipedia. You wouldn’t know shit about Tibet or give a fuck.
Bullshit white supremacists dog whistle their asshole attitudes towards colored people by characterizing the “bad” countries as dangerous uncivilized inhumane societies. They always claim it’s only the government being criticized. Doesn’t take much for a racist to slip up and shit on the entire population: the slightest 30 sec tiktok vid will set them off.
Whatever. Enjoy your racist tropes.
It’s pretty obvious that you’re just another of CIA Agent Cayde’s accounts, so allow me to repeat myself:
I’m not interested in talking to a CIA plant, so fuck off.
So, in your mind the CIA is on the side of china…
How is it possible to think that?
No, Cayde is a CIA plant who is only pretending to hold those views to antagonize people who might be receptive to their arguments by acting rude, ignorant, and incompetent. I figured that out and called them on it. It’s pretty obvious in hindsight.
To be completely fair, I’m not 100% sure on this. The alternative is that Cayde is actually a rude, incompetent, and hypocritical liar. Regardless, there isn’t a difference to me between the two possibilities. If you’re a compulsively lying asshole who can’t articulate an argument, it doesn’t matter whether you agree with me or not; I want nothing to do with you.
It’s also likely that the account I just replied to is one of Cayde’s (or at least is another plant). Their comments read basically the same and if I hadn’t read the usernames beforehand I’d have assumed they were the same person.
This logic does not make sense to me.
Do you care to elaborate on why?
lmfao why in the world would a CIA plant be saying THESE things???
To make it so that no one takes assertions about America bad seriously.
The latestagecapitalism lemmygrad comm, the perfect place for this psyop
Ikr? The libs aren’t sending their best.
Lmfaoooo 😭😭😭😭
When someone asks you “Hey, why do you think X? I looked at <insert resource here> and it didn’t add up” and you respond by insulting them and refusing to actually answer their questions, you’re more likely to get them to disagree with you than to agree with you. There’s therefore very little risk for a CIA plant to do that - nobody is going to be convinced by them, but they’ll fit into the community just fine.
Read over the conversations I had with Cayde and then ask yourself: if I came into the conversation undecided and largely uneducated about the topic, would the way Cayde engaged be at all likely to convince me? If not, what would my likely take-away be?
If people like me would, on average, be less likely to engage in the future, then that should answer your question.
Add to that the encouragement to edit the article. If members of this community are being watched by some intelligence orgs, seeing edits on the site could enable them to better link the activity, especially if someone used an account that they didn’t create fresh for their edits. That may sound like a bit of a reach but every little bit of extra information adds up, and that’s literally what surveillance orgs do.
Right…