Ian H
Legendary Member
Narrative: a spoken or written account of connected events.
War with Russia
- Thread starter Milzy
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Narrative: a spoken or written account of connected events.
multitool
Guest
It's a bit more nuanced than that, I think. "Narrative" when used by people like Milzy is used unwittingly in the manner of French post-modernists like Lyotard and Baudrillard in the sense that it is a meta-reality/metanarrative, an attempt to link what are essentially unconnected events through a conceptual framework. Or, in more prosaic terms, its a made-up story.
It's a conspiracy theorist era slur.
It's a conspiracy theorist era slur.
Last edited:
AndyRM
Elder Goth
So after over a year on we’ve got some supporting the Western narrative. Some who think Russia are in the wrong but may have been provoked but most don’t have a *beep* clue what is really going on.
And you somehow do?
What's really going on then? Because from what I've read of your wittering about this whole conflict your sources are remarkably unreliable.
Ian H
Legendary Member
An interesting twist of language by the half-educated.
multitool
Guest
It's an odd paradox within the conspiracist mind that everything is a 'narrative', except, of course, the one they tell themselves.
icowden
Legendary Member
As @multitool pointed out - yes I agree that that is the dictionary definition. In modern parlance the term now seems to carry some baggage and imply that somehow the "truth" has been constructed by %insertnameofconspiracytheoryhere%.
OP
OP
Milzy
Well-Known Member
Psychological manipulation has been used, and is being used, to control populations. Today, we refer to these efforts as “sophisticated marketing techniques”. But, these “techniques” are not only employed to sell addictive substances to children, they are also used by “political” parties and governments to keep the herds in line.
theclaud
Reading around the chip
Conversely, the idea that the official or dominant version of anything is somehow not a narrative is used to suppress criticism or alternative versions of events. This is a general point, not a point about Ukraine, but in a UK context it's obvious that widespread compassion for the plight of Ukrainians is being exploited to shore up a particular narrative about NATO being a benign defensive alliance of civilised European nations against a rogue power, and to frame opposition to or criticism about NATO as a beyond-the-pale position held only by Putin stooges.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Whether you use the word narrative or story, neither mean that it is the truth...other than someone's 'truth' that must always be taken with a pinch of salt.
multitool
Guest
Sure, but you don't have to think very hard about the relative freedoms of the media in those opposing blocks, whether now or historically, to realise that there is an imbalance. It is without irony the largest circulating newspaper in Soviet Russia was called Pravda, which means Truth.
As yet, I can't think of any western journalists who have accidentally defenestrated themselves shortly after writing a critical piece on their respective government, but I do know who Anna Politkovskaya is, because I read her book. She is one of seven journalists from the Novaya Gazeta, an establishment critical newspaper, murdered since 2000. Have a look at the last 12 months of this newspaper's history if you are interested in the notion of "narrative" in Russia.
Equally, Russian television output looks like GBNews on an acid/steroid mix. At least we just have GBNews which is only watched by a handful of gammon.
Modern warfare includes hybrid war in information space, which is why we have the likes of GCHQ, but in previous times we had the BBC World Service, or Voice of America carrying out a similar role.
Last edited:
theclaud
Reading around the chip
Yebbut don't make me get all Humbert Wolfe on your ass. The threat of an untimely end isn't the only way of limiting public discourse or setting the parameters of public opinion. With scant risk of plunging from an upper storey for venturing the wrong opinion, the British media classes nevertheless manage to churn out identikit opinions and craven interpretations across the board with a reliability that borders on the miraculous. It's commonplace to read critical things by mainstream journalists in Haaretz that are apparently unsayable in Fleet Street and which would have Starmer's goons feeling your collar for sharing on social media, even though the Israeli government is stuffed full of people who make Patel and Rees Mogg look like lollipop ladies. That the British press manages to be the worst in the world without even a dictatorship to excuse it is hardly a cause for national pride.
multitool
Guest
That is maybe a facet of an inward looking media catering to an inward looking population. After all, we did Brexit remember, so why do we need news about foreigners. You are right about Israel, but the highly anodyne reporting of Israeli actions is a fairly recent thing and coincides with the recent panic over antisemitism in UK political life.
When it comes to domestic reporting there isn't such reticence. See, for example the output on Prince Andrew's kiddy-fiddling, or reporting on war crimes by the SAS in Afghanistan. Or the Iraq war and the huge protests in the UK. Or Michelle Mone's amazing tits. All given copious amounts of airtime and print space.
When it comes to geo-political structures, like NATO, and our position within them, then I'm not sure why you'd necessarily expect to see criticism. We've had no major war to fight in Europe for 77 years, and any border wars, such as the Balkans conflicts have had input to stop them spreading into NATO territory. The world consists of alliances in one form or another, this is our one and it is remarkably successful.
When it comes to domestic reporting there isn't such reticence. See, for example the output on Prince Andrew's kiddy-fiddling, or reporting on war crimes by the SAS in Afghanistan. Or the Iraq war and the huge protests in the UK. Or Michelle Mone's amazing tits. All given copious amounts of airtime and print space.
When it comes to geo-political structures, like NATO, and our position within them, then I'm not sure why you'd necessarily expect to see criticism. We've had no major war to fight in Europe for 77 years, and any border wars, such as the Balkans conflicts have had input to stop them spreading into NATO territory. The world consists of alliances in one form or another, this is our one and it is remarkably successful.
Last edited:
multitool
Guest
Just watching Storyville. There's an episode called Inside Russia: Traitors and Heroes.
It's a stark reminder of the early days of the war when there was coverage from inside Russia. Now there isn't. I wonder why
Have people like RecordNewAce forgotten the fascististic Z symbolism? Or the fact that the government made it illegal to call the invasion a war? Or that Facebook and Instagram were banned?
But, yeah. The western "narrative".
It's a stark reminder of the early days of the war when there was coverage from inside Russia. Now there isn't. I wonder why
Have people like RecordNewAce forgotten the fascististic Z symbolism? Or the fact that the government made it illegal to call the invasion a war? Or that Facebook and Instagram were banned?
But, yeah. The western "narrative".
OP
OP
Milzy
Well-Known Member
Just watching Storyville. There's an episode called Inside Russia: Traitors and Heroes.
It's a stark reminder of the early days of the war when there was coverage from inside Russia. Now there isn't. I wonder why
Have people like RecordNewAce forgotten the fascististic Z symbolism? Or the fact that the government made it illegal to call the invasion a war? Or that Facebook and Instagram were banned?
But, yeah. The western "narrative".
Can we go into some great detail about the Z symbol please?
