Forgot Password

The Conspiracy Distillery - Digital Soldiers vs Cyber Troopers

Cybertroopers and digital soldiers are terms often used in the context of internet propaganda, though they may have slightly different connotations and roles depending on the context in which they are used.CybertroopersCybertroopers, also known as "cyber warriors" or "troll armies," are individuals or groups employed, often by state actors, to influence public opinion and manipulate online discourse. Their activities can include spreading disinformation, harassing critics, amplifying certain narratives, and drowning out opposing views. These operations are typically organized and funded, with participants following specific directives to achieve their goals.Characteristics of Cybertroopers:- Often organized and state-sponsored.- Engage in coordinated campaigns.- Use fake accounts and bots to amplify their messages.- Spread disinformation and propaganda.- Target political opponents, activists, and journalists.Digital SoldiersDigital soldiers, a term popularized in part by the QAnon movement, refer to individuals who see themselves as part of an online grassroots movement fighting for a cause. Unlike cybertroopers, digital soldiers are usually not officially organized or funded by state actors. Instead, they are motivated by ideological beliefs and work voluntarily to spread their message. Their activities can overlap with those of cybertroopers, but the key difference is their decentralized and self-motivated nature.Characteristics of Digital Soldiers:- Often decentralized and grassroots-driven.- Motivated by ideological beliefs.- Work voluntarily, not for payment.- Use social media to spread their message.- Engage in online activism, sometimes involving conspiracy theories.Comparison and RelationWhile both cybertroopers and digital soldiers engage in online propaganda and information warfare, they differ primarily in organization, motivation, and methods. Cybertroopers are typically organized and directed by state actors with clear objectives and strategies. Digital soldiers, on the other hand, are usually self-motivated individuals or small groups driven by personal or ideological convictions.However, the lines between these two groups can sometimes blur. For example, state actors might exploit the enthusiasm and reach of digital soldiers to further their own agendas, while digital soldiers might adopt some of the tactics used by more organized groups.Key Differences1. Organization:- Cybertroopers: State-sponsored and coordinated.- Digital Soldiers: Decentralized and self-organized.2. Motivation:- **Cybertroopers:** Financial or professional incentives.- **Digital Soldiers:** Ideological or personal beliefs.3. Methods:- Cybertroopers: Use of bots, fake accounts, and coordinated campaigns.- Digital Soldiers: Organic social media activity and grassroots movements.Understanding the distinction between these two can help in recognizing the varied sources and motivations behind online propaganda efforts.
The Evil Business of TikTok

*fair use policy
Liz Crokin

Liz Crokin...
PROJECT 2025 THE FASCIST PLAN FOR A NEW AMERICA

PROJECT 2025 THE FASCIST PLAN FOR A NEW AMERICAcredits to corza1rhttps://www.bitchute.com/channel/corza1r
Talpiot, Soviet, Israel and the Perestroika Deception

Published on Jan 23, 2019The Next Half CenturySuppose all that has been suggested here were to happen. Suppose the Western alliance did publicly proclaim its realization that it had been deceived by communist disinformation, that its policies of detente and arms limitation had been misguided, that the alliance was now united in its determination to face the challenge. What then? It is obvious that there can be no quick solution to an ideological struggle that has continued unabated since 1917. Perhaps there never can be a solution. Perhaps the two camps, each representing a way of life abhorrent to the other, must for all foreseeable time oppose each other. But is this so bad a thing? Is it unthinkable that ideological and political competition should become permanent? Might not open competition between two fundamentally opposed systems be the best way to sort things out? Might not the two systems, in vying with one another, improve each other?There seem to be three possible scenarious around which the history of the next half century will be written.In the first, communism, meeting neither ideological nor political resistance from the West, continues along its present course to disarmament, then to convergence with the West on its own terms, and so to world domination.In the second, the West realizes in time the nature of the communist threat, solves its own national problems, unites the noncommunist world, and adopts a policy of open competition between the two systems; as a result, the peoples of the communist bloc repudiate their leaders and the communist empire disintegrates.The third scenario resembles the second except that both systems remain intact and competition continues for a very long time.And who shall say that unrelenting competition between two opposing systems of government, each secured by the nuclear deterrent, would not prove fruitful? But where are the statesmen who will recognize this path of possible safety and guide their peoples along it?—Golitsyn, New Lies For Old, pgs. 365-6