>It's not really; I've never heard someone say that, in fact.
Lots of disputes within democracies consist of both sides implicitly claiming their position is "more democratic". E.g. how much power should the US president have over US bureaucracies? Some say that because bureaucrats are "unelected", the president should have more control. Others say that too much executive control is authoritarian. In both cases, the nature of "democracy" is what's [implicitly] at stake.
>propaganda
* I speak truth to power.
* He is exercising his right to freedom of speech.
* They spread propaganda.
I don't think the phrase "propaganda" is meaningless, necessary. But this reinforces my point from earlier, about how our social contract could use more simplicity and less ambiguity.
I don't see that happening. I see lots of propaganda trying to make the same paralyzing arguments, especially the argument that 'it's all the same and you can't tell the difference'. Yes we can, pretty easily.
That's the propagandist's argument. But the reality is there is a difference between truth and falsehood, it's not just a matter of perception, and we can tell the difference with reasonable accuracy.
>there is a difference between truth and falsehood
Of course, but that's distinct from propaganda vs non-propaganda. A foreign actor can secretly pay for a marketing campaign that spreads the truth. A scientist can make an honest mistake and spread a falsehood.
>we can tell the difference with reasonable accuracy.
Depends on the claim. Suppose I tell you that exactly one year from now, at your current location, it will be raining. Is that true or false?
Lots of disputes within democracies consist of both sides implicitly claiming their position is "more democratic". E.g. how much power should the US president have over US bureaucracies? Some say that because bureaucrats are "unelected", the president should have more control. Others say that too much executive control is authoritarian. In both cases, the nature of "democracy" is what's [implicitly] at stake.
>propaganda
* I speak truth to power.
* He is exercising his right to freedom of speech.
* They spread propaganda.
I don't think the phrase "propaganda" is meaningless, necessary. But this reinforces my point from earlier, about how our social contract could use more simplicity and less ambiguity.