Leaderboard

OK, her big achievement was, according to you, to radically change her opinion. Is this a value in itself? Because a more important question is: is her new opinion true? And was her old opinion false? Or, which is also possible, maybe both her new and her old opinions were false? You implicitly answer these questions by your choice of the video, a choice you made according to your own opinion. As such, it advances nobody’s knowledge about the Russia’s war against Ukraine. Moreover, it is embarrassing that her employer, John Mark Dougan, the independent journalist, made her visit only the Russia’s side of the frontline, but not also the Ukrainian side, as one would expect from an independent journalist, to find out that in a war both sides are suffering, and that, therefore, one has to go beyond suffering and see who is responsible for all that. However, the interview is quite interesting, on different levels – if one is familiar with the conflict in Ukraine. Now: how objective is this journalist? According to Google, John Mark Dougan is quite well known as a conspiracy theorist (e.g. about a US-funded bioWEAPONS lab in Ukraine - see here, quite interesting), but this might be a subjective view. What is not subjective is this detail in his biography: he is a US fugitive and received political asylum in… Russia… He is a frequent contributor to Russia Today, RIA Novosti/Sputnik and other such "independent" publications.

If you obey the laws of nature, are these laws the master of your rights? (that was metaphorical but helps in making my point) The law should protect your rights and everyone else's rights. No one is being subjugated when a neighbor objects to you burning leaves when the situation is incendiary. The neighbor has a right to their property too. Protection of their rights is not the same as a government supporting your subjugation or slavery. And the idea that a supporter of individual rights wants to burn leaves whenever they want is simply a smear. A person who is not aware of anyone else's rights can't be aware of their own, it's a description of a sociopath. Such a person is anti social and incapable of trade. That does not describe what an individualist is. True enough. But the current way of governing is out of control as you would agree. The exact source or solution is nuanced and confusing. But at it's core, treating innocents like they are guilty is a key indicator of evil.