Thread by @davetroy

Focusing on 'disinformation' helps the bad guys by decoupling tactics from the actors and motives behind them. It also allows 1st amendment to be used as a shield and complication.

We need to focus on the actions + influence of people trying to destroy gov't and institutions.

We don't see enough people tracking campaigns back to the source and then disrupting their operations. If we are intercepting messaging on social, it's too late.

We need to foil operations and increase expenses for those perpetrating these information attacks.

I was just searching for academic papers that connect disinformation to monetary policy, gold, or cult dynamics and didn't find anything. That's obviously a cursory check, but *nothing* on this, academia? Please show me the papers.

For all the hand-wringing and buzz around disinformation and democracy we might have thought someone would have gotten here yet in research-land. I'm not seeing it. Nothing on NESARA either. Makes me think the academic community either 1) isn't interested in understanding this,

2) is actively being dissuaded from pursuing a study of the actors and motives, 3) doesn't have the interdisciplinary capacity to pull this together, 4) is under-resourced in other ways. I don't know. Educate me.

I mean it's not like this is an arcane inquiry; disinfo channels are filled with chatter about gold, about the dollar, about "great resets" and "great awakenings." Has anyone bothered to unpack this? I would imagine so, but...

We should consider the possibility that we got @FrankLuntz'ed into using this very bad frame. It shifts responsibility downline and shields the bad actors running influence campaigns aimed at destroying our institutions.

Focusing on disinfo : trying to destroy institutions, as
climate change : global warming from carbon fuels.