You begin the thread with, "Ukraine elects" and then conclude that the use of the words "liberal media" is political commentary. Ha. I thought that those two words were combined now in common use and would be easier to explain than saying "corporate media," which rings more true. You introduce the words "modern US" as well, as if these were my thoughts instead of considering the larger worldview based on the ideas of liberty and equality. Your larger error was in suggesting that there are places where dissent "simply does not exist." I DISAGREE. I would argue that it is nearly as much a part of the human condition as the fear of death. I don't know Sid Meier so I cannot comment on whether he programs computer gaming to reflect game theory as it relates to international relations. You can use the world wide web to read now open source CIA reports that conclude the Soviet Union departed Afghanistan after a decade because of political and military reasons vice economic. In the words of Gorbachev, Afghanistan had become a "bleeding wound." Without the political will to continue, Soviet leadership became war weary. This is not to say they did not continue their other political aims, war being by its very nature: political.Hiroshima_Morphine wrote:Ignoring the political commentary on modern US media
Hopefully, you see this as continued discussion. I understand the intent of monitoring speech here but to call it a "Forum" and then say that "politics" is off limits is quite comical to me. It would be like inviting someone to a pool for the afternoon and going in, and under, and moving to and fro without interfering (much) with the other swimmers only to be censored later for saying the word "water."
The words "dissent" and "forum" insist upon themselves.