AI fantasy about tractors in Briton

Paco Dennis said:
From AI :

The video describes an imagined or fictionalized scenario of a major farmer protest in London, highlighting a conflict between the farmers and the government over tax policies [01:04]. It frames the protest as a desperate "siege" against a government that has allegedly abandoned the working farmer, leading to widespread chaos and supply chain failure [07:53]. The commentary frequently criticizes the Labour party's financial policies, stating they would rather see "the shelves empty than admit they miscalculated the resolve of the rural working class" [13:05].
Click to expand...

So just to be clear, have we got the makings of a political thread, based initially on misinformation within a YouTube video pretending to be Live News? From a YouTube channel that as a disclamer of, "...intended for informational and educational purposes only and should not be considered verified facts"

Where within the Addditional Info section of the channel, there seems to be a suggesting that the country associated with the channel’s account is Brazil.

I’m wonder who spent the time counted the 1,872 tractors -- that’s an oddly specific number for something that isn’t actually happening.
 
Last edited:
It had me going for a while also. But then I thought: How can a violent protest of this size not even be mentioned on the news? Our news channels are talking endlessly about the U.S. economy, not a word about Britain. They should make it clear that this was basically a movie. Maybe it could happen, but this didn't, not really. It reminds me of that Orson Welles movie about earth being attacked by Mars.
 
Just using the verb 'storm' in relation to tractors made it sound unlikely -- I've driven a tractor (and been behind them many times on the roads in Nebraska), and I can't see a tractor getting fast enough to 'storm'.
 
This is a total disgrace of journalism, and propaganda. It plays to the trained seals who clap everything no matter the reality. Honestly, I'm amazed it was ever posted by Paco, he usually knows better. Please, if you want to look at this, do your research. This is more of the self-hatred that is prevalent today, and it gains credence by being repeated without thought.

IMO YMMV
 
Last edited:
VaughanJB said:
This is a total disgrace of journalism, and propaganda. It plays to the trained seals who clap everything no matter the reality. Honestly, I'm amazed it was ever posted by Paco, he usually knows better. Please, if you want to look at this, do your research. This is more of the self-hatred that is prevalent today, and it gains credence by being repeated without thought.

IMO YMMV
Click to expand...
I am surprised that I thought it was real. Push the right/wrong buttons, and anyone will engage. I am human too. :) I am really not being totally careful these days. I admit that my interest in truth and justice has become less important. Now, just surviving is taking the place of being able to take care of, or research every complex issue of truth. I just don't know how mankind is going to navigate the next 50 years.
 
Paco Dennis said:
One of the most satisfying things I am witnessing in my last years is the unraveling of the two colonial empires, the United States and Britan!! :)
Click to expand...
Paco, this is the first time I have ever heard of the U.S. being referred to as a colonial empire. Wasn't that what the American Revolution was all about? To free us from the control of a colonial empire?

In spite of what some may think (or wish for), we don't have an emperor, and we are not an empire. And we're not unraveling. The violence, greed, and cruelty is all over the world. Just take a look at the news!
 
Also, I find myself getting more and more cynical about the news media all the time. The ads on TV are so unbearable to watch that I automatically turn off the sound when they come on. That's one reason I mainly watch the streaming, ad-less channels.

Even the ads in printed media are so ridiculous they would be funny if they weren't inflicting so much harm on the public. "Ask you doctor," endlessly. "Doctors don't want you to know ..." etc. It's an endless con game.

This tractor thing is just an extreme example.
 
Sunny said:
Paco, this is the first time I have ever heard of the U.S. being referred to as a colonial empire. Wasn't that what the American Revolution was all about? To free us from the control of a colonial empire?

In spite of what some may think (or wish for), we don't have an emperor, and we are not an empire. And we're not unraveling. The violence, greed, and cruelty is all over the world. Just take a look at the news!
Click to expand...
@Sunny, you might want to Google words/terms like De-colonialism, Anti-colonialism, Anti-colonial nationalism, et al., etc., ad nauseum.
There's a lot of "movement" going on about it all and it's been going on for decades and kind of morphing into the Socialist theme that's going on these days... (sorry if that's too political. But I'm thinkin' global not merely US)
 
Sunny said:
Also, I find myself getting more and more cynical about the news media all the time. The ads on TV are so unbearable to watch that I automatically turn off the sound when they come on. That's one reason I mainly watch the streaming, ad-less channels.

Even the ads in printed media are so ridiculous they would be funny if they weren't inflicting so much harm on the public. "Ask you doctor," endlessly. "Doctors don't want you to know ..." etc. It's an endless con game.

This tractor thing is just an extreme example.
Click to expand...
It is completely understandable that you feel cynical. The bombardment of advertising—especially the "Ask your doctor" pharmaceutical ads (which are actually illegal in most other countries)—can feel like a constant psychological siege. And you hit on a profound point with the "tractor thing" (likely the Right to Repair controversy with companies like John Deere): it represents a shift where corporations retain control even after you've paid for the product.
It is not a huge leap to go from feeling powerless against domestic corporate giants to asking about the United States' power on the global stage. The two are often linked.
Here is an explanation of why historians, political scientists, and critics often classify the United States as an empire, despite the fact that it calls itself a republic.
1. The "Base" Empire (Military Footprint)
The most common argument for American Empire is strictly military. Unlike traditional empires (like Rome or Britain) that sought to conquer and hold territory indefinitely, the US projects power through presence.
* Global Garrisons: The US maintains approximately 750 military bases in some 80 countries. No other nation in history has projected military force this widely during peacetime.
* Command Structure: The US military divides the entire globe into "Combatant Commands" (e.g., CENTCOM for the Middle East, AFRICOM for Africa), effectively assigning every square inch of the earth to a US admiral or general.
2. Economic Hegemony (The Dollar)
Empire is not just about soldiers; it is about who writes the rules of trade. The US exerts "imperial" control through economics:
* The Petrodollar: For decades, key commodities (like oil) have been traded almost exclusively in US dollars. This forces other nations to hold US currency, effectively financing the US economy.
* Sanctions as Warfare: Because the US controls the "plumbing" of the global financial system (SWIFT, the Federal Reserve), it can cut off a rival nation’s economy without firing a shot. This ability to cripple a country financially is a modern form of siege warfare.
3. The "Hidden" Empire (Territories)
We often forget that the US actually does hold overseas colonies, though we use euphemisms like "territories" or "commonwealths."
* The Places: Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the US Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands.
* The Status: Millions of people live in these areas; they are US citizens (mostly) and follow US laws, but they generally cannot vote for the President and have no voting representation in Congress. This fits the classic definition of empire: a center of power ruling over peripheries that have no say in that power.
4. Interventionism and Regime Change
A hallmark of empire is the belief that it has the right to determine who rules other nations to ensure stability or protect its own interests.
* Cold War Era: The US famously intervened in Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), and Chile (1973) to overthrow governments that threatened US corporate interests or geopolitical standing.
* Modern Era: Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, or air campaigns in Libya, are viewed by critics as imperial policing actions—attempting to "build nations" in the American image.
5. Cultural Imperialism (Soft Power)
This connects back to your frustration with media. The US exports its culture—movies, music, tech platforms, and consumerism—so successfully that American culture often displaces local traditions globally.
* When people all over the world watch American blockbusters, use American iPhones, and absorb American political debates, they are existing within an American "sphere of influence" that shapes how they think.
Summary: "Empire by Invitation"?
The counter-argument often made is that the US is a "benevolent hegemon" or an "Empire by Invitation." The argument is that after WWII, Europe and Asia wanted US protection and trade, so the US built this system to keep the peace (Pax Americana).
However, as you noticed with the "endless con game" of advertising, there is a growing sense that this system prioritizes corporate expansion and military dominance over the well-being of the average citizen—both abroad and at home.
Would you like me to dig deeper into the "Right to Repair" issue regarding tractors, or discuss how those pharmaceutical ads became legal in the US in the first place?
 
Here's a google definition of commonwealth vs. state, apparently written by an actual human being. (Otherwise, they are apparently required to say A-I.) They had a similar definition of territory vs. state.

Calling this country an empire is hyperbole, IMO. Things haven't gotten that bad yet. Although the whole world seems to have gone mad, so who knows what's coming?

What's the difference between a commonwealth and a state?​


Are Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia all that different from the rest?

There are four states in the United States that call themselves commonwealths: Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. The distinction is in name alone. The commonwealths are just like any other state in their politics and laws, and there is no difference in their relationship to the nation as a whole.

commonwealth and state


When used to refer to U.S. states, there is no difference between a 'state' and a 'commonwealth.' The distinction is in name alone.


So why are they called commonwealths? Well, their constitutions simply deem them such. According to one commonwealth's website (Massachusetts—the one in which Merriam-Webster is headquartered), the term commonwealth was preferred by a number of political writers in the years leading up to 1780, when the Massachusetts constitution officially designated the state as such; the preference is believed to have existed perhaps because there was "some anti-monarchial sentiment in using the word commonwealth."
 
Sunny said:
Paco, this is the first time I have ever heard of the U.S. being referred to as a colonial empire.
Click to expand...

The US is the controlling influence in the free world. Not a traditional colonialist - but instead one that gets influence in both political and monetary ways. What is fascinating right now is that the US seems to be pulling back from this. The mistake - IMO - is that some think there will be no consequence in doing so. Everything is measured in simple monetary terms, and cultural and political influence is being ignored.
 
Paco Dennis said:
I am surprised that I thought it was real. Push the right/wrong buttons, and anyone will engage. I am human too. :) I am really not being totally careful these days. I
Click to expand...

I get it. Sometimes we all get lazy and take what we read on its own terms. And I mean we ALL do it.

One thing I'm particularly bothered by these days is the lack of unity both within our countries and within our communities. A President is a president for EVERY citizen, whether one voted for them or not. A Republican is a citizen, along with every democrat. A tax payer happy to pay for security is on the same level as one that wants to pay for more homes for the poor.

We have lost this cohesion. We have allowed a level of self-hatred to creep in. We have started to actively support a mentality when it's not enough to hate on a distant group, but also to hate on people local to us. It's not enough to disagree, vitriol and dislike have to come of it.

It's all part of the extremism and radicalization that has happened. We no longer are tolerant of opposition views (and it's so bad, some will read my own opposing view here and think it's the same thing).

I look to love people. I look to care about them. That is my direction of travel, my intent. Sadly, too many want to indulge in a rhetoric of hate.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top