How do you know? Do you think it’s impossible to smuggle drone swarms into the US ( or build them from readymade parts) and attack politicians that have public events with it in an effective way?
In a conflict between a democracy and an autocracy, the democracy is usually limited by domestic support, while the autocracy can just continuously reframe the narrative and keep on going pretty much indefinitely.
I think you are wrong to model autocracies about not caring about domestic support. While the support of the average man on the street doesn’t count, support of the domestic elite does count and a leader in an autocracy who does lose support can easily die while leaders in democracies can stay alive when they leave office when they lose support.
For example—the (obviously fake) report of a strike on an all-girls school in Iran that keeps circulating for the past 3 days with ever growing casualty counts. These videos are clearly targeting Americans in order to diminish support for the campaign.
I don’t know what that example is supposed to show. Both sides have large propaganda efforts to sway public opinion and both are willing to lie for it.
Taking out the leader serves both as a very tangible, undeniable “achievement” for the democracy (although even that can be framed as a desired outcome in certain belief systems). It also takes out a significant psychological driving force, as these are usually charismatic, cult personalities.
Martyr death does not reduce the psychological driving force of a person.
I mean… The Iranians did try to assassinate Trump.
I’m saying that propaganda efforts are significantly more effective against democracies. Authoritarians receive no penalty for lying, and are less susceptible to lies by their enemy. Their local media is 100% controlled. This is why they lie blatantly all the time—this is their main lever for “winning”, since they have basically zero means of military resistance.
I think martyr death might invigorate people in the short term, but it’s much harder to argue that the war was “won” when your leader died, and the loss of key personalities can be devastating to centralized organizations. Look at Qassem Soleimani—where is Quds force now? Same for Nassralah and Hezbollah’s power in Lebanon.
It’s not 100% it’s also a matter of degree. If you are in Russia you can openly criticize Putin for not doing enough to support the troops.
The US media lied the population into the Iraq war with their lies about mass destruction weapons.
Most Westerners don’t fault Joe Biden for the antivax campaign he oversaw as the commander in chief of the military in the Philippines and a key reason that they don’t is that the media didn’t make it an important topic. Reuters as a British outlet was courageous enough to release the information but United States media didn’t pick it up in a way that the population knows it. It’s okay to criticize RFK Jr for being antivax but not Joe Biden for being responsible for telling millions of Muslims not to vaccinate against COVID because the vaccine available to them isn’t halal.
The United States media only discusses the bad health effect of using uranium ammunition or burn pits on service man but not on the local population.
this is their main lever for “winning”, since they have basically zero means of military resistance.
The US was successfully driven out of Afghanistan through military resistance. The Taliban didn’t have air power, but they certainly managed to provide military resistance.
I think martyr death might invigorate people in the short term, but it’s much harder to argue that the war was “won” when your leader died,
Arguing that a war is won means that you lose excuses for why the economic situation is bad. It’s not necessary.
Look at Qassem Soleimani—where is Quds force now? Same for Nassralah and Hezbollah’s power in Lebanon.
I’m not well read on the particulars of either. As far as Hezbollah goes, the pager attack killed a lot more leadership than just one person.
If you are in Russia you can openly criticize Putin for not doing enough to support the troops.
Can you really? I was under impression that Russians who value their lives always express their disagreement with Putin’s policies by blaming someone else, even (especially) when it is obvious that the policy comes from Putin.
Remember Prigozhin screaming “Gerasimov! Shoigu!” before he turned his troops against Moscow.
How do you know? Do you think it’s impossible to smuggle drone swarms into the US ( or build them from readymade parts) and attack politicians that have public events with it in an effective way?
I think you are wrong to model autocracies about not caring about domestic support. While the support of the average man on the street doesn’t count, support of the domestic elite does count and a leader in an autocracy who does lose support can easily die while leaders in democracies can stay alive when they leave office when they lose support.
I don’t know what that example is supposed to show. Both sides have large propaganda efforts to sway public opinion and both are willing to lie for it.
Martyr death does not reduce the psychological driving force of a person.
I mean… The Iranians did try to assassinate Trump.
I’m saying that propaganda efforts are significantly more effective against democracies. Authoritarians receive no penalty for lying, and are less susceptible to lies by their enemy. Their local media is 100% controlled. This is why they lie blatantly all the time—this is their main lever for “winning”, since they have basically zero means of military resistance.
I think martyr death might invigorate people in the short term, but it’s much harder to argue that the war was “won” when your leader died, and the loss of key personalities can be devastating to centralized organizations. Look at Qassem Soleimani—where is Quds force now? Same for Nassralah and Hezbollah’s power in Lebanon.
It’s not 100% it’s also a matter of degree. If you are in Russia you can openly criticize Putin for not doing enough to support the troops.
The US media lied the population into the Iraq war with their lies about mass destruction weapons.
Most Westerners don’t fault Joe Biden for the antivax campaign he oversaw as the commander in chief of the military in the Philippines and a key reason that they don’t is that the media didn’t make it an important topic. Reuters as a British outlet was courageous enough to release the information but United States media didn’t pick it up in a way that the population knows it. It’s okay to criticize RFK Jr for being antivax but not Joe Biden for being responsible for telling millions of Muslims not to vaccinate against COVID because the vaccine available to them isn’t halal.
The United States media only discusses the bad health effect of using uranium ammunition or burn pits on service man but not on the local population.
The US was successfully driven out of Afghanistan through military resistance. The Taliban didn’t have air power, but they certainly managed to provide military resistance.
Arguing that a war is won means that you lose excuses for why the economic situation is bad. It’s not necessary.
I’m not well read on the particulars of either. As far as Hezbollah goes, the pager attack killed a lot more leadership than just one person.
Can you really? I was under impression that Russians who value their lives always express their disagreement with Putin’s policies by blaming someone else, even (especially) when it is obvious that the policy comes from Putin.
Remember Prigozhin screaming “Gerasimov! Shoigu!” before he turned his troops against Moscow.