>>511283759theres still something you are missing here. i never said the purpose of propaganda is not to humiliate. you have a habit of using rhetoric devices which, while not flawed in and of themself, are irrelevant to the topic at hand, then pretending i somehow contradicted them. i am saying suppressing certain narratives takes primacy over profiteering.
can you name an example where anti-semitism was legitimately promoted for the purpose of profit by the establishment? im not talking about a video that makes $25 of ad revenue just to get taken down later. i mean, if they really put profiteering first, why not have one of their studios publish a documentary which could be sold and profited off of? i think the internet has shown lately there is a market.
your entire argument is based on a misunderstanding of my point. you try to lecture me due to your own lack of understanding. even your thesis "grifting is about making money" is flawed as it lacks nuance. i do not deny it can be to make money, as my thesis does not contradict this. rather, i am saying grifting can be about many things. but if the persons "grift" does not serve a purpose (i.e. does not make money, push a narrative that is useful to elites, etc.) it is not a grift. you have thus far not actually provided a refutation to my original thesis, only become increasingly confused by it and made unrelated, although often true, statements.
i think you must reevaluate.