Latin America General : Corona Carnaval

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

Is there anything particularly wrong about CEPR that makes it questionable? Because an analysis of the website shows no obvious factual errors:
LEFT-CENTER BIAS
"These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation."
Detailed Report

Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 48/180

History:
"Founded in 1999, The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) is a left leaning economic policy think-tank based in Washington, D.C. which was co-founded by economists Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot. According to their about page CEPR was created to “promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people’s lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face.”

Funded by / Ownership:
The Center for Economic and Policy Research is a nonprofit that is funded through donations. Employees at CEPR are members of the nonprofit professional employees union IFPTE Local 70.

Analysis / Bias:
In review, CEPR is a progressive think tank that researches economics and publishes news. CEPR publishes op-eds on the website that are written by staff. These op-eds appear in other publications such as the left leaning Truthout and the Washington Monthly. CEPR supports the following policy decisions: advocacy for the Affordable Care Act, increasing the minimum wage, as well as advocacy for full employment in the United States. In general, CEPR politically favors the left, however, research is thorough and properly sourced.

A factual search reveals they have not failed a fact check.

Overall, we rate the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) Left-Center biased based on political policy that favors the left. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record."
Source: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-cent ... -research/

“Progressive Think Tank” end of story

"Conservative Think Tank" end of story
See? I can play that game as well. And for future reference, the genetic fallacy does not count as evidence for a source's supposed "questionability", especially since it doesn't even address any arguments or research said source publishes.

[Torrocca]

“Progressive Think Tank” end of story

"Conservative Think Tank" end of story
See? I can play that game as well.

Like I said, "facts bad unless they agree with me."

[Fahran]

I was referring to your Spanish source. While I can somewhat read and understand it, you should for future reference just post an English source.

Spanish-language sources usually cover Latin American events in more detail than English sources from abroad, especially since said Spanish sources are usually located right in the countries they are covering, and hence they are able to publish more information than for example, Reuters or BBC.

Judging by the name Regeneración (a name probably inspired by the famous left-wing Mexican newspaper), the fact that the shared article reported a story about the military and religious activists literally murdering a puppy that was discovered under a tank, and the ommission of key details surrounding the crisis in Bolivia, I would advise taking the stories reported there with a grain of salt. They seem to have a very pro-Morales tilt. A source based directly in a country undergoing contentious political squabbles also has more skin in the game than foreign media so we can expect more propaganda and bias on average.

[Torrocca]

Spanish-language sources usually cover Latin American events in more detail than English sources from abroad, especially since said Spanish sources are usually located right in the countries they are covering, and hence they are able to publish more information than for example, Reuters or BBC.

Judging by the name Regeneración (a name probably inspired by the famous left-wing Mexican newspaper), the fact that the shared article reported a story about the military and religious activists literally murdering a puppy that was discovered under a tank, and the ommission of key details surrounding the crisis in Bolivia, I would advise taking the stories reported there with a grain of salt. They seem to have a very pro-Morales tilt. A source based directly in a country undergoing contentious political squabbles also has more skin in the game than foreign media so we can expect more propaganda and bias on average.

Turns out that article was wrong: the dog it mentioned had been killed in Chile in 2008 by the police there.

Evo's dog, Ringo, is in good hands and still very much alive as of the 13th at least. :3

... Of course that doesn't really make up for the fact that at least 32 people, as of now, are dead and hundreds more have been injured at the hands of the coup-created government. But at least they didn't senselessly murder a dog too.

[Fahran]

Turns out that article was wrong: the dog it mentioned had been killed in Chile in 2008 by the police there.

Evo's dog, Ringo, is in good hands and still very much alive as of the 13th at least. :3

... Of course that doesn't really make up for the fact that at least 32 people, as of now, are dead and hundreds more have been injured at the hands of the coup-created government. But at least they didn't senselessly murder a dog too.

The earlier article seems to have gotten the name, age, and current status of the dog wrong. It also seems to suggest that the Bolivian military stormed Morales's residence and killed the dog, which doesn't align neatly with the time-table of events reported by more neutral media sources in English and Spanish. As for the deaths due to protest, it's a problem created by both sides. Morales's supporters are currently trying to cut off La Paz from supplies, especially gasoline, and are engaging in violent riots. Ditto for the Christian fundamentalists and right-wingers who have been beating up Morales supporters.

[Outer Sparta]

Turns out that article was wrong: the dog it mentioned had been killed in Chile in 2008 by the police there.

Evo's dog, Ringo, is in good hands and still very much alive as of the 13th at least. :3

... Of course that doesn't really make up for the fact that at least 32 people, as of now, are dead and hundreds more have been injured at the hands of the coup-created government. But at least they didn't senselessly murder a dog too.

The earlier article seems to have gotten the name, age, and current status of the dog wrong. It also seems to suggest that the Bolivian military stormed Morales's residence and killed the dog, which doesn't align neatly with the time-table of events reported by more neutral media sources in English and Spanish. As for the deaths due to protest, it's a problem created by both sides. Morales's supporters are currently trying to cut off La Paz from supplies, especially gasoline, and are engaging in violent riots. Ditto for the Christian fundamentalists and right-wingers who have been beating up Morales supporters.

The indigenous population are afraid of the new government, since Anez is much more hostile to indigenous groups than Morales.

[Fahran]

The indigenous population are afraid of the new government, since Anez is much more hostile to indigenous groups than Morales.

I'm aware. The whole incident with Pachamama suggests as much.

[Aureumterra]

“Progressive Think Tank” end of story

"Conservative Think Tank" end of story
See? I can play that game as well. And for future reference, the genetic fallacy does not count as evidence for a source's supposed "questionability", especially since it doesn't even address any arguments or research said source publishes.

I don’t trust partisan think tanks in general

[Aureumterra]

Judging by the name Regeneración (a name probably inspired by the famous left-wing Mexican newspaper), the fact that the shared article reported a story about the military and religious activists literally murdering a puppy that was discovered under a tank, and the ommission of key details surrounding the crisis in Bolivia, I would advise taking the stories reported there with a grain of salt. They seem to have a very pro-Morales tilt. A source based directly in a country undergoing contentious political squabbles also has more skin in the game than foreign media so we can expect more propaganda and bias on average.

Turns out that article was wrong: the dog it mentioned had been killed in Chile in 2008 by the police there.

Evo's dog, Ringo, is in good hands and still very much alive as of the 13th at least. :3

... Of course that doesn't really make up for the fact that at least 32 people, as of now, are dead and hundreds more have been injured at the hands of the coup-created government. But at least they didn't senselessly murder a dog too.

Conan the Dog is still cuter

[Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana]

Turns out that article was wrong: the dog it mentioned had been killed in Chile in 2008 by the police there.

Evo's dog, Ringo, is in good hands and still very much alive as of the 13th at least. :3

... Of course that doesn't really make up for the fact that at least 32 people, as of now, are dead and hundreds more have been injured at the hands of the coup-created government. But at least they didn't senselessly murder a dog too.

Conan the Dog is still cuter

That dog has done more for America than every single politician in office right now

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

"Conservative Think Tank" end of story
See? I can play that game as well. And for future reference, the genetic fallacy does not count as evidence for a source's supposed "questionability", especially since it doesn't even address any arguments or research said source publishes.

I don’t trust partisan think tanks in general

Tbh, partisanship is only a major problem if it directly affects the factual accuracy of a given source. And the CEPR isn't a radical rabblerouser either, given that its degree of bias is "centre-left" at best.

[Northern Davincia]

The indigenous population are afraid of the new government, since Anez is much more hostile to indigenous groups than Morales.

I'm aware. The whole incident with Pachamama suggests as much.

That was a case of deserved hostility, at least in the church sphere.

[Torrocca]

I'm aware. The whole incident with Pachamama suggests as much.

That was a case of deserved hostility, at least in the church sphere.

Oh boy howdy, I sure do love it when people justify the genocide of indigenous religious and cultural groups because the people of them committed the utterly horrific crime of praying to a deity other than The One True God^TM.

[Northern Davincia]

That was a case of deserved hostility, at least in the church sphere.

Oh boy howdy, I sure do love it when people justify the genocide of indigenous religious and cultural groups because the people of them committed the utterly horrific crime of praying to a deity other than The One True God^TM.

I'm assuming the incident being referred to is when the Pachamama statue was thrown into the Tiber River, which was deserved. There is currently no genocide in Bolivia, however.

[Proctopeo]

Oh boy howdy, I sure do love it when people justify the genocide of indigenous religious and cultural groups because the people of them committed the utterly horrific crime of praying to a deity other than The One True God^TM.

I'm assuming the incident being referred to is when the Pachamama statue was thrown into the Tiber River, which was deserved. There is currently no genocide in Bolivia, however.

It's probably that incident. which was completely justified btw
Otherwise there's just one (1) single comment, which is hardly an incident.

[Fahran]

I'm assuming the incident being referred to is when the Pachamama statue was thrown into the Tiber River, which was deserved. There is currently no genocide in Bolivia, however.

It's probably that incident. which was completely justified btw
Otherwise there's just one (1) single comment, which is hardly an incident.

I was referencing the remark about Pachamama. The incident in Rome is only tangentially related to the state of politics in Bolivia though I tend to agree that, within the Catholic belief system, removing idols from a church and tossing them into a river is more than appropriate. The men responsible for that were Austrian Catholics annoyed by the idolatry taking place in ostensibly Catholic churches.

[Torrocca]

It's probably that incident. which was completely justified btw
Otherwise there's just one (1) single comment, which is hardly an incident.

I was referencing the remark about Pachamama. The incident in Rome is only tangentially related to the state of politics in Bolivia though I tend to agree that, within the Catholic belief system, removing idols from a church and tossing them into a river is more than appropriate. The men responsible for that were Austrian Catholics annoyed by the idolatry taking place in ostensibly Catholic churches.

I, personally, was referencing the general fact that indigenous South Americans got rather horrifically genocided during the colonial era, of which the continued anti-Pachamama response from the Catholic Church is an extension of, as small as it may be.

This is, of course, a non-sequitur to your point in particular, but I digress :V

[Proctopeo]

It's probably that incident. which was completely justified btw
Otherwise there's just one (1) single comment, which is hardly an incident.

I was referencing the remark about Pachamama. The incident in Rome is only tangentially related to the state of politics in Bolivia though I tend to agree that, within the Catholic belief system, removing idols from a church and tossing them into a river is more than appropriate. The men responsible for that were Austrian Catholics annoyed by the idolatry taking place in ostensibly Catholic churches.

Ah, makes sense.
As I said, that's not really an "incident". It's more along the lines of a controversy.

I was referencing the remark about Pachamama. The incident in Rome is only tangentially related to the state of politics in Bolivia though I tend to agree that, within the Catholic belief system, removing idols from a church and tossing them into a river is more than appropriate. The men responsible for that were Austrian Catholics annoyed by the idolatry taking place in ostensibly Catholic churches.

I, personally, was referencing the general fact that indigenous South Americans got rather horrifically genocided during the colonial era, of which the continued anti-Pachamama response from the Catholic Church is an extension of, as small as it may be.

It's really not.

It's more that monotheists, especially those at the head of a major monotheistic religion, don't tend to take kindly to pagan gods, regardless of the ethnicity of who they belong to.
The Catholic Church is no different, and, arguably, far less vitriolic about "pagans bad" than it was in the past, and others are in the present.

[Nakena]

That was a case of deserved hostility, at least in the church sphere.

Oh boy howdy, I sure do love it when people justify the genocide of indigenous religious and cultural groups because the people of them committed the utterly horrific crime of praying to a deity other than The One True God^TM.

The incident in incident in Rome where statuettes of the Pachamama where thrown in the Tiber is merely a small part of a greater controversy. I've investigated the matter a little and it seems that the Pachamama is at the center of a rather heated inner-catholic controversy surrounding the "Amazon Synod", specifically inside more "traditional" circles. I believe the "out casting" of the Pachamama from the Palace is something that must be seen in context of said controversy which may also by now become (if it wasnt already) part of this political conflict.

[Torrocca]

I was referencing the remark about Pachamama. The incident in Rome is only tangentially related to the state of politics in Bolivia though I tend to agree that, within the Catholic belief system, removing idols from a church and tossing them into a river is more than appropriate. The men responsible for that were Austrian Catholics annoyed by the idolatry taking place in ostensibly Catholic churches.

Ah, makes sense.
As I said, that's not really an "incident". It's more along the lines of a controversy.

I, personally, was referencing the general fact that indigenous South Americans got rather horrifically genocided during the colonial era, of which the continued anti-Pachamama response from the Catholic Church is an extension of, as small as it may be.

It's really not.

It's more that monotheists, especially those at the head of a major monotheistic religion, don't tend to take kindly to pagan gods, regardless of the ethnicity of who they belong to.
The Catholic Church is no different, and, arguably, far less vitriolic about "pagans bad" than it was in the past, and others are in the present.

"The anti-Pachamama beliefs and actions of the Catholic Church have no relation to the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1! Those beliefs and actions are only because of the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1!"

[Proctopeo]

Ah, makes sense.
As I said, that's not really an "incident". It's more along the lines of a controversy.


It's really not.

It's more that monotheists, especially those at the head of a major monotheistic religion, don't tend to take kindly to pagan gods, regardless of the ethnicity of who they belong to.
The Catholic Church is no different, and, arguably, far less vitriolic about "pagans bad" than it was in the past, and others are in the present.

"The anti-Pachamama beliefs and actions of the Catholic Church have no relation to the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1! Those beliefs and actions are only because of the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1!"

I don't think you read my post, or remembered what I was responding to, for that matter...

In simpler terms, the Catholic Church generally opposes paganism. It's not an extension of a centuries-gone genocide that they continue to do so. That's just silly.

[Torrocca]

"The anti-Pachamama beliefs and actions of the Catholic Church have no relation to the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1! Those beliefs and actions are only because of the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1!"

I don't think you read my post, or remembered what I was responding to, for that matter...

In simpler terms, the Catholic Church generally opposes paganism. It's not an extension of a centuries-gone genocide that they continue to do so. That's just silly.

Except it quite rather is an extension of that as well. But, yes, let's pretend that history doesn't exist and has no bearing on reality and that the only reason the church, as an institution, would harbor such continued fervent opposition is because "we no like paganism >>>:c".

[Proctopeo]

I don't think you read my post, or remembered what I was responding to, for that matter...

In simpler terms, the Catholic Church generally opposes paganism. It's not an extension of a centuries-gone genocide that they continue to do so. That's just silly.

Except it quite rather is an extension of that as well.

How? You've yet to explain yourself.

But, yes, let's pretend that history doesn't exist and has no bearing on reality and that the only reason the church, as an institution, would harbor such continued fervent opposition is because "we no like paganism >>>:c".

That's exactly why the "continued fervent opposition" continues to exist. It is, legitimately, not that deep.

[Torrocca]

Except it quite rather is an extension of that as well.

How? You've yet to explain yourself.

The centuries of history speak for themselves on this one.

But, yes, let's pretend that history doesn't exist and has no bearing on reality and that the only reason the church, as an institution, would harbor such continued fervent opposition is because "we no like paganism >>>:c".

That's exactly why the "continued fervent opposition" continues to exist. It is, legitimately, not that deep.

It's not the only reason, though. If it was literally just that and nothing else like, say, the centuries of historical actions taken against polytheistic groups with these beliefs in mind, then there'd be nothing more than some inane, meaningless ramblings about these sorts of things.

[Luminesa]

Ah, makes sense.
As I said, that's not really an "incident". It's more along the lines of a controversy.


It's really not.

It's more that monotheists, especially those at the head of a major monotheistic religion, don't tend to take kindly to pagan gods, regardless of the ethnicity of who they belong to.
The Catholic Church is no different, and, arguably, far less vitriolic about "pagans bad" than it was in the past, and others are in the present.

"The anti-Pachamama beliefs and actions of the Catholic Church have no relation to the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1! Those beliefs and actions are only because of the church's history of centuries of frequently violent, often genocidal opposition toward polytheistic religious groups!!1!"

The Church is not trying to genocide people in these areas. However, at the same time, there is a lot of worry and frustration over how these figures are being incorporated into Catholic ceremonies during the Amazon Synod. The Liturgy is the core of the Church, and the fact that these figures appeared during a Catholic Mass, with the Pope and various bishops in attendance, has caused a lot of panic regarding what exactly was occurring at this Mass. Thus the Pachamama-incident is more connected to the internal strife in which the Church is mired, rather than external strife with the Amazonians. After all, this Amazonian Synod wasn’t chiefly to convert the indigenous people to Catholicism. Rather, it was to reach-out to Amazonian Catholics who were trying to become more connected to the larger body of the Universal Church, since they are an isolated group in an isolated part of the world.

There’s also a lot of misunderstanding regarding how South America (much like the Caribbean) has its own syncretic little groups which combine Catholicism and indigenous faiths (think Voudou and Santeria). Because we have not been given a lot of outside information basically at all, even on prominent Catholic websites like Catholic News Agency, EWTN, and even the Vatican’s own website, we don’t know what the Pope is attempting to do, to perhaps draw these groups more into the universal community. Chances are it will not be a clean union, BUT genocide will definitely not be a part of the equation. This will be more of a fight over liturgy and perhaps the Church’s language regarding environmental issues, which has been a big focus of Pope Francis’s papacy.

Let’s add onto that the fact that the Conquistadors in South America were often incredibly stupid, incredibly incompetent individuals who were mostly focused on getting gold and women, and who were not as interested in spreading the Catholic Faith. The Catholic Faith did reach South America by means of Spanish colonization, but not solely through them. And on the other side of the coin, Pachamama is a goddess who causes earthquakes, and various South American religions (most infamously the Aztecs, though they are Central American) had very violent aspects.