I don't think "Americans will figure out that something is propaganda" is a reasonable position to take. After all Russian propaganda via the internet was very effective, look at the 2016 election, and native American military propaganda is hugely effective.
> After all Russian propaganda via the internet was very effective
That's a narrative, not a conclusion. It certainly wasn't effective in painting Putin as anything than the brutal dictator he is. I think you mean anti-Hillary propaganda, which there is evidence of...although it was so incidental (in spend and trend) that I'm not sure how this is still a news item. I guess it's just a red-scare-orangeman-bad proxy fight. Russia is not a friend of the US, but Putin and Trump are co-narcissists, dancing around each other.
Still, Americans are vulnerable to propaganda just like all populations are. And pretending that people can't be affected by propaganda because they'll think their way out of it is a dumb position to take.
> pretending that people can't be affected by propaganda because they'll think their way out of it is a dumb position to take
Who is that addressed to? Who would pretend? Just the phrasing of that statement seems strange. It implies an understanding that propaganda serves a function. It always has, that's why the term exists. I didn't imply or assert that a population would "think its way out of it".
