The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Page #500!!!!

 

Jeff, Substantively the articles are pretty much the same. I don't how you brought Russiagate in here. But regarding the article. I, cover all this here. I was inspired through Dennis's . "Biden beyond the veil" about the release of the JFK files. So I start by weighing in on that.

But I think the topic  was just sort of a prop for Dennis expansively telling us about his view of the insidiousness of the present day deep state. And that's cool with me, and I continue with that. I'm conversationally often talking to Dennis, here but it could be to everyone..

 

I'm going to share with you what some might find JFK- to- present-day- deep- state nihilism. I try to expose what I think is a lot of myth making by a lot of people here, so I don't expect it to be popular or fall along some ideological lines. But I think there are some twists and turns to common perceptions.I don;t think anybody that I've heard post here has posted anything that I think is near what would be called the "Deep state." I'm not sure any of the allegations thrown out have ever been solution oriented but often just general rants of personal frustration (which I understand). which can be true, but I feel there's a great confusion about who the true enemy is and how it manifests. I welcome everyone's response.

 

*****

First re the Government response to the JFKA research communities requests.

I don't think anybody in government is conscious of any real "bombs" in the remaining JFK files, and is holding on for dear life to withhold valuable information from the public. I agree that maybe the research done by the outside is impressive to the government, but it's probably not even enough to make them further undertake any great research into it.   The effort that you seem to imply that the "powers that be" are taking to conceal is  probably averted with a stroke of a pen. I'm not sure, but I'm afraid it might be a case where you're  setting yourself up for profound disappointment as to the resistance offered and the nature of the existing content.

 

Try this. IMO Nobody in government knows who killed JFK, and that in itself is probably worthy of a thread. And just as with the  government, now in 2021 I'm not sure the subset of people who may be aware through family connection or corporate connection, of their ancestral or company complicity in the JFKA are included among any of the worlds "powers that be", in any loose sense, much less directly pulling the levers of the NSS or are themselves current kingpins of industry. I'm not saying it couldn't possibly be. The notion that there are 5th generation career government bureaucrats that are being groomed  for high government positions to guard the JFKA secrets is rather absurd to me. But I suppose there could be some  wealthy heirs that know their dark family secrets, but are they really as heavy players on the world scene today as new generations of wealth that have been amassed at a pace unheard of with the old money? (We have RFK JR complaining about the massive profits being made by Pinterest!!)  And do the successive generations really have that much on the ball? But I suppose it's the RFK Jr. generation that would be keeping the secrets, like maybe that Du Pont heir who was obsessed with wrestling and ended being  a murderer who Steve Carel played in that movie. heh heh  Ok, I digress, I don't mean to be a party pooper,  But these are the conclusions to me, that make the most sense.

 

Dennis: Some researchers have done great work on the political reasons for the murder, but very few branch out to put the JFK case in proper historical context. Admittedly, this is much harder to do.

Ok it certainly is. I think this is your central theme, isn't it? I've already tried to discuss with you some of your covid theories. I'll leave your covid tie in to the JFKA alone,  and try to focus on what I think are your most lucid points. You always seem very comprehensive in your scope, which I can relate to.

Dennis:We say it was a coup but then don’t follow that logic through to today. If the security services were involved, the important question is who do they serve?

That's a good question. But drawing the direct line to today is, as you said harder to do. The reason is that the initial culprits IMO, were comprised of a relatively very small group of National Security  and the MIC defending corporate interests, but that group was so narrow. The interests back then  were largely industrial, securing raw materials through out the world. Those industries are larger now, but actually a smaller percentage of the pie now than it was and really  now only  a drop in the bucket of the total world GDP..

Honestly Dennis, again, the modern day culprit isn't even a "who". And there's really no "there" there. heh heh. If you're really serious about focusing and not just making scattershot allegations. If you really want change, you have to know the nature of your enemy, the Corporate State, which infiltrates and controls governments in various degrees throughout the world.

 

What is of prime importance to realize is that the Corporate State, being multi national, has only one real potential foe, and that is the federal governments of  the world stopping them in their tracks by extracting taxes from them for their enormous gains, as over our lifetime they have had large success in in infiltrating these governments and obstructing policy to do so. It's in the corporate interest to  a degree to foment the current climate of government distrust, to the masses of people, by propagating that  the government is an intrusive evil, that takes away your rights, intrudes on your privacy, and extracts taxes from your hard earned pay, so as to create a climate of resentment to taxation and a resultant defunding of government. But all these evils of government are in large part, because they control it!

 

You have to cut the serpent off at it's head, that is, get rid of corporate influence. Your misdirection in confusing the culprit as the temporal nation state government is just music to the ears of the Corporate State, who while they are quite content with the status quo, as they've been winning the game  marginalizing the middle class for the last 40 years. ( In fact they're even willing to give some back in taxes) None the less they would love to control the narrative to capitalize on  misdirected anger to enrage people against the government  in order to find reasons to defund the Government "administrative state" (as Steve Banon puts it.), which of course would be a great windfall for them. The fact that they have such an existing role in government already means they can regulate the specific ways the government is defunded.

The world Corporate State philosophy is essentially a Libertarian philosophy that states that  people are primarily responsible for their own survival, (which in their dishonest jargon, "survival" is exalted as "freedom" and" liberty") and there should be as  little of a Government security net as possible. So in their ideal state, (which outside of a  few groups, they know isn't completely achievable, unless there's an economic catastrophic event). They would probably scale back the government to the pre New Deal, if they could get away with it. This isn't in any way to say that all people in corporations are alike or evil. Many  of them individually have different ideas about the role of a government safety net. But that's the  elegance and seamlessness of it. No one person can be held to blame!

Similarly,  It is this philosophy that is the reason, that there are no conspiracies per se, (oh, boo hoo!)  in that none of them have to sit around and plot and conspire against you and me. They just naturally think alike.

 

 

Kirk, this is actually one of your better posts. You're not dehumanising an opponent for once, and for the most part it appears that you are on the same page as Dennis & I in multiple areas here. You agree the corruption is there, subverting democracies, you just don't agree on who and why, or the extent of it. It seems like the arguing with Dennis & I over the past year or so has influenced your world outlook. Which was really my purpose in discussing such things, to influence people. What amazes me is; if this is indeed your true outlook, why are you still a cheerleader for the blue party, why are you buying into this charade if you do indeed believe that corruption is running the show (blue & red). How do you rationalise that contradiction in your mind? Is it that you don't want to let go of a belief system that's been the foundation of your views since you were young? 

Cheers

Chris

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Veteran observer Jack Rasmus saw the same things as Hudson did - with the ultimate de-coupling of the Infrastructure and Reconciliation bills the “coup d’grace”:

“How Democrat Progressives Got Out-Maneuvered by Their Corporate Wing”

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/11/08/how-democrat-progressives-got-out-maneuvered-by-their-corporate-wing/

The theory that the Dem leadership really wanted to go along with their progressive friends but just couldn’t “assemble a real consensus” is belied by the list of machinations and legislative compromises, which undermines the notion that two rather mediocre legislators were simply successful in overwhelming the party’s true intent:

“Why not simply remove Manchin from his committee memberships, and stop federal subsidy of his West Virginia constituency? Instead, they have put him in charge of the environment bill, which he has disfigured on behalf of the lobbying money he receives from the oil and coal sectors.”

Hudson’s observation that the Dem’s leadership is beholden to the Party’s “donor class” is far more useful to developing an objective perspective than a crude reduction of events to unfortunate unforeseen circumstances. What can be recognized here is, at least in a duopoly system (no viable third parties), the Dem’s must rely on their progressive wing to win, but won’t let them influence policy. The withdrawal or withholding of the “progressive vote” in response will largely determine whether big blow-outs in 2022 and 2024 are ahead. (The same happened in 1946, after the progressive wing was screwed at Convention in 1944).

Remember, the true purpose of Russiagate was to prevent or forestall a forensic analysis of why Clinton lost in 2016. The consequences of that have now been made manifest. I suspect this is informing the constant "1/6 attack on our democracy" meme.

"Hudson’s observation that the Dem’s leadership is beholden to the Party’s “donor class” is far more useful to developing an objective perspective than a crude reduction of events to unfortunate unforeseen circumstances. " --Jeff Carter

If only that was the whole story. 

It gets worse.

The Donks, and affiliated media, have become lapdog-megaphones for the national security and surveillance state. 

This new Donk-frankenstein-party is being passed off as "progressive" or "liberal."  You know, the CIA hires Hispanic women so they must be cool. 

Also, Liz Cheney and George Bush jr. are the new Donk-media heroes. 

No, the 'Phants are no better. But let's call a spade a spade. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

8 hours ago, Richard Price said:

Even if this were possible, the imperfect humans running the government still would not do what was in the best interest of the population as a whole.  Individuals, even when in groups still tend to start from a standpoint of "what's in it for me/my company/my pocket book/etc." 

Richard, I think your posts have always been thoughtful and you should contribute.

I agree, of course, as you know, that's the same problem of humans and any governing body. since the beginning of time.But we see where this is headed, and eliminating this  influence can only help, and only lead to further transparency.

[Kirk Gallaway]

7 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Kirk, this is actually one of your better posts. You're not dehumanising an opponent for once, and for the most part it appears that you are on the same page as Dennis & I in multiple areas here. You agree the corruption is there, subverting democracies, you just don't agree on who and why, or the extent of it. It seems like the arguing with Dennis & I over the past year or so has influenced your world outlook. Which was really my purpose in discussing such things, to influence people. What amazes me is; if this is indeed your true outlook, why are you still a cheerleader for the blue party, why are you buying into this charade if you do indeed believe that corruption is running the show (blue & red). How do you rationalise that contradiction in your mind? Is it that you don't want to let go of a belief system that's been the foundation of your views since you were young? 

Cheers

Chris

Chris:It seems like the arguing with Dennis & I over the past year or so has influenced your world outlook.

Oh really? i think you're overestimating your influence Chris. I haven't interacted much with you and hardly at all with Dennis.

Since you're giving me your impression of who you think I am. I'll give mine and I'll say i don't put you and Dennis at all in the same bag, or are really motivated  at all by the same things.

Please tell me in your words about the present day pervasiveness of the corporate state.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Chris:It seems like the arguing with Dennis & I over the past year or so has influenced your world outlook.

Oh really? i think you're overestimating your influence Chris. I haven't interacted much with you and hardly at all with Dennis.

Since you're giving me your impression of who you think I am. I'll give mine and I'll say i don't put you and Dennis at all in the same bag, or are really motivated  at all by the same things.

Please tell me in your words about the present day pervasiveness of the corporate state.

Kirk, I don’t know why you’d have a problem answering a straight question. Unless of course you can’t answer it in a way that looks rational. Which is fine. 🙂 
 

[Kirk Gallaway]

I'm not a cheer leader for the blue party, but given the current situation. I don't want my country taken over by fascists. and I feel no contradiction to my belief system, just as I've always been against bullies since I was young, and now I'm against Fascists. Understood?

You've made a lot of very  parochial assumptions in that question Chris. Whereas my question to you is unassuming..

Please tell me in your words about the present day pervasiveness of the corporate state?

Or do you find it pervasive? If not why?

 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I'm not a cheer leader for the blue party, but given the current situation. I don't want my country taken over by fascists. and I feel no contradiction to my belief system, just as I've always been against bullies since I was young, and now I'm against Fascists. Understood?

You've made a lot of very  parochial assumptions in that question Chris. Whereas my question to you is unassuming..

Please tell me in your words about the present day pervasiveness of the corporate state?

Or do you find it pervasive? If not why?

 

I think it's been that way a long time, fascist. This is a common argument that Dennis and share and that is touched upon in my conspiracy theories thread, it goes back a lot further than most people think. If you have the will, have a read of Carroll Quigley's - Tragedy & Hope or, the Anglo-American Establishment. 

I think it's a good position to be against fascists and bullies. Just be careful that you don't go from gamekeeper to poacher at times. If you're taking little nips at people, making snidey remarks, partaking in reputation destruction, it is all tantamount to bullying. I recognise we are all human and imperfect, our emotions get the better of us at times. 

Regarding my assumptions; I tend to be very analytical and pick up on very subtle things. My instincts serve me very well in work, particularly EQ. Be sure you understand yourself, most people don't, and thinking through complex problems rationally isn't exactly commonplace. Our words radiate our thinking, even when we think we are masking our true feelings. The reason for the question is that in my opinion it's patently absurd that a person would defend an institution or party, when it is co-opted by the things they are against, just because there is another organisation that seems more villainous. The time expended on this alone is staggering and what purpose does it serve? Just to break that down for anyone reading; if you only have a two party system and you want to do something fascist or corrupt, all you need to do is present the voter with a worse option than your organisation and people take the lesser of two evils. The parties are counterpoints to eachother. The same way the news networks are and so on. The left and right is completely irrelevant today. It's the same in Britain, it works exceptionally well for one class of people. 

Unfortunately, I am in a position where I am pretty stretched with work and my social life, hence my lack of contribution since summer, I don't have the time to be drafting the 5000-10000 word posts that would did this topic justice, plus, there are people much more scholarly than I who are beating this drum in the public domain. Have you listened to the Neil Oliver links that I have shared?  What I will say is, this neo-fascist corporatocracy, or technocracy that's being ushered in, is exactly what Dennis & I were trying to warn you guys about in that other thread. Just to respond to your observations about seeing Dennis and I as different, we are, one of us is an American for starters but, we do share a lot of common ground on certain topics which are very pertinent in 2021. 

Cheers

Chris







 

[Dennis Berube]

22 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

and has defended the German WWII salute.

Wrong Steve, he was defending the freedom of speech. The poopoo salute in question was to protest the tyrannical policies coming out of the executive branch. It was literally a showcase of anti-fascism, democrats of today however, prefer censorship to a genuine discussion. A truly fascist philosophy through any viewpoint one would have thought.

 

 

The original word was censored by the forum to “poopoo”. I think cliff is to blame. 

Edited November 9, 2021 by Dennis Berube

[Kirk Gallaway]

That long winded personal response doesn't obscure that you've evaded the question concerning the pervasiveness of the corporate state twice now. Which I was expecting. You haven't elevated anything beyond the personal yet. Chris, look at page 499 and tell me you're not the most verbose person here. 

I've been very civil to you despite your rather snarky opening comments.

As to your comment of my being dehumanizing. I'll remind that you've become unraveled a number of times with my count is 3 people. With me, you actually called me a n--z-i. You thought this was a "loosey goosey anything goes" forum and you ended up being wrong. I've never been reprimanded here.

 

I will explain, from my side, I see you as coming  off with a lot of erroneous information from time to time, and when you indulge in figures, you're way off. And you will be held to task. You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

Trump to minority leader Kevin Mc Carthy in their phone call,safter his being sequestered from the Capitol: Trump: well Kevin, I guess they're (the rioters) are just more upset about the election than you.

 

 

As a New  Blue Cheer leader, heh heh, (Sorry, American reference) .I'd like the Democrats to answer the question of why Republican Minority leader   Kevin Mc Cartyhy isn't presently being considered to testify as to his correspondence with Trump during the riots. If this is the exclusive good old boys club, they should be asked and say so.

I'd like to see what they say. It will be embarrassing and should be!

 

Where the hell is Merrick Garland? There's been plenty of time for him to slap a contempt of Congress on Steve Banon!  We don't need Biden to appoint someone as an AG as  a consolation prize for not being appointed to the Supreme Court!

 

*****

 

 

Jonathan Karl in his book" Betrayal", says there are photos and film on 1/6 of a sequestered Pence and his family standing for awhile in a parking area, while waiting for the transfer out of the Capitol area. In that moment a Pence aide shows Pence Trump's tweet that “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.”  Pence reads it and barely shows a grimace.  Shortly after a car comes for Pence to leave the Capitol and he turns it down.

 

Trump feels betrayed that Republican party let him down and  proceeded with the certification, and upon leaving Washington the RNC chairwoman Ronna Mac Donnel (you know that rather young woman who looks like she might be a manager of a KFC, like DVP?)  phones Trump to wish him farewell. Trump becomes angry, and  says he's leaving the Republican Party and starting his own party. After meeting with the RNC, Mc Donnel  tells Trump that he better not or he's on the hook in campaign expense and legal fees  involving his post election challenges that could total 100 million dollars!, and the RNC will keep his list of supporters. Trump then backs down!!.

You can't make this stuff up!

 

https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-told-rnc-chair-leaving-gop-create-party/story?id=80979889

 

 

 

[Jeff Carter]

On 11/8/2021 at 9:05 AM, Kirk Gallaway said:

...there are huge groups of people in red states that vote against their stated interests, to put it as kind as I can. They'd accept it if it was from the Republicans  but the Republicans only want increased Defense spending and to give tax cuts to the rich.

You might want to review that assertion. Hudson clearly disputes the notion of such partisan divide. It may be more accurate to state that most voters are left to “vote against their stated interests.”

Hudson posted a follow-up this AM, again reviewing the results of last week’s compromises. The Democrat establishment watered down the entire progressive agenda which Biden campaigned on, and then added a $450 billion tax giveaway on expensive homes and neutered proposed Medicare reforms on drug prices. Previously, an initiative led by Democrat senators added $10 billion to the Defence budget, which had already been subject to increases this year over last.

“…the new BBB bill has been distorted into something quite different than what was described until last week. The largest element grafted onto it is the $450 billion tax cut for wealthy homeowners, raising the SALT property tax deductibility in East Coast Democratic states from $10,000 to $72,500. This giveaway is promoted by the same “centrists” who are blocking approval of the BBB because it will “add to the budget deficit… Over the weekend we have learned how drastically the early promise of fiscal savings for Medicare drug purchases has been drastically watered down…So much for the Blue Dogs’ crocodile tears about the federal budget deficit! Complaining about adding to the deficit is a “tell” that they will continue to oppose pro-labor, pro-consumer policies. They never raise this concern when it comes to military appropriations or tax cuts for the One Percent.”

Michael Hudson - “Did the Squad Give Away Their Bargaining Power?”

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/11/09/did-the-squad-give-away-their-bargaining-power/

[Kirk Gallaway]

Of course,I know. Salt is also about California as well as the other high state tax East Coast states writing off part of their federal taxes to the States. ( Hudson doesn't seem to know that) I got plugged bad on that one one year, and Trump moved to Florida! But things are looking better now!😀

Jeff, You've come a long way from the guy who only 3 years ago was convinced that Hilary Clinton was going to launch a nuclear attack on both Russia and China simultaneously while you said "there was a window to do so" .At one point i characterized your stuff as "one note",  remember? And  I said the real culprit is not the mighty deep state generals, but the corporate state. 

Well damn, dude, you're schooling me now! The Republicans got their tax cuts to the wealthy with a 52-48, but couldn't stop the  Affordable Care Act. The Dems were 50-50 but it may as well be 52-48..I see Bernie and Warren as the only anti corporate candidates. It will be interesting to see what Bernie says, He can't be happy.

Edited November 9, 2021 by Kirk Gallaway

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

That long winded personal response doesn't obscure that you've evaded the question concerning the pervasiveness of the corporate state twice now. Which I was expecting. You haven't elevated anything beyond the personal yet. Chris, look at page 499 and tell me you're not the most verbose person here. 

I've been very civil to you despite your rather snarky opening comments.

As to your comment of my being dehumanizing. I'll remind that you've become unraveled a number of times with my count is 3 people. With me, you actually called me a n--z-i. You thought this was a "loosey goosey anything goes" forum and you ended up being wrong. I've never been reprimanded here.

 

I will explain, from my side, I see you as coming  off with a lot of erroneous information from time to time, and when you indulge in figures, you're way off. And you will be held to task. You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. 

 

 

 

 

 

This really show how infantile your mind is. You dehumanise 20% of the population (approximately) by calling them filthy rats, or something like that, for not having their jabs. I educated you on the dark days of WW2 and how the Third Reich dehumanised minorities and where that took societies in Europe. I didn't call you one, I asked you if you were one, in jest, to highlight your poor behaviour. Then you had a hissy fit and asked the moderators for help, I suspect because of SEO implications, which obviously I was aware of. You are pointing out with pride that you've never been reprimanded by the mods here. How juvenile is that? You're old enough to be someone's great grandad and you're behaving like a jobsworth at junior school, tit tailing and acting like its a badge of honour. It's funny when the shoe is on the other foot, how people react. That was your moment of weakness, I was smiling because it was a simple trap. You really got schooled at your own game. As for me unraveling, I give at least as good as I get, so if you're throwing stones, don't expect me to cower. It was you who took the civility out of the conversation, so you can't play the victim here.

I am still waiting to be held to task. I am happy to be wrong but, I don't think you're even close to seeing reality. The reasons for that are psychological. I'll repeat, you can't see the glaring contradictions in your belief system, and you are not wishing to delve into it. I suspect we are on the same page with corporatocracy. Though it was me who I think first shared the Blackrock / Vanguard video, highlighting the level or control held by so few. Everything is erroneous if it doesn't fit your belief system. Perhaps this is indicative of your age and mine. I am more open minded than you are and perhaps you experienced a greater level of indoctrination than I did. 

[W. Niederhut]

Historian Nancy MacLean: We're seeing a right-wing plan built on "decades of disinformation"

MacLean published "Democracy in Chains" four years ago — and says it's "gut-wrenching" to see it come to life

https://www.salon.com/2021/11/09/historian-nancy-maclean-were-seeing-a-right-wing-plan-built-on-decades-of-disinformation/

November 9, 2021

Excerpts

How are you feeling? For some time, you have warned the American people about the anti-democracy campaign being waged by the libertarian right-wing. That's all coming together right now. 

MacLean: It's dispiriting. I believe that more people are understanding what's going on in this country with the democracy crisis, but I do not think it is happening on a scale and in a timely enough way to stop what's unfolding before us. It's just gut-wrenching, to be frank. People who should know better are not behaving as they should. The Biden administration is running into exactly the same roadblocks the Obama administration did.

So the Republican Party won't compromise? What did they think was going to happen when the Republican Party was taken over by libertarian donors and a base that's been fed red meat by Fox News for 25 years?

America's political class continues to behave as though it is shocked and stunned by the Republican attempts to nullify democracy, as seen on Jan. 6 and in the ongoing coup attempt. Are they in denial? Is this willful ignorance? Are they so invested in a broken political system that they refuse to admit the obvious and respond appropriately? How do you make sense of this lack of urgency?

MacLean: First, I do not believe that they are a monolith. It is important to emphasize that fact because there are people who do know better. This includes Pramila Jayapal of the Progressive Caucus, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown, Sheldon Whitehouse and others. There have been some bold and outspoken and truth-delivering voices who we should applaud. But it is a real challenge to persuade their colleagues to speak to these truths about the country's democracy crises.

I'm not denying that it's a complicated operation. If the Democrats need 60 senators to get anything substantive done and you're dealing with the likes of Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, it's a challenge and it's frustrating. But I do believe that the leading Democrats could do more with the bully pulpit to help the American people understand the origins of the democracy crisis — and what is at stake for their day-to-day lives if this right-wing libertarian and larger anti-democracy cause is allowed to advance, as it has been doing for years.

What and who are the elements in this anti-democracy movement?

MacLean: There is an elite element and the voters they count on to advance the goals. The elite elements are parts of the corporate libertarian Koch network. The large number of donors and institutions they fund include the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society, Americans for Prosperity, the State Policy Network and many others.

This network also includes supposed scholars, faculty, and students at over 300 institutions at present. The corporate-libertarian cause knows that the world they want to create is unpopular. Therefore, they have to get the votes to advance their agenda by relying on the religious right.

The religious right has now been boiled down to a base consisting of white nationalist Christian evangelicals in various forms, who are anti-science for example. In my opinion, it was fairly easy to persuade them to reject climate science and to embrace the Big Lie about the 2020 election and all the other lies and untruths being pandered by the right-wing movement and its media.

We are now also seeing the religious right overlapping in significant ways with white supremacists and the larger white power movement. In this country we are in real trouble in that regard because of how these white nationalist identities are being used to promote vigilante actions.

What did you see on Jan. 6?

MacLean: To my eyes, it was a fulfillment of these decades of disinformation and agitation of the worst impulses held by some Americans. For example, these very self-interested right-wing forces who oppose taking action to stop the global climate crisis are willing to leverage racism, homophobia, sexism and other antisocial behavior and values to achieve that goal.

There is plenty of evidence showing that the Koch donor network has funded and continues to back the politicians who spurred on the events of Jan. 6 and the Big Lie, and refused to certify Biden's election.

The mainstream news media are complicit in so much of this because of their "both sides" script. The mainstream news media needs to recognize that there is an imminent threat of autocracy in the United States.

Edited November 9, 2021 by W. Niederhut

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Historian Nancy MacLean: We're seeing a right-wing plan built on "decades of disinformation"

MacLean published "Democracy in Chains" four years ago — and says it's "gut-wrenching" to see it come to life

https://www.salon.com/2021/11/09/historian-nancy-maclean-were-seeing-a-right-wing-plan-built-on-decades-of-disinformation/

November 9, 2021

Excerpts

How are you feeling? For some time, you have warned the American people about the anti-democracy campaign being waged by the libertarian right-wing. That's all coming together right now. 

MacLean: It's dispiriting. I believe that more people are understanding what's going on in this country with the democracy crisis, but I do not think it is happening on a scale and in a timely enough way to stop what's unfolding before us. It's just gut-wrenching, to be frank. People who should know better are not behaving as they should. The Biden administration is running into exactly the same roadblocks the Obama administration did.

So the Republican Party won't compromise? What did they think was going to happen when the Republican Party was taken over by libertarian donors and a base that's been fed red meat by Fox News for 25 years?

America's political class continues to behave as though it is shocked and stunned by the Republican attempts to nullify democracy, as seen on Jan. 6 and in the ongoing coup attempt. Are they in denial? Is this willful ignorance? Are they so invested in a broken political system that they refuse to admit the obvious and respond appropriately? How do you make sense of this lack of urgency?

MacLean: First, I do not believe that they are a monolith. It is important to emphasize that fact because there are people who do know better. This includes Pramila Jayapal of the Progressive Caucus, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown, Sheldon Whitehouse and others. There have been some bold and outspoken and truth-delivering voices who we should applaud. But it is a real challenge to persuade their colleagues to speak to these truths about the country's democracy crises.

I'm not denying that it's a complicated operation. If the Democrats need 60 senators to get anything substantive done and you're dealing with the likes of Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, it's a challenge and it's frustrating. But I do believe that the leading Democrats could do more with the bully pulpit to help the American people understand the origins of the democracy crisis — and what is at stake for their day-to-day lives if this right-wing libertarian and larger anti-democracy cause is allowed to advance, as it has been doing for years.

What and who are the elements in this anti-democracy movement?

MacLean: There is an elite element and the voters they count on to advance the goals. The elite elements are parts of the corporate libertarian Koch network. The large number of donors and institutions they fund include the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society, Americans for Prosperity, the State Policy Network and many others.

This network also includes supposed scholars, faculty, and students at over 300 institutions at present. The corporate-libertarian cause knows that the world they want to create is unpopular. Therefore, they have to get the votes to advance their agenda by relying on the religious right.

The religious right has now been boiled down to a base consisting of white nationalist Christian evangelicals in various forms, who are anti-science for example. In my opinion, it was fairly easy to persuade them to reject climate science and to embrace the Big Lie about the 2020 election and all the other lies and untruths being pandered by the right-wing movement and its media.

We are now also seeing the religious right overlapping in significant ways with white supremacists and the larger white power movement. In this country we are in real trouble in that regard because of how these white nationalist identities are being used to promote vigilante actions.

What did you see on Jan. 6?

MacLean: To my eyes, it was a fulfillment of these decades of disinformation and agitation of the worst impulses held by some Americans. For example, these very self-interested right-wing forces who oppose taking action to stop the global climate crisis are willing to leverage racism, homophobia, sexism and other antisocial behavior and values to achieve that goal.

There is plenty of evidence showing that the Koch donor network has funded and continues to back the politicians who spurred on the events of Jan. 6 and the Big Lie, and refused to certify Biden's election.

The mainstream news media are complicit in so much of this because of their "both sides" script. The mainstream news media needs to recognize that there is an imminent threat of autocracy in the United States.

W.--Not sure about this perspective. 

Sure seems to me the M$M has peddled serious disinformation and misinformation for the last  60 years, as well as gigantic errors of omission, all to the present day. 

Every year there is no debate about the size of the DoD-VA budget, now at $1 trillion a year. No debate about a global military apparatus, or the $100 billion black budget. And now we are told by the M$M we need to ramp up domestic surveillance and the police state to combat domestic terrorism, and go heavy on internet censorship. 

This is the M$M. 

And since this is the JFKA forum---really, the M$M treated JFKA topic fairly?

Personally, I have little in common with the groups you mention---the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society, Americans for Prosperity, the State Policy Network---although I find nothing wrong with true libertarianism. But they have their perspectives, as did Alex Jones. Censorship in never the answer. 

When I look at the US media landscape it seems heavily affiliated with and dominated by the multi-nationalist globalist class, the panopticon national security state and the Donks, who have become subservient to the aforementioned groups, who make up the donor class.   

This does not mean the right-wing sites are founts of truth.  But people are turning to alternative news sites, as do I, to get another perspective. 

I heartily recommend reading Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, and Aaron Mate, The Hill, and Breaking Views.