What is the Deep State?

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

My beef with a lot of the discussions of the "deep state" is that it evokes the image of a bunch of rich people sitting at a table carving up the world, or signing off on plans to make more money. And I think that's just nonsense.

Hi Pat, 

I suspect some of the others feel like this too but, i'll provide some food for thought.

What is the motivating force once you have enough money? Do they give up and say, we've made enough? Power, dominance and addiction to the game. If we are low in social status terms, we feel low in confidence, and often have all sorts of self doubt. Being low on this ladder we struggle to find a mate, worthwhile friends, a good home, and safety/protection etc etc. The polar opposite is being high in the dominance hierarchy, you get access to the best girls, homes, protection, and you brim with confidence because your social status is so lofty in society (the tribe). Many animals share our neurochemistry, they behave the same way, they are arranged in hierarchies and the higher they rise up, the better access to females they have, hiding places, food etc. Some species like lobsters when confident, even have larger brains than those low in confidence. The point is; it isn't just about the money, it's about power and status. The highest a human can get is by being sat in a position where manipulation of laws or rules are within their sphere of influence, as it not only means they have the best chance of increasing their wealth and status, it also means they have it in perpetuity, ie they can't lose it, which is of course their biggest fear, it's why a revolution would terrify such people. 

Throughout western society, the dominant culture in recent history, all we see are hierarchies. You think that a bunch of rich people sitting around a table sounds like nonsense. Plenty of TV shows and films mock the idea. James Bond plots sometimes seem ridiculous and sometimes not, I can give examples. When Goldfinger and his business acolytes conspire a plan to collapse the world economy to their benefit, we chuckle at how implausible that is. When a group of Al Quaeda living in a cave in Afghanistan wreak havoc all over the globe and collapse the world trade centre, outthink the worlds finest security networks, we think that's plausible. Both supposedly involved a few people sat around a table conspiring. Both wreaked havoc in the world economy. The bankers trip that I eluded to above that led to the formation of the Federal Reserve, was a conspiracy, one that enslaves you guys today, it was perpetrated by wealthy old money guys. It's not nonsense, it's history. Everywhere we look in society there are people conspiring to make certain things happen, whether it's Curtis Le May, Lemnitzer, Arleigh Burke etc, or whether it's your modern day chiefs of staff, they sit in meetings that are esoteric by nature and kept hidden form the majority of people roaming the earth. Do boards of directors of companies share the details of their meetings with the rest of us? Again, it's a group of wealthy people conspiring to make things happen. What about these religious orders and fraternities/groups at US or British colleges and universities. They are primarily used for networking purposes, the same thing happens, a bunch of wealthy people looking to further wealth and power conspiring, its another dominance hierarchy. We have these orders like Freemasons, Rosecrutions, etc which riddle the British police, military and medical industry, it's another network, on a basic level people doing eachother favours but, they have a hierarchy too, which has tremendous influence, the people at the top have much more power. The people at the bottom are largely unaware of what goes on at the top. We can get into the Fabians and other groups too but, what it essentially amounts to is there being a patchwork of networks that are incompatible for a democracy, but, tremendously useful for businessmen, elites etc. 

What I am trying to say is, your whole country is riddled with hierarchies and people conspiring. The country is full of clubs and organisations where people in this class network, not even subtly anymore. We can't assume that because we talk about sports and girls at the local tavern, that hugely ambitious wealthy people don't talk about carving up the world's resources, they absolutely do. Insider trading is rife and how do you think that takes place? A bunch of people very quietly conspiring and sharing knowledge that is not known to the masses. 

Do you think that OPEC isn't a cartel. that a bunch of wealthy people are not price fixing for their own gain? When the FED has private shareholders, how can you think that those wealthy people are not conspiring behind closed doors to further their wealth? When we see a war for profit, do you think that those wealthy guys who profited didn't have a conversation about it in private first? This sharing of information, the architecture of foreign policy making is a hierarchy too. Do you think that if Allen Dulles being head of the CIA, and John Foster Dulles of the CF/Secretary of state, were having a meal with their elite buddies that they weren't talking about carving up the world and its resources? In which case you have these bunch of rich guys sat around a table conspiring that you reject the existence of.

In business terms if very wealthy people compete, it often ends up worse for both party if two businesses compete, so, they owners sit together in private and discuss a course of action that is mutually beneficial. They price fix, they are both against the consumer. It's another form of wealthy people doing something against democratic interests and benefitting themselves. 

The World Economic Forum are busy planning our future, its essentially the marketing and strategy department for a bunch of very wealthy people, they weren't elected, there is nothing democratic about it but, they're planning our futures without us, conspiring in private. Have you seen the guests at Bilderberg meetings? People talking in private and not publishing the minutes. Has it ever been different, tribal elders and the leader conspiring, or a king and lords, etc etc. 

The truth is, an influential hierarchy above government is the natural evolution of a hierarchical structure. The masses and democracy stifles the progress that these people want to make, if you can avoid the masses having a significant input, you would do it. We have all of these conventions that we roughly translate as morality, these people don't live by that, it's just for us. Neo-feudalism, fascism, works better for them than democracy. Sitting around a table with other powerful people conspiring works better for them than casting a vote. 

If I subscribe to your idea, Pat, there is a problem. It means that these elites would be content to leave their futures to chance variables. The other option is; controlling those variables and outcomes, which guarantees the future they want. Which would you do? 

I totally get why people don't want to accept this. It means we have to accept that things are totally unfair, it's a rigged game and that we've been made a fool of. 

Chris

[Pat Speer]

7 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Hi Pat, 

I suspect some of the others feel like this too but, i'll provide some food for thought.

What is the motivating force once you have enough money? Do they give up and say, we've made enough? Power, dominance and addiction to the game. If we are low in social status terms, we feel low in confidence, and often have all sorts of self doubt. Being low on this ladder we struggle to find a mate, worthwhile friends, a good home, and safety/protection etc etc. The polar opposite is being high in the dominance hierarchy, you get access to the best girls, homes, protection, and you brim with confidence because your social status is so lofty in society (the tribe). Many animals share our neurochemistry, they behave the same way, they are arranged in hierarchies and the higher they rise up, the better access to females they have, hiding places, food etc. Some species like lobsters when confident, even have larger brains than those low in confidence. The point is; it isn't just about the money, it's about power and status. The highest a human can get is by being sat in a position where manipulation of laws or rules are within their sphere of influence, as it not only means they have the best chance of increasing their wealth and status, it also means they have it in perpetuity, ie they can't lose it, which is of course their biggest fear, it's why a revolution would terrify such people. 

Throughout western society, the dominant culture in recent history, all we see are hierarchies. You think that a bunch of rich people sitting around a table sounds like nonsense. Plenty of TV shows and films mock the idea. James Bond plots sometimes seem ridiculous and sometimes not, I can give examples. When Goldfinger and his business acolytes conspire a plan to collapse the world economy to their benefit, we chuckle at how implausible that is. When a group of Al Quaeda living in a cave in Afghanistan wreak havoc all over the globe and collapse the world trade centre, outthink the worlds finest security networks, we think that's plausible. Both supposedly involved a few people sat around a table conspiring. Both wreaked havoc in the world economy. The bankers trip that I eluded to above that led to the formation of the Federal Reserve, was a conspiracy, one that enslaves you guys today, it was perpetrated by wealthy old money guys. It's not nonsense, it's history. Everywhere we look in society there are people conspiring to make certain things happen, whether it's Curtis Le May, Lemnitzer, Arleigh Burke etc, or whether it's your modern day chiefs of staff, they sit in meetings that are esoteric by nature and kept hidden form the majority of people roaming the earth. Do boards of directors of companies share the details of their meetings with the rest of us? Again, it's a group of wealthy people conspiring to make things happen. What about these religious orders and fraternities/groups at US or British colleges and universities. They are primarily used for networking purposes, the same thing happens, a bunch of wealthy people looking to further wealth and power conspiring, its another dominance hierarchy. We have these orders like Freemasons, Rosecrutions, etc which riddle the British police, military and medical industry, it's another network, on a basic level people doing eachother favours but, they have a hierarchy too, which has tremendous influence, the people at the top have much more power. The people at the bottom are largely unaware of what goes on at the top. We can get into the Fabians and other groups too but, what it essentially amounts to is there being a patchwork of networks that are incompatible for a democracy, but, tremendously useful for businessmen, elites etc. 

What I am trying to say is, your whole country is riddled with hierarchies and people conspiring. The country is full of clubs and organisations where people in this class network, not even subtly anymore. We can't assume that because we talk about sports and girls at the local tavern, that hugely ambitious wealthy people don't talk about carving up the world's resources, they absolutely do. Insider trading is rife and how do you think that takes place? A bunch of people very quietly conspiring and sharing knowledge that is not known to the masses. 

Do you think that OPEC isn't a cartel. that a bunch of wealthy people are not price fixing for their own gain? When the FED has private shareholders, how can you think that those wealthy people are not conspiring behind closed doors to further their wealth? When we see a war for profit, do you think that those wealthy guys who profited didn't have a conversation about it in private first? This sharing of information, the architecture of foreign policy making is a hierarchy too. Do you think that if Allen Dulles being head of the CIA, and John Foster Dulles of the CF/Secretary of state, were having a meal with their elite buddies that they weren't talking about carving up the world and its resources? In which case you have these bunch of rich guys sat around a table conspiring that you reject the existence of.

In business terms if very wealthy people compete, it often ends up worse for both party if two businesses compete, so, they owners sit together in private and discuss a course of action that is mutually beneficial. They price fix, they are both against the consumer. It's another form of wealthy people doing something against democratic interests and benefitting themselves. 

The World Economic Forum are busy planning our future, its essentially the marketing and strategy department for a bunch of very wealthy people, they weren't elected, there is nothing democratic about it but, they're planning our futures without us, conspiring in private. Have you seen the guests at Bilderberg meetings? People talking in private and not publishing the minutes. Has it ever been different, tribal elders and the leader conspiring, or a king and lords, etc etc. 

The truth is, an influential hierarchy above government is the natural evolution of a hierarchical structure. The masses and democracy stifles the progress that these people want to make, if you can avoid the masses having a significant input, you would do it. We have all of these conventions that we roughly translate as morality, these people don't live by that, it's just for us. Neo-feudalism, fascism, works better for them than democracy. Sitting around a table with other powerful people conspiring works better for them than casting a vote. 

If I subscribe to your idea, Pat, there is a problem. It means that these elites would be content to leave their futures to chance variables. The other option is; controlling those variables and outcomes, which guarantees the future they want. Which would you do? 

I totally get why people don't want to accept this. It means we have to accept that things are totally unfair, it's a rigged game and that we've been made a fool of. 

Chris

Yes, there are powerful elites who meet with others to pursue their interests. But no, they don't always use their power to the detriment of others. It is a fact that the little guys pay the highest price in a war. And yet the New World Order pursued after WWII stabilized large parts of the globe, and allowed a middle class to develop in nations impoverished by the world wars. 

As far as it being a rigged game, yes, I agree. Whatever this is it is not a meritocracy. But there's enough movement between the have-nots to the haves to keep most Americans believing it can happen to them. Even though it almost certainly will not. 

It's kinda like joining a Monopoly game after all the top properties have been handed out, and hotels have been added. You might get lucky and make it to Go without landing on Boardwalk, but your luck can only hold out for so long. In my case, I developed leukemia last year. I hate insurance companies, but if my wife didn't have a good job with insurance I would almost certainly be scattered somewhere. Last I looked the bill was over 2 million, and climbing... 

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

Well, Pat, that was a hell of a closing line!

For Chris, It may be good theater here to call every business deal that's ever been made a conspiracy. In the case of price fixing, I think you could.

But to think the elites at Bildenberg are just there to conspire to oppress us is garbage. They're just talking business deals. Similarly when the elites gather at the kingpin Davos (home of the "great reset"!!!), they're just talking business deals, and giving lip service service to progressive causes, which always drives the right wing conspiracy people into a frenzy!

I think Pat and I intersect in that dark conspiracy talk doesn't work here, because it fails to understand the nature of what you're dealing with. That it's really nothing different than the guy who was up at dawn and  sold apples on the street corner 2000 years ago, or the historical play of individuals seeking competitive advantage over others. Except now the resources are more finite, the players have staked their claim , and a smaller percentage of the population world is controlling more and more of the worlds resources. There is a general philosophy that is common to all those people I've just mentioned. It's organic, they are the oil,  and oil and water don't mix!

This is an excerpt of what I wrote about it a while back on that other thread. Paul, you can take from this, that I don't believe in a deep or "hidden" state, and IMO the more people give up these dark notions  and understand the nature of their true enemy, the better equipped they will be.

 

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, or subscribe to this philosophy. 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.

Edited May 31, 2022 by Kirk Gallaway

[Matt Allison]

Everything that Pat said. Yep.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Yes, there are powerful elites who meet with others to pursue their interests. But no, they don't always use their power to the detriment of others. It is a fact that the little guys pay the highest price in a war. And yet the New World Order pursued after WWII stabilized large parts of the globe, and allowed a middle class to develop in nations impoverished by the world wars. 

As far as it being a rigged game, yes, I agree. Whatever this is it is not a meritocracy. But there's enough movement between the have-nots to the haves to keep most Americans believing it can happen to them. Even though it almost certainly will not. 

It's kinda like joining a Monopoly game after all the top properties have been handed out, and hotels have been added. You might get lucky and make it to Go without landing on Boardwalk, but your luck can only hold out for so long. In my case, I developed leukemia last year. I hate insurance companies, but if my wife didn't have a good job with insurance I would almost certainly be scattered somewhere. Last I looked the bill was over 2 million, and climbing... 

 

I am sure that experience makes you very grateful for every day that you have. Touch wood, you have many years to come and you'd be sorely missed here if you had gone.
It strikes me that there is something drastically wrong with the medical profession when medical bills can get to that level. 😞 That's probably another conversation. 

Back on topic; if I understand you correctly, you believe in events happening or circumstances, and the elites react, when seeing opportunity, and they have the resources to capitalise. I agree, that certainly goes on. Wealthy elites don't always use their power for malevolent means. There is very much a survival of the fittest mentality, the higher up the chain you go. This concept doesn't cater for foreknowledge of significant events, false flag attacks and so on. If we take the JFKA, it took a day or two for Vietnam policy to be reversed, and a whole bunch of people gained crazy amounts of money because of that war. We see subsequent events that are almost seminal, you follow the money and see the same thing, patterns that defy probability. Some of these things require a lot of planning, organisation and tinkering to make them happen. I don't think your perspective really explains this, or at least doesn't satisfy me, and some of the others here, Pat. I think for example that Jim is probably somewhere between you and I, Paul too, maybe Mr Kossor and certainly Dennis. My point is, I don't think it's satisfactory to just accept coincidences, when there is probability and patterns. The usual counter to this is that people see what they want to see, or get hooked on believing everything is a conspiracy once they see one, but that isn't a satisfactory answer either. 

If you had all of that power and influence, and no conscience, why wouldn't you do it? ie if you could have complete control over a society. That's what the royal houses of Europe strived for. There is no doubt in my mind that the USA as country as strived for absolute dominance of the globe. Who is behind that? It isn't your puppets like Biden or Trump. That to me is what the deep state is. 
 

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

And yet the New World Order pursued after WWII stabilized large parts of the globe, and allowed a middle class to develop in nations impoverished by the world wars. 

I think is a lot more nuanced, and you have to understand the objectives of the NWO guys to really judge that. There are some like Douglas Murray who claim we have more slaves than now than at the heyday or the African slave trade. We're now seeing this middle class evaporate into 2 class system. To defeat communism the west had to not only be more prosperous but, it had to offer more opportunity. That's been accomplished and there is now a captive audience and us seemingly moving from capitalism to technocracy. 



 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

For Chris, It may be good theater here to call every business deal that's ever been made a conspiracy. In the case of price fixing, I think you could.

I am not on a wind up, Kirk. Just having an open discussion. I was actually trying to make a process more relatable or understandable. 

[Pat Speer]

Here's something I think we can all agree upon... There is an element of American business that is not as concerned with making quality products people would like to buy, as they are in making products people feel they need to buy, even if they are crap. I think Martin Luther King would turn over in his grave if he saw the younger generations (somewhat) freed by his efforts, turn around and enslave themselves to credit debt and pay day lenders so they can buy bling and Air Jordans. And it's not just the black community, by any means. How many people have no money in the bank but still feel the need to get the latest iPhone, or widescreen TV? Or skin cream? I know this last one is missed by most men, thankfully, but a large fortune is spent every year on skin cream by women so out of shape and unattractive no one would want to look at them no matter how their skin smelled. And that's not even to get into shoes. I've known women who were maxed out on their credit cards at the same time they had a closet filled with dozens (and in one case over a hundred) pairs of shoes they have never worn. Why? 

So, yes, I will agree that there is an element of mind control to big business--and that this stems from the top down, i.e. from people who want to control the public for their own selfish reasons. I would also agree that at times these people step into politics, and ask a government to overthrow another government that is interfering in their profit margin. But do they have organized meetings with other powerful businesses where they approve or disapprove the world's events? I don't think so. I attended some of the top conferences of the record business, and they were a disorganized bunch of scoundrels, with the accent on disorganized. 

[Ron Bulman]

I don't think the 1% or 5% sit around discussing how to screw the middle class or poor.  But they do feel the need to keep their profits maximized for their investors ROI.  And they coordinate their efforts to influence worldwide circumstances in this respect, without regard for the middle class or poor.

E.G., it's possible in 1963 David Rockefeller consulted with say John Mc Cone, John J Mc Cloy, C Douglas Dillon and a few others in the CFR (Council On Foreign Relations), maybe the Du Pont's and told maybe Allen Dulles it's time we did something about this anti colonialist, anti cold war sob. 

[Pat Speer]

I am actually writing to correct an earlier point I made about my time in the record industry. I had implied the big record companies were disorganized. In retrospect, they were fairly well organized, and not for the public good. 

1. They conspired to sell CDs at a list price roughly double that of LPs, even though CDs were cheaper to make. This continued until Napster and iTunes made downloads a cheaper alternative. At that point the prices came crashing downwards. 

2. They conspired to change the packaging of CDs from longbox to jewel case. When the large retailers complained (as they had easily converted their display bins from LP bins to longbox bins, but would have to buy new bins to display jewel cases) the big record companies gave the large retailers a 2% price break for jewel case CDs--at the same time they added a 2 or 3% increase in the overall price. As I recall, all the majors did this. At the same time.

3. They conspired to keep artists tied to what was then the standard contract--7 records over 7 years, which essentially tied a young artist to a label for life (seeing as most labels would not accept an album per year, and preferred to drag the contract out for 15 years or so). I reported on a government hearing on this issue for a news letter. LeAnn Rimes, the Eagles, Bing Crosby's wife, and others took the stand to complain that the standard contract was a scam designed to screw artists. Which brings me to the next point...

4. They conspired to call CDs an experimental format, and paid artists roughly half royalties on CDs long after CDs had become the dominant format. A large label could easily have broken ranks and announced their artists would get paid full royalties on CDs, and used this as a tool to get more prominent artists. But no one did. And it was only through legal maneuvers that artists such as Frank Zappa, Chicago, and the Eagles gained higher royalties and some measure of control over their music catalog. (Prince tried to break through this by changing his name, etc, which goes to show the desperate measures needed to break from the corporate grip.)

Of course, there were the smaller labels and distributors--the Indies--who did not play the major label game. Some artists, such as Ani DiFranco, were quite successful selling their own CDs at a budget price through their own distribution channels. Which leads me to another point about the big record companies.

5. They conspired to buy up most of the racks and window displays in the major retailers. They would buy a window display or a spinner rack by the counter and put brand new artists no one ever heard of right there. This was at a tremendous expense, but the costs were charged back to the artists as recoupable expenses. The main reason they did this was to prevent an indie label from getting a prime position. This, then, furthered the illusion that you needed to be on a major label to reach a large audience.

6. They were so desperate to maintain this illusion, moreover, that they got in bed with the mafia. As recounted in the book Hit Men, organized crime had bribed many if not most of the top radio stations to allow them "exclusive" promotion rights. This meant that only a designated promoter could approach a station's radio programmer about adding new songs to its playlist. In effect, this was organized payola. If a song was not "promoted" to a programmer it could not get played. And the ones doing the promoting were getting paid by the major record companies to both promote their records and NOT promote indie records. And standing in the background, collecting his cut, was John Gotti... (In case you were wondering, this was the main reason Michael Jackson and George Michael had hit after hit after hit from the same albums... CBS was paying off the mafia to make sure these songs were played ad nauseam.)

In any event, this organized evil came largely as a response to outside threats. While I do think there were plenty of conference calls regarding "What should we do about blank?" or "How do we protect our business model?" I'd bet there was little or no planning beyond the next quarter, or year. And that each major lived in constant fear one of the other majors would break ranks and offer a product more artist and customer friendly. (This did, after a crash, come to be. But notice how music is no longer at the forefront of popular culture, and that you no longer see the latest hits in bins at stores like WalMart, Target, and Costco. Alas, it almost makes one nostalgic for the good old days of evil record companies.) 

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

Pat Speer, what a story about the record industry from your view from the inside!

My father's closest friend in the final years of his life was a retired federal U.S. marshal, African-American, who had a lifetime of colorful and hilarious law enforcement experiences and knew the pulse of things. He told me once: "in every town in America there are a few families who run everything." I said, "every town?" He said, "I've never seen an exception."

[Gerry Simone]

On 5/30/2022 at 9:42 PM, Pat Speer said:

...

That's the way the deep state works, IMO. They don't need to have secret meetings. They just need to pursue their self-interest, and corruption and death follow.

 

I agree, except of course when powerful, economic entities need to collude in order to restrict competition or raise prices. 

Jefferson Morley's Deep States blog deals with powerful and influential intelligence agencies, so it's not just about big business.

(And yes, fascinating story about the record industry Pat.  I think it was the Eagles who talked about being "indentured servants").

Edited June 1, 2022 by Gerry Simone

[Matt Allison]

6 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

it almost makes one nostalgic for the good old days of evil record companies. 

Nah. No way. I've made my living recording and producing bands for the past 30 years; I had a #1 album on Billboard's Rock chart, so I've had skin in the game. When it comes to what's good for music and art, the new world is much better. And the primary reason royalties to artists from streaming are so low is because of the damn deal the majors signed with Spotify back when it first started up. Labels are still collecting far more money than they should, as they are no longer necessary for distribution; their only role is promotion.

But don't look past the vinyl comeback; it's real. I visited a pressing plant here in Chicago last month to watch one of my projects get transformed from little PVC pellets into beautiful 12 inch records  

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Nah. No way. I've made my living recording and producing bands for the past 30 years; I had a #1 album on Billboard's Rock chart, so I've had skin in the game. When it comes to what's good for music and art, the new world is much better. And the primary reason royalties to artists from streaming are so low is because of the damn deal the majors signed with Spotify back when it first started up. Labels are still collecting far more money than they should, as they are no longer necessary for distribution; their only role is promotion.

But don't look past the vinyl comeback; it's real. I visited a pressing plant here in Chicago last month to watch one of my projects get transformed from little PVC pellets into beautiful 12 inch records  

Have you read "Confessions of a Record Producer"? I was impressed and provided some of the material for the follow-up. 

[Matt Allison]

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Have you read "Confessions of a Record Producer"? I was impressed and provided some of the material for the follow-up. 

I haven't! I'll keep an eye out for it.

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

I haven't! I'll keep an eye out for it.

It was a book that explained how record contracts work, released just as the indie and DIY movement was taking flight.  Its author made the transition to conducting seminars for beginning artists. It helped many a young artist avoid the major label minefield.