The nation's powerful anti-democratic forces have had a plan for decades—a diabolic and wildly successful plan.
Betsy DeVos’ attack on our public schools is a major component of this right-wing War Against Democracy. Stopping her unconstitutional plans to use taxpayer money to fund “christian” brainwashing institutions and promote theocracy is critical to saving what little is left of our freedoms.
There is also an attempt by white nationalists to take over and the Russians are trying to undermine stability here.
A nice, quick overview of the problem. The Russian meddling story is garbage because our own American oligarchs now have their Stalinist dream and it was their idea from the start. Keep your notebooks, pens and bicycles, since you are going to need them for communication purposes!
In retrospect, it was all over in the fall of 2001, once the Patriot Act was signed. Everything since has just been consolidation.
How much did Russia spend on the 2016 election versus AIPAC/Israel? And since we know that ex-Mossad agents hire themselves out to help pervert Hollywood producers, we should assume they also provided intel to the Democrats. Next to Israel, Russia is like a troop of Camp Fire Girls.
Yes - 1971 - three years after Robert was eliminated. Had he won the presidency, an awful lot of four star generals would be still languishing in Leavenworth.
“Trump may be a buffoon, but he is the perfect useful idiot, distracting us—probably unwittingly—from the carefully crafted script written by experts.” (John Acheson)
I agree - smoke and mirrors in the USA.
Time for a flanking manoeuvre - the United Nations come to mind.
And for a rebirth of the individual - because we are very much on our own now.
The Next System Project - an example of forward thinking by folks like Kate Soper getting conversations going. Following three paragraphs to introduce the paper she lays out a framework to consider:
" (…) In this paper, I first expand on the more negative aspects of consumer culture, and explain why it needs to change and why many Americans themselves might want now to do that. In the second part, I point to the advantages of moving beyond the consumerist system, and argue for an “alternative hedonist” approach to thinking about human well-being, consumption, and the politics of prosperity. Part three outlines some of the measures already advocated or enacted with a view to curbing the hold of consumer culture on our life experience and imagination, and then moves into a discussion in part four and the final section of the cultural revolution and more systemic socioeconomic changes that will be needed to bring about a post-consumerist order. "
AIPAC is a US lobby so certainly it would be expected that they would try to influence US elections. There is nothing wrong with that. As for Israel, I am not aware of anything they did secretly to influence the US election. Since Israel is a foreign government it is barred from certainly activities regarding US elections just as all foreign governments are and citizens of foreign countries. I don’t know what Russia spent on trying to influence the US election in 2016 but it is clear that they implemented a broad strategy and had a lot of success. This strategy include hacking the DNC and computers in a number of states, working with Wikileaks, taking out fake social media accounts, paying for social media political ads, pretending to be US activists, communicating with a number of people associated with Trump, and providing fake news to social media and US websites. Some of things are very well documented and others still need further documentation to be considered proven.
Great observation, wonderful to see it here: prolonged applause.
There is not any political organization approaching the scale of national politics that is even roughly or approximately representative. (I vote Green, but the Greens cannot even enforce the counting of our votes: compare the 2016 vote with prior poll counts).
What may make it answerable in some form is that most of the population appears to be aware of that–in some protean and not mutually coherent way, true, but increasingly. Had the non-voting majority and the so-called fringes the unity and organization, we could more or less declare the existence of such an organization or flock to some existing affiliation with democratic processes (unlike the Republican or Democratic parties) and control it.
But we do not, so we cannot.
We are past the age of violent revolution–not past the age in which it might happen, but past the circumstances under which it is apt to be the primary vehicle of change. Per Trotsky, this happened with the invention of the machine gun and the removal of paving stones from the streets. At any rate, it has not much gone well of late.
We may be past the age of nonviolent mass resistance–again, not past the age in which it might happen, and probably not past the age in which it might be of some service, but very likely past the age in which it can be the single and unique most expedient manner of response to oppression. The increasing twiddling of resistance movements by media control, infiltration, falsification, and_agents provacateurs_ has so far been leagues more effective than prior strongarm tactics alone. The twiddlers are mostly professional and gain experience from conflict to conflict, the resistors mostly amateur–so this is unlikely to improve any time soon.
What can replace or augment these?
Electorally, to displace or overthrow large unrepresentative groups like the Republican or Democratic Party, we need smaller groups that these do not control. These could be nominally within a major party, or they need not. But they cannot rely on major party funding, they cannot take major party orders, and they must be willing to vote down unworthy candidates of that major party.
Away from the ballots, it probably means a wide variety of dissident activity undertaken with some unity of ideas but without a great unity of organization. We need to look for a way to provide a central discursive hub for such activity, to link the various lifestyle movements that may appear outwardly apolitical with more direct and obvious pressure on government and business.
Nothing could be less clear, and what was their success?
Last I heard, Russia spent like 50K on social media (including spent after the election). In a $6 Billion election.
Wikileaks says someone leaked the damning emails to them, & the DNC never let the FBI examine their servers…so what basis in reality is there for the use of the word ‘hacked’?
IMO, the Russia story was the Democrats version of ‘the dog ate my homework,’ & then US intelligence agencies & the Pentagon figured they could pump up the story so as to justify US aggression in Syria (we’re fighting the Russians!!! Booga-booga!) & more NATO provocation against Russia.
The same US intel agencies pimping the anti-Russia Buswah are the same ones who sold the Iraq WMD fake-out & the bogus ‘Quadaffi will commit genocide!!!’ hogwash.
I don’t know why people like you keep believing what serial liars tell you, but hey bro, it’s a free world. Except, no one is free.
This topic (Big Money media) was part of the discussion that Ralph Nader had with Nicholas Johnson on a recent Ralph Nader Radio Hour. They talked about how most media was owned by 6 conglomerates and how one was trying to buy another (Time Warner) and how public broadcasting was even sponsored by corporations.
While they seemed to favor a similar solution (getting legislators to pass some legislation to address the issue) as in the article (demanding better representatives) that really isn’t us taking care of the problem ourselves.
Us taking care of it ourselves would be the idea I thought of while listening to the show and sent to Ralph and Nicholas Johnson.
If we formed a private non-profit and sold 10 million shares at 100 dollars a share we could raise 1 billion dollars and then we could buy Time Warner or enough media to form our own media conglomerate to provide the information the corporate media will not. The shares could only be sold for 100 dollars, could only be owned by American citizens and no one person could own more than 10 shares. There would be no dividends. the purpose of owning shares is to be able to vote for who runs the conglomerate.
Nicholas Johnson thought the idea was creative. Haven’t heard from Ralph. But let him know if you like this idea, maybe he will do it.
A fourth prong of attack: Labeling non-MSM news as “fake news.”
No bleepin’ bleep! But that SHOULD be news to no one. Sinclair Lewis nailed it in 1935 with “It Can’t Happen Here” (“it” being a fascist takeover), and Eugene Burdick and William Lederer wrote both fiction and non-fiction along the same lines in the 1960s. When the Powell Memo first came to wide public notice a few years ago my take was “plan for fascist takeover,” the details of which have been documented in numerous books and movies in recent years.
Only one small quibble with the article:
Which means it is up to us—the citizenry—to fight a pitched battle against the political charlatans who pretend to represent us while serving the interests of the rich and corporations. . . . And it has to start with reversing fighting the attacks on net neutrality and the FCC.
No, it has to start with killing the bill–you know the one I mean: the tax deform (sic) bill that robs the poor (i.e., most of the 99 percent) to give to the rich.
The Next System Project is one of the more thoroughly thought-out plans for moving forward, with a lot of powerful thinkers behind it. But it gives short shrift to the likelihood that we will be dealing with breakdowns of large-scale systems before it can achieve its goals. Global climate is the largest such system and the most critical, but “nuclear preparedness” is on a par with it, and there are myriad others, with a serious breakdown in any one leading to a cascade.
I consider myself an optimist, but we really have to think and act locally, while supporting the people and organizations that have some leverage at larger scales. We may pull it off, but the world of the year 2100 is going to be a lot different from that of today in ways we can hardly begin to foresee. In a best-case scenario we will almost certainly be doing a lot more things at the household and neighborhood levels, with 100 miles being a long distance for most people.
Of course there is no easy way to measure success. Was it their efforts that flipped Wisconsin? Probably the ID law played a much bigger role and that has been analyzed and probably by itself the ID law flipped Wisconsin. Were the Russians the ones who flipped Michigan and Pennsylvania? I think it could be argued that they did. The social media stuff was targeted to certain districts and Trump did not win by that much in those two large states. In any case, the Russians did get their stuff into Facebook and Twitter using false accounts and did buy US political ads using rubles. And it has been documented that some of the stuff they put out in social media did make its way to right wing news outlets like Breitbart News. Also, the Clinton campaign had no idea about what the Russians were doing on social media so the Russians successfully kept their efforts secret from the Democrats. Therefore, Clinton was unable to combat all the false information from the Russians because she didn’t know about it. It went unchallenged. The Russians were not able to change any election results by hacking computers in various states but their goal may have been to learn how these computers work in order to change the results in future elections. I think the Russians were as successful as the could have hoped to have been .
Obviously you are a conspiracy theorist. There is nothing I can say that can change your mind because you clearly believe the Democratic Party and the US intelligence agency are part of a conspiracy to blame the Russians for interfering with election and any information that I have comes from the same people who are part of the conspiracy including the mainstream media. Obama warned us about conspiracy theorists but you probably believe he also is part of the conspiracy. So there is no way we can agree.
I think you have entered the Twilight Zone.
Why would Russia wish to undermine stability in a rogue terrorist military empire with atom bomb missiles aimed at it?
You didn’t clearly explain how world war three and nuclear armageddon benefits Russia.