MSM Uses Russiagate To Punch Left



horiz-long grey

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


he Daily Beast, whose corporate owner has Chelsea Clinton on its board of directors, recently published a report titled “Kremlin Troll Wrote for Far-Left U.S. Sites”, which it then promoted with great success on Twitter using incendiary taglines like “Those Hillary-hating hot takes you read on leftie sites during the election? Some of ’em were written in Moscow.”

The short, low-energy Daily Beast blurb went viral by reporting on another arm-flailing Russiagate “bombshell” by the Washington Post, whose sole owner is a CIA contractor and dangerous oligarch. WaPo’s article revolves around a pseudonymous writer with alleged ties to the Kremlin who succeeded in getting published by numerous alternative media outlets, most notably in CounterPunch.

I’ve got no love for CounterPunch’s elitist editors, who spent July of this year orchestrating a deceitful smear campaign against me, nor for their humorless gray-ponytailed sausage fest of a publication. But this story, like all Russiagate “bombshells”, falls apart under the slightest amount of scrutiny. Contrary to the viral proclamations of the Daily Beast, none of the articles in question had anything to do with Hillary Clinton, and only one of them was published prior to the election. As CounterPunch editor-in-chief Jeffrey St. Clair and managing editor Joshua Frank wrote in their almost-readable account of the ordeal, the amount of online traction that the pseudonymous writer Alice Donovan was able to accrue with these articles was so small that they had a mere 49 Twitter followers at the time this story broke.

And yet empire loyalists everywhere, from bloodthirsty neocon Eli Lake to psychotic tweakers Eric Garland and Louise Mensch, are parading about this inconsequential accident as though it means something.

 

I decided yesterday that I’m going to be more proactive about publicly shaming the countless establishment sycophants who accuse me of being a Kremlin agent online, and following that decision one of them happened to post right here on Medium about the very article we are discussing here. Stephen Roloff writes as follows in response to my last article:

After several reads of Ms Johnstone’s entertaining pieces, I find myself amazed that a bright young journalist would choose to brand herself as an unabashed apologist for the traitorous tragedy of the current administration.

At first I thought that the “rogue journalist” moniker was a tongue-in-check reference to Sarah Palin’s “rogue politician”, that Ms Johnstone was simply looking to make a name for herself as a contrarian “intellectual”. Just American opportunism at work.

However, articles like the one below leads me to think that “she” may in fact be a higher-order creation of Putin’s shadow army, a poisonous arrow designed for the heart of “liberal” (I’m so tired of those cold war leftovers) inteligencia.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/kremlin-trolls-burned-across-the-internet-as-washington-debated-options/2017/12/23/e7b9dc92-e403-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html?undefined=&utm_term=.a046cf8f7577&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

Everyone with any online following who dares to publicly question the CIA/CNN Russia narrative already faces these McCarthyite accusations on a daily basis. The WaPo report is plainly being used to fan the flames of that paranoia even higher, and the examples above show that it is succeeding. Now all lefty outlets are fair game in the US power establishment’s relentless crusade to attack, silence and subvert everyone to the left of John McCain.

The left (the real left, not the “I support drone bombing children but it’s okay because I call Caitlyn Jenner by the correct pronouns” faux-left that Americans are permitted to support) is under constant assault by America’s unelected power establishment due to its opposition to war and oligarchy, both of which the US power establishment is entirely dependent upon. This is why such CIA and Clinton-backed assaults like the one in question take place, and this is why the true left is so desperately weak and fragmented in America today. Generations of establishment psyops have warped and fractured the true left into neurosis and impotence, which is why you now see high-profile leftist outlets like CounterPunch spending an entire month coordinating a smear campaign on a socialist political blogger instead of facilitating the revolution. Russiagate is the ultimate weapon in facilitating these manipulations.

 

We’re going to have to get real with ourselves and do some major soul searching if we’re ever going to become capable of fighting back against these establishment manipulations, because there will be more, and they are only escalating. These relentless attacks on the left will succeed in herding all revolutionary thinking into the neoliberal neoconservative so-called “center” if we do not find ways of rising above the manipulations and disrupting the establishment propaganda machine. Fight back, and fight back hard.


Thanks for reading! My work here is entirely reader-funded so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, bookmarking my website, throwing some money into my hat on Patreonor Paypal, or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2 

About the Author
 
Caitlin Johnstone
is a brave journalist, political junkie, relentless feminist, champion of the 99 percent. And a powerful counter-propaganda tactician. 


 Creative Commons License  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

horiz-long grey

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 


black-horizontal




Jill Stein in the Crosshairs: the Russia Investigation Shifts to Clinton’s Political Rivals

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


 


“Jill Stein had dinner with Putin, so… GET THE GUILLOTINE!  That’s how we roll in this country now. Didn’t she know it’s illegal to eat with Russians?”

— Richard Baris, Twitter

The Russia-gate investigation has zeroed-in on Green Party candidate Jill Stein proving that the probe is not an attempt to determine whether Russia meddled in the 2016 elections, but a crude weapon to bully the political rivals of Hillary Clinton her dissolute allies in the bureaucracy.

The Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Richard Burr said on Monday that the committee was “just starting to look at Ms. Stein’s campaign … as it continues its investigation of the Trump campaign.”  According to a report in the New York Times:

Democrats have seethed for more than a year at Ms. Stein, whose tens of thousands of votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania either exceeded or nearly matched Donald J. Trump’s margins of victory in those states, which delivered him the White House. At least in certain quarters, they greeted news of the queries enthusiastically.

Jesse Ferguson, a former Clinton campaign spokesman, said Americans ought to know if a presidential nominee, no matter how minor, had become a Russian asset or was simply boosted in an effort to chip away Democratic votes from Mrs. Clinton.

“Russian operatives were not promoting Jill Stein because they thought she would win,” Mr. Ferguson said. “They were promoting her because they thought it would hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump.”

(“Senate investigators scrutinize another presidential candidate: Jill Stein”, New York Times)


A “Russian asset”? Jill Stein is a “Russian asset”?

[dropcap]H[/dropcap]ow long are American liberals going to put up with this bullshit?  How long before they wash the mud from their eyes and acknowledge what should be as plain as the nose on their face; that their precious investigation of Donald Trump is nothing more than a witch hunt designed to intimidate or destroy political rivals?

The persecution of Jill Stein strips away the facade once and for all exposing Russia-gate as a complete fraud that is being used to exact revenge on the adversaries of Hillary Clinton and her reprobate friends. Even the New York Times admits as much.

Why is there still no evidence of  wrongdoing after more than a year of relentless, non-stop investigations?  Why are there just accusations, allegations and baseless claims?

Take a hard look at the Stein case and you’ll understand why. The meat-puppet senators who are conducting these wretched show trials don’t give a damn about the truth. They know the case against Stein is completely fabricated. They also know they can carry on with complete impunity because  the big money powerbrokers who pull their strings and order them about, are beyond the reach of any legal accountability. That’s what’s really really going on, the fatcat honchos behind the scenes are just settling scores for Hillary’s lost election. It’s payback time for the Clinton Mafia. Here’s more baloney from the Times:

Senate investigators are interested in unraveling what was behind the apparent closeness between Ms. Stein, a Harvard-educated doctor and perennial Green Party candidate, and Russia.

Give me a break. Does anyone on the Senate Intelligence Committee honestly believe that Jill Stein is a Russian agent?

Of course not. They’re just harassing her to send a message to the rest of us: “You’d better watch your step or we’ll trump-up charges against you and make your life a living hell. Isn’t that the message?

You’re damn right it is!

And you call this “America”?

Here’s a clip from an article by Danielle Ryan at “blacklisted” RT which you probably shouldn’t read because it undoubtedly transform you into a Russian agent or a Kremlin apologist:

This is a witch hunt. It is neo-McCarthyism, plain and simple. The people who are outright calling Stein a Russian agent are making a complete mockery of themselves and of the American political process…

Dragging Stein into this mess … shows Clinton Democrats up for what they really are. It proves that the ‘Resist’ crowd’s crusade is not just about Trump and “collusion” — it’s also about discrediting all dissenting American voices and establishing their own definition of what political opposition is supposed to look like — and for the Clinton cult, it’s not supposed to look like Jill Stein….

Anyone who disagrees with the Democrats is a Putin puppet — and if you’ve ever been to Moscow, forget it — don’t even bother trying to defend yourself. Off with your head.”  (“McCarthy-style targeting of Jill Stein proves Democrats have truly lost the plot”, RT)

Bravo, Ryan! You nailed it, girl. It’s too bad America’s liberals don’t see things so clearly.

The World Socialist Web Site also issued a statement condemning the attacks on Stein. As always, the WSWS is on the forefront of the issue while the other phony liberal sites and pundits continue to support these thoroughly-corrupted and reactionary investigations. Here’s an except from their statement:

“The Socialist Equality Party condemns the targeting of Jill Stein, the Green Party presidential candidate in the 2016 election, by the neo-McCarthyite witch-hunters on the Senate Intelligence Committee…. The attack on Stein, spearheaded by the Democratic Party, is an unconstitutional attempt to delegitimize and suppress political opposition to the monopoly of the capitalist two-party system…

In addition to the dinner hosted by RT, Stein, according to ranking committee Democrat Mark Warner, had “very complimentary things to say about Julian Assange.”… For having spoken out publicly in support of a political prisoner and dissident, Stein is threatened with being hauled before a congressional committee as if she were involved in treasonous activity.

This is the Orwellian reality of America in 2017, ruled by two right-wing, oligarchic parties that can and will tolerate no political opposition…..” (“Democratic Party witch-hunters target Green Party candidate Jill Stein”, World Socialist Web Site)

Imagine that; Stein actually spoke up for Assange, the highly-principled whistleblower who sacrificed his own freedom to expose the truth about Washington’s homicidal activities around the world? That’s got to be worth 30 years of hard labor at least!

What a farce!  Here’s more from the Times:

Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the committee’s top Democrat, would not comment directly on the committee’s interest in Ms. Stein, but pointed out that several of the interactions appeared to be consequential.

“I will point out though that Ms. Stein was at the infamous dinner that included General Flynn and Vladimir Putin, and we do know that she has very complimentary things to say about Julian Assange, who certainly was being used by the Russians to take some of the hacked information and release it into our political system,” he said.

The disclosure that the committee is looking closely at Ms. Stein’s campaign is the latest indication that the Senate committee is still expanding its investigation as it nears the one-year mark. (New York Times)

Do you hear that, liberals? Do you hear what Warner is saying? Do you like the idea that the investigation is expanding and that the hectoring, harassing and intimidating is going to continue for the foreseeable future and that it’s going to include anyone who admires men like Assange or Snowden or Manning or anyone who opposes the corrupt and murderous oligarchy that rules this stinking country?

Do you like that idea?

If you’re a liberal and you hate Donald Trump, then you probably see the Russia-gate investigation as your best chance to achieve the Golden Grail of “impeachment”.  But are you willing to compromise your principles, join forces with the sinister and unscrupulous Clinton cabal, and throw allies like Jill Stein under the bus to achieve your goal?

How high a price are you willing to pay to get rid of Trump?

That’s the question that every liberal in America should be asking themselves.

And they’d better answer it fast before it’s too late.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 . 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report

window.newShareCountsAuto="smart";




If Hillary Clinton Had Won, We’d Be Even Worse

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.




In terms of personnel and therefore policy, a Clinton Administration II would look and feel like a mash-up of Obama’s third term and a throwback to figures who populated her husband’s White House during the 1990s. Having moved to the right since Bill’s first term, progressive figures like then-Labor Secretary Robert Reich would be out in the cold. Rahm Emanuel and Timothy Geithner could expect cabinet offers. So could some Bush-era neo-cons like Robert Kagan.

Hillary didn’t promise much change to domestic policy during her campaign. Her biggest proposal was to spend $275 billion on infrastructure, which would have left us $1.3 trillion short of what’s needed. Not that she could have gotten it through the Republican Congress.

The alternate presidential history of 2017 differs most significantly in two respects: foreign policy, and tone.


Clinton’s liberal supporters always glossed over her long history of hawkish, arguably far-right, approaches to military matters. Those who mourn her loss to Trump today have completely forgotten that she convinced Obama to back military coups against the democratically-elected leaders of Honduras and Egypt. She also successfully advised Obama to arm and fund radical Islamist militias in Syria and Libya...

Clinton’s liberal supporters always glossed over her long history of hawkish, arguably far-right, approaches to military matters. Those who mourn her loss to Trump today have completely forgotten that she convinced Obama to back military coups against the democratically-elected leaders of Honduras and Egypt. She also successfully advised Obama to arm and fund radical Islamist militias in Syria and Libya, plunging two modern Muslim countries into civil wars that have reduced them to failed states. Clinton’s famous cackle after a U.S. drone blew up Libyan ruler Moammar Khaddafi’s convoy, leading to his being sodomized by bayonet on video, is terrifying.

“It’s impossible to know which national security crises she would be forced to confront, of course,” Micah Zenko speculated in Foreign Policy in July 2016. “But those who vote for her should know that she will approach such crises with a long track record of being generally supportive of initiating U.S. military interventions and expanding them.”

Two months later, another FP writer penned an astonishing look behind the Kremlin walls at the thinking of top Russian officials worried about the U.S. election: “Moscow perceives the former secretary of state as an existential threat… That fear was heightened when Clinton surrogate Harry Reid, the Senate minority leader, recently accused Putin of attempting to rig the U.S. election through cyberattacks. That is a grave allegation — the very kind of thing a President Clinton might repeat to justify war with Russia,” wrote Clinton Ehrlich.

Would Hillary’s tough talk have triggered World War III with Russia by now? Probably not. But it’s not impossible — which shows us how far right she stands politically on the use of the force.

More likely and thus more worrisome, Hillary might have leveraged the current U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan into attacks against neighboring Iran. “I want the Iranians to know, if I am the president, we will attack Iran” if Iran were to attack Israel — even if there were no Congressional authorization or a clear and present danger to the U.S., Clinton said in 2008. “And I want them to understand that… we would be able to totally obliterate them [to retaliate for an attack on Israel].” Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has a real military and thus a real ability to defend itself — which would mean a long, costly and possibly unwinnable war.

Like Trump, Hillary would almost certainly be authorizing the construction, deployment and use of more assassination drone planes.

The one arena where most people agree that President Clinton would have been better than President Trump is presidential tone. Yes, “she does yell into microphones and speak in an overly enunciated voice—two factors that may make her seem abrasive.” But this is a woman whose campaign assigned 12 staffers to compose a tweet; they went through 10 drafts over 10 hours. There wouldn’t be any Trump-style 3 a.m. Twitter diarrhea coming out of a Clinton White House.

When George W. Bush was president, there wasn’t one morning I didn’t regret that Al Gore wasn’t there instead. Gore wouldn’t have invaded Iraq. He might not have gone into Afghanistan either. Unlike pretty much every other president, he cared about the environment.

There isn’t a single moment I miss President Hillary Clinton, though. Trump is a disaster, a real piece of crap. But everyone knows it. Because Trump is so loud and stupid and cruel and greedy and corrupt, all liberals and not a few conservatives clearly discern the true nature of his administration, and of the system itself.

If Hillary Clinton were president, the left would still be just as asleep as it was between 2008 and 2016. First woman president! Aren’t we just the best.

Meanwhile, the drones fire their missiles and U.S. troops and spooks prop up tyrants, and the filthy rich rake in their loot.

Trump gives us clarity. That is no small thing.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ted Rall, syndicated writer and the cartoonist for ANewDomain.net, is the author of the book “Snowden,” the biography of the NSA whistleblower. 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report

window.newShareCountsAuto="smart";




RT Television DARES to Challenge the French Intelligentsia!

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

by Phil Butler for the Saker blog

Unprecedented, is the only word to describe the assault on the Russia Today (RT) networks abroad. The U.S. backed liberal world order has declared information jihad at a time when press freedom and truth have never been more vital. Today, let’s look at these “information terrorists” in France, and the role in the EU’s intelligentsia and ministry of truth.

Olivier Schrameck, head of the French ACA.

Just days after RTTV announced a French version of its independent broadcasting, a media terror strike was launched by journalistic celebrities and career Russophobes in the form of an open letter to Olivier Schrameck, president of the superior Council of the audiovisual ( Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel1. CSA). In the letter a number of liberal academics plead for the revocation of the license for newly launched RT France to operate. In reaction, Philippe Leruth, the president of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) told Sputnik News on Thursday that giving in to the demands of prominent French personalities to stop RT France from broadcasting would be “an insidious form of censorship.” With the much talked about “Ministry of Truth” of Germany and the EU’s version of symmetrical information warfare in mind, let’s now examine a new breed of terrorist – the liberal world orders censorship gestapo.

Some hours ago, my colleague – media sniper Marcel Sardo went behind the pay wall at Le monde in order to see just who these truth jihadists are. According to Sardo, the first person to sign this open letter to French broadcast officials was career Russophobe, Galia Ackerman (a Masha Gessen wannabe), who just happens to be Chairwoman of the “European Forum for Ukraine.” Ackerman, who’s written a score of articles with titles like; “The Origins of the Gulag”, “The Heirs of the KGB”, “The Innocents Become Guilty”, “The Satrap of Belarus”, “A Woman in Putin’s Gulag” – must be the Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (ISIS leader) of this censorship cell of the this new world order jihad. A Russian Jew, Ackerman is like many other unbalanced Putin haters such as Masha Gessen – a sad eyed puppet of the hegemons with no niche but the anti-Russia one to cling to.


SIDEBAR
EXAMINE BELOW THE COTERIE OF FRENCH RUSSOPHOBIC IMPERIALIST LIBERALS ASKING FOR CENSORSHIP AGAINST RT.COM, AS PUBLISHED BY FRANCE'S LEADING PAPER, LE MONDE.

Click orange button 

[bg_collapse view="button-orange" color="#4a4949" icon="eye" expand_text="Show More" collapse_text="Show Less" ]

« Monsieur Schrameck, suspendez l’attribution de la licence de diffusion à Russia Today »

Dans une tribune au « Monde », un collectif de spécialistes de la Russie interpelle Olivier Schrameck, président du Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel (CSA), considérant que l’autorisation donnée à la chaîne Russia Today (RT) de diffuser en France est d’une extrême gravité.

LE MONDE | 20.12.2017 à 16h46 | Par Collectif

« Cette chaîne est désormais obligée par les autorités américaines de s’enregistrer comme agent de l’étranger » (L’un des studios de la chaîne de télévision Russia Today, à Boulogne-Billancourt, le 18 décembre 2017).

Tribune. Nous nous adressons à vous, Olivier Schrameck, au sujet de l’autorisation qui serait prochainement accordée à la chaîne Russia Today (RT) d’émettre en français sur les réseaux de télévision en France.

Quand on sait les pratiques de cette chaîne, dénoncées publiquement par le président de la République lui-même, et que l’on prend connaissance de la composition actuelle de son conseil d’éthique après le renoncement d’un de ses trois membres (qui constitue en soi une modification de la convention passée avec le CSA), et alors même que le Parlement européen a mis en garde contre la désinformation exercée par l’Etat russe et a pris des mesures pour la contrer (résolution 2016/2020-INI), une telle autorisation ne pourrait que susciter une profonde incompréhension, sinon l’indignation.

Lire aussi :   Lancement sous vigilance de la chaîne russe RT en France

Russia Today est accusée aujourd’hui par des responsables du plus haut niveau aux Etats-Unis comme en Europe de semer la zizanie et d’affaiblir les démocraties. Au motif qu’elle relaie la propagande du Kremlin, cette chaîne est désormais obligée par les autorités américaines de s’enregistrer comme « agent de l’étranger ».

Guerre hybride

Mme Theresa May, première ministre britannique, a, le 13 novembre, accusé les médias russes d’avoir poussé les Britanniques à la désunion à l’occasion d’élections récentes. La ministre espagnole de la défense, Mme Maria Dolores de Cospedal, a dénoncé trois jours plus tard une ingérence russe dans les affaires internes de l’Espagne.

 Lire aussi :   Russia Today France : l’arme du « soft power » russe

Dans un tel contexte de guerre hybride, l’autorisation donnée à Russia Today de diffuser en France est d’une extrême gravité car elle peut conduire au brouillage des esprits et à la désunion des Français.

En conséquence, nous vous prions, au nom de la préservation de la paix civile, de suspendre l’attribution de la licence de diffusion à Russia Today sur le territoire français.

Les signataires : Galia Ackerman, essayiste ; Antoine Arjakovsky, historien ; Wladimir Berelowitsch, professeur ; Pierre Caussat, maître de conférences ; Iryna Dmytrychyn, maître de conférences ; Jean Duchesne, professeur honoraire de chaire supérieure ; Michel Eltchaninoff, journaliste ; Philippe de Lara, philosophe, maître de conférences en sciences politiques, Paris-2 ; Bernard Marchadier, traducteur ; Hélène Sinany, traductrice ; Françoise Thom, maître de conférences.

En savoir plus sur http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2017/12/20/monsieur-schrameck-suspendez-l-attribution-de-la-licence-de-diffusion-a-russia-today_5232472_3232.html#6s2GYDWF3VQCdiPE.99

[/bg_collapse]

[dropcap]A[/dropcap]long with Ackerman, essayist Antoine Arjakovsky (a Judas of peace) is another Ukrainian knowledge terrorist who’s Emeritus Director of the Institute of Ecumenical Studies in Lviv. This article in the America Magazine: The Jesuit Review by Arjakovsky betrays his position as a pawn of the “order” headquartered in Kiev. Arjakovsky’s role is actually one of Judas in that he is an embedded fake disciple of the scriptures preaching world peace without Christian values. Please read his assessment of the situation in Ukraine and his solutions. The man elevates Boris Nemtsov to the position of martyr, so enough said about this jihadist under neocon killers (JUNK) academian.

Alongside Arjakovsky in signing this plea for censoring thought are a slew of fairly obscure academics like; historian Wladimir Berelowitsch, Pierre Caussat, Professor of Philosophy and linguist, Ukraine specialist and Tasas Bulba revisionist groupie Iryna Dmytrychyn, and Jean Duchesne, a special advisor to the Archbishop of Paris (interesting). For finding a familiar thread that runs through this liberalist sobbing plea to French officials we can look to the works of the latter undersigned, Duchesne. In his storyThe French Debate on Gay Marriage” at The Catholic Thing, the Archbishop’s helper reveals for this writer the diabolical nature of our enemy. The piece is a multifaceted lie framed to appear as if Duchesne is on the side of Catholic clergy in opposing same-sex marriage in France. Reading between the lines any writer or journalist can ferret out Duchesne’s “common sense” affirmation of gayness. I’ve no space or time to delve into this Catholic apologist (1998 on anti-Semitism deeply rooted in French Catholicism) for the church’s passive collaboration with the Vichy France Nazis of WW II here. The fact he advises the Catholic Archbishop in Paris and hates Orthodox Russia’s news pulpit RT tells me all I need know.

Marcel Sardo’s list of citizens also contains Michel Eltchaninoff,  the Deputy editor of Philosophie Magazine, who authored “Inside the Mind of Vladimir Putin” without having even psychoanalyzed the Russian president on his couch. Michel Eltchaninoff, PhD, is joined by Philippe de Lara, who’s supposed to be an expert in the history of totalitarian regimes, and a Paris professor who lectures in Ukraine as well. Bernard Marchadier, a translator at UNESCO signed too, along with Hélène Sinany and professor Françoise Thom. Among these last authors of Orwellian doctrine Thom is the most interesting. Born in France, Thom spent some years in the Soviet Union. Her focus of study and authorship has been the “barbaric USSR” illustrated with her fixation on Lavrenti Beria, who was a key Stalin era figure, and the man most notorious for his role in the Massacre of Katyń during WW II. The book “Beria: the Janus of the Kremlin”, is a biography that excels in revising history, at least from what I can glean. Anyone attempting to unravel the mysteries of the man who created SMERSH, and who ran internal and external security for the Soviet Union, must have a motivation stronger than the appeal of book sales.

Agendas
[dropcap]A[/dropcap]ll our work is about agendas and the underlying causes for study, exertion of energies, the investment of time and money. We invest in what it is we want. For these people shortly described as “media terrorists” the agenda is not hidden. Each of them has a “bone” to pick with Putin’s Russia. The case for Françoise Thom being the most transparent for me, she leverages an icon of Russophobia to perpetuate a career of lecturing to effect fear and loathing of the quintessential enemy – anyone and anything perceived as the enemy of the bourgeoisie or the western intelligentsia. And there is your truth of the matter or RTTV anywhere west of the Dnieper River. Russophobia created and perpetuated by a class of intellectual and banking elites, this is the rotten core of the liberal world order. The narrative of London, Brussels, Berlin, and Washington versus Putin’s nation can be read in Françoise Thom’s “Russia Europe : the risk of restarting, from 2010." The thinly veiled deceit of the Vatican toward the Orthodox Church can be deduced from either the EU’s recent anti-propaganda doctrine, or from the appearance of the Catholic intelligentsia against any viewpoint out of Russia via RTTV. There my friends, I have laid out the asymmetric media terror network for you – those who would impress their ideas and will upon France and the world.

Are you surprised it was not the Russians? 


About the Author
 Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

 ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Comment here or on our Facebook Group page.

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]




Rise and Decline of the Welfare State: Class Struggle and Imperial Wars as the Motor Force of US History


HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

Introduction

The American welfare state was created in 1935 and continued to develop through 1973. Since then, over a prolonged period, the capitalist class has been steadily dismantling the entire welfare state.

Between the mid 1970’s to the present (2017) labor laws, welfare rights and benefits and the construction of and subsidies for affordable housing have been gutted. ‘Workfare’ (under President ‘Bill’ Clinton) ended welfare for the poor and displaced workers. Meanwhile the shift to regressive taxation and the steadily declining real wages have increased corporate pro ts to an astronomical degree.


It has been all along the Democrats devious collaboration with the regime of capital that has brought the nation to this pass, and the world to the worst crisis in planetary history.

What started as incremental reversals during the 1990’s under Clinton has snowballed over the last two decades decimating welfare legislation and institutions.

The earlier welfare ‘reforms’ and the current anti-welfare legislation and austerity practices have been accompanied by a series of endless imperial wars, especially in the Middle East.

In the 1940’s through the 1960’s, world and regional wars (Korea and Indo-China) were combined with significant welfare program reform of ‘social imperialism’, which ‘bought off’ the working class while expanding the empire. However, recent decades are characterized by multiple regional wars and the reduction or elimination of welfare programs – and a massive growth in poverty, domestic insecurity and poor health.

 

New Deals and Big Wars

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he 1930’s witnessed the advent of social legislation and action, which laid the foundations of what is called the ‘modern welfare state’.

Labor unions were organized as working class strikes and progressive legislation facilitated trade union organization, elections, collective bargaining rights and a steady increase in union membership. Improved work conditions, rising wages, pension plans and benefits, employer or union-provided health care and protective legislation improved the standard of living for the working class and provided for 2 generations of upward mobility.

Social Security legislation was approved along with workers’ compensation and the forty-hour workweek. Jobs were created through federal programs (WPA, CCC, etc.). Protectionist legislation facilitated the growth of domestic markets for US manufacturers. Workplace shop steward councils organized ‘on the spot’ job action to protect safe working conditions.

World War II led to full employment and increases in union membership, as well as legislation restricting workers’ collective bargaining rights and enforcing wage freezes. Hundreds of thousands of Americans found jobs in the war economy but a huge number were also killed or wounded in the war.

The post-war period witnessed a contradictory process: wages and salaries increased while legislation curtailed union rights via the Taft Hartley Act and the McCarthyist purge of leftwing trade union activists. So-called ‘right to work’ laws selectively outlawed unionization mostly in southern states, which drove industries to relocate to the anti-union states.

Welfare reforms, in the form of the GI bill, provided educational opportunities for working class and rural veterans, while federal-subsidized low interest mortgages encourage home-ownership, especially for veterans.

The New Deal created concrete improvements but did not consolidate labor influence at any level. Capitalists and management still retained control over capital, the workplace and plant location of production.

Trade union officials signed pacts with capital: higher pay for the workers and greater control of the workplace for the bosses. Trade union officials joined management in repressing rank and file movements seeking to control technological changes by reducing hours (“thirty hours work for forty hours pay”). Dissident local unions were seized and gutted by the trade union bosses – sometimes through violence.

Trade union activists, community organizers for rent control and other grassroots movements lost both the capacity and the will to advance toward large-scale structural changes of US capitalism. Living standards improved for a few decades but the capitalist class consolidated strategic control over labor relations. While unionized workers’ incomes, increased, inequalities, especially in the non-union sectors began to grow. With the end of the GI bill, veterans’ access to high-quality subsidized education declined.

While a new wave of social welfare legislation and programs began in the 1960’s and early 1970’s it was no longer a result of a mass trade union or workers’ “class struggle”. Moreover, trade union collaboration with the capitalist regional war policies led to the killing and maiming of hundreds of thousands of workers in two wars – the Korean and Vietnamese wars.

Much of social legislation resulted from the civil and welfare rights movements. While specific programs were helpful, none of them addressed structural racism and poverty.

The Last Wave of Social Welfarism

The 1960’s witnessed the greatest racial war in modern US history: Mass movements in the South and North rocked state and federal governments, while advancing the cause of civil, social and political rights. Millions of black citizens, joined by white activists and, in many cases, led by African American Viet-Nam War veterans, confronted the state. At the same time, millions of students and young workers, threatened by military conscription, challenged the military and social order.

Energized by mass movements, a new wave of social welfare legislation was launched by the federal government to pacify mass opposition among blacks, students, community organizers and middle class Americans. Despite this mass popular movement, the union bosses at the AFL-CIO openly supported the war, police repression and the military, or at best, were passive impotent spectators of the drama unfolding in the nation’s streets. Dissident union members and activists were the exception, as many had multiple identities to represent: African American, Hispanic, draft resisters, etc.

US labor unions played a major role by sabotaging militant unions abroad in cooperation with the US security apparatus: They worked to coopt and bribe nationalist and leftist labor leaders and supported police-state regime repression and assassination of recalcitrant militants.

Under Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, Medicare, Medicaid, OSHA, the EPA and multiple poverty programs were implemented. A national health program, expanding Medicare for all Americans, was introduced by President Nixon and sabotaged by the Kennedy Democrats and the AFL-CIO. Overall, social and economic inequalities diminished during this period.

The Vietnam War ended in defeat for the American militarist empire. This coincided with the beginning of the end of social welfare as we knew it – as the bill for militarism placed even greater demands on the public treasury.

With the election of President Carter, social welfare in the US began its long decline. The next series of regional wars were accompanied by even greater attacks on welfare via the “Volker Plan” – freezing workers’ wages as a means to combat inflation.

Guns without butter’ became the legislative policy of the Carter and Reagan Administrations. The welfare programs were based on politically fragile foundations.

The Debacle of Welfarism

[dropcap]P[/dropcap]rivate sector trade union membership declined from a post-world war peak of 30% falling to 12% in the 1990’s. Today it has sunk to 7%. Capitalists embarked on a massive program of closing thousands of factories in the unionized North which were then relocated to the non-unionized low wage southern states and then overseas to Mexico and Asia. Millions of stable jobs disappeared.

Following the election of ‘Jimmy Carter’, neither Democratic nor Republican Presidents felt any need to support labor organizations. On the contrary, they facilitated contracts dictated by management, which reduced wages, job security, benefits and social welfare.

The anti-labor offensive from the ‘Oval Office’ intensified under President Reagan with his direct intervention firing tens of thousands of striking air controllers and arresting union leaders. Under Presidents Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush and William Clinton cost of living adjustments failed to keep up with prices of vital goods and services. Health care inflation was astronomical. Financial deregulation led to the subordination of American industry to finance and the Wall Street banks. De-industrialization, capital flight and massive tax evasion reduced labor’s share of national income.

The capitalist class followed a trajectory of decline, recovery and ascendance. Moreover, during the earlier world depression, at the height of labor mobilization and organization, the capitalist class never faced any significant political threat over its control of the commanding heights of the economy.

The ‘New Deal’ was, at best, a de facto ‘historical compromise’ between the capitalist class and the labor unions, mediated by the Democratic Party elite. It was a temporary pact in which the unions secured legal recognition while the capitalists retained their executive prerogatives.

The Second World War secured the economic recovery for capital and subordinated labor through a federally mandated no strike production agreement. There were a few notable exceptions: The coal miners’ union organized strikes in strategic sectors and some leftist leaders and organizers encouraged slow-downs, work to rule and other in-plant actions when employers ran roughshod with special brutality over the workers. The recovery of capital was the prelude to a post-war offensive against independent labor-based political organizations. The quality of labor organization declined even as the quantity of trade union membership increased.

Labor union officials consolidated internal control in collaboration with the capitalist elite. Capitalist class-labor official collaboration was extended overseas with strategic consequences.

The post-war corporate alliance between the state and capital led to a global offensive – the replacement of European-Japanese colonial control and exploitation by US business and bankers. Imperialism was later ‘re-branded’ as ‘globalization’. It pried open markets, secured cheap docile labor and pillaged resources for US manufacturers and importers.

US labor unions played a major role by sabotaging militant unions abroad in cooperation with the US security apparatus: They worked to coopt and bribe nationalist and leftist labor leaders and supported police-state regime repression and assassination of recalcitrant militants.

‘Hand in bloody glove’ with the US Empire, the American trade unions planted the seeds of their own destruction at home. The local capitalists in newly emerging independent nations established industries and supply chains in cooperation with US manufacturers. Attracted to these sources of low-wage, violently repressed workers, US capitalists subsequently relocated their factories overseas and turned their backs on labor at home.

Labor union officials had laid the groundwork for the demise of stable jobs and social benefits for American workers. Their collaboration increased the rate of capitalist profit and overall power in the political system. Their complicity in the brutal purges of militants, activists and leftist union members and leaders at home and abroad put an end to labor’s capacity to sustain and expand the welfare state.

Trade unions in the US did not use their collaboration with empire in its bloody regional wars to win social benefits for the rank and file workers. The time of social-imperialism, where workers within the empire benefited from imperialism’s pillage, was over. Gains in social welfare henceforth could result only from mass struggles led by the urban poor, especially Afro- Americans, community-based working poor and militant youth organizers.

The last significant social welfare reforms were implemented in the early 1970’s – coinciding with the end of the Vietnam War (and victory for the Vietnamese people) and ended with the absorption of the urban and anti- war movements into the Democratic Party.

Henceforward the US corporate state advanced through the overseas expansion of the multi-national corporations and via large-scale, non- unionized production at home.

The technological changes of this period did not benefit labor. The belief, common in the 1950’s, that science and technology would increase leisure, decrease work and improve living standards for the working class, was shattered. Instead technological changes displaced well-paid industrial labor while increasing the number of mind-numbing, poorly paid, and politically impotent jobs in the so-called ‘service sector’ – a rapidly growing section of unorganized and vulnerable workers – especially including women and minorities.

Labor union membership declined precipitously. The demise of the USSR and China’s turn to capitalism had a dual effect: It eliminated collectivist (socialist) pressure for social welfare and opened their labor markets with cheap, disciplined workers for foreign manufacturers. Labor as a political force disappeared on every count. The US Federal Reserve and President ‘Bill’ Clinton deregulated financial capital leading to a frenzy of speculation. Congress wrote laws, which permitted overseas tax evasion – especially in Caribbean tax havens. Regional free-trade agreements, like NAFTA, spurred the relocation of jobs abroad. De-industrialization accompanied the decline of wages, living standards and social benefits for millions of American workers.

The New Abolitionists: Trillionaires

The New Deal, the Great Society, trade unions, and the anti-war and urban movements were in retreat and primed for abolition.

Wars without welfare (or guns without butter) replaced earlier ‘social imperialism’ with a huge growth of poverty and homelessness. Domestic labor was now exploited to finance overseas wars not vice versa. The fruits of imperial plunder were not shared.

As the working and middle classes drifted downward, they were used up, abandoned and deceived on all sides – especially by the Democratic Party. [We are using the word "deceive" here, because the Republicans are too transparent a tool of the billionaires and make little effort to hide it.] They elected militarists and demagogues as their new presidents.


Bill Clinton was the man who surreptitiusly killed Glass-Steagall. Wall Street abuses and disasters grew exponentially, as the law had predicted.

President ‘Bill’ Clinton ravaged Russia, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Somalia and liberated Wall Street. His regime gave birth to the prototype billionaire swindlers: Michael Milken and Bernard ‘Bernie’ Madoff.

Clinton converted welfare into cheap labor ‘workfare’, exploiting the poorest and most vulnerable and condemning the next generations to grinding poverty. Under Clinton the prison population of mostly African Americans expanded and the breakup of families ravaged the urban communities.

Provoked by an act of terrorism (9/11) President G.W. Bush Jr. launched the ‘endless’ wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and deepened the police state (Patriot Act). Wages for American workers and profits for American capitalists moved in opposite directions.

The Great Financial Crash of 2008-2011 shook the paper economy to its roots and led to the greatest shakedown of any national treasury in history directed by the First Black American President. Trillions of public wealth were funneled into the criminal banks on Wall Street – which were ‘just too big to fail.’ Millions of American workers and homeowners, however, were ‘just too small to matter’.

The Age of Demagogues

[dropcap]P[/dropcap]resident Obama transferred 2 trillion dollars to the ten biggest bankers and swindlers on Wall Street, and another trillion to the Pentagon to pursue the Democrats version of foreign policy: from Bush’s two overseas wars to Obama’s seven.


Adoration of the Obamas has become a litmus test for political intelligence in the US and much of the world. The more adoration the worse the imbecility.

Obama’s electoral ‘donor-owners’ stashed away two trillion dollars in overseas tax havens and looked forward to global free trade pacts – pushed by the eloquent African American President.

Obama was elected to two terms. His liberal Democratic Party supporters swooned over his peace and justice rhetoric while swallowing his militarist escalation into seven overseas wars as well as the foreclosure of two million American householders. Obama completely failed to honor his campaign promise to reduce wage inequality between black and white wage earners while he continued to moralize to black families about ‘values’.

Obama’s war against Libya led to the killing and displacement of millions of black Libyans and workers from Sub-Saharan Africa. The smiling Nobel Peace Prize President created more desperate refugees than any previous US head of state – including millions of Africans flooding Europe.

‘Obamacare’, his imitation of an earlier Republican governor’s health plan, was formulated by the private corporate health industry (private insurance, Big Pharma and the for-profit hospitals), to mandate enrollment and ensure triple digit profits with double digit increases in premiums. By the 2016 Presidential elections, ‘Obama-care’ was opposed by a 45%-43% margin of the American people. Obama’s propagandists could not show any improvement of life expectancy or decrease in infant and maternal mortality as a result of his ‘health care reform’. Indeed the opposite occurred among the marginalized working class in the old ‘rust belt’ and in the rural areas. This failure to show any significant health improvement for the masses of Americans is in stark contrast to LBJ’s Medicare program of the 1960’s, which continues to receive massive popular support.

Forty-years of anti welfare legislation and pro-business regimes paved the golden road for the election of Donald Trump

Trump and the Republicans are focusing on the tattered remnants of the social welfare system: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. The remains of FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society--- are on the chopping block.

The moribund (but well-paid) labor leadership has been notable by its absence in the ensuing collapse of the social welfare state. The liberal left Democrats embraced the platitudinous Obama/Clinton team as the ‘Great Society’s’ gravediggers, while wailing at Trump’s allies for shoving the corpse of welfare state into its grave.

Conclusion

[dropcap]O[/dropcap]ver the past forty years the working class and the rump of what was once referred to as the ‘labor movement’ has contributed to the dismantling of the social welfare state, voting for ‘strike-breaker’ Reagan, ‘workfare’ Clinton, ‘Wall Street crash’ Bush, ‘Wall Street savior’ Obama and ‘Trickle- down’ Trump.

Gone are the days when social welfare and profitable wars raised US living standards and transformed American trade unions into an appendage of the Democratic Party and a handmaiden of Empire. The Democratic Party rescued capitalism from its collapse in the Great Depression, incorporated labor into the war economy and the post- colonial global empire, and resurrected Wall Street from the ‘Great Financial Meltdown’ of the 21st century.

The war economy no longer fuels social welfare. The military-industrial complex has found new partners on Wall Street and among the globalized multi-national corporations. Profits rise while wages fall. Low paying compulsive labor (workfare) lopped off state transfers to the poor. Technology – IT, robotics, artificial intelligence and electronic gadgets – has created the most class polarized social system in history. The first trillionaire and multi-billionaire tax evaders rose on the backs of a miserable standing army of tens of millions of low-wage workers, stripped of rights and representation. State subsidies eliminate virtually all risk to capital. The end of social welfare coerced labor (including young mothers with children) to seek insecure low-income employment while slashing education and health – cementing the feet of generations into poverty. Regional wars abroad have depleted the Treasury and robbed the country of productive investment.

Economic imperialism exports profits, reversing the historic relation of the past.

Labor is left without compass or direction; it flails in all directions and falls deeper in the web of deception and demagogy. To escape from Reagan and the strike breakers, labor embraced the cheap-labor predator Clinton; black and white workers united to elect Obama who expelled millions of immigrant workers, pursued 7 wars, abandoned black workers and enriched the already filthy rich. Deception and demagogy of the labor-liberals bred the ugly and unlikely plutocrat-populist demagogue: labor voted for Trump.

The demise of welfare and the rise of the opioid epidemic killing close to one million (mostly working class) Americans occurred mostly under Democratic regimes. The collaboration of liberals and unions in promoting endless wars opened the door to Trump’s mirage of a stateless, tax-less, ruling class.

Who will the Democrats choose as their next demagogue champion to challenge the ‘Donald’ – one who will speak to the ‘deplorables’ and work for the trillionaires?


  James Petras is a world-renowned public intellectual. He is a retired Bartle Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York and adjunct professor at Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada who has published extensively on Latin American and Middle Eastern political issues.


Comment here or on our Facebook Group page.

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]