Browsed by
Category: propaganda

Propaganda as a Framework for Political Control

Propaganda as a Framework for Political Control

The article listed here is critical to this post, so it is advisable that you read it first and come Uncle Humanzee can wait.  Go ahead:  You’ll Never Believe The Real Agenda Behind Anti-Police Agitators

If you are impatient, here is a summation:  Many of the anti police protests have a political agenda behind them and therefore visceral reactions need to be checked at the door.   Referring back to the Tawana Brawley affair where a young black lady she was raped by racially motivated attackers, the Federal article details that while the attack was later revealed to be fake, a frenzy of support and protest was fomented for political gain.  The goal is always to raise a trigger or red flag where injustice has occurred with authority, chaos of protest lends credence to the cause, and the social pressure brings about political change.

Seems pretty straight forward, and it has been practiced for decades by droves of activists.  During 2016, both pre and post campaigns, “spontaneous” protests sprung for causes that were championed by the media:  Black Lives Matter, Ferguson, anti-immigration is racism, etc.  Protesters were supplied with t-shirts, signs and in some cases were cameramen for media outlets.  The Anti-fa movement participation at Berkeley is another example of coordinated efforts to push political agenda with social unrest.

The State Department has spent billions in the Ukraine on political grass roots movements.  Here is Victoria Nuland discussing the expenditures for propaganda.

Same mind set:  establish goals for the political outcome, fund money for “communications” and democracy building efforts, and in the case of the Ukraine, to the tune of $5 billion dollars.  Identify grass roots movements, help them shape their message.  Sadly we know the outcome of the efforts – a duly elected government was overthrown by “nationalists”.  Note, there is no direct implication here, only that the end result was the chaotic fall of a government elected by its people.

Let’s recap:  social unrest, while in some cases can be spontaneous, can also be an effective tool for political change.  When wielded effectively, the forces of social pressure can be brought to bear upon the political arena, ala Arab Spring, support during US elections and even in the Ukraine.

Could these techniques be used to effect a coup and oust a newly elected president?  Do many of the events of the past month regarding president Trump’s relationship with the Russians, accusations of deep state eves dropping and leaks from anonymous sources seem any different than tactics used abroad.

Interestingly enough, the Showtime series Homelans, capitalizing on the possibility of a female president elect taking office amidst turmoil, poses many similar scenarios.  The plot for the 2017 season follows a series of events mirrored closely on the 2016 election, including alt-media figures, deep state infighting, Iran as a political threat and a coup run by deep state militants.

In a revelatory scene, CIA protagonist Saul Berenson instructs the president elect on the history of propaganda used by the US government in foreign countries to topple unfavorable regimes.  Note that he does not include Ukraine, but it clearly fits in with the list of countries that he sites.  Yet how easily would Ukraine and the events of Trumps nascent presidency fir the same template?  Should we be concerned and check our visceral reactions to sensational news media at the door?

 

The MSM Apparatchiks:  A Primer 

The MSM Apparatchiks:  A Primer 

For those of you who are familiar with Soviet history, you may recognize the term Apparatchik. One definition signifies a body of state agents who are chartered with the goal of preserving the Soviet State and health of the Party.  These individuals worked in various capacities, charged with acting in the interest of the Regime to preserve and extend power. All at the cost of truth, liberty and justice of the very people the Soviets claimed to protect.

Well known is the effect of the Soviet policy on communication in Russia. State sponsored “news” dissemination points were established to control information.  All information. Dissent didn’t exist because it was never hightailed in an intrepid journalists expose, no brave speaking truth to power. The Apparatchiks withheld and dispensed information to support the glory of the State, where no violence, starvation or protests took place.

Top down control of large populations dispersed geographically cannot be maintained through mere physical force. Conditioning the minds of the populist was critical to breed a citizen who would acquiesce to a command and control society. In this respect, the Apparatchiks stepped up the challenge and coordinated efforts of the news with education, medicine and psychology on all levels. Dissidents could be prevented from gaining a strong following by branding dissents as psychologically unfit or sick. Only someone with a mental disease would not love the collective and the salvation dispense for all. In the guise of preventative health measures, the Apparatchiks could enlist teachers, doctors and professors to act sensors of dissent, diagnose and remove from active society.

Those who follow the Mighty Humanzee’s musings on Twitter will recognize the #MSMApparatchiks hashtag. This construction is used to describe many of the old media or “mainstream” media. The MSM has tragically demonstrated it’s proclivities likened to the Apparatchiks in the Soviet Union, no longer acting as an independent observer of the US government; rather, outlets like the New York Times, Fox News, CNN and others act as agents of the state.

You’ll note the choice of “independent” as opposed to “objective”.  Humans are fraught with flaws and subjectivity is always present. From a philosophical stand point “we are the subjects of our own experience”, and have limited capacity to stay objective for long. Being independent may be a more permanent state of mind as long truth is consistently sought. This develops over time.

So does this apply to journalists in the US, and to what degree are the MSM Apparatchiks engaged with attempts to stimulate pure visceral reactions?  Consider the concept of Fake News:  shocking results of 2016 were the result of low level information voters being exposed to information from un-vetted sources. Worse, this stream of disinformation was infused with propaganda backed by Russia and other colluding special interests.

To begin this is a fallacious appeal to authority. A tertiary response here is “the  information is valid because men in white lab coats sat so. What happens they just bought the coats and didn’t get the credentials to be scientists?”

Diving deeper we have many stories deemed conspiracy by the MSM Apparatchiks which turned out to be true:  email server gate, CNN Brazile-gate, voter fraud, TPP revelations, Kathy Shelton-gate, the Voting Dead, Pizza-gate, Clinton-Server-gate, the list continues.  Most recently the death of Fidel Castro has lead a series of historical revisions, and other key indicator of the MSM Apparatchiks’ work.

The veracity of these stories were easily verified and the alt media rose to the occasion, many times locating back page or past articles that the MSM Apparatchiks themselves  published.  Fake News seems more of a ploy and justification for the MSM Apparatchiks to act as the Truth Ministry.  Indeed many of the experts who claim their is direct evidence of a propaganda campaign remain … anonymous!  The excuse here is that the experts would be exposed internet retribution, have accounts hacked, suffering the awful fate that exposed John Podesta.

Concluding quickly, mainstream media outlets acting as agents for establishment  politicians function as  Soviet Appratchiks, furthering the cause of the current power holders. As MSM Apparatchiks, the media serves us propaganda instead as serving the public by checking sources and practicing discernment. Combat this by checking sources no matter who brings you the story. The Mighty Humanzee speaks!

It Takes A Potemkin Village

It Takes A Potemkin Village

Editor’s Note:  This was completed prior to the election on November 8, 2016.  While Donald Trump won, the concepts are illustrative of the need for the traditional media outlets to construct a reality to support their candidate of choice.

It takes a Potemkin Village

Let that phrase sink in for a moment. What does it truly mean?  Originally Potemkin villages were staged inspection points for Czar Katherine in Russia c 1780. As the Czar would travel her kingdoms, destinations along the way would be designate as a point of interest. In order to avoid the wrath of Katherine the stops would be “cleaned up” or made presentable to their ruler. In many cases the village was just window dressing to present a pleasant view to avoid punishment,  yet in realty their pristine condition was vastly different from an average shtetl.

This concept persisted through  the Soviet era, as Potemkin Villages were used as showcases for journalists from the West. Walter Durante and other journos were stationed in Russia to record the progress that the new Soviet Union was making with their grand experiment of socialism. Stalin, now at the helm, proclaimed as his predecessors that they were building a new society based on scientific principals.

Durante reported for ten years on this progress but in reality he was escorted to Potemkin villages, set up to further the illusion that a new civilization could be engineered. Potemkin Villages were the proof for the West to admire. Stalin was revered for working miracles.

The concept of a village as a fulcrum of societal engineering was adopted again by Hillary Rodham Clinton in her book It Takes A Village. Here we get thinly guised kibbutzim practice for raising children, taking responsibility for development from a communal perspective. This time around we are treated to social science and anthology as proof that we should engineer a future by yielding to the collective good of the community.  Further controversy surrounds the book, as Barbara Feinman, the ghost writer and researcher claimed to have received no credit for her work.  At many appearances Hillary claimed she wrote the book herself.

During the campaign of 2016 the Hillary Rodham Clinton candidacy has been plagued by scandal and outcry. Prior to the DNC convention, HRC was under investigation by the Department of Justice and the FBI for violating federal law during HRCs tenure at the State Department. It was revealed that HRC had operated an unsecured email platform that house classified information, in direct violation of federal law. In addition, further email communication has surfaced that proved collusion between HRC staff efforts to scrub emails of classified information. This cover up included destruction of unauthorized devices that illegally held email, destroying the email server itself so that FBI could not perform their own forensics, and lying under testimony.

Instead of focusing on the elements that would normally disqualify anyone from presidential candidacy, the establishment media has performed blocking and maneuvers of indirection. They have created a new point of focus away from serial felonies in support of the HRC candidacy. By constructing this new reality they have in fact created a virtual Potemkin village:  clean things up, distract from unfavorable truths, and propagandize to promote a pernicious agenda.  The irony is that HRC claimed that she alone  penned “It Takes A Village”, and now the illusions that provide her cover are promoted by a media that operates in a quasi Apparatchik role, actively defending when discernment of crimes should be the focus.

It Takes Potemkin Village to elect Hillary Rodham Clinton.  The village is for our “benefit” and disguise the fences encircling us as mere landscaping. Part of the normal topography of a controlled mind.  

#ItTakesAPotemkinVillage