they were perfectly legal, civil-rights, anti-war or feminist-oriented movements, struggling for recognition.
I feel that this is a naive characterization of these movements while true it also leaves out other characteristics such as seditious, terroristic and criminal.
David Horowitz's story of his time with the Black Panthers is illustrative.Bobby Seale’s Confession: David Horowitz Was Right On
Agent provocateur's are indeed used by Law Enforcement, governments both your own and foreign and also by ideological movements.
Such as Trevor Aaronson an employee of foreign based (Quatari) propaganda organization.
I suppose that the point I want to make is that while people's government are indeed the most immediate threat anyone faces a far more dangerous threat is the one posed by external and internal actors who seek the complete downfall of our societies.
I agree with you on that one, any generalization that states something as "all of them were legal, etc..." or even "most of them..." is surely wrong.
Regarding Aaronson, well, let's say he is an employee of a propaganda organization. You can still take whatever he says and investigate for yourself, no need to believe in him or his personal opinion on the subjects he investigates. Perhaps you are implying that there is an intention of attacking the U.S. government (or society) by accusing its agencies of corruption. I'm not sure if that's what you mean. One could say that the opposite is true: if I want a legitimate government, respectful of democracy for my country or any country, I'd expose its corruption.
I tend to disagree with your final point. There are, for sure, external and internal actors with subversive and destructive agendas, but why would anyone "seek the complete downfall of our societies"? There are for sure some forces with such aims but, are they powerful enough to even consider them?
In my perspective the US government is basically, a reactionary force that aims at status quo, which means that those in power remain in power at all costs. The difference between the USG and other actors is that the USG is the dominant power, with force and means way superior to its competitors and without any respect for democracy or human life, but in discourse. But don't get me wrong, that is exactly how power conducts itself, particularly under the degenerative process of empire building.
I don't doubt trevor aaronson(in this video anyways) I really only wanted to point out how media outlets such as RT and Aljazeera's content offer liberal Chomsky-like critiques of America meanwhile they are funded by governments who are authoritarian and in Qatar's case still practices slavery.
Your second point has turned into a post I'll let you know when its finished.
Your third point lets me know what you think of the USG and my question to you is if it was your choice which other government would you replace them with as the worlds Hegemon? Who has done a better job of "Empire". I fully realize you would want to say nobody should do that but when critiquing a system of governance or indeed hegemony we should always ask ourselves who has done this better or has what we want to replace it ever worked in the real world?
Else wise you can fall victim to the "Dragons of Expectation"(a good book for perspective even if its examples are somewhat naive its premise is entirely relevant to our times)
Yeah, that's a totally valid point: a totalitarian country funding journalism... Something interesting about RT and such, is that people don't tend to think the same about BBC, for example, UK gov. funding is ok, I guess. For me propaganda is clearly a weapon or toll both sides use. But there's something else here, in my opinion, what RT is doing is basically using historical truths commonly suppresed by Western media. Think about it, why make propaganda with lies when you can use the truth and nobody can call you a liar.
I look forward to your post!
I'll try to read something about that book or even the book if I can find it (Dragons...). What I think is that concentration of power will lead to our situation, there should be a way, hopefully in the future, to make people more conscious of this fact, so what we call democracies today could probably focus on concentrated power (political or otherwise) and redistribute in some way.
What former empires did was also criminal, look at the Spanish empire or the British... but today's technology, which obviously includes mass media, the reach is many times wider and more pervasive. Also the instruments of domination are more inhumane and destructive.
But in short, without a radical change in mentality, there's no way out. Any other Hegemon will do what is in its hands to dominate and remain in power.
Here is an example of one of the forces and their detailed program seeking to cause the downfall of our society with lots of power behind them then and now.
https://steemit.com/informationwar/@openparadigm/profile-of-a-prominent-information-warrior-yuri-bezmenov
These networks of destabilization used to be backed by the full power of the Soviet Union now George Soros is their sponsor.
Yes, I'm very familiar to Soros work... he funds many MANY ngo's in Latin America, but I think there's a whole deeper "thing" into this (for example, how come Soros promotes the "left", being a millionaire (billionaire?) who made its money by speculation. I'll give a look to that link now. Thanks for all your very interesting comments!
I would describe what Soros as doing (with many others I'm sure) is promoting Ideologies of enslavement. Just like when William the Conqueror imposed Catholicism on Ireland while denying the Pope's authority over England itself.
"promoting Ideologies of enslavement" I agree 100% with this...
I will profile someone who elaborates on this subject with great knowledge you might find him interesting his first language is spanish.
Excellent!
Here it is.
https://steemit.com/informationwar/@openparadigm/profile-of-a-prominent-information-warrior-francisco-gil-white