Got Fascism? : Obama Advisor Promotes 'Cognitive Infiltration'
Posted: 13 Jan 2010 04:24 AM PST
Your government appointees at work: Cass Sunstein seeks "cognitive" provocateurs.
WRITTEN By Marc Estrin / The Rag Blog / January 11, 2010
Cass Sunstein is President Obama's Harvard Law School friend, and recently appointed Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
In a recent scholarly article, he and coauthor Adrian Vermeule take up the question of "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures." (J. Political Philosophy, 7 (2009), 202-227). This is a man with the president's ear. This is a man who would process information and regulate things. What does he here propose?
[W]e suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity. (Page 219.)
Read this paragraph again. Unpack it. Work your way through the language and the intent. Imagine the application. What do we learn?
- It is "extremists" who "supply" "conspiracy theories."
- Their "hard core" must be "broken up" with distinctive tactics. What tactics?
- "Infiltration" ("cognitive") of groups with questions about official explanations or obfuscations or lies. Who is to infiltrate?
- "Government agents or their allies," virtually (i.e. on-line) or in "real-space" (as at meetings), and "either openly or anonymously," though "infiltration" would imply the latter. What will these agents do?
- Undermine "crippled epistemology" — one's theory and technique of knowledge. How will they do this?
- By "planting doubts" which will "circulate." Will these doubts be beneficial?
- Certainly. Because they will introduce "cognitive diversity."
Put into English, what Sunstein is proposing is government infiltration of groups opposing prevailing policy. Palestinian Liberation? 9/11 Truth? Anti-nuclear power? Stop the wars? End the Fed? Support Nader? Eat the Rich?
It's easy to destroy groups with "cognitive diversity." You just take up meeting time with arguments to the point where people don't come back. You make protest signs which alienate 90% of colleagues. You demand revolutionary violence from pacifist groups.
We expect such tactics from undercover cops, or FBI. There the agents are called "provocateurs" — even if only "cognitive." One learns to smell or deal with them in a group, or recognize trolling online. But even suspicion or partial exposure can "sow uncertainty and distrust within conspiratorial groups [now conflated with conspiracy theory discussion groups] and among their members," and "raise the costs of organization and communication" — which Sunstein applauds as "desirable." "[N]ew recruits will be suspect and participants in the group's virtual networks will doubt each other's bona fides." (p.225).
And are we now expected to applaud such tactics frankly proposed in a scholarly journal by a high-level presidential advisor?
The full text of a slightly earlier version of Sunstein's article is available for download
[Marc Estrin is a writer and activist, living in Burlington, Vermont. His novels, Insect Dreams, The Half Life of Gregor Samsa, The Education of Arnold Hitler, Golem Song, and The Lamentations of Julius Marantz have won critical acclaim. His memoir, Rehearsing With Gods: Photographs and Essays on the Bread & Puppet Theater (with Ron Simon, photographer) won a 2004 theater book of the year award. He is currently working on a novel about the dead Tchaikovsky.]Source: The Rag Blog
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Palestine Think Tank <palestinethinktank@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:45 PM
Subject: Palestine Think Tank
To: feroze.moses777@gmail.com
Palestine Think Tank
![]()
Why Iran's is a 'regime' and Afghanistan's a 'government'?
Posted: 13 Jan 2010 05:16 AM PST
WRITTEN BY: Grupo Antimilitarista Tortuga (Alicante, Spain)
Translated by Ana Atienza, Revised by David Brookbank (Tlaxcala)If we paid attention to the terminology used by the mass media to refer to certain issues, perhaps we would learn more than a few lessons about the interests behind those media and the subterfuges they use to present the news 'embellished' with certain attributes.
A good example of this is the name that virtually all conventional media in Spain associate with officials of certain countries – but not with others.
When referring to Iran's highest authorities, the term regularly used is 'regime', whereas in the case of Afghanistan the term of choice is 'government'.
It is not our purpose here to analyze Iran's political system in depth, a country in which Islamic law plays an important role in its institutional order. As we all know, Iranians celebrate elections and there is more than one political party, contrary to other totalitarian states whose governments could properly and quite clearly be termed 'regimes'. We lack enough information to judge the extent to which the electoral game is fairly played in Iran. There are differing opinions both in and out of the country. Only if evidence beyond any doubt showed that the country is being despotically ruled by a minority with no possible chance for alternating of power could we more or less properly use the word 'regime'. Given that what exists in the worst of cases in Iran are only suspicions of vote rigging in a specific election process, we consider the use of this term by these media to be abusive and biased.
Now let's take a look to the case of Afghanistan, a country ruled by a man brought in by the occupying powers, backed by cruel racketeering tribal chiefs called 'warlords' and whose power has been legitimated by virtually phantom elections characterized by overwhelming abstentionism and an electoral fraud beyond any doubt, a situation acknowledged even by the very people who placed him in the presidential chair. Mr. Karzai did not need a re-run of the fraudulent elections to remain in office. His only opponent withdrew as a form of protest in the face of a more than likely repeat of the irregularities seen in the first round and the absolute lack of guarantees that it would not happen again. Western media completely ignored this act of protest demanding electoral fair play and consecrated before public opinion the victory of Karzai, a person who, according to the unanimous view of the media, now rules not a 'regime' – which would be the more proper term – but rather a 'government'.
There are more examples though. Certain Spanish media use the term 'regime' when referring to Venezuela, a country where Hugo Chávez overwhelmingly wins time and again in elections whose fairness has been acknowledged even by his most right-wing and inflammatory opposition. Imagine what the media would say if Venezuela experienced such a blatant fraud as Afghanistan's and the only opponent withdrew from a possible re-run of the elections for lack of democratic guarantees.
Interestingly enough, officials in countries with clear dictatorships or semi-feudal absolutist monarchies, such as Morocco, Saudi Arabia and others, are called 'governments'.
As we can see, for the mass media, being a 'regime' (a term conveying a charge an of political illegitimacy) versus being a 'government' has not so much to do with the political and legal systems existing in a country but with the fact that the state in question is more or less willing to serve the political and economic interests of the Western powers.
Let's take a look at some examples from both 'progressive' and conservative newspapers in Spain:
About Iran:
El País: El régimen iraní responsabiliza a los "enemigos extranjeros" de las protestas
ABC: El régimen iraní lanza a sus seguidores a la calle al grito de «¡Muerte a Musavi!»
Público: Miles de personas apoyan al régimen iraní y piden castigo para los opositores
El Mundo: Miles de opositores desafían al régimen iraní en Teherán
About Afghanistan:
El País: El Gobierno afgano crea una unidad de alto nivel para combatir la corrupción
Público: El Gobierno afgano critica a la ONU y pide que se respete su soberanía nacional
ABC: Un líder talibán y fuentes del gobierno afgano confirman los sobornos italianos
El Mundo: El Gobierno afgano y la OTAN consideran un 'éxito' las elecciones
Translated by Ana Atienza and edited by David Brookbank, members of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity.
Grupo Antimilitarista Tortuga
This antimilitaristic group is made up of ten people from Alicante (Spain), some of which took part in the conscientious objection and anti-military service campaigns linked to the Conscientious Objection Movement (MOC) in their province. They work for a demilitarized society by increasing social awareness via non-violent actions.
This group belongs to the Spanish network Alternativa Antimilitarista-MOC, and collaborates with War Resisters' International, the European Network against NATO and several conscientious objection movements in countries such as Chile or Colombia.
Also on Tlaxcala: http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=9727&lg=en
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
You are subscribed to email updates from Palestine Think Tank
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.Email delivery powered by Google Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment