Until a couple of years ago I used to frequent a website known as the online liberal bastion the world over. At the beginning, I used to just read essays posted by other users/members, many of which I found to be very informative, compelling, inspiring, and motivating. Eventually I became a regular contributor, posting essays about issues I found interesting, including the progressive movement, Occupy Wall Street, social justice, war and peace, government corruption, warranteless surveillance, the media, and (peaceful) protest strategies and tactics.

Once I became a prolific writer at the site, I eventually built a following and my essays started getting noticed via the site's (user) rating system. That's when things got interesting!

As people familiar with my writing would know, I placed a lot of emphasis on issues related to government corruption, the propagandist effects of the corporate media conglomerate, and social justice. As I kept writing about these topics, and as my essays became more popular, a small group of users started hijacking the comments' section. Now, having been an Internet user for many years I was very familiar with trolls and the like, but it wasn't something I was expecting to see at that site, again, known to be a safe haven for liberals and progressives.

But once the (organized) trolling pattern manifested itself, I started asking myself if perhaps my focus on government corruption and the use of propaganda to manipulate the population were somehow making some "key players" at the site uncomfortable. After all, once one really takes the time to research issues related to government corruption, is not hard to conclude that the entire political system is rigged, and that that includes both major political parties, which I call "corporatist parties."

As I continued writing and conducting research I would eventually read lots of articles about the Snowden leaked files; about the Stratfor files leaked by Jeremy Hammond. I read many articles by Glenn Greenwald. I conducted lots of research from WikiLeaks documents. I learned about how the national security apparatus monitors, infiltrates and disrupts social justice groups. I did a lot of research about the techniques they use, about "cognitive infiltration," about different tactics used against social justice activists characterized as "radicals," "realists," "idealists," and "opportunists."

Here's the thing: the more research I did about these subjects, and the more I wrote about them, the more hostile and relentless the trolls at the site became (at the time the popularity of my essays reached their peak). I found that curious, and then started analyzing what the trolls were doing, and eventually came to the conclusion they were using text-book "Propaganda techniques," including ad hominem, bandwagon, and other logical fallacies.

Now, at this point I'm not going to ask you (the reader) to agree with my conclusion or allusion to the possibility that somehow the trolls were professional propagandists, or were somehow targeting me as an organized group sanctioned by the sites management, including the owner. At this point I'd like to transition into a more general argument...

In the two-plus years after I stopped posting essays at the site, I haven't had the need or desire to visit it. After all, I had concluded that the site was extremely toxic in its insidiousness when it came to manipulating its unsuspecting (liberal) user base. However, for the last week-and-a-half, I've visited the site quite a few times to read posts from people I'd come to know and respect; mainly fellow progressives.

And guess what? I've seen the exact same pattern, which motivated me to write this essay you're reading -- as a warning.

As many readers familiar with these topics may know, we are currently facing a very serious crisis when it comes to democracy and the rule of law in this country. Researchers from Princeton University released a study not long ago which concluded that the U.S. has transitioned into an oligarchy. All levers of power (government, media, military) have been either captured by corporatist cartels and wealthy individuals, or have been highly compromised.

In the face of this reality, social justice groups have mobilized throughout the country, including groups like Black Lives Matters (for which I have great respect because of their non-partisan strategic and confrontational approach), and many others. And of course, there is the Bernie Sanders' candidacy, which has tapped into "the movement" for social justice.

Given this reality, and given the (corporate-controlled, for profit) national security apparatus' well-known propensity to monitor, infiltrate, and disrupt social justice movement, there has never been a more important moment in time (in recent history) for activists to be able to connect with each other, educate themselves about the true nature of the system, form bonds, and coalesce into a movement that share a long-term strategic goal of changing the system at the root level.

Getting back to the online destination I'm discussing here, it is my view that at the end of the day it doesn't really matter if the well-organized disruption (constant and relentless trolling) is being done by professional propagandists (corporate, national security, whomever) or because of a confluence of interests that results in something closer to Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky's "Propaganda Model" (conceptual model in political economy to explain how propaganda and systemic biases function in mass media), at the end of the day the damage (it does to social justice activists, progressives, and the movement) is the same.

The constant trolling, the bias in rules enforcement, the hostility, the intimidation, the double-standards, the insidious appeals to progressives' sensitivities ends up acting as a powerful disrupting force against the movement.

When it comes to the site's insidiousness, on the one hand it allows the posting of material by progressive writers, some of them whom may be considered controversial (by the site's standards). It purports to promote LGBTQ rights, women's rights, workers' rights, diversity.

But in closer (and careful) analysis, when it comes to people's ability to use the site to help them coalesce into an effective and strategic movement, the site serves as a sort of "disruptor," interfering with the ability of the movement to "close the circuit."

On the other hand, when it comes to pushing the pro-establishment (Neoliberal) narrative, I see no such organized, sanctioned disruption (overall). This is why I consider the site a tool of the establishment, in every sense of the word. The dishonesty and manipulation users are exposed to in that site are toxic.

I'd like to highlight the context in which I'm writing this today: At one point I wrote hundreds of essays at that site, and as of today, it has been over two years since I've visited (other than on a handful of occasions). I believe that having had that two-plus year time-frame has given me an even better perspective when it comes to confirming my conclusions about the site's effect users.

My final conclusion is that anybody expecting the site to be a place where progressives can come together to learn, organize, and strengthen the movement will be disappointed. To the contrary, because of its insidiousness, I consider it a graveyard of progressivism.

I don't expect I'll be writing about that site again, ever, since I see no reason to visit. But hopefully anybody wondering what's wrong with that site can read this essay and consider my conclusions. It would hopefully clarify what they may already know or suspect.