The Deep State and Shadow Government

I began this essay over a week ago and am still struggling with it, partially because there is so little truly verifiable information available and partly because it raises the question of conspiracy. I am going to state up front that if you are not open to the idea that forces beyond our control and that of our elected officials dictate much of the agenda for our country, you may want to stop reading here.

Over the last several years, I have been searching for reasons for the policies of our government that make no rational sense and the events designed to terrorize us on a grand scale, like the recent Las Vegas massacre. Explanations like we must act like terrorists ourselves in order to fight terrorism or that Las Vegas was the work of a single deranged gunman make absolutely no sense to me. What has become very apparent is that we, the people, have very little control over the major events that shape our lives and those lives of innocent people in the rest of the world.

The stranger events become, the clearer the reasons for them are becoming to me. Lately we have been seeing the terms "deep state" and "shadow government" being used in online opinion pieces. While I still cannot completely define the terms for these two entities, I feel compelled to try to get some sort of grasp upon who they are and how they have kept our lives and our world in ever increasing chaos.

We often see the terms "deep state" and "shadow government" used interchangeably. However, it is my belief that they are two different entities, although both may have some of the same principals involved. The goals of each entity may not always mesh either and may even be at odds with one another such as what appears to be the case since Donald Trump became President.

I have defined both terms within my own mind, but wanted to see if they were credibly defined elsewhere first. Many main stream sources have characterized the ideas of either the "deep state" and/or the "shadow government" as being conspiracy theory. However, these terms and their concepts are gradually becoming accepted as real, not conspiracy. With that in mind, I searched for good definitions of both the "deep state" and the "shadow government" by first referencing Wikipedia. I will cite other sources in future essays.

Former long time Congressional Republican aide, Mike Lofgren, is often credited with defining the "deep state." Lofgren's definition is stated thusly,

"a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process."

My personal take on the "deep state" was that it is comprised of individuals and agencies within the government that act secretly and without oversight or consequences. They, and often their budgets, are outside the purview and review by our elected officials. The "deep state" exercises enormous power, including that of life and death, and includes the Department of Defense, State Department, Department of Homeland Security, the NSA, the CIA, and the FBI, at a minimum.

Defining "shadow government" is more difficult and is still characterized as being "conspiracy" theory by Wikipedia.

The shadow government (cryptocracy, secret government, or invisible government) is a family of conspiracy theories based on the notion that real and actual political power resides not with publicly elected representatives but with private individuals who are exercising power behind the scenes, beyond the scrutiny of democratic institutions. According to this belief, the official elected government is in reality subservient to the shadow government who are the true executive power.

My own definition is that the "shadow government" is a group of powerful and often wealthy individuals outside the government, organizations, and corporations that exercise direct influence and control over policies and actions by the government on their behalf. A short list of "shadow government" persons would include the Clintons, the Koch brothers, George Soros, high powered lobbyists such as John Podesta and others. Examples of "shadow government" organizations and corporations would include the Federal Reserve, ALEC, big banks such as Goldman Sachs and J. P. Morgan, Monsanto, Exxon/Mobile and other major energy producers, arms manufacturers and defense companies like Lockheed Martin, and big PhRMA, among others.

Yet we never read about or see discussion of the "deep state" or the "shadow government" in our main stream media outlets because the main stream media, which is owned by six conglomerates, refuses to report on them. Instead the main stream media functions as the propaganda arm of both the "deep state" and the "shadow government."

Many news organizations and people refuse to discuss the shadow government and the deep state, whether that’s because they fear the negativity surrounding the subject or because they’re owned and funded by these groups of people.

I am not sure where this is going, but it may end up being a series of essays as I learn more along the way and try to connect the dots for myself and anyone who reads this. Please feel free to add whatever information or comments on the content that will help us to better understand what we are seeing.

In future essays, I will be referencing an article at which I found this video. This video clearly describes the hierarchy of the large central banks, corporations, and various organizations in relation to we the people and our government.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Hillbilly Dem's picture

I'm always interested in your opinions and views, probably because they seem to track mine pretty closely. Smile

up
0 users have voted.

"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey

gulfgal98's picture

@Hillbilly Dem I take it as a huge compliment. But I hope your thoughts are more organized than my own on this subject.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

SnappleBC's picture

I think this is a highly valuable essay series assuming, of course, that you keep it well cited and grounded in verifiable reality.

Honestly though, the notion that "someone is moving the levers of power behind the scenes" is, in fact, a theory at this point -- in the scientific sense. This has gone well past the stage of "hypothesis". We can see the actions of the deep state all the freakin' time. For a more empirical analysis, see Gilens & Page.

Two thumbs up and I'm waiting for the next installment.

up
0 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

lotlizard's picture

@SnappleBC  
they postulate, without any evidence, the existence of “dark matter” and “dark energy.”

In science, the logical follow-on to “don’t know” is “so let’s investigate.”

In politics, the establishment’s information gatekeepers keep trying to persuade us that the logical follow-on to “don’t know” is “so shut the f~~k up.”

up
0 users have voted.

edited to feed the gremlins

up
0 users have voted.

@lotlizard the info nazi's do not have the truth on their side, which is a disadvantage. Cracking the facade.

up
0 users have voted.
Ravensword's picture

@lotlizard Absolutely, because a conspiracy theory is totally the same thing as a hypothesis. Dark matter and dark energy and conspiracy theories are totes legit!

up
0 users have voted.
lotlizard's picture

@Ravensword  
Considering the possibility that some set of facts may be explained by a “conspiracy” — a collection of actors operating out of public view — is, one would think, by definition also a hypothesis about the accuracy of that explanation.

Here’s a good example of a hypothesis from last year — that the New York Democratic primary was rigged by a conspiracy to purge hundreds of thousands of registered voters from the rolls — that seems to have turned out to be true, wouldn’t you agree?

https://nypost.com/2017/10/25/nyc-elections-board-admits-to-purging-vote...
http://gothamist.com/2017/10/25/city_board_of_elections_admits_wron.php
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/board-elections-admit-purged-20...

up
0 users have voted.
Ravensword's picture

@lotlizard I was more curious as to how astrophysicists who make hypothesis to explain the accelerating expansion of the universe or an inference based on the effects it has on the structure of the universe (unless you’re happy with believing that God did it) to someone in their basement ranting about the NWO/ZOG/protean reptilian aliens.

Astrophysicists rely on observations, models, math, physics (general relativity is important), and go through painstaking efforts to publish their findings in peer-reviewed science journals, yet they are somehow the equivalent of some guy in his basement, wearing a tinfoil hat, “connecting the dots” to some perceived conspiracy that involves Jews (Jewish aliens?).

up
0 users have voted.
lotlizard's picture

@Ravensword  

some guy in his basement, wearing a tinfoil hat, “connecting the dots” to some perceived conspiracy that involves Jews (Jewish aliens?)

To that extent you are merely shadow-boxing with, or deprecating, an image or straw man conjured up by your own mind. “Tinfoil hat” etc. is a typical rhetorical “conversation stopper.”

This inclines me to the perception that you aren’t really interested in having a conversation here in which you reach out to others and try understand what they are saying.

up
0 users have voted.
Ravensword's picture

@lotlizard

I wasn’t implying that anyone on here is like that. My discription is that of your stereotypical fat-right conspiracy theorist. I’m sure that this site is in no way affiliated with stormfront.org. I simply wanted to make a pointed comparison to astrophysicists and conspiracy theorists. And don’t worry, astrophysicists are sometimes prone to unhinged speculation about things like what goes on beneath the event horizon of a black hole, for example. It may be impossible to ever find out, and the very thought that no one could ever find a way to discover the inner workings of a black hole (beyond the fact that there is a point inside that is infinitely dense) probably frightens some scientists. I don’t know.

Now, your initial comparison of scientists to conspiracy theorists inclines me to believe that you perhaps you simply chose a poor analogy. However, if you do indeed believe your analogy to be accurate, then perhaps we should end the conversation here. However, I am nothing if not curious, and I feel the need to satisfy that curiosity by asking if it was the quickest thing that came to your head, which would make sense since you probably wanted to post your comment as soon as possible. I just want to be charitable in my assumptions and not attribite any malice where a simple error may have been made. After all, we’re all only human.

up
0 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Ravensword This is a great example of something I commented on a couple days ago:

Conspiracy theories should be subjected to the same standards of critical thought as any other hypothesis. We don't need generalizations of any kind to protect us from wrong thinking.

In other words, each conspiracy theory must be judged on its own merits, like any other theory, because there is nothing about conspiracy that is intrinsically improbable. Where conspiracy theories are intrinsically improbable, such as the theory that technologically advanced space aliens met with the U.S. government in New Mexico in the 1950s, they are improbable not because conspiracy in the U.S. is unlikely. In the case of the Roswell theory, the improbability arises because of the vast distances of space and the likelihood that sentient, technologically advanced races that can survive in an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere are likely to be living very far apart from one another-- particularly if one of them is in a galactic backwater, as we are.

Under the classic authoritarian technique of establishing guilt or credibility by association, the fact that the Roswell theory is both improbable and asserts a conspiracy has been used to conclude that therefore, the Roswell theory is improbable because it asserts a conspiracy. Sort of like if I'm tall and blonde, I must be tall because I'm blonde. This associative technique is further extended by linking far-fetched theories like the Roswell theory with all other conspiracy theories. In other words, if I'm tall because I'm blonde, all blondes must be tall. If the Roswell theory is improbable because it asserts a conspiracy, all other theories which assert a conspiracy must be improbable too (unless you're talking about the idea that Russians hijacked the 2016 election, but, as with all authoritarian systems, preferential treatment is extended to ideas and people that serve to buttress authority and advance its aims).

This leads rather quickly into needing to ignore data that doesn't fit one's hypothesis (what happens when you encounter a person who is a tall redhead?) But that can be taken care of by the Lee Atwater method of accusing one's opponent of committing the error one is already committing oneself. In other words, accuse the conspiracy theorist of ignoring data that doesn't fit. Whether the conspiracy theorist's opponent ignores data will cease to be a consideration, as everyone scrambles to determine whether the conspiracy theorist ignores data or not.

Also...

The important characteristic of the phrase "conspiracy theorist" is that it is a conversation stopper (h/t Garrett Hardin, with whom I have many disagreements, but who is right about the deleterious effect of conversation stoppers on rational thought). Conversation stoppers, in general, are to be viewed with extreme suspicion by any rational person. Embracing conversation stoppers as a prophylactic against baseless beliefs is like stepping on a landmine to avoid having to take a bath.....

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@lotlizard That's because science is still largely driven by the desire to know something.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

Ravensword's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
The only difference between scientists and conspiracy theorists is that scientists don’t pull theories out of their ass, whereas conspiracy theorists are mostly driven by paranoia which gives them a tendency to perceive nefarious plots where there aren’t none.

That’s pretty much what has happened after the Las Vegas shooting. Although the more well known conspiracy theory, which came from the alt-right, that the shooter was a member of antifa, or (popularized by conservative Christians) that the shooter was an atheist who targeted a country music concert because country music fans tend to be devout Christians. Then there are the conspiracy theories that I’ve seen here that allege that dark shadowy forces within government orchestrated the shooting in order to cover up the assassination of particular individuals (or to drop off bodies of recently assassinates individuals amongst the victims of the shooting). How do you investigate those unverifiable claims? How do you investigate TPTB, who seem to be able to maintain zero margin of error for decades in order to stay several steps ahead of investigators? At this point, I would be inclined to believe David Icke’s per theory that protean reptilian aliens, who disguise themselves as prominent world leaders (Putin included, naturally), because he claims that these aliens are able to maintain perfect cover because they’re from the fourth dimension, and have plotted out every little detail. Of course these aliens were unable to outwit Mr. Icke, which leads me to believe that is unwittingly playing his role in the alien conspiracy.

up
0 users have voted.
Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Ravensword I don't care where they pull their hypotheses from: their ass, or the hand of God. Each one should be subjected to the same rigorous vetting process and held to the same standards. The obvious bullshit will fall to the ground as if by magic, discredited. The not-so-obvious bullshit may take some time, but some enterprising academic or journalist of the future will make their name by successfully and factually discrediting it, no matter what it is.

This is the old academic process for determining the truth, used by scientists and others. It works quite well if one wants to encourage maximum freedom of mind while minimizing bullshit. Don't censor, or censure, at the level of conjecture, but at the level of proof.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

Ravensword's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
There are still groups harping on about discredited claims by scientists and engineers about the WTC. Those have been looked over and debunked, so Trutherism is pretty much a conspiracy theory, not a scientific theory. Anyone who still believes that it was a controlled demolition is pretty much basing their belief not an factual information from a review of the evidence, but in simple faith alone. Like people who believe in the Noah’s ark story, but now I’m comparing a conspiracy theory with a fairytale.

Speaking of the above-mentioned fairytale, there are plenty of people who believe in their respective religions’ creation myths, but that doesn’t mean that scientists should waste their time having to debunk what primitive people pulled out of their asses thousands of years ago. Evolutionary biologists have stopped debating young earth creationists, because it’s pointless. They’re not gonna convince these folks that they are believing in a fairytale and they’re lending credibility to creationists. Similarly, you don’t see engineers and physicists engaging truthers in public debates so as not to lend credibility to them.

You’re free to believe whatever kind of insane bullshit you want, but don’t get bent out of shape when the world at large are sheeple because they disagree with you.

Equal time should be reserved for equivalent things. With more pressing problems on the planet and a finite amount of resources and brainpower to devote, not every single person’s pet theory or asspull should be carefully analyzed.

up
0 users have voted.

@SnappleBC are the ones who reported that ordinary people have NO control over our government policies, correct? Showing stats of something like 60% or more of voters favoring policies that never come to pass? I think that's pretty damned definitive of how much control the deep state has over us.

I have read that Lofgren book a couple times now, and he's certainly in a position to know of what he speaks. Hell, when Vladimir Putin expresses the idea that it does NOT matter who the POTUS is, "our" policies never change, it's a perfect illustration of willful American ignorance to not see that as fact.

up
0 users have voted.

Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur

SnappleBC's picture

@lizzyh7

I believe they specifically said, "no statistically significant impact".

My own sense is that the only reason it cuts off at 80% is that the interests of the upper 19% start to coincide with those of the 1%... for now at least. Here it is in cartoon form.

Gilens & Page gave us the mathematical proof that our government really doesn't care about our opinions. All of our "call your Senator" and "online petition" stuff is wasted energy. It doesn't matter. The plutocrats are running the show... and running the deep state.

up
0 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

gulfgal98's picture

@SnappleBC may be a result of the deep state. Right now, I am inclined to believe that the shadow government is more about influencing the decision making. And the degree of influence they have is considerable in a corrupt system.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

@gulfgal98
of a "deep state" and a "shadow government" are relatively new, and as yet poorly defined. Nonetheless they both certainly do exist, are very influential, and the more we can know about them, the better. Your essay here is very welcome and timely indeed.

up
0 users have voted.

native

is a good first step. While they may consider themselves beyond scrutiny, I still believe this is our country. With the alt media working in our favour, exposing the "hidden rulers" goes beyond CT.

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@QMS we can actually name names simply because the names may change in the deep state and many of the influences of the shadow government are not single human beings but are organizations and corporations.

Maybe as I try to dive down into this, my answer may change.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

back in 2014. It features Lofgren as well.

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@jobu for the link! *great*

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

studentofearth's picture

The video did not include foundations and trusts as pockets of power. There are fewer windows into their operations than public corporations.

Another Deep State agency is the Department of Energy
The agency’s chief responsibility isn’t energy policy: It’s maintaining and overseeing the country’s nuclear weapons stockpile and cleaning up nuclear waste, a role critical to America’s national security.

For the most part we are not educated in banking as a government tool of foreign policy or significance of evolution from silver, gold standard to petrodollars. I came across this series on development of banking in China (5 parts) and it helped improve my understanding of our banking system. It moves over a period of time and includes attempts to force colonizing China with finance as a tool. Is is created by CCTV and could be considered a propaganda tool, less than MSM (mainstream media)

up
0 users have voted.

Still yourself, deep water can absorb many disturbances with minimal reaction.
--When the opening appears release yourself.

@studentofearth the petroyuan may be a game changer. Bet the IMF is getting a sphincter reaction to that nugget.

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@studentofearth The key word in this for me is "attempt." This subject matter is far from my own knowledge base that I am learning as a basic student while I try to write this series.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

travelerxxx's picture

@studentofearth

The video did not include foundations and trusts as pockets of power. There are fewer windows into their operations than public corporations.

I just finished Jane Mayer's book, Dark Money, which is about these deep dark trusts and foundations and how they manipulate our government and our laws. She mainly covers the Hard Right/Libertarian organizations, but those alone account for the majority of the hidden controlling funds. I recommend the book. It's a surprisingly easy read considering interweaving network of these tools of billionaires.

up
0 users have voted.
studentofearth's picture

@travelerxxx Smile

up
0 users have voted.

Still yourself, deep water can absorb many disturbances with minimal reaction.
--When the opening appears release yourself.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@studentofearth Reading Ellen Brown helps.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

studentofearth's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Thanks for the reference Smile

up
0 users have voted.

Still yourself, deep water can absorb many disturbances with minimal reaction.
--When the opening appears release yourself.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@studentofearth Sure!

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

polkageist's picture

The subject you bring up and the tentative conclusions you mention are not new. You are on very firm intellectual ground and in very good company. For some years I have had a broad view of what you are exploring now. You are right that there is no way to arrive at legal, judicial proof if that is what you are concerned with, but the picture is clear nevertheless. Here is an excerpt from one of Eric Ambler's books published in 1937:

"It was difficult . . . to spend any length of time in the arena of foreign politics without perceiving that that political ideologies had very little to do with the ebb and flow of international relations. The Foreign Ministers of the great powers might make the actual declarations of their Governments’ policies; but it was the Big Business men, the bankers and their dependents, the arms manufacturers, the oil companies, the big industrialists, who determined what those policies should be. Big Business asked the questions it wanted to ask when and how it suited it. Big Business also provided the answers. Rome might declare herself sympathetic to a Hapsburg restoration; France might oppose it. A few months later the situation might be completely reversed. For those few members of the public who had long memories and were not sick to death of the whole incomprehensible farce there would always be many ingenious explanations of the volte face—many explanations, but not the correct one. For that one might have to inquire into banking transactions in London, Paris and New York with the eye of a chartered accountant, the brain of an economist, the tongue of a prosecuting attorney, and the patience of Job. One would have, perhaps, to note an increase in the Hungarian bank rate, an “ear marking” of gold in Amsterdam, and a restriction of credit facilities in the Middle-West of America. One would have to grope through the fog of technical mumbo-jumbo with which international business surrounds its operations and examine them in all their essential and ghastly simplicity. . . . The Big Business man was only one player in the game of international politics, but he was the player who made all the rules."

Background to Danger, Eric Ambler, 1937

Then there is this excerpt from an offer made a few months ago by Stratfor, a newsletter for the powerful with subscribers such as Henry Kissinger, which gives them access to their own virtual intelligence network:

"I’d also like to offer you a preview of the new, premium product we’ll be unveiling next month called Stratfor Threat Lens™. Threat Lens helps corporate security leaders identify, anticipate, measure and mitigate risks that emerging threats pose to their people, assets and interests around the world. Clients gain exclusive access to research tools and the underlying data that drives our analysis, enabling them to develop their own deeper understanding of specific security issues and regional risks."

John Buchan says in one of his books "Capital knows no homeland." He was the author of "The 39 Steps" as well as being, in real life, Baron Tweedsmuir and Governor General of Canada when Britain still counted as a world power. His sentence sums it up. The wealthy and powerful use nationalism for their own purposes but are not bound by it, but, instead, are bound only by their self-interest and that of their class.

My references are dated and all the more cogent for being so. This state of affairs is not new. Henry Ford sold goods to Hitler and many of his friends did too. We see the same thing happening now with the Military Industrial Complex (Big Business) selling anyone anything they want so long as it is deadly and will need to be replaced fairly soon. War is good for big business--high turnover and lucrative contracts. Not so hot for the rest of us.

I have been tempted for a few years to write on this, but I'm 82 and probably don't have the time or energy left to do anything worthwhile. Therefore, I encourage you to keep on going. I think you are on the right track and probably only need to look into the interests of the very wealthy politically connected such as the Kochs, Bushes, Clintons, Putins, Sauds, and their friends and families and business partners. Unfortunately there are plenty of them and every day we are supplied with more names.

edited for a misplaced comma

up
0 users have voted.

-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962

gulfgal98's picture

@polkageist What a wealth of information you give us. I do wish you would write sometime for us. I am no spring chicken and am not particularly well read. Most of what I have written in the past is based upon my own experience in local government coupled with intuition about what it all means. Right now I am navigating in the dark as far as a knowledge base, but am going to try to at least bring this subject up for discussion. Thank you for your wonderful and enlightening comment.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

ggersh's picture

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheneys-shadow-government

In other words, Cheney acted very much like an unelected dictator of the kind of banana republic that past U.S. presidents used to enjoy overthrowing. Until now, even though some of his orders have been countermanded—most prominently by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld—he did so with both political and legal impunity.

up
0 users have voted.

Buy a Bible don't read it and you'll be a Catholic
Buy a Bible read only what suits you and you'll be an Evangelical
Buy a Bible read it fully, analyze it, reason it and you will be
an Atheist

Knowledge is power and they are keeping this knowledge from us, which is why we are in the mess we are in - IMHO! If this turns into a series like the one you penned on neoliberalism, I'm sure it will be well researched and bring a great deal of information to all of us.

Thank you so much! Pleasantry

up
0 users have voted.

"When will our conscience's grow so tender that we will act to prevent human misery rather than avenge it?" Eleanor Roosevelt

"The secret of change is to focus all your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new." Socrates (469-399 BC)

gulfgal98's picture

@Raggedy Ann I have a feeling I will be doing a LOT more research on this. Knowing what we are up against gives us strength to combat it.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

In the Soviet Union, the official government organs ran the country, but the Communist Party (CPSU) ran the government.

The party leader was the de facto chairman of the CPSU Politburo and chief executive of the USSR; the tension between the party and the state (Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union) for the shifting locus of power was never formally resolved, but in reality the party dominated.

Party members weren't necessarily all government officials. They were drawn from elites of every industry and profession. Together the party members wielded monopolistic control over all vestiges of the government apparatus. And like Deep Staters, the Communist Party members enjoyed absolute immunity from government prosecution.

Decision making was run on the Leninist philosophy of Democratic Centralism:

The CPSU was a communist party organized on the basis of democratic centralism, a principle conceived by Lenin that entails democratic and open discussion of policy issues within the party followed by the requirement of total unity in upholding the agreed policies.

You see a similar process within Deep State decision making. The hold their party congresses at places like Davos. There's a lot of telegraphing via media and other outlets of dissenting opinions within a limited ideological spectrum, and once the decision is made, nobody deviates from the established party line.

'Democratic Centralism' is a bit of an oxymoron, since the enforcers of party discipline tend naturally to rise to the top in such a system, where they exercise increasingly authoritarian influence until decision making eventually becomes vested in a small group of uber elites with a supreme arbiter at its head.(see Hillary, Mao, Stalin, Xi, GHW Bush)

Of course, the biggest difference between Deep State and the Soviet Communist Party is that Deep State isn't a formally recognized institution. Like the spies that created it, Deep State would rather hide in the shadows, avoiding public scrutiny and striving for maximum decision making opacity (Cheney).

Hence the term 'Shadow Government', which I sure the dark denizens of Deep State believe is an inscrutability upgrade over even the old Soviet model.

up
0 users have voted.

The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?

@Not Henry Kissinger

to point out the behavior of the Soviet Deep State and its similarity to the U.S. Deep State. Antony Sutton, who was a researcher for the Hoover Institution, documented the close relationship between Soviet military industrialists and U.S. military industrialists, because they were the same, one and the same. U.S. military industrial corporations have been in the Soviet Union and Russia since the Bolshevik period, and they are still there.

Hence, the secret services of the Soviet state worked for those corporate interests, just as they do here. This is partly why the whereabouts and what-abouts of people like Lee Oswald are so opaque and so scary.

up
0 users have voted.

where I started, as 2 of my grandparents worked in companies that were in a position to be aware that WWII was planned by corporate fascists in this country, my country, our country. I am in my 70's, and both of my grandparents spent many hours talking at our kitchen table to my parents about the atrocity of war and the corruption of our government. This where I started as a young child.

So I welcome your reasoned and reasonable approach to examining what we're looking at. You are a gem.

up
0 users have voted.
ggersh's picture

@Linda Wood much longer than many want to even contemplate.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/31/americas-open-door-policy-may-ha...

The “open door” fantasy

The core of our foreign policy can be summed up with the regrettably still extant propaganda slogan known as the “Open Door Policy,” as explained recently by Atwood.[19] You might remember this old phrase from a high school history class. Atwood’s brief survey of the history of the Open Door Policy shows us why it can be a real eye opener, providing the key to understanding what has been happening lately with North Korea-Washington relations. Atwood writes that “the U.S. and Japan had been on a collision course since the 1920s and by 1940, in the midst of the global depression, were locked in a mortal struggle over who would ultimately benefit most from the markets and resources of Greater China and East Asia.” If one had to explain what the cause of the Pacific War was, that one sentence would go a long way. Atwood continues, “The real reason the U.S. opposed the Japanese in Asia is never discussed and is a forbidden subject in the establishment media as are the real motives of American foreign policy writ large.”

up
0 users have voted.

Buy a Bible don't read it and you'll be a Catholic
Buy a Bible read only what suits you and you'll be an Evangelical
Buy a Bible read it fully, analyze it, reason it and you will be
an Atheist

arendt's picture

@ggersh

all the way to the beginnings of modern capitalism.

I will quote from a commentary on Fernand Braudel.

Unlike theorists from the left and the right who believe capitalism developed through several stages, first being competitive and subservient to market forces and only later, in the twentieth century, becoming monopolistic, Braudel has shown with a wealth of historical evidence that as far back as the thirteenth century, and in all the centuries in between, capitalism has always engaged in anti-competitive practices, manipulating demand and supply in a variety of ways. Whenever large fortunes were made in foreign trade, wholesale, finance or large scale industry and agriculture, market forces were not acting on their own, and in some cases not acting at all. In short what Braudel shows is that we must sharply differentiate between the dynamics generated by many interacting small producers and traders (where automatic coordination via prices does occur), from the dynamics of a few big bussinesses (or oligopolies, to use the technical term), in which prices are increasingly replaced by commands as coordinating mechanisms, and spontaneous allocation by the market replaced with rigid planning by a managerial hierarchy. What these new historical findings suggest is that all that has existed in the West since the fourteenth century, and even after the Industrial Revolution, is a heterogeneous collection of institutions, some governed by market dynamics and some others manipulating those dynamics, and not a homogeneous, society-wide capitalist system . In the words of Fernand Braudel: "We should not be too quick to assume that capitalism embraces the whole of western society, that it accounts for every stitch in the social fabric...that our societies are organized from top to bottom in a 'capitalist system'. On the contrary, ...there is a dialectic still very much alive between capitalism on one hand, and its antithesis, the 'non-capitalism' of the lower level on the other." {3}

Manuel De Landa, "Markets, Antimarkets and Network Economics" (1996)

The De Landa article is brief and well worth the read. It summarizes the conclusions of the massive body of Braudel's historical scholarship and reaches some unfamiliar (and very derogatory for capitalism) conclusions.

That said, it is incredibly ironic that Braudel should make this observation, because Braudel's whole school of history was funded from the start by the CIA as a counter-attack on Communist ideology:

Ross writes that the “main tactic” employed the Western-backed intellectuals at the Annales school “was that of cannibalism: encompass and absorb the enemies as a means of controlling them.” She refers to this approach as a “Science of empirical and quantitative sociology – the study of repetition – was erected against the science of history, the study of event.”

“In the 1950s and 1960s Braudel, Le Roy Laduirie, and others, ensconced after 1962 in the Maison des sciences de l’homme, produced what Braudel called ‘a history whose passage is almost imperceptible … a history in which all change is slow, a history of constant repetition, ever recurring cycles.’ Their most formidable enemies within the field of history lived across the street: the long lineage of Marxist historians of the French revolution – Georges Lefebvre, Albert Soboul, and the like – housed at the Sorbonne. For what is at stake in the erasure of the study of social movement in favour of that of structures is the possibility of abrupt change or mutation in history: the idea of Revolution itself. The old-fashioned historians of the event par excellence of French history, each in turn occupying the chaired professorship for the study of the French Revolution institute by the Sorbonne after 1891, looked askance at their thoroughly modernized, well-funded, and well-equipped (with photocopiers and computers) colleagues across the way.” (p.189)...

“A grant from the Rockefeller Foundation in 1947 helped finance the founding of the VI section of the Ecole pratique des hautes etudes under the directorship of historian Lucien Febvre, who had seized the initiative from a rival group of sociologists headed by Georges Gurvitch. Home to Fransois Furet in the early 1960s, this institution would be central to the future of the social sciences in France: in 1962, when Febve’s successor Fernand Braudel gathered all the various research laboratories scattered around the Latin Quarter and housed them in a single building on the Boulevard Raspaid, the Maison des sciences de l‘homme, the Ford Foundation helped finance the operation. In 1975 the VI section would in turn emancipate itself from the Ecole pratique and become the Ecole de hautes etudes en sciences sociales, with university status and the authorization to grant degrees.” (p.187)

The Ford Foundation’s decision, in 1959, to finance of the Maison des sciences de l‘homme proved to be a critical moment for the evolution of French social sciences as Ford’s $1 million grant certainly brought them great influence. Moreover shortly after this grant was dispensed, Ford also helped Raymond Aron to launch his Institute of European Sociology in Paris. Certainly it is not coincidental that Aron was already playing a prominent role in the undertakings of the CIA-backed Congress for Cultural Freedom – a famous anti-communist enterprise that had been set up in Paris in 1950 with the full support of America’s most influential liberal foundations.

Michael Barker, Why the CIA Cares About Marxism

(2017)

So, IMHO, the "Deep State" has been around as long as there have been crooked gangster oligarchs, whether they called themselves the nobility, the merchants, or whatever. The top level of society is a shark tank that feeds on the true producers.

Nothing new under the sun.

up
0 users have voted.
ggersh's picture

@arendt video on the JFK assassination earlier today
and what got to me outside of the facts was Jesse stating
that he didnt start realizing the scope of what was
happening until he got into wrestling, That's when he
started having time to read everything about JFK.

I assume most amerikans, me included hardly ever get to
that stage of learning of the real shit that our country
is. That is what tptb count on, amerikans being to busy
to figure out how/why they are taking it up the bloody
arse.

What's really changed is that since the end of WWII the CIA
has pretty much taken over the country. I can picture the
CIA wanting to know Braudel theories as to know thy enemy is
a good thing? My assumption here could be wrong, as it was just
my first impression.

Her heinous has steadily along w/zero that the "markits" are
what's important, while in the meantime never stating that
the "markits" are fixed for tptb, Braudel stated below

Braudel shows is that we must sharply differentiate between the dynamics generated by many interacting small producers and traders (where automatic coordination via prices does occur), from the dynamics of a few big bussinesses (or oligopolies, to use the technical term)

Markits, it's all about capitalism/neoliberalism, he who pays
get's what he wants.

up
0 users have voted.

Buy a Bible don't read it and you'll be a Catholic
Buy a Bible read only what suits you and you'll be an Evangelical
Buy a Bible read it fully, analyze it, reason it and you will be
an Atheist

arendt's picture

@ggersh

I must have been, because what you think I said is different than what I meant.

I can picture the CIA wanting to know Braudel theories as to know thy enemy is a good thing? My assumption here could be wrong, as it was just my first impression.

Here is the timeline:

1950s-60s:

CIA/Ford Foundation (same thing) heavily funds Annales school historians as intellectual warriors against Communism. Tactic: claim history is static or very slow moving - no such thing as revolutions, hence no Communist dogma.

The CIA doesn't need to "study Braudel" because he is not an "enemy", he is the creature of the CIA.

Late 1970s-1980:

Braudel publishes (In French) three volume magnum opus, which includes "The Perspective of the World", which describes the anti-market corruption of the oligarchs that I quoted. These lengthy works are not published in a readily accessible English language paperback until 1992 - seven years after Braudel himself died.

So, by the time Braudel's proof that capitalism has always been corrupt is published (at which point, he might have become "the enemy" of the CIA), the Cold War is over for three years, and capitalism is triumphal. Besides, Braudel is long dead. So let dead dogs lie, why stir things up by fighting with his argument?

At that point, I don't think the CIA gives a shit. The whole Annales school withered away because (paraphrase of direct quote I read while researching) it was too difficult and inaccessible to ordinary readers. That is, it had done its job combatting Commumism and could be retired.

----

I hope that clears things up for you.

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@arendt that I am the wrong person to be writing about this subject. Your knowledge is so much greater than I could even hope to have. Smile

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

arendt's picture

@gulfgal98

You put important ideas out there on a regular basis. Me, I know a lot, but I don't do much.

You can teach an activist some facts; its much harder to teach an egghead to be an activist.

up
0 users have voted.
ggersh's picture

@arendt

up
0 users have voted.

Buy a Bible don't read it and you'll be a Catholic
Buy a Bible read only what suits you and you'll be an Evangelical
Buy a Bible read it fully, analyze it, reason it and you will be
an Atheist

gulfgal98's picture

@arendt Thank you!

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

gulfgal98's picture

@Linda Wood @Linda Wood for your kind comment.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Ravensword's picture

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

I'm in agreement with you on this because not only have I been reading about it for years, but because of the many others who have said that this is real. And this isn't something that has happened recently.

“Today the path to total dictatorship in the U.S. can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system … a well-organized political-action group in this country, determined to destroy our Constitution and establish a one-party state…. The important point to remember about this group is not its ideology but its organization… It operates secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government…. This group … is answerable neither to the President, the Congress, nor the courts. It is practically irremovable.”— Senator William Jenner, 1954 speech

Other people such as John Kennedy and Eisenhower are also on record stating this.
I would add in The Council on Foreign Relations and The Trilateral Commission which Bush Sr. is involved in. James Baker and other people from Bush's administration are also members.

People think that Ron Paul is just a flake, but he too says this and he also quotes Lofgren.

RON PAUL: VOTE ALL YOU WANT, THE SECRET GOVERNMENT WON’T CHANGE

I'm not sure what to make of this website yet only because I'm not sure lately how to separate fact from fiction with everything that has been happening.
There are too many conflicting stories on the Vegas shooting. If it was a false flag event, I would think that the PTB would have their story straight before committing it.

up
0 users have voted.

“An addicted underclass is easier to control than one that is fully functional and aware of its oppression.” - The Elite
Centrism is the failed political philosophy of those “despised elites.” Centrism gave us Trump.

The Aspie Corner's picture

@snoopydawg But even a flake can have moments of lucidity now and then. Besides, Ron Paul swallows and regurgitates wholesale the Austrian School narrative when it comes to economics.

Put another way: Much like the average Democrat in 2017, guys like Ron Paul aren't our allies.

up
0 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@The Aspie Corner Depends. Which conflict are you talking about, or thinking of, when you speak of alliances?

We're involved in more than one conflict right now. Ron Paul is my ally in one of the fights I'm involved in. He's an enemy in two of the others.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

The Aspie Corner's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Ron Paul may have been anti-war but he was also a market fellating, lunatic racist piece of shit. He is not an ally, but a trojan horse.

up
0 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.

polkageist's picture

@snoopydawg As to the Vegas shooting not happening, the Emergency Nurses Association website can give you not only numbers but graphic descriptions of the all too real havoc wreaked on people which many of their member nurses were trying to save. There are lots of disturbed people out there. And also lots of people in the pay of interested parties who will sow misinformation just to make us distrust our own eyes. On these kinds of happenings even our compromised media will report fairly accurately. It's far too easy to fact check. The Twin Towers doubt notwithstanding.

up
0 users have voted.

-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962

gulfgal98's picture

@polkageist The question I have is who was really behind it and why are the authorities lying about how many shooters there were? It may or may not have been a false flag event, but we are not being told the truth for sure.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

gulfgal98's picture

@snoopydawg as always, snoopy! Smile

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

snoopydawg's picture

I first saw that pyramid of how the government works on this site. It has more information if anyone wants to explore it.

The Thrivemovement

IIRC, this site does name names of who is involved and at what levels.

up
0 users have voted.

“An addicted underclass is easier to control than one that is fully functional and aware of its oppression.” - The Elite
Centrism is the failed political philosophy of those “despised elites.” Centrism gave us Trump.

lotlizard's picture

@snoopydawg  

up
0 users have voted.
The Aspie Corner's picture

What alt media? BitChute? That place is wholly owned by the same assholes who act as willing dupes for the Orange Cheeto.

up
0 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.

@The Aspie Corner as a broad spectrum example of alt media. Know not what bitchute means, in your language. No matter. Will need all "resources" at our "disposal" to slay the dragon.

up
0 users have voted.
lotlizard's picture

@QMS  
whose USP (“unique selling proposition” in marketing-speak) is that they don’t censor or disadvantage “controversial” expressions of opinion the way YouTube is now doing.

https://www.bitchute.com/

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@The Aspie Corner as to what you are referencing. Please elucidate for me. Thanks.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Song of the lark's picture

It's right out in the open
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogfeb14/dollar-deep-state2-14.html.

Part of the problem is that the deep state is at war with itself.

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@Song of the lark mostly due to the election of Donald Trump. It may present an opportunity for we the people to weaken the deep state. How we do it, I am not sure. But the deep state automatically becomes weaker when the spotlights are turned on it.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Song of the lark If that's true, it's hardly a problem.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

Thank you all for this effort.

up
0 users have voted.

It is exactly like youtube was when that first appeared, as far as I can tell. A constant blathering of the masses, BYOF-bring your own filter. It is good she is trying to move off censored media like facebook and youtube, I wish more talking heads would follow her example and do the same. Anything is better than nothing, says my poverty mentality.

good luck

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@eyo Youtube channel was shut down. I am guessing that she was getting far too close to the truth as she usually does so they decided to censor her by shutting down her channel. To me, this is an indication that they (deep state and shadow government) are really worried that their house of cards is falling down.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@gulfgal98 Oh, *fuck* them! I didn't know this, having taken a bit of a sabbatical from watching podcasts.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

Yes, for now!

up
0 users have voted.
arendt's picture

Capitalism vs. The Market – A Braudelian Definition
Sebastian A. Stern | October 19th, 2013

The blog bills itself as "left-anarchist". Here are a few snips to give the flavor:

Braudel distinguishes between capitalism and the market, and if anyone is qualified to do so, it is the historian who actually established the empirical study of the emergence of capitalism. Braudel asserted three defining features of the capitalist versus the entrepreneur:

1. The refusal to specialize
2. Avaricious speculation in financial markets, and
3. Monopoly control of the market rather than simply filling in a niche demanded by consumers.

The market economy and capitalism are not the same. The market economy is composed of daily, local exchanges such as “wheat and wood being sent to a nearby city.” Braudel would “even include trade on a broader scale, as long as it is regular, predictable, routine, and open to both small and large merchants; for example, the shipping of Baltic grain from Danzig to Amsterdam during the seventeenth century, or the oil and wine trade between southern and northern Europe.” [14]

The market is defined by “transparent exchanges, which involve no surprises, in which each party knows in advance the rules and the outcome, and for which the always moderate profits can be roughly calculated beforehand.”

The capitalist appeared wherever exorbitant profits were to be made.

Opportunistic profit seeking could benefit those in need. “Let a famine break out in the Mediterranean—a famine such as that in the 1590s—and international merchants representing major clients would divert entire ships from their usual routes […].” [17]

This type of exchange replaced the normal collective market and substituted for it individual transactions based on arbitrary financial arrangements that varied according to the respective situation of the individuals involved. This fact is clearly established by the frequent lawsuits in England over the interpretation of notes signed by sellers.

It is obvious that here we are dealing with unequal exchanges in which competition—the basic law of the so-called market economy—had little place and in which the dealer had two trump cards: he had broken off relations between the producer and the person who eventually received the merchandise (only the dealer knew the market conditions at both ends of the chain and hence the profit to be expected); and he had ready cash, which serves as his chief ally.” [18]

up
0 users have voted.

We do need to remember that anyone can write/edit a Wikipedia article and that it would certainly be easy to find and use reference sources supporting the claim of only wako conspiracy theorists imagining that the pristine (at all levels) American government could possibly be anything but disinterestedly doing whatever's best for the American public and country and couldn't possibly be influenced by those shedding a cut of newly stolen-via-political-bribe money and power on those who do their bidding at and to the cost of other's - for whom they are intended to be working.

How long until this turns out to be another Russian invention anyway, I wonder...

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Big Al's picture

who and what are having undue influence on our government and even acting in it's stead.
The question as always is what are we going to do about it, if anything. I'm waiting for the interest in that to get to an acceptable level, then perhaps we can make some inroads against the deep state or whatever people want to call those who are running the show.
Right now I see very little interest in taking down the mafia at the top. I hear a lot of talk about it but no real calls for what it's going to take, which is a flat out revolution.

up
0 users have voted.

@#0

(The person I was addressing has had his comment ID number switch to a zero, but I'm posting this anyway, because it's important information to keep in mind.)

Do you honestly believe that such a theory, based on the knowledge of many such long-standing destructive and undemocratic influences as are represented in the examples to follow, to be a lunatic comparison to other such theories which fit facts and explain apparent principles and outcomes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

Project for the New American Century
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Project for the New American Century (PNAC) PNAC logo.png
Formation 1997; 20 years ago
Founder William Kristol, Robert Kagan
Dissolved 2006
Type Public policy think tank
Location

Washington, D.C.

Chairman
William Kristol
Directors

Robert Kagan
Devon Gaffney Cross
Bruce P. Jackson
John R. Bolton

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative[1][2][3] think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan.[4][5] PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership."[6] The organization stated that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world," and sought to build support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."[7]

Of the twenty-five people who signed PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.[8][9][10][11] Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War.[12][13][14][15] Academics such as Inderjeet Parmar, Phillip Hammond, and Donald E. Abelson have said PNAC's influence on the George W. Bush administration has been exaggerated.[16][17][18]

The Project for the New American Century ceased to function in 2006;[19] it was replaced by a new think-tank named the Foreign Policy Initiative, co-founded by Kristol and Kagan in 2009. ...

... During the summer of 1996, Kristol and Kagan co-authored an article in Foreign Affairs titled "Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy" - referring to the foreign policy of President Ronald Reagan. In the article, they argued that American conservatives were "adrift" in the area of foreign policy, advocated a "more elevated vision of America's international role," and suggested that the United States' should adopt a stance of "benevolent global hegemony."[20] In June 1997, Kristol and Kagan founded the PNAC in order to advance the goals they had first laid out in Foreign Affairs, echoing the article's statements and goals in PNAC's founding Statement of Principles.[19]

According to Maria Ryan, the individuals who signed the PNAC's statements and letters were not employees or members of the group, and "supporters of PNAC's initiatives differed from case to case."[19] While its permanent staff was relatively small, the organization was "especially well connected," with some of its statements and letters attracting the support of prominent conservatives and neoconservatives.[9][19]

In this regard, Stuart Elden has stated that "The influence that PNAC had was astonishing," and noted that

The number of figures associated with PNAC that had been members of the Reagan or the first Bush administration and the number that would take up office with the administration of the second President Bush demonstrate that it is not merely a question of employees and budgets.[21] ...

If you read even just down the above Wiki entry, you'll see that their objectives have been followed by every President since Bush. And that a number of those PNAC members mentioned moved into government and are still influential within it, even when in unofficial/'advisory' capacities, as with Dick Cheney advising the Trump Admin and mentoring Vice-President Pence..

It's obviously best if you can also go to source and read this article following, about just one of many such influences upon government policy/politicians having had great success in crushing the public interest to further enrich and empower their corporate and political members at public expense.

I'm just going to quote, below, one section from the article regarding that Constitutional Convention for which a great push erupted some time back and where the Dems have been, seemingly deliberately, losing enough seats to allow the 'bad cop' Republicans the majority they need to pass one:

https://www.alternet.org/economy/alecs-scary-corporate-agenda-7-their-mo...

ALEC's Scary Corporate Agenda: 7 of Its Most Anti-Democratic and Science-Denying Ideas
ALEC's annual gathering revealed how right-wingers will push dangerous legislation across the country.
By Brendan Fischer / PR Watch
July 22, 2015

...5. Amend the Constitution

In recent years, one of ALEC's top priorities has been to add a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. And it will be a major focus of this month's meeting.

A balanced budget amendment is an idea that has been bouncing around for decades--even though it would cripple the federal government's ability to spend on earned benefit programs like Social Security, and block Congress from responding to economic downturns or natural disasters--but what is unique about ALEC's push is that they are trying to do it via an Article V Constitutional Convention.

Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides that thirty-four states (two-thirds) can trigger a convention to propose an amendment, which must then be ratified by 38 states (three-fourths). Although this seems like a tall order, in the past year over a dozen states have passed resolutions calling for an Article V convention, adding to at least twelve other states that enacted resolutions years ago. The proposal has been supported by Koch-backed groups like Americans for Prosperity and the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB).

Key to the Article V push has been the "Jeffersonian Project," the 501(c)(4) group that ALEC formed in 2013 amidst complaints from Common Cause and CMD that ALEC was violating its 501(c)(3) charitable status by engaging in excessive lobbying. In order to deflect allegations of lobbying, the "Jeffersonian Project" is now used to urge legislators to pass ALEC model legislation, an activity that ALEC used to do directly.

This year, the Article V strategy dominates the agenda of ALEC's Task Force on Federalism and International Relations, with five presentations and two pieces of draft legislation. The task force's private sector chair is a representative of Americans for Tax Reform, the anti-tax group founded by Grover Norquist. And, there will be two separate ALEC-wide policy workshops on the Article V effort, as well as a reception and dinner titled "States Constitutionally Saving “The American Dream” Summit Via Balanced Budget Amendment Convention."

Throughout U.S. history, the Constitution has only been amended through a two-thirds majority vote in both houses of Congress on a specific amendment, which is then ratified by two-thirds of state legislatures. In contrast, the Article V strategy triggers a full constitutional convention, and it is unclear whether the delegates could be confined to only passing one amendment. This fear of a "runaway convention" has led critics on both the right and left to oppose the Article V strategy.

ALEC has tried to quell these fears through a companion bill declaring that delegates to a convention may not vote on other issues besides a balanced budget amendment. Yet, at least some amendment supporters want to open up the Article V process and amendment the constitution to address an array of issues, like limiting the Commerce Clause, banning international law in the U.S., and placing term limits on the Supreme Court, among other items from a right-wing wishlist.

The key driver of the broader Article V amendment effort is Citizens for Self-Governance (CSG), a group led by Tea Party Patriots co-founder Mark Meckler, and whose board includes Wisconsinite Eric O'Keefe. CSG, which receives most of its funding through foundations such as DonorsTrust that cloak their donors' identities, has also backed multiple lawsuits related to the "John Doe" investigation into coordination between Governor Walker's campaign and Wisconsin Club for Growth, where O'Keefe is a director.

CSG's Convention of States effort has been endorsed by Mike Huckabee (who will be addressing the ALEC conference) and also attracted support from the likes of Glenn Beck. CSG's "Compact for America" appears on the ALEC agenda with both a presentation and a model bill, and Meckler will also address the conference on July 24.

Another group pushing an Article V amendment is Compact for America, a Texas-based group advised by Nick Dranias, formerly of the Goldwater Institute, and chaired by former Goldwater chair Thomas C. Patterson. This group also is promoting a model bill at the ALEC meeting, and will hold a full breakout session on July 23.

Wisconsin State Rep. Chris Taylor attended a session on ALEC's Article V plans at the group's 2013 conference. When she expressed hesitation that the public would support the effort, she was told, "You really don’t need people to do this. You just need control over the legislature and you need money, and we have both." ...

Even just with these two examples, even leaving out such as the even-better known influence and control over policy and politicians which has been exerted by such as the Israel lobby, the NRA and the MIC mob, it's evident that a tin-foil hat would be required to deny the fact that there are many powerful outside self-interests conspiring together with public officials to successfully subvert the purpose of government in serving the public interest to instead work against it to profit themselves.

To paraphrase Carlin: "It's a big club, and they'll beat your head in with it."

Better to use that head first, and know thine enemy, for estimates of unknown members, numbers and areas of which, a working hypothesis is required, based on whatever verifiable information we can garner.

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

seems like what you call "shadow government" is part of what he calls "Deep State."

I tend to associate the term "shadow government" with the Dulles brothers and the business they were engaged in in the 50s and 60s. Especially in the 60s, after JFK came to power. Apparently they didn't see eye to eye.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Of course, I believe that the Dulles brothers' endeavour continued and continues to this day. They have their descendants. I'm betting Lee Atwater counted himself among them.

up
0 users have voted.

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones." - Fiver

Exit polls not involving George W. Bush or Hillary Clinton tend to be quite accurate.
--Doug Hatlem

gulfgal98's picture

@arendt @Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal was these terms were often being used interchangeably without anyone defining them. Lofgren defined the deep state only and if only one term is being used, I agree mostly with his definition. But I am not sure the term shadow government was being used at the time he coined his definition of deep state. As I stated early in this essay, I believe the two terms are not necessarily interchangeable even if some of the same players are involved in both as I have tried to define them.

There are forces outside our government that have significant effect upon policy, but do not have the ability to actually make the decisions that drive the implementation of that policy. For example, these forces outside the government (what I am calling the shadow government) may be lobbying decision makers in the Department of Defense to build up forces in an area, say Africa, but they have no legal authority to direct troops to Africa. However the Department of Defense (deep state) does have the authority, outside Congressional approval, to conduct operations all over the world without any check or balance from our elected representatives. In fact, the Dept. of Defense (deep state) has declared the right to with hold information as to where in the world the United States currently has military bases or how many there actually are.

The roles that these entities play and the effect they have upon us and the rest of the world are my reasons for trying to define these terms at this point. As this goes on and I learn more, I may just throw those distinctions out the window.

up
0 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~ Dr. Cornel West

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

econoclast's picture

@gulfgal, outstanding post and i hope you do a series

some comments, more directed at readers than at you:
1. if a definition is useful, i'll not spend much time refining it
in my use of the terms, "deep state" applies mainly to the public sector (the agencies you list, and then some, including the federal/corporate handmaidens at the local level whose power also is police power); whereas "shadow government" relates primarily to the private — i.e. predatory corporate capitalist — sector
in some respects the former are handmaidens of the latter
when you consider the revolving door between public and private, the distinction between the two terms become blurred as a practical matter

2. in my experience, the term "conspiracy theory" is usually used by someone who wants to diminish the subject, for whatever reason, including leaving it altogether, to dismiss it from the conversation
i have no patience for that when i encounter it and recognize it for what it is: a cover for denial and distraction
that said, we can discuss the semantics of "conspiracy" and "theory"/hypothesis for a long time, and sooner or later we will discover we've lost our focus and opened ourselves up to being divided and conquered
i use the latin root of "conspiracy", which means "breathe together"
and so the 1% does breathe together: at their clubs, while swinging their clubs and making rackets with their rackets, shooting skeet, in the locker rooms (and the conspiracy is nourished in high school boys locker rooms across the land), fraternities, sororities, bridge clubs, high-church potlucks, many places
their concerted antidemocratic actions need not involve extensive planning, simply the recognition of their shared power, shared capitalist ideology, unlimited money and enduring persistence (we just beat nestle in my community, but they never sleep)

3. we need to name names here and someone keep track so we can build a large database of the antidemocratic offenders
your list is a good beginning
one category of names i will work on is the "fire" (finance, insurance and real estate) sector, which more and more is running the national and global economies
it is important to know the enemy
for example, did you know that safeway supermarkets is owned by an investment group, cerebus, that also owns bushmaster, the gunmaker for sandyhook (as well as other arms manufactureres, such as remington)?

4. i submit this hypothesis, on which i am working and about which i invite your interest and assistance:
for about 150 years orthodox economics (sometimes called "neoclassical", the method of training for any of us who've taken a college-level econ course) has provided the emperor's clothes to further the pretense that we live in a democracy (or even a republic), when in fact we are governed by an empire run by the predatory corporate capitalist plutocracy; and the cover has been intentional

the flaws of orthodox economics are well-documented, and i will not summarize them here
i am assembling documentation to bolster my hypothesis; this is not so much "proving" anything in the hard-sciences sense, as it is building a compelling case of verification
i invite anyone reading this who knows the difference between speculation and verification, the difference between rumor and fact, who cares to live in a place where facts are respected, and who appreciates quality historical information to help me with this by providing your input

in a future post i'll provide some contact information
find it by searching my name, "econoclast"

please, gulfgal, make it into a series
you are off to a great start

edited to make sure i didn't use any more punctuation than i normally use, which is very little; and no capitals, as i am an anticapitalist

up
0 users have voted.
polkageist's picture

@econoclast How long have you waited to use that one? It's quite up to your usual high standards.

up
0 users have voted.

-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962