What's new

The OSSification of America

babe

Well-Known Member
We have a recent Netflix documentary that basically foreshadows the "Ministry of Truth" under programs termed policies for managing "Disinformation" in various platforms of public media. I use the term "public media" but this is really not just the NPR programming....... all the large social media platforms in general use. There are professional platforms as well, but they are already under such policies with institutional management.



While I believe this is properly best understood as an "Obama Agenda" for the emergent world globalism, you may note the self-righteous moral posturing here of Big Tech management " protestors" who have for over a decade been already talking about the social impacts, some concerning, of their technology. Yes, it looks like fine citizens concerned within these institutions trying to find a better way. But in the end, the solution proposed is an even higher level of control over public information and public speech.

During WWII, we created a monster, the OSS. The Office of Special Services. They did stuff like spy on Nazi and Japanese military operations, and they provided information to our military for planning our offensive responses. And they got involved in propaganda. "Ministry of Truth" propaganda. Official government lines for managing the public. In the US, "the public" was supposed to be the manager class over their government.

The OSS became the CIA after the war. When a lot of former German scientists and officials, including the infamous Dr. Mengele for example, were eagerly sought out by Russian and western corporates and governments. Such fine talent. Should not go to waste. Imagine all we can do with people like this. Dr. Mengele evade3d being arrested and tried for his crimes by worki9ng for a while as a farmhand, then moving to South America and eventually assuming a friend's name after the friend died. His identity was proven by dental records years after he died. While "Dr. Mengele" did not turn up as a professor at Yale, or as a Dr. at Johns Hopkins, his ideas found practical application in our leading institutions, and in many further research projects in the military and in corporatescience,and in our universities. In a thousand reincarnations for the cause of human "herd management" generally termed 'professional expertise".

But we can't be sure, either, that he did not have a few other aliases, and did not actually help do more "research" at other places. I just don't believe he really worked as a farmhand and slipped out of Germany without good professional bureaucratic guidance.

My father became an upper level manager in a military-oriented company a few years after the war, where the production at that company incorporated a whole shipload of German technology developed in German during the Nazi era. There were dozens of scientists there with likely German origins. But it would be a problem if the American public knew or talked about this stuff. So the emergent CIA developed a knee-jerk term for disparaging anyone who tried to talk about it.

Before WWII, a number of American well-known corporate monopolists were stung by the faithful operations of the Sherman Anti-Trust law, and found a welcome in Hitler's Germany, and built operations for chemicals and machinery there, where they evaded the antitrust laws and went on with their good monopolist ways. They literallly built the Nazi war production plants. That fact had to be suppressed in America. Some good lawyers and public relations firms were needed to keep it form inflaming the American body politic, and some good guvmint institutions had to be set up to officially stop the spread of that viral publicity nightmare.

Funding and supplying both sides of the same damn war is a business as old as the hills. Well, since "the bankers of Venice" at least.

That term was "Conspiracy Theory" or "Conspiracy Theorist" This term universally ends whatever discussion is not "wanted" by our institutional leadership.

But with the coming program for "Disinformation Policy", coming soon to every web site that will be allowed to exist with social credence.

But at the same time, our Marxist-oriented political strategists are actually starting the worst sorts of "sources": for really crazy stuff. Centuries ago, in the book "The Prince", the political strategist Machiavelli outlined the method for public management and manipulation which has been widely used by British and Communist agents worldwide...... set up a oppositional pair of public organizations meant for and used to divide the public and arouse controversy....... for the purpose of creating manipulatable forces for change.

So we get crazies of all kinds, and a guvmint organization to "solve the problem" , ....... A Ministry of Truth.......

Our Constitutional Republic vested citizens with the management of their government, and did not authorize or anticipate government agencies designed to control or manage the public.

The rights of Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly are the supreme law of the land, and the CIA and whatever damn corporate platform with moral "Truth" programs, are intolerable offenses against human rights.

But I am not going to be here to quibble with management on this site. Bigger fish to fry. I will be out of this country. Ironically, its the boondocks where freedom will survive and rebuild.

Goodbye.
 
Last edited:
In the US, "the public" was supposed to be the manager class over their government.
In the US, from the beginning, the wealthy were supposed to be the manager class over the government.

Our Constitutional Republic vested citizens with the management of their government, and did not authorize or anticipate government agencies designed to control or manage the public.
Originally, just that land-owning white men were so vested.

The rights of Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly are the supreme law of the land, and the CIA and whatever damn corporate platform with moral "Truth" programs, are intolerable offenses against human rights.
A right to free speech and free assembly does not include the right to speak on Facebook/Twitter/etc.

Random capitalization noted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
In the US, from the beginning, the wealthy were supposed to be the manager class over the government.


Originally, just that land-owning white men were so vested.


A right to free speech and free assembly does not include the right to speak on Facebook/Twitter/etc.

Random capitalization noted.
you need to get over your classical political narrative lying habits/addictions.

Madison and Wilson of PA were very idealistic proponents of actual human rights invested fully in the core of humanity. Sure there were other "thinkers" in the room, but with Washington and Jefferson siding largely with the pure ideals of generic human liberty, your political poisoning of the narrative is just inexcusable.

Americans across the colonies were reading Locke and other philosophical advocates of human rights advanced on principles inimical to the feudalism of Europe and elitist governance of every kind.

Americans were in fact as far as states' voting ordinances permitted, becoming in fact politically invested in their government, and more than that, committed believers in having their government their way.

That ideal was still the driving force behind the civil rights movement in the 1960s

*******

The courts will be seeing a lot of cases against the public platform operators in the immediate future, and across as many decades as it will take, to fully vindicate the human right of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly on public platform operators who try to hide behind the "Whites Only" signs of the old South and argue that they can refuse service to anyone any damn way they want.

You should join the right side of this issue.

333333333

yah, the capitalization was not coherent enough. I edited the post and made a few changes, added some paragraphs. Damn my addiction to verbiage.

I'm an old school capitals for emphasis practitioner.

Go Jazz.

Power to the People.

Repent Pathetic Unthinking Political Hack.

Think for Yourself.

Get the Facts, Stop Reprinting Talking Points.

I'll try again to have a real life, starting now.
 
you need to get over your classical political narrative lying habits/addictions.
Your naive view of the founding fathers is not my problem.

Madison and Wilson of PA were very idealistic proponents of actual human rights invested fully in the core of humanity. Sure there were other "thinkers" in the room, but with Washington and Jefferson siding largely with the pure ideals of generic human liberty, your political poisoning of the narrative is just inexcusable.
Did you notice Washington was in an opposing political party to Jefferson/Madison? They were in disagreement on quite a bit, including the rights of people.

Americans across the colonies were reading Locke and other philosophical advocates of human rights
Locke was a big advocate of the rights of white men. Others, not so much.
 
Americans were in fact as far as states' voting ordinances permitted, becoming in fact politically invested in their government, and more than that, committed believers in having their government their way.
One Brow is correct, though, in pointing out that political franchise, suffrage, was determined by property qualifications. The assumption being that only property owners had an actual stake in society. The Dorr Rebellion in Rhode Island is a little known example of the struggle to actually expand political franchise:


The Dorr Rebellion (1841–1842) (also referred to as Dorr's Rebellion, Dorr's War or Dorr War) was an attempt by middle-class residents to force broader democracy in the U.S. state of Rhode Island, where a small rural elite was in control of government. It was led by Thomas Wilson Dorr, who mobilized the disenfranchised to demand changes to the state's electoral rules. The state was still using its 1663 colonial charter as a constitution; it required that voters own land as qualification to vote. A later legislative rule required that a man had to be white and own $134 in property in order to vote.
 
Your naive view of the founding fathers is not my problem.


Did you notice Washington was in an opposing political party to Jefferson/Madison? They were in disagreement on quite a bit, including the rights of people.


Locke was a big advocate of the rights of white men. Others, not so much.

Some, including me, fault Washington's tax on Whiskey as an over reach of Federal authority. There was a "Whiskey rebellion".

Mark Levin is a big advocate of a "Convention of States" to get some amendments Congress will never initiate, like term limits for Senators and Congressmen and Supreme Court Justices, as a way of eroding DC power structures and enabling faster federal turnover supposedly more answerable to the common people.

I support transferring legitimate and beneficial government authorities to the States, and having term limits on federal employees, and wages at 90% of comproble private sector jobs. If someone wants to work for the government, there should be an idea of personal sacrifice and service in the gig. Not as extreme as LDS Church callings, lol.

The ideas of federalism is basically a concept of locating government close to the people most affected and allowing divergence in approaches taken so we actually can see what is working best.

Globalism is everything bad, everything done in the worst possible way.
 
Top