Another Latin American Soft Coup on Tap? Western Media Decries Evo Morales’ Candidacy – By Mint Press

Bolivia's President Evo Morales, top, attends a ritual ceremony honoring Pachamama, Mother Earth, at the government palace in La Paz, Bolivia. (AP/Juan Karita)

Supporters of Bolivia’s first Indigenous president, Evo Morales, wonder why his popular government can’t enjoy the same privilege of indefinite re-election afforded to many Western leaders without being called a “dictator” by media. Is it truly concern for “democracy” or is another agenda at play?

LA PAZ, BOLIVIA (Analysis) — When Bolivia’s Constitutional Court made the decision in January to modify aspects of the Constitution that placed limits on the number of times an elected official could seek re-election, it sparked a flurry of negative coverage in mainstream media.

“Bolivia Tells President His Time Is Up. He Isn’t Listening,” a New York Times headline read. “President Evo Morales of Bolivia seems obsessed with staying in power,” another declared. Other mainstream publications have followed suit, with phrases such as “president for life” adorning the headlines and pages of The Washington Post and Bloomberg.

Nicolas Melendres, a Bolivian journalist and activist with La Resistencia, an alternative media platform, believes such statements by media are hypocritical. He told MintPress:

This is something that is not only done in Bolivia … we have the example of Angela Merkel in Germany. I believe it is already going to be her fourth term re-elected as Chancellor. And it’s okay, because she is democratically re-elected. There are other examples, if I’m not mistaken; they have the same electoral system in Spain. Spain does not have term limits…

And so why is it that they try to make us believe here in Latin America that re-election is bad? That continuity in governance is bad?”

While corporate media cries “dictator,” Morales’ supporters ask why it is that Bolivia’s most popular president, under whose leadership poverty and unemployment have decreased dramatically — a fact that even the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has had to admit — cannot enjoy the same privilege of indefinite re-election as do many First-World leaders.

Melendres argues that opposition to Morales’ candidacy in 2019’s elections does not lie in any true concern for “democracy,” but rather in the threat Morales’ government has represented for Bolivia’s landed oligarchy and its associated foreign interests:

President Evo Morales has captured the aspirations of the majority of Bolivians, and made them reality… Naturally, the opposition is scared that they won’t win the elections in 2019 up against Evo Morales. And when we speak of the opposition, we are not only talking about the Bolivian opposition, but also foreign interests for whom Evo Morales represents a threat… Basically, Evo Morales represents a threat to global capitalism. He represents a threat to many capitalist interests in the world, and so it is natural that they try to bring him down.”


The “Cartel of Lies”

Carlos Valverde, the journalist who broke the story of Evo Morales' alleged secret son with a teenage partner, would later admit his information was wrong, but not after the damage to Morales' was already done.

The Bolivian right-wing, along with its North American allies and media, claim that the court’s decision on re-election is fundamentally anti-democratic, and that it is contradicting a referendum held on February 29, 2016 asking whether or not Bolivians wanted to amend the constitutional article imposing presidential term limits.

The vote was closely split, with the “no” securing barely 51 percent of the electorate for a surprise victory. The results of this vote are cited as evidence that “Bolivia said no” by much of the opposition and media like The New York Times, but Melendres argues that this is an oversimplification and generalization of what actually happened:

What is the discourse the opposition is using in respect to this? … That “Bolivia said no.” … The first idea that must be clear is that Bolivia did not “say no.” Fifty percent of Bolivia, or rather 50 percent of the electorate, said no. This is not “Bolivia.” The other 50 percent said yes.”

In the months leading up to the vote, polls showed a polarized Bolivia, but with the “yes” vote holding a small but consistent lead.

However, in the days leading up to the vote, a media scandal consumed Bolivia’s press when journalist Carlos Valverde broke a story that Morales supposedly had fathered a secret son with a teenage partner, Gabriela Zapata, and covered it up. The story was later revealed to be “fake news,” but the damage was done. The supposed “scandal,” along with other stories claiming that Vice President Alvaro Garcia Linera had lied about his education, was enough to tip the vote, just barely, in favor of the “no” vote.

In the months following the referendum, Morales’ government denounced a group of the country’s most powerful journalists as a “cartel of lies,” fabricating sensationalist stories to manipulate public opinion during key electoral moments.


Media lies, a transnational venture

Himself a journalist on the front-lines of Bolivia’s media battle, La Resistencia’s Melendres told MintPress that in political processes like Bolivia’s, capitalist media can often be a determining factor:

The media, when all is said and done, can decide whether a government enters or not… It is deception, lying, that can confuse the people … The media can’t be unlinked from the ones who finance it … The media is always financed by a certain social class that has a determined interest. They want that the people hear only what this social class has in its own interest. The majority of the media outlets in the world are capitalist enterprises that naturally exercise global capitalism and imperialism as hegemony over public opinion.”

Indeed, Bolivia’s “cartel of lies” reveals a national media landscape intimately tied to foreign, imperialist interests.

One of the most prominent members of the “cartel,” Raul Peñaranda, is the founder of Pagina Siete, one of Bolivia’s most prominent papers, and currently is managing editor of the Agencia Noticias de Fides.

Raul Peñaranda speaks at a National Endowment for Democracy sponsored event in Washington D.C. (Photo: Susana Escobar/Twitter)

Peñaranda, however, is closely tied to the U.S. Department of State-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED), where he currently holds a fellowship. His NED biography bills him as an “independent” journalist, who is fighting against “mechanisms used by the Bolivian government to infringe on democratic liberties and to control and co-opt independent media outlets.”

Rather than denying his activities in concert with the U.S. Department of State, Peñaranda has published articles on NED-associated websites bragging about his role in affecting the outcome of 2016’s referendum.

Peñaranda’s successor at Pagina Siete is Juan Carlos Salazar, who was also appointed as the director of the Bolivian NGO, Foundation for Journalism, in 2016. The Foundation for Journalism claims to be “a non-profit organization that was founded by Bolivian journalists,” which “does not have ideological, political, racial or religious commitments.”

The supposedly “independent” Foundation for Journalism is, however, afforded a spot on the list of organizations funded by the NED.


The NGO-media complex

Tens of thousands of supporters of Bolivia's President Evo Morales marched towards the opposition stronghold of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, to demand the imprisonment of Pando's province Gov. Leopoldo Fernandez following the massacre of 13 Morales supporters in Pando on Sept. 11, 2008. (AP/Dado Galdieri)

Evo Morales’ Movement Toward Socialism began to surge in popularity and influence in 2004 as an alliance of campesino coca farmers with leftists and marxists. This alliance is embodied in the duo of Morales, a cocalero, and Vice President Alvaro Garcia Linera, who was a former leftist guerrilla member on the U.S. terrorist list.

Argentine journalist Stella Calloni argues in her book, Evo en la Mira: CIA y DEA en Bolivia, that the United States has engaged in “low intensity war” tactics to undermine Morales’ leadership and set the stage for possible regime change. She argues that this became clear during an attempted coup of September 2008, when it was discovered that U.S. Ambassador Philip Goldberg had been working with separatist groups in several regions of the country. He was expelled as ambassador that same year. According to Calloni:

They tried to depict a ‘popular rebellion’ against Evo Morales, which was in reality an action of low intensity warfare, that had, as it is now known, the support of mercenary groups within and outside the country; and special troops of the United States in Paraguay, in the border zone with Bolivia, to ‘enter’ as soon as the coup happened ‘to help the Bolivian people’ in their struggle against the supposed ‘dictator.’

Furthermore, the plan was to separate the wealthiest region of the country, called the ‘Media Luna’ zone (Santa Cruz, Beni, Pando), where the greater part of the Amazon and Tarija region extends. This is an old dream of the oligarchs of this region, brutally racist and separatist, who furthermore covered up Nazis such as the ‘butcher of Lyon,’ Klaus Barbie, and other Nazis who arrived from Croatia, that together with ex-military officers of the Argentine dictatorship form the elite oligarchy of Santa Cruz.”

The conflict with right-wing separatists reached its climax on September 11, 2008, when at least 13 Indigenous supporters of Morales were killed in the Pando region, prompting the government to declare the region under a state of siege and bringing in the military to control the area. An emergency UNASUR session called by Chilean president Michelle Bachelet declared “full and decided support for the constitutional government of President Evo Morales.”

The Media Luna region has continued being a center of conflict for the Morales government, and of efforts to undermine its image, mostly in the form of the controversy surrounding plans to construct a highway through the Isiboro Secure National Park and Indigenous Territory, commonly known as TIPNIS, to connect the Beni department with Cochabamba.

A consultation was held in 2013 with the Indigenous communities of the region, in which the majority supported the project. However the highway has been strongly opposed by various environmental NGOs and foreign media, which have broadcasted the controversy to an international stage. Much of this began when AVAAZ, an advocacy group that has been known to promote war in Syria, launched an online petition asking recipients to demand the Bolivian government cease the project.

While La Resistencia’s Melendres emphasizes that the debate over TIPNIS and how best to minimize environmental impact is important and ongoing in Bolivia, he offers a scathing critique of foreign environmentalists coming into the country:

What are the most polluting countries in the world? They are the “post industrial” countries … all of the First World … And naturally, what do these countries do? What they do is, instead of reduce their environmental pollution, they give funds to NGOs in Third-World countries, so that these NGOs go and tell the governments of those countries that they don’t develop themselves … In Bolivia, we are not going to serve environmentalists from First-World countries. We need to develop ourselves. We need to transform nature, so that there are not children who go to sleep hungry and with empty stomachs.”

Indeed, the regions within and around TIPNIS are among the most isolated and poor of Bolivia, with little access to basic services, such as health centers or hospitals. Although concerns about environmental damage are real, supporters say the highway has the potential to lift people out of a situation of extreme poverty.

The Beni region is also the country’s major meat producing region; however, its isolation has made it difficult for producers to engage in trade.

Melendres explained to MintPress that Beni’s inability to directly bring its product to market has kept the area in poverty, dependent on ranchers acting as middlemen to transport the product by plane to Santa Cruz, where it is then resold and exported to the rest of the country. “And so, we are speaking of … a type of profiting bourgeoisie, or a social class in Santa Cruz of these ranchers that have a monopoly,” Melendez said.

These material interests in defense of a lucrative monopoly add greater nuance to the TIPNIS matter than the overly simplistic image that some environmentalist groups portray.

The TIPNIS conflict has been a symbolic struggle for Bolivia. It embodies the genuine difficulties that come with leading and transforming a historically colonized country, and the contradictions of developing a country mired in poverty while also caring for the environment.

Unfortunately, it has also demonstrated all too well the insidious ways in which media and organizations connected to both foreign and local interests can exploit internal tensions. Rather than seeking to understand the nuanced facets of an internal problem, an exaggerated version is broadcast to the world, of an Indigenous leader-turned-president trying to destroy the Amazon and the communities who live there.


Can Bolivia avoid regime change?

Before Morales had even arrived to office, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed in 2005 that the United States was “very concerned” about a “party of coca cultivators” that was surging in popularity. “Something curious” was happening in Bolivia, she said.

Morales, all too aware of the magnitude and complexity of his project, has not been shy about taking measures to curb activity against his leadership. Among the first measures taken was requiring all U.S. citizens to obtain a visa to enter the country.

In 2013, Morales expelled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), claiming that it was attempting to foment opposition by funding and backing various NGOs and separatist groups.

Supporters of Bolivia's President Evo Morales attend a rally in favor of his reelection, in La Paz, Bolivia, Feb. 21, 2018. Supporters of Morales marched in the 2 year anniversary of the referendum that rejected his bid for another reelection. Bolivia's Constitutional Court is allowing him to go forward with his run to a fourth mandate. (AP/Juan Karita)

When U.S. Ambassador Philip Goldberg was expelled in 2008, the measure enjoyed wide support among a country that is known for its anti-imperialist sentiments. Morales embodies this popular sentiment, and has not softened his rhetoric toward the United States with time, as some perhaps hoped he would. An active social media user, Morales frequently takes to Twitter, condemning U.S. interference around the world.

To one who pays attention to sessions in the United Nations Security Council, the small Andean country’s large presence in international relations would be obvious. Bolivian Ambassador, and close friend to Morales, Sacha Llorenti, has been known to show up to sessions on Palestine wearing a Keffiyeh.

In April, 2017, when several Western governments held up photos of supposed “evidence” that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons, Llorenti came prepared with his own photos, of former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell holding the infamous vial of “anthrax” he used to make the case for war in Iraq. “I believe it’s vital for us to remember what history teaches us,” Llorenti told the council.

But while Bolivia enjoys more success domestically and makes its presence known internationally, the stakes have continued to grow, as Morales finds himself representing one of the last strongholds of the 21st century’s surge of South American leftism. With soft coups having taken down leftist governments in Brazil, Argentina, and Ecuador, a new right-wing administration in Chile, and an ongoing economic war crippling Venezuela, the geopolitical situation is far different from what it was when Evo came to power riding the Bolivarian wave.

Former Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa assessed the situation for the Latin American left in a recent opinion piece for Granma, concluding that media is currently acting as the primary destabilizing instrument of regime change:

The problem is much more complex if we consider the hegemonic culture constructed by the media — in the Gramscian sense, that is — assuring that the wishes of the great majorities are in line with the interests of the elites. Our democracies should be called media democracies instead. The media is now a more important component of the political process than parties and electoral systems. It has become the true representative of conservative and business political power.”

It is perhaps unsurprising then that Evo Morales — who concluded his 2005 inauguration speech with a cry of “death to the Yankees!” — is targeted by media. As he situates himself for re-election, one should have no doubt that such efforts toward destabilization and misinformation will only continue growing.

Top Photo | Bolivia’s President Evo Morales, top, attends a ritual ceremony honoring Pachamama, Mother Earth, at the government palace in La Paz, Bolivia. (AP/Juan Karita)

Republish our stories! MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.

Russian Exodus from the West – by Peter Koenig for the Saker blog


by Peter Koenig for the Saker blog

By now the West – the US, Canada, Australia and the super-puppets of Europe, overall more than 25 countries – has expelled more than 130 Russian diplomats. All as punishment for Russia’s alleged nerve gas poisoning of a former Russian / MI6 double-agent, Sergei Skripal (66) and his daughter Yulia (33), who was visiting her father from Moscow. Sergei Skripal lived in the UK for the last seven years, ever since President Putin lifted his prison sentence in 2010 in a spy swap with the UK. The pair, father and daughter, was discovered on 4 March slumped on a park bench in Salisbury, England, not far from Sergei’s home. Apparently traces of the same nerve agent were found at the Skripal home’s door.

Russia in the meantime has started in a tit-for-tat move expelling western diplomats – in a first round 60, plus closing the US Consulate in St. Petersburg. According to Mr. Lavrov, more will most likely follow. – There will be an exodus and a counter-exodus of diplomats, west-east and east-west. It looks like a Kindergarten at play – but is of course a blatant provocation by the west on Russia and a continuation of the vilification of President Putin – especially after he has just been reelected with an overwhelming majority of over 76%. It’s a provocation with zero substance, to further justify an escalating NATO aggression against Russia. The war-bells are ringing – for a lie, an abject farce, visible to a child. Only the blind, those puppets, because out of fear or out of stupidity, who do not want to see – are supporting this new US instigated, UK executed drive against Russia.

The nerve gas, called Novichok, had been produced by the Soviet Union in the 1970s, but was subsequently banned and destroyed under international supervision. The ‘inventor’ of Novichok lives apparently in the US. Mr. Putin said, if the military-grade Novichok would have been used, the only form the USSR ever produced, there would have been no survivors.

What hardly anybody talks about is that the secretive UK Defense (War) Ministry’s laboratory of Porton Down, is but 13 km away from where father and daughter were allegedly found unconscious on a park bench. Porton Down is a highly sophisticated chemical and biological weapons lab that entertains contracts with the Pentagon of more than US$ 70 million for carrying out “experiments”, including on humans and animals. Porton Down has the capacity to produce Novichok. See the full story on Porton Down, by Bulgarian investigative journalist, Dilyana Gaytandzhieva – .

At this point there is no prove – other than what the police reported – that Sergei and Yulia Skripal were found on that dubious park bench. There are no civil witnesses. The UK government does not disclose where the two are treated, what their current health status is. Only on the repeated insistence of Mr. Lavrov that according to an agreement between the UK and Russia (the USSR) in the 1960s, both countries have the right to inquire and investigate about the wellbeing of their respective citizens, an official statement today from the UK said that Yulia is doing better and is on her way to recovery, while her father is still in critical but stable conditions (The Guardian, 29 March 2018). Is it true? – What if one or both recover and have enough memory of the events to go public?

What if the two have indeed been poisoned at Sergei’s home, or abducted and brought to the Porton Down laboratory to be infected with the nerve gas and then later dumped to the park bench? Why does the UK not disclose any ‘evidence’ they apparently have against Russia? – No details of where the two are being treated? – No visits allowed. Russia’s offer to collaborate in the investigation is laughed off and refused. Is this a well-orchestrated MI6 / CIA false flag, followed by outrageous lambasting by the UK’s highest leadership against Russia and her newly re-elected President Putin?

This criminal propaganda event is so full of lies, false accusations and deceit, pulling along more than 25 (so far) western nations to condemn and sanction Russia in unison for something Russia has with absolute certainty not committed. Just apply logic – a tough challenge, I know, these days for the dumb-folded west – but logic would tell a child that there is no sense, absolutely no sense, for Russia to carry out such an evil act. So, the usual question is: cui bono – who benefits? – And the answer is also crystal clear: Profiting from this sham are the war-mongering US / NATO and their miserable vassal-allies – spineless for years – following lies, their governments are fully aware of the lies, of the untruth Russia is accused of.

Let’s take this a step further. Diplomatic relations between the west and Russia have totally fallen apart. The doors are closed. Russia doesn’t need the west. But the west, especially Europe, badly needs and will every day more need Russia, a close ally and trading partner for hundreds of years. The west, eventually abandoned and every day more enslaved by Washington with weaponized refugees, with false flag terror attacks, leading to increased militarization, to oppression and censorship, privatization of public goods and infrastructure – Greece is but an example – and strangulation by Wall Street private banking and troika (IMF, European Central Bank, European Commission) imposed debt, the west will beg Russia to open her doors and show them their kindness – the kindness and openness Russia has been demonstrating to the west over the past almost 20 years, despite flagrant western abuse and demonization no end.

The western Anglo-Zionist-led empire will collapse. It’s a mere question of time but collapse it will. Today, not only a few, but all western “leaders” (sic) know that they are committing suicide by teaming up with destructive Washington – and this against the will of the majority of the European people. – Yet, they push a long this path of auto-destruction. Why? – Have they been personally threatened, or else lavishly rewarded if they follow the dictate of deep state-led White House and Pentagon?

The day may come when the west will knock desperately at Russia’s door – please talk to us, we need you. But this may happen only if they have not let themselves be pulled into the abyss of annihilation by Washington. Their stupidity may just do that – another few lies, accusing Russia of crimes against humanity she didn’t commit and prompting a war, an all-destructive nuclear war. The pretext could be another false flag Syrian sarin attack on “her own people”, wrongly blaming Bashar al-Assad; or a missile landing in Israel, blaming Iran with the same no-proof propaganda fervor applied by the UK in the Sergei and Yulia Skripal case; or North Korea – in the course of negotiations between Trump and Kim Jong-un next month (April), the US / west launches a false flag missile, for example, from Guam, that lands in Japan, destroying infrastructure and killing people, blaming it immediately on DPRK, without any evidence whatsoever, but with a rigorous campaign UK-style, to the point that nobody dares to contradict the obvious lie.

What if the current UK virulent and violent Russia slandering campaign is but a dry-run for much worse to come? – By now the mental state of western society is at the level of Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, Goebbels’, statement – “Let me control the media, and I will turn any Nation into a herd of Pigs”. Yes, that’s what the west has become, a herd of pigs.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; RT; Sputnik; PressTV; The 21st Century; TeleSUR; The Vineyard of The Saker Blog; and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.

The West’s ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mantra is wrecking lives & international relations – By Robert Bridge (RT)

Robert Bridge
Robert Bridge is an American writer and journalist. He is author of the book, ‘Midnight in the American Empire,’ released in 2013.
The West's ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mantra is wrecking lives & international relations
Western society is flirting with a disturbing trend where people are being denied the time-honored ‘presumption of innocence’. The same undemocratic method is even being used against nations in what is becoming a dangerous game.

Imagine the following scenario: You are a star football player at the local high school, with a number of college teams hoping to recruit you. There is even talk of a NFL career down the road. Then, overnight, your life takes an unexpected turn for the worse. The police show up at your house with a warrant for your arrest; the charges: kidnapping and rape. The only evidence is your word against the accuser’s. After spending six years behind bars, the court decides you were wrongly accused.

That is the incredible story of Brian Banks, 26, who was released early from prison in 2012 after his accuser, Wanetta Gibson, admitted that she had fabricated injurious claims against the young man.

Many other innocent people, however, who have been falsely accused in the West for some crime they did not commit, are not as fortunate as Brian Banks. Just this week, for example, Ross Bullock was released from his private “hell” – and not due to an accuser with a guilty conscience, but by committing suicide.

“After a ‘year of torment’… Bullock hanged himself in the garage of the family home, leaving a note revealing he had ‘hit rock bottom’ and that with his death ‘I’m free from this living hell,’” the Daily Mail reported

There is a temptation to explain away such tragic cases as isolated anomalies in an otherwise sound-functioning legal system. After all, mistakes are going to happen regardless of the safeguards. At the same time, however, there is an irresistible urge among humans to believe those people who claim to have been victimized – even when the evidence suggests otherwise. Perhaps this is due to the powerful emotional element that works to galvanize the victim’s story. Or it could be due to the belief that nobody would intentionally and unjustly condemn another human being. But who can really say what is inside another person’s heart? Moreover, it can’t be denied that every time we attempt to hunt down and punish another people, tribe, sex, religion, etc. for some alleged crimes against victims, there is a real tendency among Westerners to get carried away with moralistic zeal to the point of fanaticism.

A case in point is last year’s scandal that rocked the entertainment industry as the movie mogul Harvey Weinstein was accused of sexually assaulting numerous women over the span of a 30-year career. Eventually, over 80 females, emboldened by the courage displayed by their peers, drove Weinstein straight out of Hollywood and into the rogue’s gallery of sexual predators. Few could deny this was a positive thing.

But then something strange began to happen that has been dubbed the ‘Weinstein effect.’ Powered by the social media #MeToo movement, women from all walks of life began to publicly accuse men for all sorts of sexual violations, some from decades ago. Certainly, many of the claims were legitimate. However, in many cases they were not. Yet the mainstream media, which has taken great delight in providing breathless details of every new accusation, has shown little interest in pursuing those stories of men who went on to suffer divorce, ruined reputations, and the loss of jobs without so much as a fair hearing in a court of law. 

As far as the mainstream media is concerned, and to be fair they don’t seem that concerned, the victim’s story is the only story that matters. Indeed, it was almost as if the victim had become judge, jury and executioner. This is, in reality, just one step from mob rule, and woe to anyone who questions the motives of the movement, as French star Catherine Deneuve discovered.

The (female) writer, D.C. McAllister, described the poisonous “environment of suspicion” that has beset relations between men and women.

“While women’s willingness to hold men accountable for criminal sexual behavior is to be applauded, the scorched-earth approach we are seeing today is destructive because it undermines trust,” McAllister wrote in The Federalist. “When anything from a naive touch during a photo shoot to an innocent attempt at a kiss is compared to rape and sexual abuse, we are not healing society but infecting relationships with the poison of distrust.” 

In other words, neither men nor women have gained anything from this otherwise-well-intended campaign against sexual improprieties. However, this is not the first time the West has allowed raw emotions to knock the train of progress right off the tracks. History books are replete with examples of Western campaigns rising out of sheer mass hysteria. But at least in those wild times there was still some semblance of justice, complete with trials and investigations. Now compare that with our ‘modern’ times, when all it took for the United States to win approval for an illicit attack on Iraq was for Colin Powell to shake a vial of faux anthrax in front of the UN General Assembly.

With these historical hiccups in mind, it is possible to argue that the West has truly forgotten the lessons of history because they are certainly repeating them today.
By way of example, consider where the great bulk of US troops are encamped today – in and around the Middle East – and then ask yourself how they got there. The answer is by hook and by crook, and not a little public manipulation and chicanery. That is because, in our insatiable desire to defend victims – the good guys, we are told – we are allowing ourselves to ignore crucial evidence while placing blind faith in what we are being told is the truth. Clearly that has not been the case to date.

From the accusations that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction to launch against innocent people, to the current claims that the Syrian government of Bashar Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people, the West is gambling that claims based on zero evidence will always work to fulfill ulterior motives. So far, the ploy seems to be working with the gullible public, but sooner or later truth will catch up, indeed, as truth usually does.

Just this month, for example, an assassination attempt was made against Sergei Skripal – a former double agent who had moved to Salisbury, England following a spy-swap in 2010. Any guesses as to who the British authorities have ruled – without a trial, evidence or motivating factor – is the main culprit? Yes, Russia. Yet, even the usually loyal British press has started expressing reservations over the dubious claims.

This should come as no surprise since the UK, a member of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), has staunchly refused to provide samples of the alleged nerve agent to Russia for analysis. Why would it do that? Would anyone be surprised if this investigation goes the same way it did for all those Russian athletes who were, unjustly, banned from the Winter Olympic Games this year? 

Or perhaps the same way it went following the 2016 US presidential elections, when Russia was accused of meddling on behalf of Donald Trump – zero evidence to back up the slanderous accusations, which are responsible for putting US-Russia relations into a free fall.

In conclusion, the unsightly spectacle of Western capitals backtracking on legal precedent – from domestic cases to international – makes it all the more clear why it is so anxious to win back the media mountaintops – it has no evidence whatsoever to support the reasons behind its increasingly illicit behavior. It is therefore incumbent upon them to own the narrative, as well as the justice system. How long this democratic charade can last is anybody’s guess.


The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Reporting what the mainstream media won’t: Follow RT’s Twitter account

The Hired “Jumping Jacks” of the Press and Their Corporate and Deep State Overlords – By Tim Keating (

There are laws to protect the freedom of the press’s speech, but none that are worth anything to protect the people from the press. ~ Mark Twain

Today’s news cycle is such that we are bombarded with information, much of it fake news and most of it echo and spin. There are excellent journalists, bloggers and academics out there, but too often they go unheard in the electronic haze of hysteria that passes for ‘news’. The mainstream media has few journalists worthy of the name on the payroll, but plenty of those willing to compromise themselves for ‘the inside scoop’. The CIA’s Operation Mockingbird exposed collusion between government and media decades ago. And today, when some journalists routinely submit their drafts to powerful interests before publication, getting ‘the right people’ who will ‘stick to the script’ into media is a relatively easy job.

Publicare et Propagare

Acta Diurna

The Acta Diurna Populi Romani: The “Daily Acts of the People of Rome”

Journalism is as old as civilization. Ptah-hotep, vizier to Egyptian pharaoh Djedkare Isesi, wrote sometime around 2,200 BCE of the need for “communicating truthfully, addressing audience interests, and acting in a manner consistent with what is being said.”

Julius Caesar launched the Acta Diurna, a daily gazette “posted in prominent places in Rome and in the provinces with the intention of feeding the populace official information.”

The Acta Diurna introduced the expression ‘publicare et propagare’, which means “make public and propagate,” and was typically written as a footnote to texts published in the Diurna. The practice of recording Senate deliberations was kept up after Caesar, though his successor refused to publish them, and thereafter they were often only published in censored form.

Dangerous Medium

Then as now, information is a craft. Who crafts the information, controls the message and therefore what the population believes. As much as purveyors of information may wish to convey that the information they are reporting has objective value, free from bias and constituting simply ‘the news’, everything that is packaged as such is laden with assumptions, all of them ultimately geared towards ensuring ‘continuity of narrative’ and thus the status quo.

Serena Shim

Serena Shim (born USA 1985 – died Turkey 2014)

But good journalism, while respecting the ‘rules of the game’, will challenge official narratives. Journalism isn’t always a cushy profession; in fact, it can be downright dangerous. The Press Emblem Campaign (PEC) reports that “more than 1,000 journalists have been killed in the past nine years.”

In 2013, 129 journalists were killed. In 2014, 128 were killed. In Ukraine alone during the US-backed coup d’etat in 2014, 9 were killed, including Andrei Stenin, snuffed out by Western-backed Kiev fascists. In Gaza, 16 journalists were killed by Israeli forces during Operation Protective Edge. In Syria in 2017, 13 were killed, including Serena Shim (see photo at left), killed just over the border in Turkey.

These were not ’embedded’ journalists, or journalists masquerading as truth-tellers, but reporters and photojournalists risking their lives to tell stories that the mainstream refuses to.

Creeds and Oaths

monkey see no evil,etc

The serious journalist is supposed to uphold the “Journalist’s Creed“, which contains this statement:

“I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.”

Of course, the task of deciding what is in the “welfare of society” does not fall to the average hack, but on his bosses, who in turn often are connected to political and corporate bosses. So if we ever end up in a situation where a culture of corruption and cronyism defines politics and business, with this definition of ‘journalistic ethics’, there is literally no chance that the corrupt will ever be called to account by the mainstream media. They are “society” and their welfare is at risk.

There are other ethical declarations for the modern day journalist, such as from the Society of Professional Journalists. Without citing all their ‘codes’, their prime directive is:

“Never deliberately distort facts.”

Distorting facts is the purposeful ‘twisting’ in different ways of the realities that face people each and every day. In this respect, when distortions of facts are broadcast ad infinitum people begin to believe half-truths and outright lies. History and the news are pregnant with this approach to deliberately mislead, whether it is allowing space for advertisers to manipulate people for their money or rallying readers behind political leaders, or pushing for war. This is no accident. Media moguls well understand that people are subject to ‘confirmation bias’. This bias, essentially, roots itself in the distortion of believing what you want to believe rather than what reality is.

At the end of the day, the journalists within the MSM surely must know whether or not they are practicing their creed, ‘deliberately distorting facts’ or simply embellishing them. Either that, or they have the self-awareness of a walnut. Why would they violate their creed? Most need a paycheck, and almost all crave recognition. And it’s much easier to follow the herd than to stick out one’s neck with an inconvenient truth.

US Media

The Conglomerates

Today the media in increasingly a single conglomerate that purveys a single message to the people: ‘trust us, no matter what we say’. This is not new. In the 1930s, the Krupp dynasty were famous for their production of steel, artillery, ammunition, and other armaments. They also owned newspapers. In their book the Merchants of Death published in 1934, H.C. Engelbrecht and F.C Hanighen observed:

“No modern business methods were unknown to Krupp. The power of the press was understood and appreciated. Krupp owned or controlled three great newspapers, the Rheinisch-Westphaelische Zeitung, the Berlin Taegliche Rundschau, and the Neuests Nachrichten. It was a simple matter to rouse public opinion to a patriotic frenzy at any time by war scares or by giving prominent space to the armament activities of other countries, especially during the feverish years before the War.”

As a time-period exposé, the authors highlight many more examples covering the period between WWI and WWII. Post 1945, the arms makers and press were interlocked once more – the examples could fill volumes. Since that time, the same corporate forces have further consolidated their alliance and power in an attempt to completely dominate the market for your mind.


Fortunately, there are some excellent journalists who try to honor their creed. Some may have developed their careers working for the MSM and learned of its pitfalls, manipulations, and lack of overall integrity. Those who have made these observations and decided instead to opt-out, who have set their own paths based on conscience and responsibility to provide facts, are sadly few and far between.

But this rare breed of journalist has objectively reported on the Gulf of Tonkin (Bắc Kỳ) the Vietnam war; the assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK; Iraq 1.0 and 9/11,Iraq 2.0 and Libya; Syria’s moderate rebels and the White Helmets; the Ukraine coup and the scapegoating of Russia, the recent American election and the fallout therein. Unfortunately, real journalism rarely makes it to the mainstream. Instead, we have companies that act as media gatekeepers such as Google and Facebook.

The ‘Constitution Society‘ writes of an event alleged to have occurred at the New York Press Club in the year 1880. A toast was offered to the esteemed press gathered around New York journalist John Swinton. Swinton responded with this:

‘We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”

With the current leftist hysteria dominating the news, perhaps some words on the press by someone who knew how to weaponize it – Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi minister of propaganda – might bring the message home:

“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”

And play it they do.


Tim Keating (Profile) reader!

Anonymous – Events That are Shocking The World… (2018-2019) – By Anonymous


Anonymous – Events That are Shocking The World… (2018-2019)

7 Comments on Anonymous – Events That are Shocking The World… (2018-2019)

The Great Degeneration of the West: Where Do Wrong Decisions Lead? – By Sofia Pale



The processes taking place in the US and the European countries over the past 30 years have led to the economic, cultural and ideological decline of the West. It is now being pushed back by the central powers of the East, more precisely, China, which possesses great influence in Southeast Asia, and Russia, which unifies the Eurasian areas.

And while today, new political, social and economic structures are being created in Russia and China to improve public administration and living standards, Western powers proudly believe that they have long since formed an ideal system of government that can ensure the well-being of society within the framework of the notorious Western democracy.

Then how does one explain the evident economic downturn and the decline in the efficiency of state institutions, the financial speculation and excessive regulation, the reduction of private initiative in all spheres and the deterioration of the Western education system? That said, for many leading Western countries, enormous national debt remains a foremost concern as it cannot be paid off even by several decades of hard work of entire country populations.

All these processes were described in detail by one of the most influential Western historians of the XXI century, Niall Ferguson, in his book “The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die”, published in 2014. According to him, a great economic collapse awaits the yet unborn future generations, who will have to pay the loans of their fathers and grandfathers. In the words of the author, “The Great Recession is merely a symptom of a more profound Great Degeneration.”

The world’s leading media have recently been reporting the decline of economic, social and political efficiency in the US and Europe. For instance, famous economist and publicist Paul Krugman analyses the failures of President Donald Trump’s domestic and foreign policy. And there are many. The US withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Paris Agreement on Climate evoked a negative international response. Trump’s battle with immigrants left almost 1 million people unemployed (more precisely, drove them into the underground economy, depriving the country of tax revenues). The $100 billion-plus arms deals have brought a certain amount of profit to the US, yet did it no honor. The deals were struck with Saudi Arabia, Japan and South Korea, the latter ready to take up arms due to tense relations with the DPRK, which Trump himself had exacerbated.

With Trump’s efforts, the US economy grew by 3% during the course of 2017, but the country’s annual expenditures still exceed revenues. This isn’t surprising, considering what the profits are spent on. For example, in September 2017, the US Senate approved an unprecedented military budget of $ 700 billion, which is $100 higher than last year’s. This figure is worth about 40% of world military expenditures and is equal to the sum of the defense budgets of almost 14 leading world powers, making America the number one military power. Yet while the US government increases its military budget, at the same time, it reduces social welfare payments for its citizens (this speaks of Trump’s desire to cancel Obamacare’s health insurance, Medicaid and a number of other benefits for the poor).

On the one hand, Trump tries to create jobs in America, but does so through a policy of protectionism which negatively affects world trade in general. On the other hand, in September 2017, the US president signed a bill raising the federal borrowing limit, which is already $ 20 trillion and is the highest in the history of mankind.

Then again, the second largest public debt in the world was accumulated by the countries of the EU and is at $ 18 trillion. This stems from the so-called fifth enlargement of the EU in 2004 through the accession of the following economically weak countries: The Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus and Malta. Then, in 2008, the Great Recession originated in the US and spread worldwide. As a result, “The weakest economies—Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Ireland—faced staggering public debt, anemic growth, and high unemployment, but they did not have the monetary policy tools at their disposal that come from controlling your own currency,” Hillary Clinton wrote in her book, Hard Choices, published in 2014.(p. 1378-9) She was also “worried that too much austerity in Europe would slow growth even further, making it harder for [these countries] and the rest of the world to climb out of the hole.” Nevertheless, she did not criticize the policy of President Barack Obama who “responded to the recession by pushing an aggressive investment program through Congress to get growth going again, while working to reduce the national debt over the long term.”

However, it is quite obvious that the austerity policy of the EU and the US policy of raising national debt to stimulate the economy both fail to yield positive results.

The errors of the West can easily be examined with the help of the analysis of the relations between the EU and Great Britain in 2004-2007. Back then, Britain’s public debt was about 40% of GDP, and reached almost 90% of GDP in 2017. An attempt to save the sinking economy led London to a difficult decision to follow through with Brexit in 2016-2017. This situation arose due to the fact that, after the fifth enlargement of the EU, Brussels decided to redistribute resources between the rich and the poor countries. As a result, since 2011, the UK’s national industry has all but collapsed. As a commenter on the article in the magazine The Sun pointed out in June 2016, the UK had transferred almost all of its production to Poland (Cadbury), Slovakia (Jaguar Land Rover), Spain (Ajax), Malaysia (Dyson), Turkey (Ford Transit) and other countries. Following this, the UK economy became largely dependent on the growth of property prices due to mass purchases of housing by immigrants; over the past eight years, prices have risen by 50%. In the sphere of education, prices have also increased due to the heightened demand from foreign students. Thus, many British citizens can no longer afford to buy housing or pay for their children’s higher education. In addition to everything, in 2017, the national debt of Great Britain hit a record $ 7 trillion.

Then again, London, having made such mistakes, expects to work more closely with the United States after Brexit. However, considering that the US dollar will lose its position to the Chinese yuan in the world market by at least 30% in the near future, this cooperation is unlikely to fulfil the hopes of the UK to improve its economy.

Therefore, we can conclude that the economic, political and ideological systems of the West are currently in crisis. The growth of national debts along with the increase of the Gini coefficient (the gap between the rich and poor segments of society) indicates the need for fundamental reforms in the above-mentioned spheres. Otherwise, the great achievements of the West, so highly valued in the past, will soon lose their relevance and give way to new structural transformations coming from the East.

Sofia Pale, PhD, Research Fellow of the Center for South-East Asia, Australia and Oceania of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, exclusively for the online magazine – “New Eastern Outlook.

Mainstream Media Still Hyping The Muslim Boogeyman, Hate Crimes Up – By Roqayah Chamseddine


The first half of the year saw a 91-percent increase in hate crimes against Muslims on the heels of President Donald Trump’s inauguration. His own Islamophobic comments, coupled with biased media coverage of Muslims, have created an aura of fear around the religion in the U.S.

The American boogeyman of terrorist threats, often used to further war and military intervention, comes with domestic consequences. In the United States, Muslim houses of worship have been inundated with threats of bodily harm and property destruction, as well as seen items like pig’s heads and desecrated Qurans left on their doorsteps.

According to a recent report by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), there was a 91-percent spike in hate crimes against Muslims in the first part of this year compared to the same period in 2016. The abuses Muslims have faced include targeted harassment, FBI intimidation, discriminatory legislation and violent assaults.


The role that the media has played in stoking fears of a Muslim menace can’t be discounted, especially when it comes to how they cover violence. Journalist Mehdi Hasan has argued that this disparity is most obvious when a Muslim is involved in a terrorist act, as the media tends to give it much more coverage than similar incidents involving non-Muslims.

From print media to the programs and films watched on a daily basis, Muslims are often seen through a single lens: as barbarians. This portrayal has real-life impact. Nearly half of Americans believe U.S. Muslims are “anti-American,” and the overall view of Muslims remains deeply negative.

Related | What’s Behind The Surge In Hate Crimes Against American Muslims?

A study conducted by researchers at Georgia State University found that terror attacks in the US between 2011 and 2015, when perpetrated by a Muslim, were given five times more media coverage than terror attacks committed by non-Muslims. And while Muslims carried out 12.4 percent of attacks in the U.S., they received 41.4 percent of news coverage. This extreme focus on Muslims is intentional and leads to violence against not only Muslims, but those mistakenly associated with Muslims, such as Sikhs.

In one of many anti-Muslim incidents, Rick Sorrel of Portland, Oregon admitted that he threatened a Muslim couple in July because of “fear and ignorance” and after being influenced by what he had seen and read in the news and social media. The answer to these types of incidents is a free and independent press that does away with Orientalist stereotypes and treats news as something informative instead of a spectacle to be consumed.

The Fourth Turning and Steve Bannon Pt. 2 = Happiness, Hedonism, Horror – Repeat – By Harrison Koehli


Continued from Part 1: Why He’s Wrong, Even Though He’s Right

I wasn’t familiar with the ‘fourth turning’ before the Bannon media hype, but the idea didn’t strike me as off the wall once I read about it. I think it’s actually quite useful. And it’s not really new either. Howe and Strauss seem to have built upon existing ideas of historical cycles and refined them, tying them to the biological life cycle and filling in a lot of the details. For example, Howe mentions Toynbee’s idea of a “great war cycle”:

And this is the old lesson of Arnold Toynbee, of what he calls the great war cycle that arose every 80 years or so: it’s when the generation who doesn’t remember the last great catastrophe finally become the senior leaders.

Another source is Russian sociologist Pitrim Sorokin. I’m not sure if Howe and Strauss were familiar with Sorokin’s work, but these blog posts (here, here, and here) suggest that their theory at least “appears to be a clean innovation on Sorokin’s work”. Sorokin also identified a cycle of 80 to 100 years that ping-pongs between spiritual and materialistic mindsets, roughly corresponding to the awakening and crisis turnings. For Howe and Strauss, the second and fourth turnings – spiritual awakening and secular crisis – form the key moments in the larger cycle of cultural trends.

There’s another source, however, that I think rounds out generational theory even more and provides the perspective we need in order to prevent the current crisis from progressing to a reign of terror. Readers familiar with Lobaczewski’s Political Ponerology (which cites Sorokin’s work as a source) know that one of main points of the book is that some psychopaths strive for political power, and create societal nightmares once they achieve it. But equally important is his focus on the historical cycles that make such a thing possible. The two are intimately tied together.

In PP, Lobaczewski describes this cycle in terms of “good times” and “bad times”. Bad times contain within them the seeds of good times, because they provide the hard lessons that force people to rediscover what really matters, prompting a spiritual awakening for society to rebuild. But good times also contain the seed of bad times, because they tend to lead to hedonism, complacency, and stagnation, where past lessons are forgotten and written off as a waste of time. But the hedonistic pursuit of happiness only leads to misery, because it lacks any meaning or sense of purpose. And by ignoring the lessons learned in the past, societies open themselves up to the same “infection”. They lose their “immunity”. Their defenses are weakened, and another crisis becomes inevitable.

Already we see aspects of Howe and Strauss’s “high” (good times), “awakening” (rediscovery of lost values), and “unraveling” (stagnation and hedonism), which lead to “crisis” (bad times).

Lobaczewski admitted that the two key “danger” phases were well recognized by historians. The first is a spiritual crisis where moral, religious, and intellectual values atrophy and cease to nourish a society. If the correct measures aren’t taken, this leads to a secular crisis: economic collapse, revolution, war, the fall of empires. That’s pretty standard stuff in history, but what’s not understood very well are the specific dynamics that govern why and how this happens – and therefore give a clue as to how to prevent the worst from happening. Left only with Howe & Strauss’s theory, we’d be in the same boat as any other generation, albeit with the advantage of knowing we’re navigating a crisis. Luckily, we have PP to help us out.

As a psychologist who lived in Communist Poland and studied the Soviet system – risking his life in the process – Lobaczewski had a unique perspective, something people like Bannon could probably benefit from. He focuses in detail on two “pathological states” of societies. Think of them as mental illnesses affecting an entire society, which have specific causes, stages, symptoms, and treatments. These two societal diseases also act as distinct stages within a bigger “macrosocial disease process”:

…their essence and contents appear different enough, but they can operate sequentially in such a way that the first opens the door to the second. (PP, p. 120)

I want to focus on the first: a state of heightened and pervasive societal hysteria, which can open the door to the nightmare of the second disease state, “pathocracy”.

Lobaczewski fits these pathological social conditions into what he calls a “hysteroidal cycle”, but I’ll just refer to it as the cycle of hysteria. It’s important information to have, so I’m going to summarize his ideas here and relate them to Howe and Strauss’s work on the four turnings. (For those readers who have PP, the bulk of this information comes from Chapter 2.)

The Cycle of Hysteria

Lobaczewski says the cycle of hysteria repeats “not quite every two centuries”. The level of social hysteria peaks around one generation before a crisis, in other words during an unraveling. If it peaks hard enough, it can lead to a reign of terror, as it has so often in the past. If Lobaczewski is right about the length of the cycle, that suggests a longer cycle – close to two of Howe and Strauss’s cycles (i.e. 150 to 180 years). Civil War buffs might be able to provide some insight into this, given that the Civil War happened just over 150 years ago. Or perhaps Howe and Strauss are correct in limiting the cycle to 80 years, and the conditions that make one cycle worse than another are secondary and don’t repeat like clockwork. I don’t know.

As bad as the bad times are, they give purpose: for progress and the rediscovery of lost values. A close encounter with evil forces us to gather the physical and mental strength to fight not only for our lives, but also for our sanity. Even though our first response is usually to turn to violence and military might (revolution, counter-revolution, civil war), that hotheadedness falls by the wayside with time and experience. In the cauldron of suffering and chaos, frivolous emotions eventually make way for sober reflection, and we’re forced to regain lost powers of thought and discernment. Society eventually regains a healthier worldview: knowledge of self and others, old virtues and values, understanding the meaning of history. All of which eventually gives us the power to actually conquer evil by creating a new order out of the chaos.

But this knowledge slowly fades. Those who benefit the most after the crisis in terms of position and wealth give birth to children who haven’t known real hardship. These children learn to repress uncomfortable truths that would force them to admit that they profit from injustice (e.g., slavery, worker exploitation, corrupt business practices, imperialism, etc.). This form of denial only gets worse with each new generation. In other words, the privileged, elite establishment gradually loses touch with reality, becoming more self-serving and self-entitled with time.

This kind of comfortable life – blind to the negative underbelly – gives rise to increasing levels of self-importance and hysteria, which eventually reach a critical point. If this critical point can’t be overcome, a bloody tragedy usually results within the next generation. In other words, if the disease isn’t treated in its infancy, crisis is probably inevitable. How bad it is depends on how far a society has devolved morally and psychologically. Some societies survive relatively intact; some are tied to the fate of other nations; but empires can and do collapse. A crisis of hysteria is how it all happens.

So let’s take a look at some of the “symptoms” of this social disease, which show up after a couple generations of living the good life. Lobaczewski gives a few specific examples of how the hysteria manifests. People tend to become overly emotional, hyper-sensitive and hyper-irritable, prone to taking offense at the drop of a hat, and unreasonably distrustful of others. In Eastern Europe, some of the older generation assumed anything anyone said to them in casual conversation was a lie. Having a conversation with such a person is not easy. They’re constantly seeing something that isn’t there: you lying to them. And nothing you can say or do will convince them otherwise. In other words, they’re basically hallucinating.

Cognitively, critical thinking goes down the tubes, people lose their ability to reason, and cognitive dissonance reaches pandemic levels because people come to believe many things that just aren’t true. When you consistently hallucinate an alternate reality that isn’t actually there, naturally that alternate reality has to come face to face with actual facts. But those facts can’t be accepted as true, otherwise that would mean you’re wrong and you’re not as smart as you think you are. Result: cognitive dissonance. And when this kind of pseudo-thinking based on “alternative facts” becomes habitual, people habitually miss the point. Lobaczewski calls it “chronic avoidance of the crux of the matter” – they simply can’t see what’s actually important or significant. (I’ll go into this in more detail in Part 3.)

This video captures some of the above. It’s also funny.

This is bad news. When we ignore reality, or substitute facts with more comfortable alternatives, this means we can’t come to correct conclusions or make effective choices. And as Dr. Jordan B. Peterson put it in one of his talks: “Every time you tell yourself a lie and every time you act out a falsehood, you distort the pristine integrity of your nervous system, and the reports it will give you about the nature of the world will be distorted.” And that inevitably leads to bad results.

When these emotional and cognitive errors run rampant, they lead to a life dominated by what Lobaczewski calls the “three egos”:

  • Egoism: selfishness, self-interest above all else on the personal and national levels
  • Egotism: self-importance, arrogance, boastfulness on the personal and national levels
  • Egocentrism: self-centredness, thinking only of oneself, without regard for feelings, interests, of well-being of others, on the personal and national levels

That’s what happens when you hallucinate a world in which you are the best and the most important, and you ignore or reinterpret any evidence to the contrary. At the level of governmental administration, it leads to self-defeating and even disastrous domestic and foreign policy.

So, due to all the above (emotional hysteria, cognitive dissonance, the three egos), people and nations steadily cease to see the importance of engaging in introspection and self-criticism, and acknowledging their own faults. They lose interest in gaining knowledge of life and of others. They aren’t interested in understanding or acknowledging the suffering of others, here or abroad. When creature comforts and a relatively decent or exceptional standard of living are readily available, answering tough questions and acknowledging harsh realities just aren’t worth the effort. What’s the point when you have everything you want or need? “What’s in it for me?”

Public, social and moral responsibilities take a back seat. People become self-indulgent, driven by the pursuit of pleasure, and obsessed with trivial things. Our social connections with others get weaker and weaker. We don’t think seriously about the future, how to prepare for it, and what to do in order to make sure we have a future. We steadily lose basic knowledge of how our own minds work and how to interact with others in a healthy way. In a nutshell, we lose our understanding of the very things necessary for a peaceful preservation of law and order, and for social progress. And without this understanding, we can’t and don’t properly educate the next generation with the knowledge they need to deal successfully with the world, which only sets them up for failure.

Truth becomes an uncomfortable concept in such times; truth tellers and whistleblowers aren’t treated well, lies become common currency. People in high social positions become contemptuous of their inferiors, while those “inferiors” grow resentful of those at the top. Universities, politics, and business form a united front of talentless, incompetent hacks. This leads to a paralysis of leadership. Simple problems that should have relatively common-sense and simple solutions become overwhelming. Can’t get much worse, right? Wrong. Things can get much worse.

In sum, when hysteria reaches its peak, people are overwhelmingly ruled by automatic, unconscious emotional and cognitive processes. Readers should check out Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow, and Timothy Wilson’s Strangers To Ourselves, because they talk about these specific processes. And a little self-knowledge goes a long way. The alternative is not pretty:

Those who try to maintain common sense and proper reasoning finally wind up in the minority, feeling wronged because their human right to maintain psychological hygiene is violated by pressure from all sides. This means that unhappy times are not far away. (PP, p. 105)

So the question is this: Is America (and the rest of the world) in for some unhappy times?

In Part 3, I’ll take a look at the hysterical state of American society, the implications, and what can go wrong.

Harrison Koehli

Harrison Koehli co-hosts SOTT Radio Network’s Truth Perspective, and is an editor for Red Pill Press. He has been interviewed on several North American radio shows about his writings on the study of ponerology. In addition to music and books, Harrison enjoys tobacco and bacon (often at the same time) and dislikes cell phones, vegetables, and fascists.



‘Mass sex assaults by refugees’ in Frankfurt on New Year’s Eve… never happened – by RT

Hystericizing Westerners against Muslims:

Fake news: An example of the ‘reporting’ done by media outlets across Europe in the wake of ‘mass rapefugee-gate’ in Germany on New Year’s Eve 2015.

Reports of mass sexual assaults on women in Frankfurt on New Year’s Eve allegedly committed by dozens of drunken refugees, and which initially appeared in Germany’s Bild newspaper, were made up and are “completely baseless,” police said.

The story about mass sexual assaults by refugees in the Fressgass Street area in downtown Frankfurt was reported by Bild earlier in February. The article has since been taken down.

One of the victims, Irina A., 27, told Bild: “They [the migrants] grabbed me under the skirt, between my legs, my breasts, everywhere….More and more of these guys came. Their hands were everywhere,” the Express said, quoting the original report.

Her words were supported by Jan Mai, a local pub owner, who said that a mob of Arabs was “highly aggressive, there was shouting and hand gestures.”

“When I came in, the whole place was full with a group of around 50 Arabs. They did not speak German, drank our guests’ drinks and danced towards them. The women asked me for help because they were being attacked. The mood changed completely,” he told Bild, as cited by the Express.

It was claimed the migrants came from a refugee center in Hesse state, where Frankfurt is located, the Local said, citing the original report.

Police started an investigation into the alleged incidents and on Tuesday released a report stating that the allegations of mass sexual assaults had been invented.

“There were no massive mob-like attacks by masses of refugees in Fressgass [Street]. The allegations were groundless,” police said.

In the article several people “reported about sexual assaults, bodily injuries, thefts and extremely aggressive behavior of masses of refugees. Media interest in these descriptions was very high. The police were not aware of these circumstances,” the statement said.

According to police, “interviews with alleged witnesses, guests and employees led to major doubts with the version of events that had been presented.

“One of the alleged victims was not even in Frankfurt at the time the allegations are said to have taken place,” the report said.

The Bild editorial team quickly apologizedfor this inaccurate reporting and the accusations against those concerned.”

“This reporting does not correspond in any way to the journalistic standards of Bild,” the newspaper said in a statement.

Comment: Actually, it does. Bild, like other Fake News outlets, the British Express included, is one of the key tabloids the ‘reality-creators’ have routinely used since 9/11 to hystericize the population in western Europe against Muslims.

Bild said that the alleged witnesses – the pub owner and his staff – talked of mass sexual assaults to other media outlets.

“We apologize for our own work. I’ll shortly announce what Bild will do about it,” online editor-in-chief Julian Reichelt tweeted.

Comment: Too late; mission accomplished. There’s no way this genie is going back in the bottle. It appears at this point that a majority in western Europe has been ‘bitten’ by The Big Lie: for them, Muslims are inherently evil and the phony ‘clash of civilizations’ is reality.

The Bild story appeared to prompt comparisons with the Cologne attacks committed on New Year’s Eve in 2015. Back then, groups of North African men sexually assaulted hundreds of women in the city.

A German police report from November revealed the latest figures on the crimes committed on New Year’s Eve 2015 across Germany: 881 sexual offenses involving over 1,231 women. The victims were almost all young women.

Apart from Germany, similar sex attacks allegedly took place on New Year’s Eve that year in Sweden, Austria, Finland and Switzerland.

Comment: That first round of ‘mass rape-fugee’ in 2015 was likely also fake news:

Fact Check: Daily Express Publishes Fake Cologne Assault Video

Cologne sex assaults: Muslim rape myths fit a neo-Nazi agenda

The Truth About The New Years Eve Refugee Attacks On Women In Germany

Fake photos flood Internet after sexual assaults in Germany

Yes, assaults took place… and they’ve been taking place on an increasing basis in cities across the West for years. These assaults are being carried out NOT primarily by newly-arrived immigrants, but by nationals and longer-term residents of European countries (ie, by people already living in Europe’s ghettos before the waves of arrivals after NATO destroyed Libya and Syria) – a fact that has everything to do with the West’s internal economic, political and moral collapse, and little to do with ‘outsiders coming for our wimmins’.

See Also:

Obama’s Farewell Tears Are an Insult, His Record is Soaked in Blood – By John Wight

President Barack Obama wipes away tears as he delivers his farewell address in Chicago, Illinois.

Obama’s Farewell Tears Are an Insult, His Record is Soaked in Blood © REUTERS/ Jonathan Ernst Opinion 17:41 12.01.2017(updated 17:49 12.01.2017) Get short URL John Wight 151514303 Do not be fooled by the tears and gushing words of Obama and his supporters as he counts down to his departure from the White House. They are an insult when measured against the tears of the countless Libyans, Syrians, Afghans and others who have suffered as a result of a foreign policy that brought his administration into disrepute. Barack Obama goes down in history as a president who more than any other in living memory entered the White House on a wave of hope and expectation, only to depart eight years and two terms later under a cloud of crushing disappointment and bitterness. In speech after speech, America’s first black president outlined a vision of his country’s place in the world that would embrace multilateralism, place a premium on diplomacy, and embrace a foreign policy underpinned by justice. He also pledged to close the controversial US detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Eight years later it’s impossible to avoid the conclusion that he lied. When it comes to the Middle East, although Obama certainly cannot be blamed for creating the disaster in Iraq — for this we have the war unleashed on the country by his predecessor, George W. Bush, in 2003 to thank — his actions upon entering the White House in 2009 made the situation worse. A hooded demonstrator is seen at a protest calling for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in front of the White House on May 18, 2013 in Washington, DC. © AFP 2016/ Mandel Ngan ‘Coarsening the Soul of America’: Guantanamo Bay Prison Turns 15 The military surge, begun in 2007 under the Bush administration with the deployment of thousands of additional US troops to the country’s Anbar province (Sunni Triangle), had been designed to end the brutal sectarian control of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) over the province. Within a year it had succeeded in reducing the terrorist group to the point of near extinction. In partnership with Anbar’s Sunni tribes, who’d suffered under the iron heel of the terrorist group, US forces had embarked on an aggressive policy of seek and destroy. It was an innovative and successful operation that not only succeeded militarily but also in terms of winning the hearts and minds of the country’s Sunni minority. Unconscionably, Obama ended the surge while continuing to support the Maliki government in Baghdad, whose sectarian policies favouring of the countries Shia majority at the expense of the Sunni minority led to the revival of AQI’s fortune. In 2013 the group changed its name to Islamic State in Iraq (ISI) and at the beginning of 2014 succeeded in taking control of Fallujah, just 57km from Baghdad, where its notorious black flag first came to international attention. In attempting to underplay the significance of the growing strength of ISI in Iraq, Obama infamously compared the terrorist group to a junior varsity (jayvee) team — in other words a threat of no great consequence. How wrong he was. In June 2014, ISI launched offensives against Tikrit and Mosul, taking both cities, before moving across the border into Syria. There it morphed into Daesh (also known as ISIS/ISIL), establishing a reign of barbarism, terror, and cruelty such as the world hasn’t seen since the Khmer Rouge ravaged Cambodia in the 1970s. Obama Bids Farewell, Trump’s First Press Conference as President-Elect It was a disaster that had arrived in the Middle East on the coattails of a so-called Arab Spring that saw the Obama administration throw former US and Western-supported dictatorships in Tunisia and Egypt under the bus. It did so at the same time as opportunistically throwing its weight behind the mass protests that had erupted throughout the region, doing so with the objective of ensuring that the outcome was favourable to US and Western strategic, geopolitical, and economic interests. The destruction of Libya, wrought by Washington and its NATO allies in 2011, along with US support for sectarian terrorist groups in Syria, almost pushed the region into the abyss. When Russia entered the fray at the end of 2015, at the request of a Syrian government whose forces were overstretched and struggling to beat back a Western supported onslaught, Obama refused to accept Russia’s request to join forces to defeat terrorism. Instead his administration did its utmost to impede Russian efforts. Fighters ride a pickup truck as smoke rises during a battle with Islamic State fighters in neighborhood Number Two in Sirte, Libya © AFP 2016/ Ismail Zitouny Fighters ride a pickup truck as smoke rises during a battle with Islamic State fighters in neighborhood Number Two in Sirte, Libya The result has been the unnecessary prolongation of the conflict in Syria and the suffering if its people. Along with the turning of Libya into a failed state, it produced a refugee crisis of biblical dimension, leading to thousands of people drowning in the Mediterranean in the act of fleeing a region plunged into chaos. In Eastern Europe, meanwhile, the US under Obama’s watch supported a fascist driven coup in Ukraine in 2014 that toppled the country’s democratically elected government. The result was a civil conflict on Russia’s southwestern border. U.S. President Barack Obama sits after addressing the United Nations General Assembly in the Manhattan borough of New York, U.S., September 20, 2016. © REUTERS/ Carlo Allegri Obama Claims Rivals Like Russia, China Cannot Match US Global Influence The attempt to paint Russia as the cause of the ensuing instability exposed Obama’s mendacity and his blithe disregard for Russia’s security and legitimate rights. With the arrogance of a Roman emperor, the president attempted to bully the largest and most populous country in Europe into submission over Ukraine and its role in Syria fighting terrorism reduced relations between East and West to the point of full-blown crisis, where they currently remain. Add to his legacy a drone war that has killed hundreds of innocent civilians, and nobody should be fooled by the happy-clappy emotional farewell speeches he is currently giving in advance of his departure from the political stage. His record in office leaves both him and his presidency disgraced. The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

Read more:

%d bloggers like this: