Hacker News Reader

I think without the adversarial subversion, the states would be in just as bad of a place. It would be less clear in policies implemented, but the root cause is a lack of engagement in politics and use of the tools from modernity and the enlightenment.

People aren't sold on debate and discussion, and aren't aligned on goals, and don't have a way to align on goals

The middle of both parties are getting older and older. Newly elected politicians tend to be populistic culture warriors. Consequently, we’re not able to elect anyone that gets anything done. Gone are the days of electing the most serious and responsible public servants. We’re not able to replace aging incumbent politicians with grownups. Or so it seems.

> It is patently evident that ...

This is a very easy intelligence trap to fall into, but it neglects internal bad actors that are doing the same things for profit. That interview is structured to set you up into a subtle us vs. them mentality. If you look at what he says and how you feel when you find out (if you agree, which itself is a subtle lever of influence with consistency [Cialdini]), its hard to argue that he isn't doing exactly what he says they do (creating a demoralized state).

You always have to remember the source, and he is not a good source for this. There are much better sources.

We value freedom of speech, because proper communication enables debate which allows us to come to a fuller understanding of certain issues than in the absence of this.

This understanding often allows us to save lives, whereas those mistakes that would never normally be addressed would result in deaths in a system where this doesn't take place.

That being said, you can never have a debate where the number of real people is less than fake people, and they have some motive to amplify or de-amplify what's being said which is ineffable ahead of time.

Where things have gone wrong is in treating corporations as dual entities. When it suits them they are people, when it suits them best they are a corporation, and in some industries when it suits them they act as arms of government without any of the mandates from the constitution, and are immune from legal repercussions.

>"It's patently evident that the current social and political instability in the West is caused by ideological subversion carried out by their political enemies."

I call utter BS on this. You are basically shooting a messenger here (whether said messenger is a baddy is not really relevant). If you had healthy society where fucking lefties and asshole righties were not at each other throats and where poverty, ever progressing lack of education and other social issues were not so rampant political enemies would have no grass to feed on.

Those two things are directly related.

The post-Cambridge Analytica cognitive warfare has two goals:

- To elect your candidate

- To prevent any meaningful discussion of political goals and to focus the conversation on whatever wedge issues are needed to win

I was going to post this exact interview. What's crazy is that the tools to do this are now so much more powerful and far-reaching. Worth a watch.

Your point is true, but this “interview” is mostly nonsensical fearmongering with no substance.

There's some hyperbole in what Bezmenov claims will be the consequences, but psyops and information warfare are very much real, and have been in use for decades. If he defected from the USSR and worked as a propagandist, he would be very familiar with what these tools are capable of. And if you take a look at the current state of many Western countries, it aligns well with the effects of psyops. Whether it was done by internal or external forces doesn't matter much, but it would be naive to think enemies of the West aren't engaging in it, just as the West is[1].

[1]: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/sep/19/us-governme...

There's a very interesting read on the USMC University website that covers political warfare (which this would arguably fall into). Its freely available.

> The internet and social media have provided the perfect weapon to deliver disinformation and propaganda to manipulate the masses, and create a state of internal conflict and confusion.

Yes, unlike the good old day when legacy media (tv/newspapers/radio) served the people and told them the truth, without trying to manipulate the masses.

Ideological subversion has been happening since the Frankfurt school fled to the US: “critical theories” festered in academia for generations until they could permeate and rot society.

Social media, however, accelerated that by allowing individual manipulation of vulnerable young people with that messaging by both foreign adversaries and subverted citizens. Boosted by things like economic warfare, where China funds these radical groups and promotes their agendas.

That wouldn't have happened if the legacy media and local state actors didn't discredit themselves with blatant lies, open bias and non-stop propaganda. Foreign adversaries have gained some meaningful ground only because local sources of information stopped even pretending to be an objective source of information.

I don’t think that’s true.

Eg, as a recent example, we saw major media institutions subverted to run propaganda cover for an organized terrorist campaign which saw over a billion dollars in arson attacks across dozens of major cities — and dozens of murders, including Antonio Mays Jr and David Dorn.

I see the role of social media as accelerating the subversion of traditional institutions, eg media or academia.

Could you explicitly explain your critique of "the Frankfurt school" and "critical theories"?

The Frankfurt school is a set of communist revolutionaries who promoted “critical theories” as their methodology of fomenting civil unrest and social breakdown to bring about Marxist revolution. When the Germans chased them out by preferring literal Nazis, they settled in the US and performed the same schtick — most recently with “critical race theory” and “critical queer theory”, both of which have increased division in US society and undermined social progress, such as civil rights. Eg, “critical race theory” promotes continued organized racism against Asians while promoting grievance myths which encourage terrorism. As seen in the burning of dozens of cities and dozens of murders and institutions such as Harvard arguing before the Supreme Court they’re allowed to discriminate against Asians.

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

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

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

BLM founder explaining: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM5zUwiCTzw

Harvard case: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/31/us/supreme-court-harvard-...

Harvard filing showing nearly double chance of admission if you’re black or Hispanic versus white or Asian, in exhibit 26: https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/diverse-education/file...

”As seen in the burning of dozens of cities”

Hang on, you’re claiming that no less than 24 US cities have suffered significant fire damage by critical-race-theory-espousing arsonists? What are some examples?

For level-setting purposes, personally speaking, I do not consider one or two buildings burning to be equal to a “city” burning — that wording evokes major widespread arson on par with 70s race riots.

And if you are referring to protests in response to a police-involved killing incident, the protesters cannot automatically be assumed to have any tie to “critical race theory”, it needs to be a firm provable connection to make this claim.

Big difference: legacy media was far less accessible to foreign enemies. Not that disinformation didn't happen from within, but certainly not with the force we've seen in the last two decades, and without the intent to destabilize their own democracies.

Instead we had people like William Randolph Hearst owning the press, who started a war with Spain.