I just recently ran across this very strange world of foreign policy blogging. It might already be familiar to many of you, but it’s new to me.
I’ve been familiar with Chomsky for years and have fact checked him many times before, and I know he’s generally correct. I also knew that US-based NGO’s with names involving things like “Freedom” and “Progress” are kind of demonstrably creepy if not evil at times. I didn’t know there was a bizarre, apparently well-funded (by who? You tell me. But it appears to be true) blogopshere devoted to denouncing, exposing, and sometimes just trashing everything an American NGO touches.
One example is this blog. I don’t trust this blog, btw. It seems to have a self-contradictory bias…far lefty language used many times, but also a strange libertarian twist to the conclusions (like denouncing the oligarchs and calling for anarchy to reign them in.) But it’s interesting. This “guy” (I suspect it’s written by a team of people; the author’s name is mysteriously untraceable) really doesn’t like #OWS (except for Occupy the Fed) and apparently loves Ron Paul. And while I totally disagree with these conclusions, this is an interesting article.
Blog name: LandDestroyer
Subtitle:
A timeline & history: One year into the engineered “Arab Spring,” one step closer to global hegemony.
Again, I DON’T agree with the author’s conclusion. But that article, and the whole blog, does contain some useful information. The author links to Alex Jones, tho, on his blogroll, so. Yeah. Actually, the whole blog is almost just like Alex Jones’ stuff, but less hysterical and somewhat less speculative and conspiratorial. And much, much better written – almost academic.
Slightly less bizarre is this blog, called “Color Revolutions and Geopolitics”. They have this interesting article:
How Do You Escape a Color Revolution? Replace Emotional Reaction With Intellectual Sobriety
The topic, I’m guessing is aimed at…uhhh…dictators (???) :
Authors’ Introductory Note: the following essay was prepared in the style of an “open letter” intended to be read by leaders and policy-makers of nation-states targeted for “regime change” by the West.
Again, interesting stuff, even if handing out advice to dictators is both odd and morally questionable. But in these times, where Putin just saved us from a war in Syria and a war with Iran seems almost inevitable, I think this might be important information.
Going back to mental territory I think most will find more habitable, here’s one final blog. I actually really like this blog. This is a blog called “What’s Left” and it’s a far left blog, for real. Really, really far left. No libertarian nuthin’. The author seems sane and doesn’t link to Alex Jones or any other known quacks, to boot. And here’s his (very sane, IMO) take on Egypt and the NGO, etc:
Unquestionably, Sharp, the ex-cop, Ghonim, and the US government too, played a role in the Tahrir Square uprising, some remotely and indirectly, others more directly. But they alone weren’t the only ones who played a part. So too did Mubarak and his policies and the corruption of his son Gamal, as did Egypt’s military, the Muslim Brotherhood, food prices, the privatization of Egypt’s publically owned enterprises, bloggers, Israel, unemployment, Saudi Arabia, the police, millions of ordinary Egyptians, the media and a vast array of other events, people, relations and systems.
I have no fondness for Sharp. His politics skew far to the right of what I’m comfortable with, though he’s by no means what people in the United States would understand to be right-wing, or Republican. All the same, the depiction of him as a mastermind who mobilizes uprisings around the world is insupportable. He may inspire some rebels to embrace nonviolence, but he no more inspires rebellion than the manufacturers of Grecian Formula inspire the hair of it customers to turn grey.



17 Comments

The major media/CIA connection was disclosed by the head of the CIA back in 1981. Blogging plants seems like little return for the dollar, but given CIA over funding post Clinton it is likely.
As to Chomsky, my fact checking of his comments/writing over the years came to a conclusion similar to yours, namely he throws out a lot of valid facts, but what ties much together so as to get to the conclusion he wants (such as Israel is always evil) are a few not quite true items – and that annoyed me to the point I have refused to follow him directly since the 70/80′s. In one on one’s in the 70′s when confronted about his lie he would never address the lie – he’d just throw out more. It just was not worth going to see him, IMHO. But I agree that as a lead to interesting information he remains useful.
I admit I am chomskyist who determines legitimate from illegitimate revolutions based on whether neoliberals will like it it or not. Generally corresponds to whether proisrael activists will support it or not, though not always. I think Tunisia and Egypt were legitimate revolutions, and Syria and Libya are phony ones.
Anonymous and wikileaks are often very naive, and they often fall for the phony revolutions as well as the good ones.
I find this blog unstrustworthy as well, mostly because of its lesser evilism, and lack of concrete ideas for changing anything.
I’m not really familiar with Chomsky’s work from back then. Nowadays he’s pretty good about using qualifying words like “apparently” to distinguish between when he’s stating a fact vs something with an element of speculation.
I doubt he was intentionally being dishonest, even in the 70′s. But everybody makes mistakes sometimes, and he might have had to get older to not get butthurt by being shown that he was in error or something?
You find FDL untrustworthy? I don’t see much lesser-evilism at this “side” of the blog. Not a whole lot in the comments on the front page, either.
The new Tunisian President was recruited as a “pro-democracy activist” by the CIA/US State Dept. after 2004-05 when funding was started to recruit/train such “activists” from the MENA region. Your second and third statements need to go one step further, if you catch my drift.
The legitimacy of a revolution, in and of itself, need not necessarily be determined by its outcome, though. The oligarchs are kind of taking a gamble with this form of regime change, IMO. They could get a Mubarak or a Hugo Chavez. At least in theory.
Or, they might not be taking a gamble. They might just feel confident that between bloody, brutal crackdown (Bahrain) and military coup (Egypt) as contingency plans, they’re reasonable covered. :(
We need some progressive game theorists up in here.
> Anonymous and wikileaks are often very naive,
> and they often fall for the phony revolutions as
> well as the good ones.
Excuse me, but people are often naive, and make mistakes. BTW, I take it as a fact that you are a people.
> I find this blog unstrustworthy as well, mostly because
> of its lesser evilism, and lack of concrete ideas for
> changing anything.
Not to be intentionally cruel, but you are most certainly confusing this site with balloon-juice.com.
I’ve seen that blog: LandDestroyer. They are right wing libertarian conspiracy theorists.
They know stuff is messed, and get a few pieces of information/evidence but seem to lack a critical ability to discern poor sources and/or disinformation or suspend judgment on certain things before performing a synthesis. It’s like a bunch of circuits got fried up together.
They correlate people and events through “seven degrees of Kevin Bacon” type logic or guilt by weak association. They do dig up some gems from time to time tho-.
Then there is the sane right wing, and you might mistake them for left wingers and they get labelled as such, like Thierry Meyssan. He has cross over appeal like “The American Conservative” or Gilad Atzmon.
Here is a blog that explores right wing populism.
http://chipberlet.blogspot.com/2007/09/webster-g-tarpleys-toxic-waste-is.html
Here’s an ultraleftist I follow:
https://twitter.com/#!/charlesdavis84
Our government actually likes these backassward totalitarian sunni brotherhood, regardless of the squawking about them in the media. They are authoritarian and can be bought off.
There’s not much to theorize about. If they wanted bloody dictators they wouldn’t protest for the downfall fo the regime.
It’s really not about what Tunisians feel comfortable with. It’s about what the US/Saudis want, so the choices are limited and any threats are refused a spot on the ballot or the boxes are stuffed, or threats are made.
See South Vietnamese Ngo Dihm Diem.
Bio at Spartacus lays it out, at wiki you’ll have to read between the lines.
This is just one instance of how we helped game an election, and they have become experts at this. They don’t have to kill so many people now, most of it can be done with a controlled press and tons of cash.
I have my suspicions that most of our elections are gamed too.
We are even better at removing other peoples leaders, than we are at installing them, but that list is too long.
Hey Athena,
OT…..and sorry really, but you left a comment on my latest GMO Monsanto post yesterday that I was unable to get to as I’ve been really busy with Occupy recently. You repeated the propaganda about higher crop yields being produced by biotechnology. This is a fallacy, crop yields are falling everywhere Monsanto and et al have insinuated themselves within a few years of taking over, after the initial surge, everything goes to hell in a lot of truly disturbing and actually dangerous ways. Go read some of my posts on GMOs or go read at some of the sources I cite routinely…..GMO Journal is a particularly good one, Diniza Gertsberg is really really sharp. But if you must continue reading at Monsanto’s website, please don’t post their lies on my comment threads. I hope that doesn’t sound too harsh, and I hope you know that I like you,but the comment you posted was a blind acceptance of the corporate line and dismissive of my post, and frankly embarrassing to see uttered by someone who counts themselves an informed progressive.
Who do you think is funding them?
Or do you think they’re grassroots?
Something (a lot of things, really) about that blog just seems really weird to me.
Yeah, I’d already seen that. And before I saw that I decided that Tarply was full of crap.
But it’s good to know I’m not alone in following these issues!
There is no organized left, and it’s up to us to become that, I think.
Yeah, and I guess you would oppose efforts to nationalize Monsanto (the only BIG biotech farming company ever)?
We have every right to it. We could globalize the rights to the technology if we all decided to do so.
Do you know what a scam/fraud “Natural News” is? They are almost always wrong.
Anyone see the news that Monsanto bought Blackwater, Xe?
http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/monsanto-now-owns-blackwater-xe/