The Silencing of Dissent
By
Chris Hedges
September 18, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- The ruling elites, who grasp that the
reigning ideology of global corporate
capitalism and imperial expansion no
longer has moral or intellectual
credibility, have mounted a campaign to
shut down the platforms given to their
critics. The attacks within this
campaign include blacklisting,
censorship and slandering dissidents as
foreign agents for Russia and purveyors
of “fake news.”
No
dominant class can long retain control
when the credibility of the ideas that
justify its existence evaporates. It is
forced, at that point, to resort to
crude forms of coercion, intimidation
and censorship. This ideological
collapse in the United States has
transformed those of us who attack the
corporate state into a potent threat,
not because we reach large numbers of
people, and certainly not because we
spread Russian propaganda, but because
the elites no longer have a plausible
counterargument.
The elites
face an unpleasant choice. They could
impose harsh controls to protect the
status quo or veer leftward toward
socialism to ameliorate the mounting
economic and political injustices
endured by most of the population. But a
move leftward, essentially reinstating
and expanding the
New Deal programs
they have destroyed, would impede
corporate power and corporate profits.
So instead the elites, including the
Democratic Party leadership, have
decided to quash public debate. The
tactic they are using is as old as the
nation-state—smearing critics as
traitors who are in the service of a
hostile foreign power. Tens of thousands
of people of conscience were blacklisted
in this way during the Red Scares of the
1920s and 1950s. The current hyperbolic
and relentless focus on Russia, embraced
with gusto by “liberal” media outlets
such as The New York Times and MSNBC,
has unleashed what some have called a
virulent “New
McCarthyism.”
The
corporate elites do not fear Russia.
There is
no publicly disclosed evidence
that Russia swung the election to Donald
Trump.
Nor does Russia appear
to be intent on a military confrontation
with the United States. I am certain
Russia tries to meddle in U.S. affairs
to its advantage, as we do and did in
Russia—including our clandestine
bankrolling of Boris Yeltsin, whose
successful 1996 campaign for re-election
as president is estimated to have cost
up to $2.5 billion,
much of that money
coming indirectly from the American
government. In today’s media environment
Russia is the foil. The corporate state
is unnerved by the media outlets that
give a voice to critics of corporate
capitalism, the security and
surveillance state and imperialism,
including the network
RT America.
My show on
RT America, “On
Contact,”
like my columns at Truthdig, amplifies
the voices of these dissidents—Tariq
Ali, Kshama Sawant, Mumia Abu-Jamal,
Medea Benjamin, Ajamu Baraka, Noam
Chomsky, Dr. Margaret Flowers, Rania
Khalek, Amira Hass, Miko Peled, Abby
Martin, Glen Ford, Max Blumenthal, Pam
Africa, Linh Dinh, Ben Norton, Eugene
Puryear, Allan Nairn, Jill Stein, Kevin
Zeese and others. These dissidents, if
we had a functioning public broadcasting
system or a commercial press free of
corporate control, would be included in
the mainstream discourse. They are not
bought and paid for. They have
integrity, courage and often brilliance.
They are honest. For these reasons, in
the eyes of the corporate state, they
are very dangerous.
The first
and deadliest salvo in the war on
dissent came in 1971 when Lewis Powell,
a corporate attorney and later a Supreme
Court justice, wrote and
circulated a memo
among business leaders called “Attack on
American Free Enterprise System.” It
became the blueprint for the corporate
coup d’état. Corporations, as Powell
recommended in the document, poured
hundreds of millions of dollars into the
assault, financing pro-business
political candidates, mounting campaigns
against the liberal wing of the
Democratic Party and the press and
creating institutions such as the
Business Roundtable, The Heritage
Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the
Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound
Economy, the Federalist Society and
Accuracy in Academia. The memo argued
that corporations had to fund sustained
campaigns to marginalize or silence
those who in “the college campus, the
pulpit, the media, and the intellectual
and literary journals” were hostile to
corporate interests.
Powell attacked Ralph Nader by name.
Lobbyists flooded Washington and state
capitals. Regulatory controls were
abolished. Massive tax cuts for
corporations and the wealthy were
implemented, culminating in a de facto
tax boycott. Trade barriers were lifted
and the country’s manufacturing base was
destroyed. Social programs were slashed
and funds for infrastructure, from roads
and bridges to public libraries and
schools, were cut. Protections for
workers were gutted. Wages declined or
stagnated. The military budget, along
with the organs of internal security,
became ever more bloated. A de facto
blacklist, especially in universities
and the press, was used to discredit
intellectuals, radicals and activists
who decried the idea of the nation
prostrating itself before the dictates
of the marketplace and condemned the
crimes of imperialism, some of the best
known being Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky,
Sheldon Wolin, Ward Churchill, Nader,
Angela Davis and Edward Said. These
critics were permitted to exist only on
the margins of society, often outside of
institutions, and many had trouble
making a living.
The
financial meltdown of 2008 not only
devastated the global economy, it
exposed the lies propagated by those
advocating globalization. Among these
lies: that salaries of workers would
rise, democracy would spread across the
globe, the tech industry would replace
manufacturing as a source of worker
income, the middle class would flourish,
and global communities would prosper.
After 2008 it became clear that the
“free market” is a scam, a zombie
ideology by which workers and
communities are ravaged by predatory
capitalists and assets are funneled
upward into the hands of the global 1
percent. The endless wars, fought
largely to enrich the arms industry and
swell the power of the military, are
futile and counterproductive to national
interests.
Deindustrialization
and austerity programs have impoverished
the working class and fatally damaged
the economy.
The establishment politicians in the two
leading parties, each in service to
corporate power and responsible for the
assault on civil liberties and
impoverishment of the country, are no
longer able to use identity politics and
the culture wars to whip up support.
This led in the last presidential
campaign to an insurgency by Bernie
Sanders, which the Democratic Party
crushed, and the election of Donald
Trump.
Barack
Obama rode a wave of bipartisan
resentment into office in 2008, then
spent eight years betraying the public.
Obama’s assault on civil liberties,
including his use of the Espionage Act
to prosecute whistleblowers, was worse
than those carried out by George W.
Bush. He accelerated the war on public
education by privatizing schools,
expanded the wars in the Middle East,
including the use of militarized drone
attacks, provided little meaningful
environmental reform, ignored the plight
of the working class, deported more
undocumented people than any other
president, imposed a corporate-sponsored
health care program that was the
brainchild of the right-wing Heritage
Foundation, and prohibited the Justice
Department from prosecuting the bankers
and financial firms that carried out
derivatives scams
and inflated the housing and real estate
market, a condition that led to the 2008
financial meltdown. He epitomized, like
Bill Clinton, the bankruptcy of the
Democratic Party. Clinton, outdoing
Obama’s later actions, gave us the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA),
the dismantling of the welfare system,
the deregulation of the financial
services industry and the huge expansion
of mass incarceration. Clinton also
oversaw deregulation of the Federal
Communications Commission, a change that
allowed a handful of corporations to buy
up the airwaves.
No
Advertising
- No
Government
Grants
-
This
Is
Independent
Media
|
The corporate state was in crisis at the
end of the Obama presidency. It was
widely hated. It became vulnerable to
attacks by the critics it had pushed to
the fringes. Most vulnerable was the
Democratic Party establishment, which
claims to defend the rights of working
men and women and protect civil
liberties. This is why the Democratic
Party is so zealous in its efforts to
discredit its critics as stooges for
Moscow and to charge that Russian
interference caused its election defeat.
In January
there was
a report on Russia
by the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence. The report
devoted seven of its 25 pages to RT
America and its influence on the
presidential election. It claimed
“Russian media made increasingly
favorable comments about President-elect
Trump as the 2016 US general and primary
election campaigns progressed while
consistently offering negative coverage
of Secretary [Hillary] Clinton.” This
might seem true if you did not watch my
RT broadcasts, which relentlessly
attacked Trump as well as Clinton, or
watch
Ed Schultz,
who now has a program on RT after having
been the host of an MSNBC commentary
program. The report also attempted to
present RT America as having a vast
media footprint and influence it does
not possess.
“In an
effort to highlight the alleged ‘lack of
democracy’ in the United States, RT
broadcast, hosted, and advertised third
party candidate debates and ran
reporting supportive of the political
agenda of these candidates,”
the report read,
correctly summing up themes on my show.
“The RT hosts asserted that the US
two-party system does not represent the
views of at least one-third of the
population and is a ‘sham.’ ”
It
went on:
RT’s reports often characterize the
United States as a ‘surveillance
state’ and allege widespread
infringements of civil liberties,
police brutality, and drone use.
RT has also focused on criticism of
the US economic system, US currency
policy, alleged Wall Street greed,
and the US national debt. Some of
RT’s hosts have compared the United
States to Imperial Rome and have
predicted that government corruption
and “corporate greed” will lead to
US financial collapse.
Is the
corporate state so obtuse it thinks the
American public has not, on its own,
reached these conclusions about the
condition of the nation? Is this what it
defines as “fake news”? But most
important, isn’t this the truth that the
courtiers in the mainstream press and
public broadcasting, dependent on their
funding from sources such as the Koch
brothers, refuse to present? And isn’t
it, in the end, the truth that frightens
them the most? Abby Martin and Ben
Norton ripped apart the mendacity of the
report and the complicity of the
corporate media
in my “On Contact” show
titled
“Real purpose of intel report on Russian
hacking with Abby Martin & Ben Norton.”
The
blacklist published by the shadowy and
anonymous site PropOrNot in November
2016 soon followed. The blacklist was
composed of 199 sites PropOrNot alleged,
with no evidence, “reliably echo Russian
propaganda.” More than half of those
sites were far-right, conspiracy-driven
ones. But about 20 of the sites were
major left-wing outlets including
AlterNet, Black Agenda Report, Democracy
Now!, Naked Capitalism, Truthdig,
Truthout, CounterPunch and the World
Socialist Web Site. The blacklist and
the spurious accusations that these
sites disseminated “fake news” on behalf
of Russia were given prominent play in
The Washington Post
in a story
headlined “Russian propaganda effort
helped spread ‘fake news’ during the
election, experts say.” The reporter,
Craig Timberg, wrote that the goal of
the Russian propaganda effort, according
to “independent researchers who have
tracked the operation,” was “punishing
Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping
Republican Donald Trump and undermining
faith in American democracy.” Last
December, Truthdig columnist
Bill Boyarsky wrote
a good piece about PropOrNot, which to
this day remains essentially a secret
organization.
The owner
of The Washington Post, Jeff Bezos, also
the founder and CEO of Amazon, has a
$600 million contract with the CIA.
Google, likewise, is deeply embedded
within the security and surveillance
state and aligned with the ruling
elites. Amazon recently
purged over 1,000 negative reviews
of Hillary Clinton’s new book, “What
Happened.” The effect was that the
book’s Amazon rating jumped from 2 1/2
stars to five stars. Do corporations
such as Google and Amazon carry out such
censorship on behalf of the U.S.
government? Or is this censorship their
independent contribution to protect the
corporate state?
In
the name of combating Russia-inspired
“fake news,” Google, Facebook, Twitter,
The New York Times, The Washington Post,
BuzzFeed News, Agence France-Presse and
CNN in April imposed algorithms or
filters, overseen by “evaluators,” that
hunt for key words such as “U.S.
military,” “inequality” and “socialism,”
along with personal names such as Julian
Assange and Laura Poitras, the
filmmaker. Ben Gomes, Google’s vice
president for search engineering, says
Google has amassed some 10,000
“evaluators” to determine the “quality”
and veracity of websites. Internet users
doing searches on Google, since the
algorithms were put in place, are
diverted from sites such as Truthdig and
directed to mainstream publications such
as The New York Times. The news
organizations and corporations that are
imposing this censorship have strong
links to the Democratic Party. They are
cheerleaders for American imperial
projects and global capitalism. Because
they are struggling in the new media
environment for profitability, they have
an economic incentive to be part of the
witch hunt.
The World
Socialist Web Site reported in July that
its aggregate volume, or
“impressions”—links displayed by Google
in response to search requests—fell
dramatically over a short period after
the new algorithms were imposed.
It also wrote
that a number of sites “declared to be
‘fake news’ by the Washington Post’s
discredited [PropOrNot] blacklist … had
their global ranking fall. The average
decline of the global reach of all of
these sites is 25 percent. …”
Another article,
“Google rigs searches to block access to
World Socialist Web Site,” by the same
website that month said:
During the month of May, Google
searches including the word “war”
produced 61,795 WSWS impressions. In
July, WSWS impressions fell by
approximately 90 percent, to 6,613.
Searches for the term “Korean war”
produced 20,392 impressions in May.
In July, searches using the same
words produced zero WSWS
impressions. Searches for “North
Korea war” produced 4,626
impressions in May. In July, the
result of the same search produced
zero WSWS impressions. “India
Pakistan war” produced 4,394
impressions in May. In July, the
result, again, was zero. And
“Nuclear war 2017” produced 2,319
impressions in May, and zero in
July.
To cite some other searches: “WikiLeaks,”
fell from 6,576 impressions to zero,
“Julian Assange” fell from 3,701
impressions to zero, and “Laura
Poitras” fell from 4,499 impressions
to zero. A search for “Michael
Hastings”—the reporter who died in
2013 under suspicious
circumstances—produced 33,464
impressions in May, but only 5,227
impressions in July.
In addition to geopolitics, the WSWS
regularly covers a broad range of
social issues, many of which have
seen precipitous drops in search
results. Searches for “food stamps,”
“Ford layoffs,” “Amazon warehouse,”
and “secretary of education” all
went down from more than 5,000
impressions in May to zero
impressions in July.
The accusation that left-wing sites
collude with Russia has made them
theoretically subject, along with those
who write for them, to the Espionage Act
and the Foreign Agent Registration Act,
which requires Americans who work on
behalf of a foreign party to register as
foreign agents.
The latest
salvo came last week. It is the most
ominous. The Department of Justice
called on RT America and its
“associates”—which may mean people like
me—to
register
under the Foreign Agent Registration
Act. No doubt, the corporate state knows
that most of us will not register as
foreign agents, meaning we will be
banished from the airwaves. This, I
expect, is the intent. The government
will not stop with RT. The FBI has been
handed the authority to determine who is
a “legitimate” journalist and who is
not. It will use this authority to
decimate the left.
This is a war of ideas. The corporate
state cannot compete honestly in this
contest. It will do what all despotic
regimes do—govern through wholesale
surveillance, lies, blacklists, false
accusations of treason, heavy-handed
censorship and, eventually, violence.
Chris Hedges, spent nearly two
decades as a foreign correspondent in
Central America, the Middle East, Africa
and the Balkans. He has reported from
more than 50 countries and has worked
for The Christian Science Monitor,
National Public Radio, The Dallas
Morning News and The New York Times, for
which he was a foreign correspondent for
15 years.
This article was first published by
Truth Dig
-