The Only Arbiters of Truth, a.k.a. Official DIs-information

Having read numerous histories of WWII, among the most interesting facts analyzed after the fact was the handling of information obtained surreptitiously through intelligence. Various authors have pointed out that once code-breakers at Bletchley Park cracked the Enigma machine code, they were presented with the problem of which information was actionable. That is, if the Allies acted upon every intercept, the Germans would soon know their communications were no longer secure and change codes to evade the Allies.

Since I will surely be accused of “conspiracy theorizing” regardless, because I dissent from most all the official “truths” promulgated by FedState and its corporate minions and apparatchiks, I will go right ahead and pose a theory or two. I hasten to recall that many substantive “conspiracy theories” of the past few years turned to truths with the passage of a modest amount of time. Recounting them all - and especially the venom spewed on them when posed - is too painful to recollect and reiterate here.

Anyway, this line of thought emerged as I read a piece by Roger Kimball yesterday, entitled The Surveillance State is on the March. Therein, he references a thoroughly dispiriting opus by Jacob Siegel - A Guide to Understanding The Hoax of the Century - thirteen ways of looking at disinformation. These essays capture the essence of the revolution which has already destroyed the former Constitutional Republic, with astoundingly little notice or resistance. These pieces make clear the abysmal depths to which we have sunk, in an almost banal manner.

I commend both of these for your consideration as exceptionally worthwhile (and profoundly dispiriting). Any summary I might make could not do them justice. Please read them.

Kimball says of Siegel -

“If I had to summarize his findings, I would emphasize three points.
First, that “after the pretense of fighting a foreign threat fell away, what was left was the core mission to enforce a narrative monopoly over truth.”
We see that everywhere, whether the subject is Trump, Jan. 6, COVID, Russia, the joys of transexuality, or the brittleness of the Constitution in the face of the perpetual emergency foisted upon us by the permanent state.
The second point follows that brittleness: “The pattern in these cases is that the ruling class justifies taking liberties with the law to save the planet but ends up violating the Constitution to hide the truth and protect itself.”
And that brings me to the third and most fundamental principle that Siegel has uncovered in this harrowing piece of work: That the ruling class, the elite that officiates over the ceremonies, perquisites, and directives of the deep state, are bound by one overriding conviction.
As a class,” Siegel concludes, “their highest principle is that they alone can wield power.”
No one who reads this essay can doubt that this is true.
As I say, things are always worse than they seem”.

My juxtaposing broken Nazi codes and today’s surveillance state is to pose the following questions: what if the apparatus of the “security state” which reigns over us is, for the moment - like the Allies in WWII - biding its time? What if, rather than hundreds of rolling early-morning SWAT raids, we are merely being assigned secret “national security credit scores” - rankings for later active neutralization - as part of an in-depth database consisting of the entire digital life of each and every one of us?

Surely, if ChatGPT4 in private hands can do what it does, it would be a trivial matter for the NSA, with unlimited resources, to rank the digital lives of the roster of its subjects here in these dis-United States for “subversive tendencies” or “Russian interference”. If you think such a database is far-fetched, I must ask what you think is stored (exabytes? yottabytes?) in the NSA’a Bluffdale Utah Data Center (and who knows where else)?

In considering these abysmally depressing matters, I wish I could have some stiff drinks, but alas, I’m allergic to alcohol. If I drink, I break out in spots - spots in Pittsburgh, spots in New York, spots in Las Vegas, or who knows where. Allergies notwithstanding, it doesn’t feel like there is much else to lose.

8 Likes

This is illustrated perfectly in the article I cite in the spoiler section of this “Crazy Years” comment”. How dare parents and the representatives they elect presume to meddle in the decision of “experts” prescribing what their children will be taught and indoctrinated with?

This lack of expertise is doubly dangerous for our students and democracy. First, it means a small number of people rely on their personal priorities for a child’s education to determine school curricula for all students. The dependence on individual perspectives as much as knowledge grounded in research and expertise leads to an increasing conflation of faith with science, memory with history, and dogmatism with truth. Second, the unwillingness to provide students with subject-appropriate, expert-developed materials that introduce them to new ideas limits their ability to assess sources for reliability and accuracy.

But what are these “experts” if not “a small number of people [who] rely on their personal priorities for a child’s education to determine school curricula for all students”?

5 Likes

Yes, and as is often the case, polls of opinions of so-called experts are called “science”. Often, sleight-of-hand is applied as well, by summing and “analyzing” the opinions with statistics; this, of course adds a patina of scientism. I call it bullshit.

4 Likes

Or, if they want to baffle the bubbas, call it “meta-analysis”. Sounds like science. In fact, they call it “the highest form of knowledge in science”. I call it bullshit.

4 Likes

Or maybe one might say “Biden its time”. To me, what is clear from observing the last few years is that the greatest fear of this regime is, like dictatorial regimes elsewhere, losing its legitimacy. Legitimacy is how they impose their will on a third of a billion people without having more than a thin scum of pistol-packing feds ready to gun down those who dissent. This is why you here so many repetitions of the litany of “free and fair elections” and “our democracy” when it’s obvious to any rational observer what is going on is none of those things. It’s why those who protested a corrupt election on 2021-01-06 were locked up, Soviet-style, without trial, for two years. It’s why the organs of dissemination of state propaganda label any evidence of election fraud “malinformation” (I am using the edgy, emerging term, which doesn’t, if you listen closely, imply that it is untrue—just that it is bad for those whose agenda is aligned with All that is Right and Good).

The importance of legitimacy is why tyrannical regimes, from the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Red China, and every laughable comic opera dictatorship in the “developing world” regularly stage “elections” in which the Party of Fearless Leader is returned to office with 99.7% of the vote (and the 0.3% who dissent do so for the last time). Everybody knows it is a sham, but the diplomats from the “developed countries” go along with it and call the murderous thug in charge “President” and allow him to address the General Assembly of thugs and murderers in the Hall of Winds in New York.

What they fear is not revolution, but being laughed at. It is the mockery that Ceaușescu was subjected to in that last disastrous speech before he got what he had deserved for so long. So it is with our “betters” in the West. They are beginning to lose their legitimacy, they know it, and they do not know what do do about it. Nobody believes anything they say, and they are barely making any effort to disguise their plans for tyranny. I don’t think they appreciate how quickly it all can end when legitimacy is lost. Ask the Ceaușescus. Oh right, you can’t.

7 Likes

Excellent points. It amazes me how many at the retail level on the left do not see what they are really about. Most every day, there is at least one essay on Realclearpolitics calling the Republicans “fascists”. How can they not see? Ahh, lets call them the “Not-see” Party!

5 Likes