MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Marxist Left’

Secret, Invisible Evidence Of Russian Hacking Is Not Actually Evidence – Caitlin Johnstone

Posted by M. C. on December 21, 2020

Blaming Russia is safer than blaming say…the CIA or Middle Eastern “friends”.

As Moon of Alabama explains, the only technical analysis we’ve seen of the alleged hack (courtesy of cybersecurity firm FireEye) makes no claim that Russia was responsible for it,

Government contractor FireEye, they can’t even protect themselves. Remember that next time you file taxes.

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/12/18/secret-invisible-evidence-of-russian-hacking-is-not-actually-evidence/

author: Caitlin Johnstone

The Communist Party of China has been covertly sending arms to extremist Antifa militants in the United States in preparation for the civil war which is expected to take place after Joe Biden declares himself President for Life and institutes a Marxist dictatorship. The weapons shipments include rocket launchers, directed energy weapons, nunchucks and ninja throwing stars.

Unfortunately I cannot provide evidence for this shocking revelation as doing so would compromise my sources and methods, but trust me it’s definitely true and must be acted upon immediately. I recommend President Trump declare martial law without a moment’s hesitation and begin planning a military response to these Chinese aggressions.

How does this make you feel? Was your first impulse to begin scanning for evidence of the incendiary claim I made in my opening paragraph?

It would be perfectly reasonable if it was. I am after all some random person on the internet whom you have probably never met, and you’ve no reason to accept any bold claim I might make on blind faith. It would make sense for you to want to see some verification of my claim, and then dismiss my claim as baseless hogwash when I failed to provide that verification.

If you’re a more regular reader, it would have also been reasonable for you to guess that I was doing a bit. But imagine if I wasn’t? Imagine if I really was claiming that the Chinese government is arming Antifa ninja warriors to kill patriotic Americans in the coming Biden Wars. How crazy would you have to be to believe what I was saying without my providing hard, verifiable evidence for my claims?

Now imagine further that this is something I’ve made false claims about many times in the past. If every few years I make a new claim about some naughty government arming Antifa super soldiers in a great communist uprising, which turns out later to have been bogus.

Well you’d dismiss me as a crackpot, wouldn’t you? I wouldn’t blame you. That would be the only reasonable response to such a ridiculous spectacle.

And yet if I were an employee of a US government agency making unproven incendiary claims about a government that isn’t aligned with the US-centralized power alliance, the entire political/media class would be parroting what I said as though it’s an established fact. Even though US government agencies have an extensive and well-documented history of lying about such things.

Trump’s former homeland security adviser: “The magnitude of this ongoing attack is hard to overstate…The Russians have had access to a number of important networks for 6 to 9 months…The access they now enjoy could be used for far more than spying.” https://t.co/ACCPVvCNZ7

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) December 17, 2020

Today we’re all expected to be freaking out about Russia again because Russia hacked the United States again right before a new president took office again, so now it’s very important that we support new cold war escalations from both the outgoing president and the incoming president again. We’re not allowed to see the evidence that this actually happened again, but it’s of utmost importance that we trust and support new aggressions against Russia anyway. Again.

The New York Times has a viral op-ed going around titled “I Was the Homeland Security Adviser to Trump. We’re Being Hacked.” The article’s author Thomas P Bossert warns ominously that “the networks of the federal government and much of corporate America are compromised by a foreign nation” perpetrated by “the Russian intelligence agency known as the S.V.R., whose tradecraft is among the most advanced in the world.”

Rather than using its supreme tradecraft to interfere in the November election ensuring the victory of the president we’ve been told for years is a Russian asset by outlets like The New York Times, Bossert informs us that the SVR instead opted to hack a private American IT company called SolarWinds whose software is widely used by the US government.

“Unsuspecting customers then downloaded a corrupted version of the software, which included a hidden back door that gave hackers access to the victim’s network,” Bossert explains, saying that “The magnitude of this ongoing attack is hard to overstate.” Its magnitude is so great that Bossert says Trump must “severely punish the Russians” for perpetrating it, and cooperate with the incoming Biden team in helping to ensure that that punishment continues seamlessly between administrations.

New on MoA:
Media Blame Russia For Cyber Intrusions Without Providing Evidencehttps://t.co/LBKNDiOywm pic.twitter.com/mhvmtIqGb9

— Moon of Alabama (@MoonofA) December 16, 2020

The problem is that, as usual, we’ve been given exactly zero evidence for any of this. As Moon of Alabama explains, the only technical analysis we’ve seen of the alleged hack (courtesy of cybersecurity firm FireEye) makes no claim that Russia was responsible for it, yet the mass media are flagrantly asserting as objective, verified fact that Russia is behind this far-reaching intrusion into US government networks, citing only anonymous sources if they cite anything at all.

And of course where the media class goes so too does the barely-separate political class. Democratic Senator Dick Durbin told CNN in a recent interview that this invisible, completely unproven cyberattack constitutes “virtually a declaration of war by Russia on the United States.” Which is always soothing language to hear as the Russian government announces the development of new hypersonic missiles as part of a new nuclear arms race it attributes to US cold war escalations.

Journalist Glenn Greenwald is one of the few high-profile voices who’ve had the temerity to stick his head above the parapet and point out the fact that we have seen exactly zero evidence for these incendiary claims, for which he is of course currently being raked over the coals on Twitter.

“I know it doesn’t matter. I know it’s wrong to ask the question. I know asking the question raises grave doubts about one’s loyalties and patriotism,” Greenwald sarcastically tweeted. “But has there been any evidence publicly presented, let alone dispositive proof, that Russia is responsible for this hack?”

Perhaps they have information sources they can’t describe without compromising sources and methods?

— Timothy B. Lee (@binarybits) December 17, 2020

“Perhaps they have information sources they can’t describe without compromising sources and methods?” chimed in Ars Technica‘s Timothy B Lee in response to Greenwald’s query, a textbook reply from establishment narrative managers whenever anyone questions where the evidence is for any of these invisible attacks on US sovereignty.

“Of course they can’t show us the evidence!” proponents of establishment Russia hysteria always say. “They’d compromise their sources and methods if they did!”

US spook agencies always say this about evidence for US spook agency claims about governments long targeted for destruction by US spook agencies. We can’t share the evidence with you because the evidence is classified. It’s secret evidence. The evidence is invisible.

Which always works out very nicely for the US spook agencies, I must say.

Hmm… America Keeps Getting Attacked By Nations It Hates In Ways Only The CIA Can See

I’d like to tell you a folktale. It’s called “The Emperor’s New 9/11”.https://t.co/uduUCajFUx

— Caitlin Johnstone ⏳ (@caitoz) October 24, 2020

Secret, invisible evidence is not evidence. If the public cannot see the evidence behind the claims being made by the powerful, then those claims are unproven. It would never be acceptable for anyone in power to say “This important thing with potentially world-altering consequences definitely happened, but you’ll just have to trust us because the evidence is secret.” In a post-Iraq invasion world it is orders of magnitude more unacceptable, and should therefore be dismissed until hard, verifiable evidence is provided.

Isn’t it interesting how all the Pearl Harbors and 9/11s of our day are completely invisible to the public? We can’t see cyber-intrusions for ourselves like we could see fallen buildings and smoking naval bases; they’re entirely hidden from our view. Not only are they entirely hidden from our view, the evidence that they happened is kept secret from us as well. And the mass media just treat this as normal and fine. Government agencies with an extensive history of lying are allowed to make completely unsubstantiated and unverifiable claims about governments long targeted by those same government agencies, and the institutions responsible for informing the public about what’s going on in the world simply repeat it as fact.

Sure it’s possible that Russia hacked the US. It’s possible that the US government has been in contact with extraterrestrials, too. It’s possible that the Chinese government is covertly arming Antifa samurai in preparation for a civil war. But we do not imbue these things with the power of belief until we are provided with an amount of evidence that rises to the level required in a post-Iraq invasion world.

These people have not earned our trust, they have earned our pointed and aggressive skepticism. We must act accordingly.

_____________________________________

Image via Pixabay

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Poems For Rebels or my old bookWoke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Why the Marxist Left Loves Lincoln – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 13, 2020

It is little wonder that the ideas promulgated by the New York Tribune, the mouthpiece of the Republican Party, were overtly socialist:  Karl Marx himself was a twice-weekly columnist for the paper from 1852 to 1862, contributing over 500 articles. 

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/07/thomas-dilorenzo/why-the-marxist-left-loves-lincoln/

By

“No leader of a powerful nation” should allow such a thing as “the dismemberment of the Soviet Union.”

–Marxist “Civil War” historian Eric Foner, The Nation, Feb. 11, 1991

A July 27, 2019 article in the Washington Post by Gillian Brockell was headlined, “You Know Who Was into Karl Marx?  No, not AOC.  Abraham Lincoln.”  Following up on the New York Times’ 2017 weeks-long celebration of the centenary of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the Post was doing its part to celebrate and promote Marxian socialism by crowing that “the first Republican president . . . was surrounded by socialists and looked to them for counsel.”  The message being conveyed by the Post was that this is what all American presidents should do.  They should listen to and obey the Washington Post, in other words.

Much of Lincoln’s socialilstic “counsel” came from Horace Greeley’s New York Tribune, described by the Post as “the newspaper largely responsible for transmitting the ideals and ideas that formed the Republican Party in 1854,” many of which were “overtly socialist.”

It is little wonder that the ideas promulgated by the New York Tribune, the mouthpiece of the Republican Party, were overtly socialist:  Karl Marx himself was a twice-weekly columnist for the paper from 1852 to 1862, contributing over 500 articles.  An April 1957 article in American Heritage magazine entitled “When Marx Worked for Horace Greeley” spoke of how “the organ of . . . the new Republican party, sustained Karl Marx over the years when he was mapping out his crowning tract of overthrow, Das Kapital . . . The Tribune was not only Marx’s meal ticket but his experimental outlet for agitation and ideas during the most creative period of his life.”  Without this financial support, “there might possibly – who knows?—have been no Das Kapital” and maybe even no “Lenin and a Stalin as the master’s disciples . . .”   Much of what was written in The New York Tribune by Karl Marx “went bodily into Das Kapital.”

Lincoln was an avid reader of the Tribune since it was “the” voice first of “respectable Whig opinion” and then of the Republican Party.  He addressed his letters to Greeley as “Dear Friend Greeley.”  Lincoln and Karl Marx personally communicated as well and had a sort of mutual admiration society.  Upon being reelected, Lincoln received a letter from Marx saying, “We congratulate the American people upon your reelection by a large majority.”  Lincoln responded with a thank-you letter.  The Washington Post, meanwhile sounded absolutely giddy in noting that “Once in office, [Lincoln’s] alliance with socialists didn’t stop.”  That “alliance” was not only political or literary:  Lincoln’s army was filled with so-called “48ers,” German immigrants to America who had participated in failed socialist revolutions in Europe in 1848, the year of publication of The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels (See Lincoln’s Marxists by Al Benson, Jr. and Walter Kennedy).  The Post brings all of this up in order to make the point that, despite President Trump’s occasional references to Abraham Lincoln in support of his populist agenda, the most appropriate use of the Lincoln myth would be to promote their crusade for socialism in America.

There is nothing new about this. At their 1939 national convention the American Communist Party adorned its stage with a gigantic image of Abraham Lincoln alongside a large image of Vladimir Lenin and held Lincoln-Lenin Day rallies in New York City.

In other words, far from defacing the Lincoln Memorial or other Zeus-like images of Lincoln around the country, the radical, violent, and often criminal communists of Antifa and Only Black Lives Matter (“We are trained Marxists,” one of the founders of OBLM has said) are more likely to continue using the image, words, and deeds of Lincoln to assist in their crusade to destroy American civilization and replace it with another communist hell.  If they ever get control of the government it is not beyond the imagination that they would follow Lincoln’s footsteps and suspend habeas corpus, mass arrest and imprison dissenters, censor communications, shut down conservative newspapers, withdraw licenses from conservative talk radio and television stations, deport or imprison some opposition members of Congress to send a message to all the rest, abolish the separation of powers, confiscate firearms, and use the military to wage total war on the civilian population of areas of the country where “deplorable” political dissent is strongest.

Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo [send him mail] is a senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. His latest book is The Problem with Lincoln.

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

How Marxists Exploit Race | The American Spectator

Posted by M. C. on June 28, 2020

That’s what seems to be going on. Radicals are cynically exploiting a genuine injustice like the George Floyd killing for a larger ideological purpose. So many of the oblivious (and often good-hearted) foot soldiers who join them don’t realize the degree to which they’re being enlisted and exploited.

I was asked last weekend by an apolitical family member: What’s the goal of the protests and riots? It depends on the organizers. Oftentimes it’s to tear down, to take down, to stir chaos and disorder. For instance, calls for defunding the police would do nothing but foment more chaos and disorder.

https://spectator.org/black-lives-matter-marxists-exploit-race-george-floyd-patrisse-cullors/

by
We saw it in the 1930s. And on a larger scale, we’re seeing it now.
Patrisse Cullors, co-founder of Black Lives Matter (YouTube screenshot)

On March 25, 1931, two white women, Victoria Price and Ruby Bates, claimed they had been raped by nine black teenagers along the railroad from Chattanooga to Memphis. In a town called Paint Rock, Alabama, a citizen posse took the law into its hands and “arrested” the boys, transporting them to jail cells in nearby Scottsboro.

As news spread, enraged whites gathered outside the jail, ready to form a lynch job. Local authorities promised quick justice to the seething vigilantes. On cue, five days later an all-white jury indicted the nine boys. A second round of trials commenced in March 1933, during which Ruby Bates recanted her initial testimony. Nonetheless, the jury voted again to convict the boys.

In both cases, the Scottsboro boys and George Floyd, you had crimes against not just race but humanity. Both became episodes for exploitation by revolutionary ideologues with wider purposes and agendas.

The case of the Scottsboro boys was nationally known as a serious miscarriage of justice. The boys literally fought for their lives against a system rigged against them. Decent Americans were outraged. Something needed to be done. People with cooler heads needed to step in to calm the situation.

Unfortunately, the Scottsboro case became further enflamed. It attracted some of the worst elements of the Marxist Left. American communists saw a delicious opportunity to swoop in. They attempted to hijack the case and the cause.

Really, this was no surprise. Communists have long been adept at agitating, instigating, and organizing. They are trained in the art. As skilled propagandists, they conceive and coordinate tight campaigns that work wondrously in enlisting liberals in particular. They are really good at raising lots of hell without a lot of members, at fomenting chaos and discord and getting people in the streets.

In the case of Scottsboro, the goal was not only to attract black Americans to the Communist Party — and liberals, various fellow travelers, and social-justice warriors — but above all to portray the United States as an inherently racist nation where cases like Scottsboro are the systemic norm.

How fruitful was the Scottsboro campaign?

It succeeded in drawing some black Americans into the Communist Party, albeit only some. A December 1954, congressional report examined the effort. Titled “The American Negro in the Communist Party,” the report delineated decades of attempts by the Soviet Comintern and Communist Party USA (CPUSA) to try to recruit African Americans. Crazy as it now sounds, the Comintern and CPUSA actually envisioned a segregated Soviet–American “Negro republic” under Kremlin command in the American South.

This was no mere fleeting fancy. In 1922, the Comintern approved a fat $300,000 subsidy (an enormous sum) to the American Communist Party for purposes of propaganda among black Americans. In 1925, the Comintern selected a small group of 12 black American communists to come to Moscow for training. (The most well-known was Lovett Fort-Whiteman, described by Time magazine as the “Reddest” among them, and who a decade later died in the Soviet Gulag.)

Congress found that communists had failed miserably to attract black Americans. The report found no evidence that Communist Party USA and its Moscow masters had generated a mass swell of black Americans.

And yet, it is not the quantity of recruits that necessarily counts, but the quality. And some of those that the Scottsboro campaign attracted were nothing short of sensational successes with results that would pay off in unimaginable ways down the road. For instance, it was that particular recruitment tool — CPUSA’s cynical Scottsboro campaign — that began drawing into the Communist Party a young journalist and editor in Atlanta named Frank Marshall Davis, who decades later in the 1970s would become a mentor to a Hawaiian adolescent named Barack Obama. Yes, Barack Obama. Davis was first drawn into the Communist Party orbit by a campaign to recruit African Americans via a racial wedge issue.

This history is well documented. I’ve written about it in several books, most notably in my biography of Frank Marshall Davis, titled The Communist, in my book Dupes, and in my book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Communism. The history is totally ignored today. Of course, historical ignorance is killing us. It explains how one week protesters are ripping down statues of Confederate generals and then the next week targeting Ulysses S. Grant, the Union general who defeated the Confederacy. But alas, this is what our schools have done, especially our awful universities.

How does Scottsboro relate to today — namely, the fallout from the George Floyd tragedy?

In both cases, the Scottsboro boys and George Floyd, you had genuine racial injustices, unquestionable abuses, crimes against not just race but humanity. Both Scottsboro and George Floyd deserved condemnation and protest. Only a cretin couldn’t feel for George Floyd after watching that video, just as only a scoundrel couldn’t feel for the Scottsboro boys. And unfortunately, both became episodes for exploitation by revolutionary ideologues with wider purposes and agendas.

“We actually do have an ideological frame,” says Patrisse Cullors of her and Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza. “Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.”

Cullors and Garza, co-founders of Black Lives Matter, are self-acknowledged trained Marxists. They are trained organizers. That’s their ideological framework. As trained, ideological Marxists, they know how to tap an issue (the more legitimate the better) to rage against the existing social and political order.

“Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things,” wrote Marx and Engels at the close of the Communist Manifesto. “They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions.”

That’s what seems to be going on. Radicals are cynically exploiting a genuine injustice like the George Floyd killing for a larger ideological purpose. So many of the oblivious (and often good-hearted) foot soldiers who join them don’t realize the degree to which they’re being enlisted and exploited.

I was asked last weekend by an apolitical family member: What’s the goal of the protests and riots? It depends on the organizers. Oftentimes it’s to tear down, to take down, to stir chaos and disorder. For instance, calls for defunding the police would do nothing but foment more chaos and disorder.

Sure, obviously the vast majority attending rallies aren’t Marxists. Of course. For certain communist ringleaders, however, they will support a revolutionary movement that goes against the existing social and political order of things.

Importantly, Black Lives Matter is hardly the only such organization. Everyone points to Antifa. But Antifa is a new kid on the block. One of the worst exploiters and agitators is Revolutionary Communist Party USA (“Revcom”), which has long had a specialty of racial agitation. It’s seizure of the George Floyd outrage is obvious right now at its website.

Groups like Revcom and Communist Party USA were very active in the summer of 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri, shamelessly tossing gasoline on that fire just as it seemed to be mercifully cooling off. The official Communist Party USA website rallied, “Let us turn grief and anger into action and change.” The grief and anger was over Ferguson (understandably so), but it was channeled to explicitly Marxist action and change.

These are far from isolated examples. This has been going on for a hundred years.

It’s really quite sad. What happened with George Floyd and the Scottsboro boys are outrages, legitimate wrongs that should be used to make legitimate reforms and strive for peace, reconciliation, racial harmony, and a better world. And yet, lurking in the shadows are those looking to seize these matters for revolutionary purposes.

For Black Lives Matter, that’s a wide-ranging panoply of revolutionary change that goes way beyond George Floyd or even black issues. BLM states at its website that it seeks to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure.” Its “What We Believe” statement is remarkably cultural and sexual, using words like “trans” four times, “queer” once, “heteronormative” once, and “comrades” twice.

What does this mean for you, or maybe for your child thinking about signing on the dotted line?

Be careful and vigilant in finding groups to express your outrage and a desire for intelligent reform. Don’t rally to the wrong guys. Know who they are. Be smart. If you want to protest the George Floyd killing, there are a thousand ways to do so without supporting Marxist revolutionaries.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »