I was recently quoted in the New York Times‘ article “Ahead of 2020, Facebook Falls Short on Plan to Share Data on Disinformation” by Davey Alba in relation to my research on Venezuela.
While I’d have liked to expand more on the issues, it’s a good read.
In the article they state the following: “Ariel Sheen, a Colombia-based researcher, claims his group has found evidence of a disinformation campaign by Venezuelan media on Facebook using fake accounts, but that the social media giant has not provided the necessary information for them to prove it.”
This is categorically false – we know that Venezuela is using fake accounts and we don’t need Facebook’s assistance to prove this.
Why would Sputnik then claim otherwise? I can think of two answers.
One, is that the unnamed person who compilied this is incompetent and was not able to distinguish between the part from the whole. Meaning in this case that we can have verifiable findings about one aspect of the project (sock-puppets) but not be able to continue other parts of the project without access to data.
Secondly, they want to seed the notion that there is doubt as to whether or not Venezuela in fact uses a large number of fake Facebook accounts to promote their worldview.
Whatever it is, the takeaway is this, in terms of fairness and accuracy in reporting, by far:
I’ve decided to made public this selection of videos related to my research on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s efforts to influence politics in the United States.
It’s not comprehensive, I don’t include a number of videos related to the project for operational reasons, but does provide a base for others to view.
Disinformation, Bolivarian Propaganda, Cold War Media Studies, PSUV, Communist Infiltration, Social Media and Democracy
Abstract:
This article reviews the historical practices used by the intelligence services of Russia described in the New York Times and then links this to examples of disinformation campaigns that are operated by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
On the Science of Disinformation with Russian and Venezuelan Case Studies
Operation InfeKtion is a 47-minute long documentary produced by the New York Times which uses archival footage and interviews. Hosted on YouTube, it presents examples of the information warfare military strategies used by the Soviet Union’s KGB in operations against the United States.
Read any book published over the last several years in the digital marketing field – such as Growther Hacker Marketing, Content Inc., or Trust Me, I’m Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator – and you’ll learn how economic pressures cause by changes caused by the growth of the internet that have lead to the decline professional and ethical standards in publishing and the general public’s increasing.
As disinformation campaigns seeks to mobilize the emotions of their audience by distorting reality for political ends, this means that it’s now easier than ever for false information to be inserted into public discourse.
Because the Constitution and the U.S. legal system so highly values freedom of expression, there is no singular Federal Law nor widely-adopted industry-standards for honesty or integrity in journalism and publishing, nor is there any enforcement organization in the United States outside of the courts.
This lack of accountability is why technology companies that host or link to news content have recently been targeted for regulation by the government.
Rule #1: Find the Cracks
Finding the crack isn’t merely about coming up with controversial content, it’s about finding an audience and tailoring their consumption in such a way that it (Rule #7) fits long term goals.
There’s a lot of ways to manipulate people into believing disinformation, and disinformation campaigns make knowing as much as possible about their target audience a key component of any good information warfare project.
Intersectional chart depicting social hierarchies able to be exploited by foreign-state sponsored propandandists.
Audiences that have witnessed or experienced trauma, that identify with groups whose identities relate in some way to a sense of collective trauma, or that are neurologically divergent are especially vulnerable to disinformation. Lack of subject area knowledge, deference to alternative-authority figures and interpersonal social pressures to conform makes youths particularly vulnerable to this sort of messaging as well.
Rule #2: The Big Lie
While once big lies – such as the claim that the United States invented AIDs to depopulate undesireable demographics – were the main focus of disinformation campaigns, in the contemporary attention economy a large number of smaller false claims. Here are some examples.
A young black child has a plastic bag put over his head following his arrest, leading to headlines that “many people are outraged“. However if you watch the actual video you’ll see that this was because he was repeatedly spitting on police officers, that he was at no risk of suffocating and, most importantly, the child seemed to be encouraged to engage in this behavior by the person filming it in order to create this “outgrageous” scene.
Another recent example which featured President Donald Trump is found in coverage of a joke he made (linked here to C-Span as the HuffPost’s version has edited out of their linked-to video the larger context of the comment ). Some media outlets – such as CNN – covered this as him implying that he was the Messiah, while others did not mention it at all. What’s clear from the full context of the speech act is that Trump is comparing himself to other politicians that would not be as firm with China in economic negotiations and making a joke – as recognized by Fox News.
Rule #3: A Kernel of Truth
It’s this small kernal of truth that makes the big lie possible. By relying on the audience to not fact check, it’s creates the conditions for misleading headlines and outrage.
The article is written by “Matt Agorist”, the pen name of the director of the Free Thought Project whose government name is unknown. Interesting to note is that others have seen fit to investigate him and when confronted with the fact that so much of the content associated with his writings and website are classified as misinformation and disinformation, he’s used the Alex Jones Defense – claiming he wants to “inspire conversation and a free flow of alternative views.”
Like the example of Donald Trump provided above, the article’s headline and content are vastly at odds with reality.
Reviewing the primary material from which the article is based on – it’s clear that the Chief Rabbi in question was answering a question which contrasts the norms described in certain Biblical passages to that which are now abided by by the IDF.
In other words, nothing in the headline is true – even though the article provides the evidence which shows that it isn’t true!
Rule #4: Conceal Your Hand
Disinformation does not always emerge from an official party outlet, such as Pravda, RT or TeleSUR English.
In fact, because of that direct connection to the government it can be far more effective for it to emerge from other sources.
Other outlets – in Venezuela’s case The Real News Network and Venezuela Analysis (both are operated by ex-Bolivarian Republic of Venezuelan Officials, and likely funded in part with their assistance as well), Orinocco Tribune, Ghion Journal, or a number of pan-Africanist “news services” – can equally serve that State’s interest.
This is accomplished by creating distance between the actors involved in a disinformation campaign. Furthermore it provides for a powerful “victim narrative” if their are any ramifications.
Being called out for poor reporting, bad fact-checking or unreported interests in coverage – as Max Blumenthal, Rania Khalek and Anna Parampul have in relation to their coverage of the war in Syria – can be spun into a “vast conspiracy” to keep the truth from being told and whatever professional ramifications that come from this can lead one to becoming a cause celebre.
Once the uncertainty of conflicting narratives is cemented, there will always be come people that are gullibile enough to believe it.
Rule #5: The Useful Idiot
“Useful idiots” is a derogatory term for people perceived as propagandizing for a cause without fully comprehending the cause’s goals, and who is cynically used by the cause’s leaders. During the research for my Master’s Thesis at NYU I read a lot about useful idiots. It’s interesting to note that often times it’s not until the collapse of a government, as happened with the Soviet Union, that the full extent of these networks becomes apparent.
One of my favorite TV series, The Americans, depicts a variety of useful idiots – from those that have been cultivated so as to engage in espionage, treason, sedition, incitement and other illegal activities. Useful idiots typically work in media, education, political activism, public relations. Opertion InfeKtion depicts scientists that publish and defend fake findings as well as political commentators that grossly misrepresent history.
Following the opening of the Soviet Archives extensive troves of evidence was found detailing how US Communists Aided the USSR. Amongst the many examples of the Soviet Union’s success in infilration was helping manage the publication of Rampage – a radical left journal. Given what some commentators have called the “rapid rise” of socialism it seems sensible to investigate the relation of the oil rich nation on our border identifying as socialist, no?
As there is no centralized authority responible for judging questionable content and it’s origins, there are some simple ways to avoid accountability when questioned.
Deny existance of topic at hand.
Deflect to another topic.
Defend claims made as being part of performance art.
Defend claims made as being the product of a mental imbalance.
Refuse to respond to any and all professional and ethical related questions.
Because honesty and integrity in the public sphere falls open those with a sense of civic duty, private companies that wish to monetize their research or contests related to Fake News.
I’ve asked a lot of people at TeleSUR questions related to the Social Media and Democracy project – and almost all have refused to respond and blocked me. This link goes to an updated list of executives in charge of various aspects of operations that have done this.
Rule #7: The Long Game
As Operation InfeKtion illustrates, it sometimes takes years for the fruits of counterintelligence work to be born.
The Long Game also means orienting the development of information related towards those already engaged in intergenerational struggles.
People’s political orientations can become increasingly radicalized through encuentros, a tactic frequently used by individuals and organizations connected in some way to the PSUV. Because these interactions and economic, cultural, political or other types of exchanges are often not recorded for public consumption – and as they can quickly be deleted from servers if they are exposed – they make for the best type of recruitment for irregular warfare disinformation campaigns.
Operation InfeKtion is an excellent documentary, however it unfortunately does not cover Russia’s connection to Venezuela’s state media apparatus.
Technology Transfer: From Russia to Venezuela
Nicholas Maduro, President of the the PSUV, and Vladimir Putin, ex-KGB Agent
“Although a lack of transparency makes precise accounting nearly impossible, in recent years Venezuela’s government has purchased Russia’s state-of-the-art S-300 anti-aircraft missiles; imported hundreds of thousands of Kalashnikov rifles and ammunition; and acquired 5,000 Igla-S MANPADS (man-portable air defense systems). And this is just what has been on public display in Venezuela’s military parades or outlined in leaked military contracts. There are no doubt many more small arms and equipment in the Venezuelan military’s possession.”
Given the above comments, italics added by me, we see an example of military technology transfer occuring. While irregular warfare isn’t mentioned therein, it’s been an interest of Hugo Chavez Frias and Nicolas Maduro Moros since the founding of TeleSUR.
One such personality that has perfectly illustrates my speculation as to Russian-Venezuelan information warfare technology transfer is Abby Martin – who stated at RT and then, like many other of their employees, transferred to TeleSUR. More about her in a minute.
Thus with Russian know how; the religious and political solidarity networks already developed by the Cuban Communist Party (PCC) and the race-based outreach made possible by PSUV cultural ministers and militants – we can come to recognize Venezuela as an organizing and supporting force of a complex state intelligence appratus designed to cultivate, coordinate and control small political groups that have the capacity to converge for large, violent political events. This not only allows for the depleting of local, state, government and federal budgets and an unofficial political tax on private enterprises near those areas – it also allows for the fodder of disinformation narratives.
Gillars v. United States [182 F.2d 962 (D.C. Cir. 1950)] sealed the fate of Sally Gillars, aka Axis Sally, as a traitor. She hasn’t been the only one in American history. Foreign state-sponsored propagandist Robert Henry Best was also tried and convicted of Treason for his speech acts.
They were tried because the First United States Congress, in 1790, provided this statute:
“…if any person or persons, owing allegiance to the United States of America, shall levy war against them, or shall adhere to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, and shall be thereof convicted, on confession in open court, or on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act of the treason whereof he or they shall stand indicted, such person or persons shall be adjudged guilty of treason against the United States, .” 1 Stat. 112 (1790).
Another words disinformation produced in coordination with a foreign government during wartime equals Treason.
Venezuela’s Media Workers: The Future Target of Law Enforcement?
This previous case history rasises some intersting questions given the current political relations between the United States and Venezuela.
While bullets were not now flying between armed military combatants – any honest review of the language, iconography and policies presided over by Nicholas Maduro’s reveals pronouncements which frequently express the sentiment that he and the whole country is under seige, meaning categorically that one is engaged in a protracted war. Also worth noting is that according to the words of TeleSUR’s founders and their executives their state media apparatus was explicitly founded for ideological combat. Does this and the fact thatVenezuela has long been considered an irregular threat to the United States – mean that those who are or have been contracted by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela could be tried for treason?
Given Nicolas Maduro’s role as executive director of TeleSUR and the thrust of their “news” coverage and related activities, it seems like this may be so.
Hands off Venezuela, one of the myriad political action cells that the PSUV sponsors internationally.
But then again, I’m not a lawyer.
Still – to me it does raise several interesting questions, such as:
How does the definition of treason change in periods of irregular warfare?
How do the principles underlying the foundations of prior judgements relate to the evidence at hand?
If Abby Martin is ever prosecuted and found guilty of Treason for the misinformation she has produced while employed by the Russian and Venezuelan Intelligence Services – what’s the best nickname that can be given her – #AnybodyAgainstAmericaAbby, #MultipolarMartin or, my personal favorite, #BocamierdaMartin?
Also, what of the platforms and accounts that spread and host such content?
In a situation such as Venezuela is now facing, I’ve emailed the Venezuela Affairs Office and shared some of my own research as well as my belief that they should seek to exproprirate TeleSUR’s accounts and websites.
Disinformation, Democracy, and Social Media
Fake News is really real and is really dangerous, especially so when there are intelligence
Its purveyors prey on traumas, ignorance, bias and aspirations in hopes that it will lead to political gain. While clearly distinct from terrorist violence, the overlapping goals between the two are readily appearant.
While professional organizations, private companies and state laws used to be sufficient to counteract the rapid spread of such social contagion – the capabilities created by new information and communication technologies over the past two decades has outstripped their capacities.
As the federal system of the United States differs vastly from that of the United States, we have yet to address the new capabilities wrought by technology in law. It’s likely that in the near future, there will complex work done to address this.
Abstract: This article offers an overview of the structure of those political parties and international organizations most relevant to the current goings-on in northern South America and the Caribbean. It highlights a network of revolutionary-left parties and concludes with a working hypothesis regarding the network’s conspiratorial prospects.
Keywords: 21st Century Socialism, Sao Paolo Forum, Transnational Criminal Organizations, Political Science
Party Affiliation in Latin America and Connection to Political Movements
The author argues that one needs to become familiar with the ideological signaling and collaborative habits of an armful of militant-left organizations in order to understand the Bolivarian Movement that has lead to the economic crisis and deterioration of democracy in Venezuela.
As a multi-national movement predicated on the idea that pan-Latin American revolution should be accimplished “by any means necessary,” Bolivarianism is defined by it’s soaring rhetoric and criminal behavior.
First Tier:
The Cuban Communist Party (PCC)
The United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV)
The Brazilian Workers Party (PT)
Second Tier:
The Sandinista National Liberation Front (Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional or FSLN) in Nicaragua.
Movement to Socialism (Movimiento al Socialismo or MAS) in Bolivia.
Dominican Liberation Party (Partido de Liberación Dominicana or PLD) in the Dominican Republic.
These organizations wield enhanced influence within the above described composite in that they control their respective country-level governments.
Associated Groups:
FARC-EP
ELN
Umbrella Organizations
The Forum of São Paulo (Foro de São Paulo or FSP)
The Permanent Conference of Political Parties of Latin America and the Caribbean (Conferencia Permanente de Partidos Políticos de América Latina y el Caribe or COPPPAL).
The Sao Paolo Forum’s Origins
Lula da Silva’s Worker’s Party was the organizing force behind the first Sao Paolo conference. Foreshadowing the corruption that was to later shown via Operation Car Wash, the first conference later lead to corruption charges being brought against the organizers for misappropriation of public sector funds.
A number of the FSP associated parties run the offices of the chief executive of their respective countries. This includes Ecuador’s PAIS Alliance (Patria Altiva y Soberana Alianza), El Salvador’s Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional or FMLN), Uruguay’s Broad Front (Frente Amplio or FA), and Mexico’s National Regeneration Movement (Movimiento Regeneración Nacional or MORENA).
This does not mean that only one party per country is given credentials to attend.
While none of these following Colombian political parties have much electoral support, all are members of the Foro de Sao Paulo.
(1) Patriotic March (Marcha Patriótica)
(2) Progressive Movement (Movimiento Progresista)
(3) Green Alliance Party (Partido Alianza Verde)
(4) Colombian Communist Party (Partido
(5) Alternative Democratic Pole (Polo Democrático Alternativo)
(6) Here for Socialism (Presentes por el Socialismo)
(7) Patriotic Union (Unión Patriótica)
(8) Citizen Power Movement (Movimiento Poder Ciudadano)
Given that some of the above mentioned groups are designated terrorist organizations and that there is an increasing suspiscion as to the motivations and goals of the actors involved Sao Paolo Forum – other organizations act as front groups for their interests. The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, or ALBA) “advances PCC and PSUV positions on a complete range of international issues.”
The author closes his article with the statement that until these extraregional entites and their coercive associates are weakened, that democratization in Venezuela will be more difficult – an assessment made evident by the fact that the Cuban military now occupies a significant role in the functioning of the government of the PSUV.
While Venezuela in Light of Anti-American Parties and Affiliations in Latin America only takes Venezuela as it’s subject, it’s also worth mentioning in this review that the Forum’s influence is not limited to Latin America. Thus this ends the literature review. Below continues with an extension of the author’s thesis – which relates to my own movement of movements thesis.
The PSUV and the FARC-EP
One of the recurring tropes used by the PSUV and their political accomplices is that everyone that seeks to maintain a global political order based on laws is a Nazi.
Given the effectiveness that these organizations have had in helping leftist parties win office in Latin America – one would expect them to try to export the process. And indeed they have!
U.S. Social Forum: The North American Iteration of the Sao Paolo Forum
The United States Social Forum, like the New Horizons Conference in Iran, presents an opportunity for the assessment and recruitment of political activists by foreign intelligence services.
This, however, is not the extent of influence that can be charted. Indeed, a number of American political activists connected to the United States Social Forum have travelled to the Sao Paulo Forum.
Americans at the Sao Paulo Forum
American organizations associated with the Sao Paolo Forum include political parties – such as the Communist Party USA and the Green Party, as well as movements such as Code Pink, Black Lives Matters, CISPES.
As is evident from the above flyer, there are several U.S. organizations whose political activities, rhetoric and goals align with that of the Anti-American Parties which normally attend the Forum.
Indeed Black Lives Matter founders Alicia Garza and Patrisse Cullors were present at the first United States Social Forum while Opal Tometti has recieved an award from her activism from Nicolas Maduro.
The United Socialist Party of America
Conceptual Map of the United Socialist Party of America. Important to note is that this excludes other NGOs and movements that fit into their activities.
Given all this I believe it’s worth reconceiving how Socialist Parties within the United States are viewed.
In Venezuela the PSUV brought sundry Socialist political activists together due to the charisma and policies of Hugo Chavez.
It seems reasonable to state that a similar political alignment, which I call the United Socialist Party of America, has also formed. But rather than love of a leaders, it’s around hatred manufactured against President Donald Trump.
Carlos Ron, the Counselor of Political Affairs at the Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is the larger, bald man two seats away from the 1st Annual People’s Congress of Resistance Convention.
This development isn’t some organic happenstance, but something that has been manufactured in large part by a variety of Venezuelan political officials – like Carlos Ron, pictured above. Carlos along with Jesus “Chucho” Garcia, Jorge Arreaza and other diplomats have frequently attended socialist events in the United States – be it at Party of Socialism and Liberation meetings or at events held at the People’s Forum in New York – an obvious nod to the Social Forum. What the extent of their influence has been – be it funding, access to goods and services, etc. – is something for another article.
I decided to start watching the films produced by Citizen United Films and the first one that I decided to watch, given the connection to my research on CastroChavismo, was Occupy Unmasked.
A project of Steve Bannon and Andrew Breitbart’s – I found the film to be compelling in its depiction of the covert goals of the Occupiers; the disingenuous methods used to try to obtain positive media coverage and the generally intellectually bankrupt character of the personalities involved despite whatever “good intentions” they claimed. This was, in fact, why I paid so little attention to what was going on after the first encampment was created in Zuccotti Park.
While I was living in Barcelona, Spain at the time that the occupation started, the supposedly “spontaneous” event was being planned when I was living in New York City and attending New York University. In fact in my Contemporary Marxist Theory class, taught by Vivek Chibber, there were several students from the New School for Social Research – the educational institution associated with the Frankfurt School that sought people to become involved in this “spontaneous” uprising against the 1%.
Before that, even, at an academic conference at SUNY Binghamton, I debated with Micah White (one of the “founders” of the movements) over the merits of the actions to come. My experience at this conference of self-proclaimed radicals was so cringy I even wrote a poem about it.
Occupy Unmasked: A Critical Appraisal
My one criticism of the film, which is half-heartedly given the closeness of the film’s release to the events described, is that it doesn’t delve deep enough into the details on the personalities driving occupy.
The section on Brandon Darby and Common Grounds Collective, for instance, covers a very significant point – the infiltration by communists and anarchists into “solidarity” and assistance organizations in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina for the purpose of base-building for the purpose of creating Dual Power.
The various organizations and their connections to international organizations, international political parties, and the intelligence services operations of foreign states – however – are not explored in the film. Furthermore the connection of various domestic educational institutions – such as NYU’s Hemispheric Institute and the New School for Social Research, who in their own literature describes themselves as the heirs of the Frankfurt School – is not covered.
Given that the focus of the film is on showing the anti-Consitutional, anti-capitalist, illegalist, and insurrectionary nature of OWS political activists as well as it’s connections to unions – this is just additional erudition related to points made in the film.
Occupy Wall Street, Rape and “Alternative Justice”
One of the most compelling moments of Occupy Unmasked is when Andrew Breitbart yells repeatedly into the Zuccoti Park encampment: “Stop raping people.” after rapes were reported to the police and news media. While this film focuses on New York, it’s important to note that there were a number of other sexual assaults at Occupy Wall Street camps – including that of minors.
Breitbart, immediately thereafter records someone on film stating that they have their own set of “means” for dealing with such crimes.
As someone that has read the accounts of sexual assaults by now-former members of various American Socialist Parties, it’s worth noting that there are a number of instances described by members criminal charges are not brought against anyone (as it would damage the prestige of the organization and thus the likelihood of revolution) and instead, like the practices of the Catholic Church and pedophile priests, organizers are instead sent to other cities and those that bring it up publicly are ostracized.
Occupy Unmasked and CastroChavismo
Watching Steve Bannon’s film I noticed a number of indicators that are connected to my own documentary/data science project.
The below photo collection further provides further evidence to my own Movement of Movements Thesis, as well as reinforces the claims made by Bannon and Breitbart in Occupy Unmasked.
Revolutionary Communist Party at Occupy Wall Street
Occupy Wall Street Photo by a Brazilian photographer. Their relationship to the Brazilian Workers Party is unknown.
Occupy Wall Street protest coordinated with the CPI(M)
Liberation Theology and Raised Fists Common Ground Relief New Orleans
The Flag of Ecuador at Occupy Wall Street Protest
“Marx Was Right” Poster
Natasha Lennard, who now teaches at New School for Social Research and writes for the Intercept.
Occupy Unmasked Screenshot of Medea Benjamin
Evidence of online spam network promoting media personalities and political activists.
Occupy Wall Street NYC Flikr Party for Socialism and Liberation Poster
Occupy Wall Street NYC Flikr Party for Socialism and Liberation Poster 2
Occupy Wall Street NYC Flikr Party for Socialism and Liberation Poster 3
Occupy Wall Street NYC Flikr PSL Poster 4
“Occupy Unmasked” Screenshot Party for Socialism and Liberation
Wikileaks was present at the Occupy Wall Street NYC Flikr
Occupy Wall Street – Workers World Party Poster
Occupy Wall Street – Workers World Party Poster 2
Activist Update – Now Harassing Politicians
Activist Update – A group of ex-Occupy Wall Street activists have made it over to The Hemispheric Institute, which has strong connections to Brazil under the Workers Party, provides acclaim to Angela Davis and houses Venezuela Hand George-Ciccariello Maher.
As my reader can see from this quotation from the U.S. Code’s subsection on Treason, Sedition and Subversive Activities as listed on the Cornell Law School Website:
“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.”
Defining Treason in Relation to Venezuela’s U.S. Political Influence Network
Since becoming informed as to part of the scope and scale of the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s financial support and assistance of radical political activity in the United States, I’ve been publishing online about it in part to avoid being charged with misprision of treason.
While those on my list are likely to try to use the Free Speech clause of the Constitution as an aegis for their activities, if one reads the original documents of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela it is clear that the Government views their investments in American media and political personalities as being part of a war.
This article contextualizes an exchange between Dr. Richard Wolff and Abby Martin about Jordan Peterson that was uploaded to Empire Files’s YouTube channel.
It then debunks some of the critical analysis and positions made by Wolff, and places his work within the context of Kultural Marxism.
Jordan Peterson and Slavoj Žižek Discuss “Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism”
I know a lot about Marxism.
Slavoj Žižek was one of my professors during my M.A. research at New York University and in his lectures, he frequently explicated on the works of Karl Marx and G. W. F. Hegel.
Vivek Chibber and Bertell Ollman, experts in the fields of historical and dialectical materialism – sub-fields in History and Political Sciences based on the writings of Marx – were also my professors while at NYU.
While not that familiar with the work of Jordan Peterson (my familiarity with his work consists of watching another of his other debates) I was curious to see him speak given his rise to fame and my own psychological investigations under my father’s guidance while attending FICAM.
Grading the Debate
Watching Jordan Peterson explain Marxist thought was thorougly cringy.
When I first heard him say something askew from what Marxists actually describe in their works I thought of writing – as I did with the Steve Bannon vs. David Frum Munk Debate – a sort of ongoing commentary, this time correcting him.
I quickly realized that to do so would consume more time than I was willing to commit, so was heartened to see that Harrison Fluss, a former colleague from mine from FAU, went into specifics in Jacobin Magazine. Though I don’t agree with a number of his conclusions there or in his other commentary on Peterson, his assessments related to Marx are valid and insightful.
This, however, doesn’t mean that Slavoj Žižek won the debate.
There was no real overarching conflict affirming or negating a resolution. It was more like a mutual clarification of perspectives, a charting of concepts histories and a series of clarifications and jokes.
Though Žižek states in his rebuttal that Peterson’s reading of The Communist Manifesto was overly-simplified, he also recognizes that what Peterson means by “Cultural Marxism” doesn’t actually emerge from Marxist thought and even agrees with Peterson that some of the critical points he makes about it are nevertheless correct.
More importantly, as it relates to Capitalism vs. Marxism and it’s relationship to Happiness, is that Žižek agrees with Peterson’s description of post-modernist/identity politics protests and other ideas it the replacement of Marx’s idea of class conflict– defined as being between the working class, proletariat and the bourgeoisie – with those of the terms used within identity politics discourse.
Thus even though Dr. Peterson can’t name a single of these “post-modern Marxists” – they both share that they’ve had experiences on campus of those embodying this value system.
This is important, as it allows the Žižek and Peterson to come to a mutually agreed-upon understanding of what is meant by Cultural Marxism and to agree that what they understand by it is socially harmful.
Debunking the Debunking of Jordan Peterson’s “Cultural Marxism” with Richard Wolff
In his interview with Abby Martin on Empire Files Dr. Richard D. Wolff similarly recognized Peterson’s unfamiliarity with Marxist literature and inability to name a single person that would fall under the rubric of a “Cultural Marxist”.
But, rather than being a magnanimous interlocutor he claims that Dr. Peterson’s used of the term Cultural Marxism is merely a revival of an old Nazi trope that has no connection whatsoever to Marxism (it does, and I describe it in brief here) and then denigrates him for not understanding what “exploitation” means to Marxists. That whole subsequent dialogue between Dr. Peterson and Dr. Žižek which finds them clarifying the terms used and then agreeing to the? Completely ignored.
The extent to Dr. Wolff’s unfairness to Jordan Peterson goes beyond making red herrings and being condescensing to someone speaking outside their area of specialization.
In his closing comments, Dr. Wolff equates the perspective of Dr. Peterson (a view, incidentally, shared by Marx [₁]) – that social hierarchies will always exist in some form to the justification of chattel slavery in the Americans.
Let me state this again as it is important.
Whereas Dr. Jordan Peterson limits his discussion on hierarchies to endogenous personal capabilities (such as physical attractiveness and other such mundane and widely recognized categories) and says equality of ends is offensive to the human condition but equality of opportunity is a necessary value to strive for – Dr. Wolff twists this and Dr. Peterson’s otherwise mundane argument (“People can be judged based on different qualities” – a position adjacent to his claim that history can be judged on qualities other than class struggle) to mean that he is justifying slavery.
More than that, he places this position within a wider, conspiratorial framework wherein Peterson is an expression of the economic elite which feels the “status quo is in danger” and thus the “dominant classes” revert to using the language of “natural law” to justify their rule.
Beyond merely making the false claim that Peterson’s position is to justify slavery, Wolff states that in situations wherein people use the language of natural law – that physical violence is an appropriate response.
His exact words are: “The minute you hear that [justification of hierarchies] you should reach for your gun.”
Given that Dr. Peterson’s last words are to praise the human capacity to engage with and learn from others that hold different world views and that Žižek’s last words are to warn Leftists from falling into “the political correctness trap” and to be intrepid in their thinking, this line of commentary by Dr. Wolff’s seems highly suspect [2].
Orwellian Irony: Why Kultural Marxists Seek to Debunk Cultural Marxism
“Loyalty Forever, Traitors Never” – In this Facebook Live video Nicolas Maduro expresses the view that good citizens don’t question the Revolutionary Process or speak bad about Hugo Chavez. In the comments section on the right, Venezuelans ask Maduro for financial assitance.
Dr. Peterson and Dr. Žižek both reject the Marxist framework that subsumes individual liberty under the collective.
The above image provides a brief indicator as to why that is so – being forced to rely upon the attention and benevolence of a Party or Dear Leader for the means by which to self-reproduce or better one’s socio-economic standing is degrading and has lead, historically, to a wide variety of crimes great and small.
In contrast to Dr. Richard Wolff, who views Dr. Peterson as an avatar for the anxieties of an economic elite that fears a shift towards Socialism in America (Idealism), I view Dr. Richard Wolff along with a number of intellectuals, artists and political activists as being associated with Venezuela’s state media, state intelligence apparatus and the PSUV (Historicism).
What is the basis for my claim, besides being on a show funded by Venezuela?
In addition to appearing on a number of media outlets connected to or associated with Venezuelan state media, Richard D. Wolff was also involved with Occupy Wall Street (along with many other Venezuela-aligned Marxist-inspired organizations such as the Workers World Party, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, and the Revolutionary Communist Party); is also an instructor at the People’s Forum and and is on the board of the Left Forum – organizations which hosts a number of Kultural Marxist personalities; frequently appears on The Real News Network– which has numerous former Venezuelan government officials working for it; and is involved with a Democracy at Work, a non-profit with an anti-capitalist orientation akin to other political activism projects that have received funding from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
In fact, Dr. Wolff’s closing comments – misrepresenting the position of a perceived enemy and then threatening violence – are roughly commensurate with the political climate fostered by Nicolas Maduro: Discouraging criticism under threat of neglect (access to government goods and services) and violence (via SEBIN and colectivos). Given the role that academic editors and peer-review plays in academic publications
I imagine that Dr. Wolff’s written corpus isn’t as distortive and crass as this “debunking,” but I’ll have to rely on other’s assessments as after having watched his exchange with Abby Martin I’m disinterested in potentially encountering other falsifications done for the sake of demonstrating ideological purity and superiority.
Footnote
[1] This is a very strange claim for Wolff to make as the notion that “hierarchy” disappears under a socialist regime is quickly disproved via historical analysis or reference to seminal Marxist texts. In Critique of the Gotha Program, Karl Marx writes:
“In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”
While one can certainly make the claim that conflating Marx and Lenin is intellectually problematic, it’s also worth citing Lenin to disprove Wolff’s claim that all hierarchies are flattened in a Socialist societty. In Lenin’s own words, from , “The State and Revolution”:
“We are not utopians, we do not ‘dream’ of dispensing at once with all administration, with all subordination. These anarchist dreams, based upon incomprehension of the tasks of the proletarian dictatorship, are totally alien to Marxism, and, as a matter of fact, serve only to postpone the socialist revolution until people are different. No, we want the socialist revolution with people as they are now, with people who cannot dispense with subordination, control, and ‘foremen and accountants’.”
One could also look to the history of the Soviet Union, with Joseph Stalin’s policy enactment of “primitive socialist accumulation” to demonstrate that exploitation still existed via the provision of surplus value being provided to political cadres loyal to the current leader of the Communist Party and not workers.
[2] In what is essentially a criticism of The Resistance, which is intimately connected to the Left Forum, Slavoj Žižek also claimes in his closing statement that “People labeling others fascist is lazy thinking, and Trump is not a fascist.”
Dan Kovalik is one of the intellectuals and activists that I’ve identified as being associated with Venezuela’s Kultural Marxism network as well as the Nicaragua Network founded by Daniel Ortega.
When I noticed that he was going to be giving what was described as a “Talk and Exchange” via a live video chat, I set a notification for myself in order to watch and ask some questions.
Verifying Authenticity and Logging On to the Network
The first thing that I do in order to access live feed described in this brief essay designed to enlighten the minds of its readers on the connections between Venezuela’s Intelligence Services and intellectuals and political activists in America was by logging on to Facebook.
One logs on by first pulling up their website on an internet browser or smartphone app. After I logged in to my account, the use of which is predicated upon Facebook’s terms and conditions, I pulled up the Alliance for Global Justice Facebook page and began to watch Dan Kovalik speak.
The preliminary speech was aligned with other not-very-insightful commentary that I’ve seen Abby Martin and other Venezuela-hands provide. I’d be curious to learn if they receive these talking points – which don’t seem to vary much – from their Venezuelan handlers or if they come up with them themselves. Anyway, after a while, he started to wind down and open for questions.
Questioning Dan Kovalik
It makes sense that those associated with Venezuela’s Intelligence Agencies would want to watch Dan Kovalik, after all, they need to make sure he doesn’t go off script.
My first question related to whether or not there was any sort of conflict of interest in Dan’s reporting – specifically if he had even been given money by the Venezuelan government or their associates. He never answered this question.
The second question, shown above, was a question related to discerning whether or not there was anything that could cause Kovalik to lose support for Maduro. As numerous charges have been brought up against Venezuelan government officials for narco-trafficking, corruption, political oppression and assassination – this seemed pretty relevant. He never answered this question.
The last question – hidden in the above so that I could provide evidence that a former member of Venezuela’s Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Cultura was watching the Facebook Live video – was in regards the limits of acceptable behavior for those in America who wanted to ensure that Nicolas Maduro’s grip on the Venezuelan state apparatus continued. As the Embassy Protection Collectives in Washington D.C. and New York were engaged in an illegal occupation; as there is a history of Venezuela’s political associates harassing American politicians; as Venezuela assists in the publication of content promoting the idea that violence against American police officers and assassination of American politicians is justifiable – I wondered what sort of behavior was considered “off limits”. He never answered this question.
Grand Jury Investigation Using Only Publicly Available Evidence
I’m not terribly surprised that Dan Kovalik refused to answer any of these questions – on his public Facebook profile it is very evident that he identifies as a Nicaraguan revolutionary that would sooner face physical assault or incarceration than snitch on his comrades.
To me this seems yet another example of Orwellian Irony.
Why so? In The Communist Manifesto Karl Marx claims that true “communists disdain to conceal their views and aims”. And yet here we clearly see that when it comes to avowing who it is that funds and organizes the speaking engagements wherein those views are shared – a state which identifies itself with the Marxian tradition – deception and disavowal is the actual behavior practiced.
Alliance for Global Justice is Funded by Venezuelan Government and their Political Associates
Alliance for Global Justice admitting by silence that they are funded by Venezuela.
Blocking my profile and ignoring my questions have been a typical tactic of those involved with Venezuela’s network of artists, activists and intellectuals living and operating in the United States.
To my surprise, one of the operators of Alliance for Global Justice Facebook account responded to one of my comments after the talk had ended. I can’t say I’m terribly surprised, as I prefaced my inquiry with purposefully provocative comments.
Not to my surprise, the Alliance for Global Justice account operator responding to my prior inquiry did not answer the question as to the relationship between Venezuela and their organization. Nevertheless the existence of this thread allows me now to say definitively that the Alliance for Global Justice is funded in part by Nicolas Maduro and his network of associates.
How can I legitimately this claim despite the fact that they didn’t answer? Two reasons.
First, there is the fact that the political history of the organization and the activities it supports are aligned with Hugo Chavez’s Gramscian phantasy of Latin America united under Venezuela’s rule.
Secondly is the ancient legal precept Qui tacet consentire videtur, which translated in English to “He who is silent is taken to agree”.
Cultural Marxism as a Worldview Propounded by the Directors of Kultural Marxism
Understanding the origins of the Alliance for Global Justice’s funding of politically polarizing socialist views and events is important as it relates to destroying the anti-Semitic mythos of Cultural Marxism and verifying my claims of the existence of Venezuela’s Kultural Marxism operations.
Given the many anti-Semitic/anti-Israel views expressed and actions taken by the Venezuelan government along with the Cultural Marxist claim that George Soros uses the Alliance for Global Justice as part of some amorphous international Jewish conspiracy I would hypothesize that they are in part responsible for some of the content or promotion on the matter. Considering that this narrative also deflects from the much more sensible explanation that this is part of Venezuela’s effort to create a multi-polar world, it seems all the more true.
Screenshot from Abby Martin’s interview with Mark Crispin Miller, who wrote the forward to the recently republished book Propaganda by Edward Bernays.
One of Venezuela’s media assets that I’ve identified is Mark Crispin Miller.
He’s a professor of media studies at NYU and in addition to his work with TeleSUR English, he is interviewed in the documentary Orwell Rolls in his Grave.
Given this and the recurrent invocations of George Orwell throughout the literature associated with Kultural Marxism, I thought I would give a quick look through his website and see if he had anything to say that I might be able to add to my case study on Orwellian Irony. I was not disappointed!
I found this link to a re-posted article about NewsGuard, a company which is working with different news organizations to do the analytical work previously done by newspaper and magazine editors prior to the Internet Age.
What I find most ironic is that the article does not at all engage with the substance of what NewsGuard does – basically checks it’s credibility, reliability transparency by determining if the website, amongst other factors:
Regularly publishes false content
Gathers and presents information responsibility
Regularly corrects of clarifies errors
Handles the difference between news and opinion responsibly
Avoids deceptive headlines
Discloses ownership, financing and potential conflicts of interests
Clearly labels advertising
Published names of the authors
Instead of actually stating what is going on, the article Mark Crispin Miller linked to (by another “journalist” associated with the Kultural Marxism network, Whitney Webb) instead engaged in fear-mongering.
What’s even more ironic than this, in light of the fact that he’s a professor?
I left a post raising some of the issues that I see as missing from the article and pointed out a factual inconsistency.
Individuals like myself are genuinely concerned with ensuring that honesty, integrity, and professionalism are values that are upheld within the media and journalism industry and the claim of conspiracy that this is all a matter of “big Silicon Valley tech companies in league with the U.S. government” that are trying to “censor” people is absurd.
Mark Crispin Miller’s response?
Not to allow the comment to be posted.
He’s certainly welcome to make that choice as his website is his platform, but so too am I free to share a portion of my comments below to show the sweet, sweet Orwellian irony of a 9/11 Truther refusing to let counterfactual evidence onto his website.
A portion of the comment post left on Mark Crispin Miller’s website about NewsGuard.
Caleb Maupin is an ex-Occupy Wall Street activist, ex-Workers World Party member that previously worked for Russia’s RT news and is now an “independent socialist”.
I admit that I haven’t read much of his writing nor watched more than two of his YouTube videos as I neither felt intellectually enlargened nor amused by the. And yet I decided to jump onto his live YouTube chat when I read an announcement of it on Facebook as I wanted to, like I did with Ajamu Baraka and Abby Martin, inquire about any relationship to funding networks manag.ed by Venezuela
Amusingly enough within 3 minutes of my asking him a question about his relationship to funding and assistance networks for American aocialist activists that are connected to Venezuela’s state intelligence apparatus he ended the live broadcast.
That right. Only 25 minutes into a live chat that was supposed to be an hour long and he cancels it!
I was a little bummed as I was hoping to get a definitive response – but also not surprised.
The only information that I got came from the one “person” that shared Caleb Maupin’s announcement of his upcoming YouTube Talk.
I put “person” in quotes as a quick look at his profile, which is public, and a number of the qualities indicating coordinated inauthentic behavior connected to the Kultural Marxism network became evident. These are:
Links to TeleSUR
Links to Black Agenda Report
Praise of Julian Assange
Links to Counterpunch
Multiple links praising China
A link to a foreign language website (in this case Chinese) website
