This Substack is why I am a paid subscriber. While many may consider me right wing, I refuse to be labeled. Your description of the no-center pipeline is excellent analysis and why we ARE individuals. By that, I mean liberal, conservative, or unlabeled, we are individual sentient parties and need to continue to be free to associate our thoughts and opinions apart from categories.
I appreciate your individuality, and am particularly fond of your passion for free speech and thinking. Keep up the great work and speak more loudly, as required, to call out those who would censor our speech and thoughts!!!
I'm a 66 yo conservative who's never voted for a Dem Presidential candidate.
That was going to change in 2016 when Bernie Sanders presented as the 'anti DC' candidate. I paid no attention to Trump as I thought he was clown who didn't stand a chance of making it through the primaries.
Then, two things happened'
Hillary rigged the primaries and screwed Bernie (I think it says something about Bernie's character that he rolled over and played nice about it)
Trump was the Republican candidate.
I voted for Trump because Hillary is evil incarnate, and he became, imho, the best President of my life. I overlooked his personality flaws and focused on his policies, which were spot on,
So what's really going on here? We tend to depict politics as a clash of ideologies. Democrats vs. Republicans or the right vs. the left. But is that really what the political class is focused on? Those who have ever managed a glimpse inside the beast that is politics know that first and foremost, money is the driving wheel. The hand in glove relationship between a myriad of special interests and elected government provides the billions of dollars necessary to maintain the political status quo. Peddling influence has been molded into fine art by both political parties.
The political enterprise has done a masterful job of enlisting law enforcement and the US Intelligence apparatus to identify and castigate those "extremists" who dare oppose the mainstream. And let's not forget the doting press who proliferate the false dichotomy of partisan politics while marginalizing those who attempt to expose the big, long con. Mainstream politics, associated government and the press is nothing more than a giant money machine. We the people are their victims.
Oh the irony. Just incredible. Let’s not forget who provided the intellectual inspiration for the “Trump is the single most dangerous person” narrative, and the “GOP party is so far right they are off the chart” narrative: NOAM CHOMSKY. Glenn do you think it is time to question Chomsky’s intellectual honesty? I used to fall for him. But then I would hear clips of him talking on matters I happen to know quite a bit about and I have come to realize he is a charleton. A garden variety Marxist who rightly criticizes the US security state but whose real passion is to enslave everyone into Marxism under the false cloak of “libertarianism.”
The Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) has become a tool of corporate medicine and the Establishment. It has increased the paperwork required of physicians to the extent that many physicians have left private practice, a vacuum filled by corporations. It has established treatment protocols and used its available sticks (denial of reimbursement for therapies that work) and carrots (reimbursement for therapies that don't work like Remdesevir and ventilators) to entice hospitals to shun effective treatment and adopt deadly protocols for Covid-19. This has resulted in doctors like Paul Marik being denied hospital privileges as Sentara has done.
Until that is corrected, or the concept of M4All treatment protocols is turned over to the states or local governments, I can no longer support M4All.
The key is that politicians become wealthy without doing anything except “public service”. And our definition of “bribe” simply doesn’t cover the creative ways money flows from stakeholders to politicians.
"What matters to them, what they want is someone who will reject and wage war against the neoliberal and neoconservative order that has dominated Washington for decades at their expense. And if you don't understand this about American or Western politics -- and these establishment journalists, by definition, don't -- then you understand nothing about American politics.": You 'nailed it' Glenn. Why else would a lifelong compassionate conservative (yes, we DO exist) like me abandon the MSM and pay for unbiased reporting . . . when I could receive all of the MSM drivel/lies I might (and don't) want for free? Unknowingly, both the so-called "left" and "right" have separately been fighting this battle against the entrenched bureaucracy (a/k/a The Deep State) for decades. The fact that it has finally been realized that we just might be more effective in moving for true change by working together literally scares the cr*p out of the elites. And, well it should. We might just pull it off this time. In closing, I cannot help but note that it was none other than former President Eisenhauer who warned the American people to beware of the MIC and the disaster he presciently saw could, and has, come to be if it was not reigned in.
Glenn pointed out: "What's amazing is that someone was willing to admit, in public, that that's how they think. But credit to Sam Harris, I suppose, for his candor in admitting all of that. "
Well, let's take a closer look what credit is due Sam Harris and his brethren ... A clear majority of the power-wielders-and-exercisers of the current elite have some very serious cultural dysfunctions, based on several indefensible principles, among them:
(1) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim that the current state-of-the-art in any science (of all kinds, natural and social) is, somehow, always at its "End of History", no matter that (when it is permitted to function) science progresses nonetheless. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(2) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim they are always in full, sole, and thus unimpeachable possession of all this End-of-History knowledge. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(3) Most importantly, they privately believe that possession of intelligence and knowledge and busy-ness make one not only functionally superior, but *morally* superior as well. They conflate functionality with morality, and thus are perplexed at the supposed conundrum of one-person, one-vote for everyone in the supposedly sophisticated West. For all their fetishizing diversity, they cannot imagine how any other state of living, and of mind, is tolerable but their own. "We need to 'Look like America'!! (Just make sure to think like Cambridge.)" That's how they can, and do, use us "lessers" as fertilizer and cannon fodder with insouciance, and lie to us as easily and unconsciously as breathing. So while they scream on and on about democracy, they are instead beyond contemptuous of it, and have absolutely no heartburn over the hypocrisy. Why, they argue in private (and lately, increasingly, sloppily, in public -- Hello, Sam Harris!), should they reason with cockroaches?
This situation is completely analogous to the clueless arrogance and ignorance that the Western world / white man had toward the rest of the world c. 1900, that today's elite loves to lecture us on and on about as if it were a living breathing problem, even though it is now 90-99% history. *Completely* analogous.
The 'horseshoe theory' is how this flattening is invoked in Britain. It's a favourite of midwits who favour technocracy as a means of controlling pesky humans who get uppity about being crushed by neoliberalism. They seem to believe it, too. What flows from this is an ambient discrediting of 'populism' as a word. There has to be a way to delegitimise concerns about growing poverty and wealth gaps and 'populist' is a way to dismiss them, in favour of the status quo. Under which they are all comfortable.
Glen’s point about the Democratic Party embodying some of the elements of fascia governments is interesting. My point here is not to call Democrats fascist, but I’m wondering if anyone has given thought or has recollections of using the same arbitrary (as Niccolo Soldo pointed out, fascist has no real definition) language to attack the party using it. I.e. what would the impact be if the right began to call the left fascists? Would it work to eliminate the ability to use it as an attack?
The role of journalists should be adversarial to the government, and both parties in America. Aren't the Twitter Files a perfect example of that? Unfortunately, that is not how it works. Despite what you are suggesting, there is a continuum in politics of left versus right - like neocons; for example, which describes a particular foreign policy.
While a political continuum certainly can be blurred at times, it nonetheless serves to differentiate broad viewpoints. That's undeniable - and it is simply a fact that most of today's journalists have joined one side or the other which is why there is essentially a blackout of the Twitter files by the "left". Modern journalism is advocacy journalism at its worst. Adversarial journalism - which is much closer to old school "objective writing" - can restore journalism to its rightful role as the Fourth Branch of Government.
Glenn,
This Substack is why I am a paid subscriber. While many may consider me right wing, I refuse to be labeled. Your description of the no-center pipeline is excellent analysis and why we ARE individuals. By that, I mean liberal, conservative, or unlabeled, we are individual sentient parties and need to continue to be free to associate our thoughts and opinions apart from categories.
I appreciate your individuality, and am particularly fond of your passion for free speech and thinking. Keep up the great work and speak more loudly, as required, to call out those who would censor our speech and thoughts!!!
I'm a 66 yo conservative who's never voted for a Dem Presidential candidate.
That was going to change in 2016 when Bernie Sanders presented as the 'anti DC' candidate. I paid no attention to Trump as I thought he was clown who didn't stand a chance of making it through the primaries.
Then, two things happened'
Hillary rigged the primaries and screwed Bernie (I think it says something about Bernie's character that he rolled over and played nice about it)
Trump was the Republican candidate.
I voted for Trump because Hillary is evil incarnate, and he became, imho, the best President of my life. I overlooked his personality flaws and focused on his policies, which were spot on,
So what's really going on here? We tend to depict politics as a clash of ideologies. Democrats vs. Republicans or the right vs. the left. But is that really what the political class is focused on? Those who have ever managed a glimpse inside the beast that is politics know that first and foremost, money is the driving wheel. The hand in glove relationship between a myriad of special interests and elected government provides the billions of dollars necessary to maintain the political status quo. Peddling influence has been molded into fine art by both political parties.
The political enterprise has done a masterful job of enlisting law enforcement and the US Intelligence apparatus to identify and castigate those "extremists" who dare oppose the mainstream. And let's not forget the doting press who proliferate the false dichotomy of partisan politics while marginalizing those who attempt to expose the big, long con. Mainstream politics, associated government and the press is nothing more than a giant money machine. We the people are their victims.
Oh the irony. Just incredible. Let’s not forget who provided the intellectual inspiration for the “Trump is the single most dangerous person” narrative, and the “GOP party is so far right they are off the chart” narrative: NOAM CHOMSKY. Glenn do you think it is time to question Chomsky’s intellectual honesty? I used to fall for him. But then I would hear clips of him talking on matters I happen to know quite a bit about and I have come to realize he is a charleton. A garden variety Marxist who rightly criticizes the US security state but whose real passion is to enslave everyone into Marxism under the false cloak of “libertarianism.”
The Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) has become a tool of corporate medicine and the Establishment. It has increased the paperwork required of physicians to the extent that many physicians have left private practice, a vacuum filled by corporations. It has established treatment protocols and used its available sticks (denial of reimbursement for therapies that work) and carrots (reimbursement for therapies that don't work like Remdesevir and ventilators) to entice hospitals to shun effective treatment and adopt deadly protocols for Covid-19. This has resulted in doctors like Paul Marik being denied hospital privileges as Sentara has done.
Until that is corrected, or the concept of M4All treatment protocols is turned over to the states or local governments, I can no longer support M4All.
The key is that politicians become wealthy without doing anything except “public service”. And our definition of “bribe” simply doesn’t cover the creative ways money flows from stakeholders to politicians.
Thanks for the transcript, as always!
I must say that when reading Glenn’s transcripts it’s like reading something that was carefully thought out word for word...
...rather than having some stream of thought thrown into a live report
"What matters to them, what they want is someone who will reject and wage war against the neoliberal and neoconservative order that has dominated Washington for decades at their expense. And if you don't understand this about American or Western politics -- and these establishment journalists, by definition, don't -- then you understand nothing about American politics.": You 'nailed it' Glenn. Why else would a lifelong compassionate conservative (yes, we DO exist) like me abandon the MSM and pay for unbiased reporting . . . when I could receive all of the MSM drivel/lies I might (and don't) want for free? Unknowingly, both the so-called "left" and "right" have separately been fighting this battle against the entrenched bureaucracy (a/k/a The Deep State) for decades. The fact that it has finally been realized that we just might be more effective in moving for true change by working together literally scares the cr*p out of the elites. And, well it should. We might just pull it off this time. In closing, I cannot help but note that it was none other than former President Eisenhauer who warned the American people to beware of the MIC and the disaster he presciently saw could, and has, come to be if it was not reigned in.
Glenn pointed out: "What's amazing is that someone was willing to admit, in public, that that's how they think. But credit to Sam Harris, I suppose, for his candor in admitting all of that. "
Well, let's take a closer look what credit is due Sam Harris and his brethren ... A clear majority of the power-wielders-and-exercisers of the current elite have some very serious cultural dysfunctions, based on several indefensible principles, among them:
(1) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim that the current state-of-the-art in any science (of all kinds, natural and social) is, somehow, always at its "End of History", no matter that (when it is permitted to function) science progresses nonetheless. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(2) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim they are always in full, sole, and thus unimpeachable possession of all this End-of-History knowledge. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(3) Most importantly, they privately believe that possession of intelligence and knowledge and busy-ness make one not only functionally superior, but *morally* superior as well. They conflate functionality with morality, and thus are perplexed at the supposed conundrum of one-person, one-vote for everyone in the supposedly sophisticated West. For all their fetishizing diversity, they cannot imagine how any other state of living, and of mind, is tolerable but their own. "We need to 'Look like America'!! (Just make sure to think like Cambridge.)" That's how they can, and do, use us "lessers" as fertilizer and cannon fodder with insouciance, and lie to us as easily and unconsciously as breathing. So while they scream on and on about democracy, they are instead beyond contemptuous of it, and have absolutely no heartburn over the hypocrisy. Why, they argue in private (and lately, increasingly, sloppily, in public -- Hello, Sam Harris!), should they reason with cockroaches?
This situation is completely analogous to the clueless arrogance and ignorance that the Western world / white man had toward the rest of the world c. 1900, that today's elite loves to lecture us on and on about as if it were a living breathing problem, even though it is now 90-99% history. *Completely* analogous.
You are a Force for good, Glenn Greenwald. I like your studio and video format teaser to rumble. You look and sound very sharp!
Excellent
I can’t find any of your opinions in this article for which I disagree. This was red meat for an anti republicrat of which I proudly am.
The 'horseshoe theory' is how this flattening is invoked in Britain. It's a favourite of midwits who favour technocracy as a means of controlling pesky humans who get uppity about being crushed by neoliberalism. They seem to believe it, too. What flows from this is an ambient discrediting of 'populism' as a word. There has to be a way to delegitimise concerns about growing poverty and wealth gaps and 'populist' is a way to dismiss them, in favour of the status quo. Under which they are all comfortable.
Glen’s point about the Democratic Party embodying some of the elements of fascia governments is interesting. My point here is not to call Democrats fascist, but I’m wondering if anyone has given thought or has recollections of using the same arbitrary (as Niccolo Soldo pointed out, fascist has no real definition) language to attack the party using it. I.e. what would the impact be if the right began to call the left fascists? Would it work to eliminate the ability to use it as an attack?
Mr. Greenwald
The role of journalists should be adversarial to the government, and both parties in America. Aren't the Twitter Files a perfect example of that? Unfortunately, that is not how it works. Despite what you are suggesting, there is a continuum in politics of left versus right - like neocons; for example, which describes a particular foreign policy.
While a political continuum certainly can be blurred at times, it nonetheless serves to differentiate broad viewpoints. That's undeniable - and it is simply a fact that most of today's journalists have joined one side or the other which is why there is essentially a blackout of the Twitter files by the "left". Modern journalism is advocacy journalism at its worst. Adversarial journalism - which is much closer to old school "objective writing" - can restore journalism to its rightful role as the Fourth Branch of Government.