Distraction is the means of Corporatism's power-holding — examples
© 2020 Peter Free
21 September 2020
Yesterday, I mentioned creating "deja vu" as a public control method
Today, we return to the subject, but more broadly.
Do you wonder why nothing substantive favorably changes in the United States — ever?
Could it be that Robber Baron Elites don't want change?
(Of course.)
And could it be that they assert their societal power by distracting the Public from things that actually do matter (lots) with other issues that seem important, but are much less so?
This week . . .
. . . I stumbled across three analyses of this deja-vu-forever issue that are well done.
They range from the obvious to the noticeably less so. All subtly (or overtly) emphasize the political utility of the Oligarchy's distraction methods:
W. J. Astore, RIP RBG, Advantage GOP, BracingViews.com (19 September 2020)
Essentially pointing out that characteristically cowardly Democrats are so oligarchically oriented themselves, that they do not substantively object to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's choice of neolithically oriented judges.
The Hill, Saagar Enjeti: How The Elites RIGGED Supreme Court Politics To Cover Their Corporate Scam, YouTube (21 September 2020)
Enjeti argues that Congress has shunted its legislative, issue-deciding duties over to the Supreme Court. This legislation by the Judiciary forces the public to focus only on "social" issues like abortion and guns — which determine a good portion of the public's core identities — as those will be impacted by the appointment of specific Supreme Court justices.
Congress escapes responsibility for anything, insofar as its members continue to support whichever Supreme Court candidate the public has been forced into choosing. It's a genuinely creative way to combine professional dishonor with institutional sloth.
The societal result?
Lots of turmoil, going nowhere. Exactly as our plundering Plutocracy wishes.
Mike Whitney, BLM's War on the Deplorables, Unz Review (19 September 2020)
Whitney points out the Black Lives Matter and possibly Antifa require funding from somewhere, in order to carry out the mass activities that they've been doing.
He follows this money (based on secondary sources). Then, he explains why the money is being funneled as it is.
His is a clever conspiracy theory. It actually fits the facts, insofar as we know or suspect them to be.
One need not agree with the specifics of Whitney's analysis to see that what he proposes would be both workable and entirely characteristic of oligarchical control methods.
The moral? — We return to the point that Caitlin Johnstone and I repeatedly emphasize . . .
If we do not look for the parasitizing puppet strings attached to our psyches, we are continually played.