Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley): Julian Assange is a journalist who’s been imprisoned for doing journalism on war crimes, by an empire that claims to defend journalists and oppose war crimes. Assange and his persecution expose the giant plot holes in every story the western power structure tells about itself. About its love of free speech and the free press. About its opposition to tyranny. About its wars and why it wages them. Assange exposes the empire’s true face.
You don't have to be a fan of Putin to agree that you are right about the West's demonization of Russia.
Back in the early1990s, we had a real opportunity to bring Russia - a nation awash with European cultural history (Pushkin, Tolstoy, Chekhov, Tchaikovsky etc etc etc) - into some sort beneficial relations with the West. They wanted that. And we blew it...... big time.
I have a number of friends and acquaintances who are journalists and other assorted media types (admin, exec, engineers, etc.). Frankly, I'm appalled at the, at best, relative apathy and, at worst, antipathy most of these folks feel towards Assange and what he's done, what he represents, etc. With my closest relationships among these people, I have tried to start dialogues with them -- not so much to get them to change their minds or positions (although that would be great), but to at least see and hear what they are feeling, and how they came to their particular view on this subject.
Admittedly, all of these journos and media types are younger than I am; most are in the throes of career development and, er, shall we say..."career preservation." I get it. However, I tell them that they ostensibly chose their profession to channel and speak truth to power, no matter what venue or outlet they speak or write for. Gobsmackingly, most disagree. They've fallen into the career trap of "I need to make a living."
If so many of my friends and acquaintances feel and act this way, I'm pretty sure the media industry, writ large, mirrors this aspect. Until and unless more of the folks in this profession stand up for what is right and take their blinders off, they not only won't see that they are figuratively cutting their own throats vis a vis journalistic integrity, but they're depriving the rest of us the necessary truths and perspectives free society needs from our town criers.
After 8 years of broken promises to implement Minsk, all the while shelling civilians and committing atrocities, the people of the Donbass implored Putin to protect them. The US has invoked the Responsibility to Protect doctrine to start wars, only the circumstances were provoked by the US in the first place. In the case of Donbass, Russia is accused of criminality for defending people who've been under attack, and with the certian knowledge that extremely serious attacks, both military as well as biological attacks were coming. Thus, West is doing exactly what Johnstone warns against. Sounding reasonable, when in fact ceding to actual Nazis their right to attack without reprisal.
The problem with the current climate debate is the nonsensical assertion that simply transitioning from a petroleum-powered industrial platform to an electric-powered industrial platform is the solution. It's essentially claiming that the highly toxic processes involved in producing electric everything (and the totally ignored disposal problem) is somehow ecologically safe as opposed to the alternative. It also ignores the other huge inputs to climate change such as big-ag (crops as well as cattle); military activity (no such thing as 'green' bombs); over-development and its asphalt effects on temperatures, and western lifestyles of overconsumption, etc. If these other climate change contributors were erased, petroleum emissions from motor vehicles would have a greatly reduced effect on climate. All of this is to say that switching to an electric-powered industrial platform isn't the panacea that even thinkers I admire, such as Caitlin, seem to fall for. It's the industrial platform itself, regardless of how it's powered, that is the problem. And it's the dependence -- of even the people who see that truth -- on the toxic industrial platform to survive and navigate their lives, that pushes it to its ultimate endpoint: gradual but imminent collapse. Choosing to drive off the proverbial cliff in an electric car still ends in disaster.
What's the difference between Leftists and Liberals?
The simplest distinction between liberals and leftists is that liberals support capitalism and want to make changes within it, while leftists vouch for an alternative economic system entirely. For example: where a liberal would theoretically support the inclusion of gay people into the U.S. military, a leftist might oppose the military in general, believing the U.S. military to be a harbinger of death and therefore deplorable no matter which marginalized groups are represented in its ranks. Where a liberal would support laws heavily limiting civilian gun ownership, a leftist might support the arming of the masses, and particularly of the marginalized groups of society, because the disarming of those groups has historically allowed for violent government suppression.
It is helpful to consider the idea of reform versus revolution; a liberal believes that the system is overall redeemable if it is reformed through laws and social change, while a leftist believes that the system itself is the problem and only a revolutionary restructuring of that system would truly do any good.
"The mainstream position in the west is that Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom"
Not quite. The mainstream propaganda (lie) is that Putin is an authoritarian dictator seeking to restore the Soviet Union via military conquest of Ukraine and then the rest of eastern Europe.
Re "the biosphere is showing us many, many other signs of looming collapse." - don't ignore or forget that there are many possible causes for this. This paragraph is in the same article as you wrote about the Overton window. The Overton window of the corporate media tells us that this is due to global warming caused by CO2 levels. Where did the phrase "97% of scientists" believe this? This came from a literature review of scientists who have published on climate change. It's a false claim that 90% of all scientists believe that global warming is caused by CO2 levels and that this is catastrophic for the planet.
Other contributors: 1) all the toxic chemicals that have been dumped into our environment for decades now? These criminals polluting our environment have not been jailed, and that is contributing to habitat collapse. 2) geoengineering, look up the documentary "the dimming" to find out more. 3) weather manipulation and whether warfare has been developed since at least the 50s. How much is it being used today? We have no idea. But this is one of the most powerful technologies for war and for good. Don't be naive and think that nations have not developed this capacity and are using it. 4) other types of technologies affecting weather in the habitat. If HAARP can heat and bend the planet's ionosphere, how else is this technology and others like it affecting our planet?
Caitlins articles are fascinating for the GCHQ headquartered in Cheltenham England to read.Its where the 5 Eyes secret surveillance system employing over 20,000 people and financed by the taxpayers to ruin , interfere, destroy any narrative which isn’t keeping Australia, Canada, New Zealand USA, England safe from its evil citizens.
Look no further for its existence than in the comments here with
“ Caitlins 06565 @gmail.com Send me a mail privately”
Now I receive two newsletters from Caitlin!
One is the voice of evil in a masquerade costume and wants you to update your private information which Caitlin will never do.
The humanness they espouse in wanting for all of us to be safe from disinformation is hard to swallow as they devour their own mother, democracy with its freedom to express thoughts.
What they do is illegal but their hunger to devour is overpowering.
How can we made safe from this monster infecting like a lethal virus our people?
"Assange is the greatest journalist who has ever lived."
No truer statement ever made. He has to be--or else why are they trying so hard to keep him silenced and to silence anyone who acts similarly?
"The only people who hate leftists more than rightists do are liberals, which is a bit funny because rightists think leftists and liberals are the same."
I hate being labeled as a "liberal" or a "neoliberal"! I just politely correct people now and say, "No, I'm just your garden variety eco-socialist. You're free to call me a communist if you like, but never ever confuse me with being a neolib. I don't like being insulted. Thank you."
I am puzzled why serious attorneys well practiced on First Amendment issues don't go after any/every MSM that made much hay, not to mention $$$, on Wikileaks revelations. Is there any conceivable reason why THEY should not be up on espionage charges for using Julian's work?
I reckon Caitlin has got this one wrong. In her closing statement she advocates as much force as is needed to fix the problem. And that is fine and correct if you are a policeman needing more force simply call for reinforcements . Bur here we are talking of the most heavily armed system in the world which would not hesitate to use large nuclear weapons if it became necessary, I would love to see the American Empire consigned to the dustbin of history. But it will have to nonviolent massive opposition. And if that doesn't work sadly we will all soon be in the dustbin if history .Except there will be no dustbin and no history
Assange exposes the face of the West, and it's a fascist face. Our support of Ukraine , even though we know it's a loser, proves that beyond any doubt. John Pilger fills in a lot of details in his essay: the Coming War: Speak Up, Now. He cites a Banderist pamphlet that proclaimed to Ukrainian Jews: 'We will lay your heads at Hitlers's feet'. This is the Banderist legacy, still highly visible and honoured in Ukraine today, that we support in our recognition and support for Zelensky, the unfortunate captive of the Azov element. The element Russia would not tolerate in its original "operation ". But the West for reasons of state and private profit, ignores this element, and turned a limited and clear-cut operation into an all-out war, with Ukraine the big present loser, and with residual effects of mindless Russophobia about to turn Europe into a pauper state. We will be lucky to escape with our lives before this insanity of ecstatic hatred and misplaced fears ends.
You don't have to be a fan of Putin to agree that you are right about the West's demonization of Russia.
Back in the early1990s, we had a real opportunity to bring Russia - a nation awash with European cultural history (Pushkin, Tolstoy, Chekhov, Tchaikovsky etc etc etc) - into some sort beneficial relations with the West. They wanted that. And we blew it...... big time.
Russia is not our enemy!
I have a number of friends and acquaintances who are journalists and other assorted media types (admin, exec, engineers, etc.). Frankly, I'm appalled at the, at best, relative apathy and, at worst, antipathy most of these folks feel towards Assange and what he's done, what he represents, etc. With my closest relationships among these people, I have tried to start dialogues with them -- not so much to get them to change their minds or positions (although that would be great), but to at least see and hear what they are feeling, and how they came to their particular view on this subject.
Admittedly, all of these journos and media types are younger than I am; most are in the throes of career development and, er, shall we say..."career preservation." I get it. However, I tell them that they ostensibly chose their profession to channel and speak truth to power, no matter what venue or outlet they speak or write for. Gobsmackingly, most disagree. They've fallen into the career trap of "I need to make a living."
If so many of my friends and acquaintances feel and act this way, I'm pretty sure the media industry, writ large, mirrors this aspect. Until and unless more of the folks in this profession stand up for what is right and take their blinders off, they not only won't see that they are figuratively cutting their own throats vis a vis journalistic integrity, but they're depriving the rest of us the necessary truths and perspectives free society needs from our town criers.
After 8 years of broken promises to implement Minsk, all the while shelling civilians and committing atrocities, the people of the Donbass implored Putin to protect them. The US has invoked the Responsibility to Protect doctrine to start wars, only the circumstances were provoked by the US in the first place. In the case of Donbass, Russia is accused of criminality for defending people who've been under attack, and with the certian knowledge that extremely serious attacks, both military as well as biological attacks were coming. Thus, West is doing exactly what Johnstone warns against. Sounding reasonable, when in fact ceding to actual Nazis their right to attack without reprisal.
For some historical perspective on Russia and Ukraine, listen to RFK Jr. interview portion with Lex Fridman. https://youtu.be/SzjEgaquNWc
And just to note, Bobby has said he will pardon Assange and Snowden Day One, and will work to negotiate a peace settlement between Ukraine and Russia.
The problem with the current climate debate is the nonsensical assertion that simply transitioning from a petroleum-powered industrial platform to an electric-powered industrial platform is the solution. It's essentially claiming that the highly toxic processes involved in producing electric everything (and the totally ignored disposal problem) is somehow ecologically safe as opposed to the alternative. It also ignores the other huge inputs to climate change such as big-ag (crops as well as cattle); military activity (no such thing as 'green' bombs); over-development and its asphalt effects on temperatures, and western lifestyles of overconsumption, etc. If these other climate change contributors were erased, petroleum emissions from motor vehicles would have a greatly reduced effect on climate. All of this is to say that switching to an electric-powered industrial platform isn't the panacea that even thinkers I admire, such as Caitlin, seem to fall for. It's the industrial platform itself, regardless of how it's powered, that is the problem. And it's the dependence -- of even the people who see that truth -- on the toxic industrial platform to survive and navigate their lives, that pushes it to its ultimate endpoint: gradual but imminent collapse. Choosing to drive off the proverbial cliff in an electric car still ends in disaster.
What's the difference between Leftists and Liberals?
The simplest distinction between liberals and leftists is that liberals support capitalism and want to make changes within it, while leftists vouch for an alternative economic system entirely. For example: where a liberal would theoretically support the inclusion of gay people into the U.S. military, a leftist might oppose the military in general, believing the U.S. military to be a harbinger of death and therefore deplorable no matter which marginalized groups are represented in its ranks. Where a liberal would support laws heavily limiting civilian gun ownership, a leftist might support the arming of the masses, and particularly of the marginalized groups of society, because the disarming of those groups has historically allowed for violent government suppression.
It is helpful to consider the idea of reform versus revolution; a liberal believes that the system is overall redeemable if it is reformed through laws and social change, while a leftist believes that the system itself is the problem and only a revolutionary restructuring of that system would truly do any good.
As always... BRILLIANT WRITING, Caitlin Johnstone!
Thank you Caitlin🙏
"The mainstream position in the west is that Putin invaded Ukraine solely because he is evil and hates freedom"
Not quite. The mainstream propaganda (lie) is that Putin is an authoritarian dictator seeking to restore the Soviet Union via military conquest of Ukraine and then the rest of eastern Europe.
Re "the biosphere is showing us many, many other signs of looming collapse." - don't ignore or forget that there are many possible causes for this. This paragraph is in the same article as you wrote about the Overton window. The Overton window of the corporate media tells us that this is due to global warming caused by CO2 levels. Where did the phrase "97% of scientists" believe this? This came from a literature review of scientists who have published on climate change. It's a false claim that 90% of all scientists believe that global warming is caused by CO2 levels and that this is catastrophic for the planet.
Other contributors: 1) all the toxic chemicals that have been dumped into our environment for decades now? These criminals polluting our environment have not been jailed, and that is contributing to habitat collapse. 2) geoengineering, look up the documentary "the dimming" to find out more. 3) weather manipulation and whether warfare has been developed since at least the 50s. How much is it being used today? We have no idea. But this is one of the most powerful technologies for war and for good. Don't be naive and think that nations have not developed this capacity and are using it. 4) other types of technologies affecting weather in the habitat. If HAARP can heat and bend the planet's ionosphere, how else is this technology and others like it affecting our planet?
Caitlins articles are fascinating for the GCHQ headquartered in Cheltenham England to read.Its where the 5 Eyes secret surveillance system employing over 20,000 people and financed by the taxpayers to ruin , interfere, destroy any narrative which isn’t keeping Australia, Canada, New Zealand USA, England safe from its evil citizens.
Look no further for its existence than in the comments here with
“ Caitlins 06565 @gmail.com Send me a mail privately”
Now I receive two newsletters from Caitlin!
One is the voice of evil in a masquerade costume and wants you to update your private information which Caitlin will never do.
The humanness they espouse in wanting for all of us to be safe from disinformation is hard to swallow as they devour their own mother, democracy with its freedom to express thoughts.
What they do is illegal but their hunger to devour is overpowering.
How can we made safe from this monster infecting like a lethal virus our people?
"Assange is the greatest journalist who has ever lived."
No truer statement ever made. He has to be--or else why are they trying so hard to keep him silenced and to silence anyone who acts similarly?
"The only people who hate leftists more than rightists do are liberals, which is a bit funny because rightists think leftists and liberals are the same."
I hate being labeled as a "liberal" or a "neoliberal"! I just politely correct people now and say, "No, I'm just your garden variety eco-socialist. You're free to call me a communist if you like, but never ever confuse me with being a neolib. I don't like being insulted. Thank you."
I am puzzled why serious attorneys well practiced on First Amendment issues don't go after any/every MSM that made much hay, not to mention $$$, on Wikileaks revelations. Is there any conceivable reason why THEY should not be up on espionage charges for using Julian's work?
I reckon Caitlin has got this one wrong. In her closing statement she advocates as much force as is needed to fix the problem. And that is fine and correct if you are a policeman needing more force simply call for reinforcements . Bur here we are talking of the most heavily armed system in the world which would not hesitate to use large nuclear weapons if it became necessary, I would love to see the American Empire consigned to the dustbin of history. But it will have to nonviolent massive opposition. And if that doesn't work sadly we will all soon be in the dustbin if history .Except there will be no dustbin and no history
Assange exposes the face of the West, and it's a fascist face. Our support of Ukraine , even though we know it's a loser, proves that beyond any doubt. John Pilger fills in a lot of details in his essay: the Coming War: Speak Up, Now. He cites a Banderist pamphlet that proclaimed to Ukrainian Jews: 'We will lay your heads at Hitlers's feet'. This is the Banderist legacy, still highly visible and honoured in Ukraine today, that we support in our recognition and support for Zelensky, the unfortunate captive of the Azov element. The element Russia would not tolerate in its original "operation ". But the West for reasons of state and private profit, ignores this element, and turned a limited and clear-cut operation into an all-out war, with Ukraine the big present loser, and with residual effects of mindless Russophobia about to turn Europe into a pauper state. We will be lucky to escape with our lives before this insanity of ecstatic hatred and misplaced fears ends.
w