The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

[liminalOyster]

“I f‑‑‑ing crashed!” Manning, a current candidate for a Maryland U.S. Senate seat, told a New York Observer reporter at the coat check. Later in the night, Manning posted her own tweet acknowledging she had “crashed the fascist/white supremacist hate brigade party,” she wrote, adding: “learned in prison that the best way to confront your enemies is face-to-face in their space.”

......

The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald also chimed in, arguing that “Questioning her is 100% valid.” But Greenwald also pointed out that “someone w/her history — she went to prison for 7 years to expose US war crimes, withstood abuse the UN said was ‘inhumane,’ and then defended trans rights *while in a military prison* — deserves the benefit of the doubt that she’s not a fascist.”

On Monday, Manning again addressed the Saturday night event, writing on Twitter that “fascists/alt-right deserve no platform” and that she “took up an opportunity to gather intel on them b/c the ideology they peddle threatens everyone.” According to the Guardian, Manning also reached out to Women’s March organizer Linda Sarsour to apologize for her “very bad judgment.” Buzzfeed’s Joe Bernstein reported Manning “was on the verge of tears” when she expressed her regret to Sarsour.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... -far-left/

[seemslikeadream]

of course she is not a fascist...I don't need Greenwald to inform me of that....but "confront your enemies is face-to-face in their space” and that being a party doesn't seem to be the best venue for confrontation...it was just bad judgement

btw could someone inform me on what news Greenwald has broke lately ..I guess I missed it

[liminalOyster]

Cassandra Fairbanks, one of those mentioned in the piece you quoted, does now support Trump but was also a very adept Ferguson live-streamer and strong Bernie supporter. Gavin McInness is a clownish reactionary way out of his league but also loves to wax rhapsodic about Steve Ignorant and Penny Rimbaud. Neither impress me as great minds. I don't share their politics. But they do represent a certain longitudinal anchoring more in libertarianism (if an admittedly more authoritarian variant) than either the right's racialized nationalism or the left's social justice.

[American Dream]

You should me more (undogmatic) anarchists and libertarian socialists. I know there are shallow ones in the mix in North America but there are also good ones.

[liminalOyster]

You should me more (undogmatic) anarchists and libertarian socialists. I know there are shallow ones in the mix in North America but there are also good ones.

Yes, there are some I like quite a bit. This is good, I think you'd enjoy his work if you have not seen it:

In the United States, [“communitarianism”] usually has a relatively conservative connotation, and is juxtaposed to liberalism in mainstream political thought. In South Asia and Britain, it’s a more popularized term, often with pejorative undertones, and is linked to strong ethnic and religious identification and group conflicts. As I, and many others, use it, it is an affirmation of the age-old tradition of free, self-determining community. This might also be termed “communism,” and often has been, though unfortunately this term has been co-opted by the forces of domination, just as the word “libertarian” has.

Nevertheless, I like to pose the seemingly paradoxical question: “Why is communism so good in practice, but it never seems to work in theory?” What most people think of as “communism” has not been communism at all, but rather a form of oppressive state capitalism or techno-bureaucratic despotism, justified through an ideology (a theory that doesn’t work) that disguises it as “communism.” Such a system has often been very effective as a form of domination, but not as a free, just or humane form of social organization. We might call it “authoritarian communism,” but in reality, not only is it not really communism, it is in a very precise sense a form of anti-communism, the negation of communal autonomy. Historically, it has always feared real communities, taken power away from them, and done its best to crush or dissolve them.

From The Impossible Community: An Interview With John P. Clark on Grassroots Revolution

[American Dream]

John P. Clark seems interesting and good. I've not really studied his work at all. I also like the general thrust of this:

"I have been struck for a long time by the contrast between the largeness of the aims of Anarchism — the greatest possible realization of freedom and well-being for all — and the narrowness, so to speak, of the economic program of Anarchism, be it Individualist or Communist. I am inclined to think that the feeling of the inadequacy of this economic basis — exclusive Communism or exclusive Individualism, according to the school — hinders people from acquiring practical confidence in Anarchism, the general aims of which appeal as a beautiful ideal to many. I feel myself that neither Communism nor Individualism, if it became the sole economic form, would realize freedom, which always demands a choice of ways, a plurality of possibilities.

I know that Communists, when asked pointedly, will say that they should have no objection to Individualists who wished to live in their own way without creating new monopolies or authority, and vice versa. But this is seldom said in a really open and friendly way; both sections are far too much convinced that freedom is only possible if their particular scheme is carried out. I quite admit that there are Communists and Individualists to whom their respective doctrines, and these alone, give complete satisfaction and leave no problem unsolved (in their opinion); these would not be interfered with, in any case, in their lifelong constancy to one economic ideal. But they must not imagine that all people are constituted after their model and likely to come round to their views or remain “unreclaimed” adversaries on whom no sympathy is to be wasted. Let them but look on real life, which is bearable at all only by being varied and differentiated, in spite of all official uniformity. We all see the survivals of earlier Communism, the manifold workings of present-day solidarity, from which new forms of future Communism may develop — all this in the teeth of the cut-throat capitalist Individualism which predominates. But this miserable bourgeois Individualism, if it created a desire for solidarity, leading to Communism, certainly also created a desire for a genuine, free, unselfish Individualism, where freedom of action would no longer be misused to crush the weaker and to form monopolies, as to-day.

Neither Communism nor Individualism will ever disappear; and if by some mass action the foundations of some rough form of Communism were laid, Individualism would grow stronger than ever in opposition to this. Whenever a uniform system prevails, Anarchists, if they have their ideas at heart, will go ahead of it and never permit themselves to become fossilised upholders of a given system, be it that of the purest Communism.

Will they, then, be always dissatisfied, always struggling, never enjoying rest? They might feel at ease in a state of society where all economic possibilities had full scope, and then their energy might be applied to peaceful emulation and no longer to continuous struggle and demolition. This desirable state of things could be prepared from now, if it were once for all frankly understood among Anarchists that both Communism and Individualism are equally important, equally permanent; and that the exclusive predominance of either of them would be the greatest misfortune that could befall mankind. From isolation we take refuge in solidarity, from too much society we seek relief in isolation: both solidarity and isolation are, each at the right moment, freedom and help to us. All human life vibrates between these two poles in endless varieties of oscillations."

— Max Nettlau, Anarchism: Communist or Individualist? Both

[Jerky]

About Greenwald: thing is, Rachal Maddow IS an utterly scripted, intellectually dishonest, partisan hack.

That's a load of purest honking cant, Elvis. Sound and fury, signifying less than nothing. Unless, that is, you'd care to point to some of Maddow's reportage that you believe qualifies as "utterly scripted, intellectually dishonest, partisan hackery"? It needn't be all three. Just one or two will suffice.

The fact that's the lead of the article tells me all I need to know. Nauseating hit job on progressives, lots of liberals will swallow it whole and shuffle back onto the reservation.

If you think GG is a "progressive", well... you haven't been paying much attention to the lad. In the meantime, here's an incomplete list of the awards bestowed to Maddow in recent years for her journalistic work, most of it relating to actual, real world, relevant progressive causes:

2017 Emmy Award in the Outstanding News Discussion & Analysis category for The Rachel Maddow Show story "An American Disaster: The Crisis in Flint".
2011 Emmy Award in the Outstanding News Discussion & Analysis category for The Rachel Maddow Show segments "Good Morning Landlocked Central Asia!".
Maddow won a Gracie Award in 2009, presented by the American Women in Radio and Television.
In 2009, Maddow was nominated for GLAAD's 20th Annual Media Awards for a segment of her MSNBC show, "Rick Warren, Change To Believe In?", in the Outstanding TV Journalism Segment category.
In 1994, Maddow was an Honorable Mention in the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity Prize in Ethics.
In June 2009, Maddow's MSNBC show was the only cable news show nominated for a Television Critics Association award in the Outstanding Achievement in News and Information category.
In March 2010, Maddow won at the 21st Annual GLAAD Media Awards in the category of Outstanding TV Journalism- Newsmagazine for her segment, "Uganda Be Kidding Me".
In July 2010, Maddow was presented with a Maggie Award for her ongoing reporting of healthcare reform, the murder of Dr. George Tiller, and the anti-abortion movement.
In August 2010, Maddow won the Walter Cronkite Faith & Freedom Award, which was presented by the Interfaith Alliance.
In February 2012, Maddow was presented the John Steinbeck Award by the Martha Heasley Cox Center for Steinbeck Studies at San Jose State University.

Let's see some of your honors, Elvis, that grant you the self-esteem to summarily dismiss the entirety of this good woman's impressive career as a load of partisan hackery.

The very people who work to expose nefarious deep politics are coming under attack by the very people who ought to be supporting them the most. The writers doing this are either true-believer partisan hacks, or they care about their careers more than they care about the truth, or they're spooks.

Who the fuck are you even talking about here?! Journalists actually DIE exposing the nefarious deep politics of Putin's regime. The TRUTH here is that anyone who at this point is STILL poo-poo'ing claims of Russian malfeasance and criminality -- and Trump being inexorably stuck to that Satanic tarbaby -- is either Useful Idiot Purity Progressive nihilist who honestly believes that the weight of America's historical sins is so terrible and unforgivable that it deserves to be utterly destroyed, or else they are dangerously mentally incompetent.

J.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Good God, 'ol pal, are you actually citing EMMY AWARDS as a measure of integrity/achievement?
Next you'll be telling us there was no irony in Obama's Nobel Peace prize, ay, Jerky?

[I must disclose that I've only skimmed the last 2 pages and therefore have no other thoughts at this time -- I simply saw an EMMY AWARD referenced as an example of merit/journalistic integrity (you slay me, 'ol pal!) and was compelled to respond. I may chime in later with more substantive rumination, but otherwise do carry on.]

[JackRiddler]

About Greenwald: thing is, Rachal Maddow IS an utterly scripted, intellectually dishonest, partisan hack.

Nah. She's not all that scripted, or it wouldn't take so long to fail to make a point.

So I guess no meta threads will be allowed without flooding them with the same Russia hysteria that still has, not liberals exactly (extremely vague category), but that segment of the corporate media and blogosphere meaninglessly defined as "liberal" in its grip, fantasizing that this is the way to resist Trump.

[Karmamatterz]

She's spot-on about the dearth of women in the piece (and at large in media)

And at large in the media?

Have you walked through any newsrooms lately? There are a lot of women working as editors and reporters for U.S. media companies.

[seemslikeadream]

Why doesn't Greenwald read The Intercept or believe what is reported?

TOP-SECRET NSA REPORT DETAILS RUSSIAN HACKING EFFORT DAYS BEFORE 2016 ELECTION
Matthew Cole, Richard Esposito, Sam Biddle, Ryan Grim
June 5 2017, 2:44 p.m.
LEIA EM PORTUGUÊS
RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier and sent spear-phishing emails to more than 100 local election officials just days before last November’s presidential election, according to a highly classified intelligence report obtained by The Intercept.

......
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/top ... -election/

sorry can I post Russia stuff in an OP named The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject, Jack?

please?

It's kinda important.....you know like PROOF of Russia hacking

I think there are people here still looking for proof

please I won't clutter up this thread with all my c/ps one can go to my thread for it all

This is incredible. Not only did the Dutch hack into Cozy Bear’s network, they also hacked the security cameras outside the building the Russian hackers worked in— allowing them to be identified and compared to known Russian spies.

Dutch intelligence first to alert U.S. about Russian hack of Democratic Party
GISTEREN, 21:35 AANGEPAST GISTEREN, 21:44BUITENLAND
NIEUWSUUR
GESCHREVEN DOOR
Eelco Bosch van Rosenthal
verslaggever
In the Summer of 2015, Dutch intelligence services were the first to alert their American counterparts about the cyberintrusion of the Democratic National Committee by Cozy Bear, a hacking group believed to be tied to the Russian government. Intelligence hackers from Dutch AIVD (General Intelligence and Security Service) had penetrated the Cozy Bear computer servers as well as a security camera at the entrance of their working space, located in a university building adjacent to the Red Square in Moscow.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40738&start=120

[Jerky]

Yeah, I really wish that I had listened to my instincts and inoculated my post against this sort of meaningless drive-by snark by mentioning the fact that the first thought that came to mind as I was posting was "someone's gonna crack wise about the Emmys being any sort of barometer of quality for television news".

But then I thought, no, that fruit hangs too low. This isn't InfoWars or the Breitbart comment section. Not yet, anyway. The smarty-pants here probably won't stoop to pluck it.

Sarcastic thanks for proving me wrong.

But on a non-sarcastic point for a moment in defense of the (GUFFAW!!! FOR REALZ?!) National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, I realize that we're living through the Death of Expertise and all, but have we completely abandoned the concept of industry recognition and peer review?

J.

.

Good God, 'ol pal, are you actually citing EMMY AWARDS as a measure of integrity/achievement?
Next you'll be telling us there was no irony in Obama's Nobel Peace prize, ay, Jerky?

[I must disclose that I've only skimmed the last 2 pages and therefore have no other thoughts at this time -- I simply saw an EMMY AWARD referenced as an example of merit/journalistic integrity (you slay me, 'ol pal!) and was compelled to respond. I may chime in later with more substantive rumination, but otherwise do carry on.]

[dada]

have we completely abandoned the concept of industry recognition and peer review?

I think it probably depends on the individual.

[liminalOyster]

industry recognition and peer review

How exactly do you see these two things as related?

[Jerky]

Hey DaDa!

Cool profile pic.

J.