Skip to main content

Another example showing that the establishment narratives and methods rapidly decline

UK election


The following example, presented by Jimmy Dore in his show, is another sign that the classic narratives and methods of the establishment to maintain the pro-plutocracy neoliberal agenda, are fading rapidly. All it takes, is a good speaker with simple, sensible speech, to repel the absurdity behind the 'logic' of the corporate agents in the media.

In this interview, Sarah Champion, Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities for the Labour Party in the UK, actually exposes this absurdity, by just making some sense.

Champion starts with a very sensible sentence which any political party should take for granted:

           What we are trying to do, here today, is have a campaign that is based on facts, that is genuinely looking at how we can benefit everybody in this country.

The response from the media pundit is the most typical for those who adopt the classic (and obsolete now), neoliberal narrative, resembling the old, well-known Thatcherism. Therefore, he tries to interpret a very straight and clear answer according to this neoliberal dogma:

           But basically what you're saying is that we are going to spend money on nice things and we're going to do it by squeezing people who won't feel the pain ...

Well, no pretexts are kept here. This is the personification of a system that works for the elites who want to pay less and less taxes for the benefit of the rest of the society, even when they exploit the state to make more money and even when they see their profits grow enormously, in many cases without moving a finger. (Notice how Jimmy Dore hilariously comments on the obvious absurdity of this statement at 10:12.)

So, this was very easily repealed by Champion, again through simple logic and real rationality, contrary to the distorted rationality of the neoliberal establishment that has become mainstream over the decades.:

           If nice things are things like education, about taking care of when you're poorly, then, yes, we think those sorts of things are very important, ... and, yes, that means that some people and particularly businesses that are making a big profit, and they are not reinvesting it back to our country, yes, we will be looking at them paying their fair share.

Then, again, the response of the representative of the establishment comes from the 'manual' of the classic neoliberal narratives, based on the deliberately simplified (and therefore, false) equation that cutting taxes for big corporations equals more jobs:

           Where is your evidence that they are not reinvesting it back in the economy? We do, after all, have record levels of employment.

Champion beats him again by simply telling the truth:

           What I'm looking at, our businesses that are taking the money offshore, that are not looking at paying their employees properly ... what we want to see is that wealth is shared out, because really, when you look at the business, they are using the infrastructure, they are benefiting from the education system we've got. So, paying your fair share back in again, that seems very sensible to me.

Then, when the pundit sees that he is about to suffer a heavy defeat by an intelligent speaker, it's time to disorientate the discussion towards the 'identity politics' (as also noticed by Jimmy Dore). Pay attention to a common trick used by the establishment mouthpieces here, as the pundit deliberately starts his next question with additional emphasis, highlighting the fact that Sarah Champion is Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities, in order to harm her credibility and, therefore, the credibility of the Labour Party, against all women, therefore, the half electorate:

           You are Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities. Why do you think it is that the Conservatives have now had two women Prime Ministers and Labour haven't had any?

Champion laughs against this effort of the pundit to disorientate the discussion away from the substance of the politics and gives, again, the right, sensible answer:

           Why do you think it is that in the budget that we've just had, 86% of the cuts and changes the Treasury made, fell on women's shoulders, how is that about equality? They are the sort of big questions that we're looking at, not looking at one individual. We're looking at how is it that certain groups in our society are facing the biggest cuts? Why is it that low mothers are repeatedly not reaching their full potential? ...

Notice that, for the first time, the pundit interrupts Champion (probably because they are shouting in his microphone to smear her), in a last, desperate effort to disorientate discussion away from the substance of the politics:

           You're telling us Jeremy Corbyn would be a better Prime Minister than Theresa May, so, you are looking at individuals, aren't you?

But he gets again the appropriate answer:

Yes, what's that got to do with her being a woman, or not?


It is worth to remember that 'identity politics' were used extensively by the establishment, especially during the primaries of the Democratic party in the US in favor of Hillary Clinton and against the biggest threat for the establishment, Bernie Sanders. As pointed in previous article:

The establishment becomes highly predictable, which is a sign of saturation. It is remarkable how the establishment mechanisms use similar narratives everywhere to expel undesirable politicians and policies.

Just one paragraph from the article My Hail Bernie Pass by Fred Baumgarten, describes almost the whole situation: “Now that I’m proclaiming my support for Sanders, I expect the vitriol to be no less intense, though maybe from some other quarters with different arguments. Secretly my friends will suspect that maybe I’m a misogynist, too, and don’t want a female president. I’ll be accused of being 'impractical' and 'hopelessly idealistic,' and of 'wasting' my vote. And I’ll still be held personally responsible for getting Trump elected!

One of the most successful psychological techniques used by the mechanisms of the establishment, is the bombardment of mind with isolated words, or, phrases, ending up to become powerful symbols. These symbols are frequently so powerful that manage to prevail over the ability of mind to build a rational hierarchy. Which, many times, equals to heavy misjudgment.

For example, the fact that the United States will have the opportunity to be governed "for the first time in their history by a female president", often prevails over what this president truly represents, especially among the female voters. The election of Hillary will give a superficial satisfaction to many Americans, that the United States will become an even more progressive society (after Obama term), while in reality, Hillary will certainly follow the "politics as usual", totally aligned with the neocon agenda.

Psychological methods also use "logical leaps" to force the individual to bypass a certain rational hierarchy. The example in Baumgarten's paragraph above is characteristic: even his friends will suspect that he is a misogynist, just by saying that he will support Sanders instead of Clinton. The political arguments, which is the main issue in such a process, since they determine the policies that will have direct effect to millions of Americans, are bypassed through this absurdly simplified "logical leap": You vote for Sanders = You are probably a misogynist.

So, in our current example, the establishment pundit follows a similar method. He tries to present the Labour Party as being not friendly to women's rights through the absurdly simplified observation that it has a male leader against the Concervatives who have a female one. Yet, his mission fails miserably because he gets the right answer from Champion, proving that the policies and the level of progressiveness of each party have nothing to do with their leader being male or female.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 3 - The corporate-backed institutions behind the rapid and artificial ideological transformation of the American society in favor of neoliberalism
In the US case I begin with a confidential memo sent by Lewis Powell to the US Chamber of Commerce in August 1971. Powell, about to be elevated to the Supreme Court by Richard Nixon, argued that criticism of and opposition to the US free enterprise system had gone too far and that ‘the time had come –– indeed it is long overdue –– for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of American business to be marshalled against those who would destroy it’. Powell argued that individual action was insufficient. ‘Strength’, he wrote, ‘lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and n…

Mystery solved: here's why the Western mainstream media suddenly 'discovered' the war in Yemen

globinfo freexchange
Why it took so long for the Western mainstream media to 'discover' the war in Yemen and the war crimes committed by the Saudi coalition in full co-operation with the US?
One might think that the humanitarian disaster there - caused also by the blockade of goods for the relief of the civilians - has become so obvious, condemned multiple times by the UN, that the media finally forced to speak about it.
In previous article we attempted to explain the 'unexplained phenomenon' and the fact that CNN surprisingly returned to the issue to openly condemn the US support to the Saudi coalition atrocities against civilians in Yemen.
Yet, despite that the Saudi regimes have been, traditionally, the best allies of the Western neocolonialists, this time, the US had serious reasons to overthrow the Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). And, surprisingly enough, at the center of this underground conflict lies an attempt by the US to privatize Aramco, Saudi Arab…

CIA had an agent at a newspaper in every world capital at least since 1977

Joel Whitney is a co-founder of the magazine Guernica, a magazine of global arts and politics, and has written for many publications, including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. His book Finks: How the C.I.A. Tricked the World's Best Writers describes how the CIA contributed funds to numerous respected magazines during the Cold War, including the Paris Review, to subtly promote anti-communist views. In their conversation, Whitney tells Robert Scheer about the ties the CIA’s Congress for Cultural Freedom had with literary magazines. He talks about the CIA's attempt during the Cold War to have at least one agent in every major news organization in order to get stories killed if they were too critical or get them to run if they were favorable to the agency. And they discuss the overstatement of the immediate risks and dangers of communist regimes during the Cold War, which, initially, led many people to support the Vietnam War.
globinfo freexchange
James Jesus Angleton wa…

Trump proves he is completely clueless on what's the real reason behind the mass layoffs epidemic in big businesses and how to deal with it

globinfo freexchange
Donald Trump's response to recent General Motors' decision to close plants and slash jobs, proves that he is completely clueless on what's the real reason behind the mass layoffs epidemic in US big businesses and how to deal with it.
The media circulated what Trump thinks to do about it, including threats against GM to impose auto tariffs, or, his most beloved action: penalties on foreign cars.
Yet, perhaps the most hilarious part in the whole story, is that one of the key frontline tools of the global neoliberal capital immediately published an 'in your face' article to make Trump realize that he is completely powerless too, against the forces of the markets. Here are some interesting parts:
... market forces are tough to beat, even if you’re president. Trump captured the White House thanks in large part to the story he told -- that he could reverse America’s industrial decline. He promised to bring back manufacturing and fossil-fuel j…

In 1961, US experts knew that the Soviets had only four ICBMs

globinfo freexchange
In a discussion with Paul Jay of the Real News, Daniel Ellsberg revealed that the US discovered - through a top-secret operation -that the USSR had only four(!) ICBMs back in 1961. This meant that the Soviets were very far from becoming a serious threat for the West. However, the false picture of the 'Soviet threat' remained powerful in order to permit the US to justify its frenzy nuclear armament race.
Ellsberg explains:
The estimate of 40 to 60 [Soviet intercontinental ballistic missiles] - which was pretty much in 1962 at the time of the missile crisis based on a lot of satellite photography - was much lower than was estimated earlier, from ‘58, ‘59, ‘60.
The Air Force had a higher estimate. Even the CIA official estimate in 1961 was well over 100. The State Department estimated like 160. The Air Force was much higher than that. And in August of 1961, the then commander of Strategic Air Command, Thomas Power, believed that there were then 1000 Soviet ICBMs…

Another US slow motion coup in Latin America: astonishing details on how the neoliberal-fascist complex destroyed Leftist leaders in Brazil and brought Jair Bolsonaro to power

globinfo freexchange
Greg Wilpert of the RealNews, spoke with Brian Mier, editor for the website Brasil Wire, about the recent developments after right-wing extremist Jair Bolsonaro won the presidential election in Brazil.
Mier revealed astonishing details on how the neoliberal-fascist complex in Brazil (fully backed by the US), undermined and destroyed the most popular leaders of the Workers' Party (PT), Lula da Silva, Dilma Rousseff and even Fernando Haddad, in order to bring Jair Bolsonaro to power.
The purpose of this slow motion coup was what has been always for the US empire, especially in Latin America: to secure and broaden the absolute domination of the US and the Western corporate monopolies and destroy any Leftist resistance against the neoliberal status quo.
As Mier explained:
On the eve of the Supreme Court decision - which ruled on whether Lula should be imprisoned or not, exceptionally, in a moment when his appeals were still going on, contrary to hundreds of other poli…

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 4 - Neoliberalism's second big experiment after Chile: the financial coup by the banking mafia to take over New York
One line of response to the double crisis of capital accumulation and class power arose in the trenches of the urban struggles of the 1970s. The New York City fiscal crisis was an iconic case. Capitalist restructuring and deindustrialization had for several years been eroding the economic base of the city, and rapid suburbanization had left much of the central city impoverished. The result was explosive social unrest on the part of marginalized populations during the 1960s, defining what came to be known as ‘the urban crisis’ (similar problems emerged in many US cities).
The expansion of public employment and public provision –– facilitated in part by generous federal funding –– was seen as the solution. But, faced with fiscal difficulties, President Nixon simply declared the urban crisis over in the early 1…

Exploiting Khashoggi's assassination: the neoliberal predators hang over Saudi Arabia

globinfo freexchange
A month ago we gathered some information to explain the sudden 180 degrees hostile turn by the Western neoliberal status quo against the current Saudi regime.
We discovered that the US corporate dictatorship and the Wall Street mafia heavily invested on the rapid neoliberalization of the Saudi Arabian economy, with the privatization of the state-owned oil company Aramco at the heart of this plan. Suddenly, Mohammed bin Salman decided to step back from the deal.
It would be worth to note that Aramco was standing at the top of the global list of the largest oil and gas companies for 2017 with a revenue of 465.49 billion US dollars.
It seems that the neoliberal regime didn't abort its plans concerning Saudi Arabia and silently seeks to "replace" bin Salman with a more faithful puppet, exploiting, of course, the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi.
Digging a little bit more, we found plenty of evidence in the Western mainstream media, in recent years, showing …

How neoliberalism manufactured consent to secure its unlimited power

From David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Part 1 - Construction of political consent across a sufficiently large spectrum of the population
How was neoliberalization accomplished, and by whom? The answer in countries such as Chile and Argentina in the 1970s was as simple as it was swift, brutal, and sure: a military coup backed by the traditional upper classes (as well as by the US government), followed by the fierce repression of all solidarities created within the labour and urban social movements which had so threatened their power.
But the neoliberal revolution usually attributed to Thatcher and Reagan after 1979 had to be accomplished by democratic means. For a shift of this magnitude to occur required the prior construction of political consent across a sufficiently large spectrum of the population to win elections. What Gramsci calls ‘common sense’ (defined as ‘the sense held in common’) typically grounds consent.
Common sense is constructed out of long-standing pr…

The Guardian in the frontline of the establishment media that have declared a dirty and ruthless war against Julian Assange, WikiLeaks and real journalism

globinfo freexchange
The Guardian has stepped up its contemptible role as one of the main media conduits for the persecution of Julian Assange, publishing unsubstantiated and sensationalist allegations that the WikiLeaks publisher met with American political lobbyist, Paul Manafort.
One of the two authors of the Guardian article was, predictably, Luke Harding. Harding has penned a stream of material aimed at undermining support for Assange and WikiLeaks and attempting to justify the efforts of the US government to prosecute him for espionage or conspiracy. Assange aptly described an error-filled 2014 book written by Harding about whistleblower Edward Snowden and WikiLeaks as a “hack job in the purest sense of the word.
The allegation that Assange met with Manafort is another desperate effort to implicate WikiLeaks in the lurid claims of the Democratic Party, US intelligence agencies and much of the media that the Russian government “interfered” in the 2016 US presidential election to pr…