Why So Many Americans Believe In The Deep State

[ocfightfan]

I guess you've never heard of the so called "resistance". I'm referring to the people in government who have made it known that they will be resisting Trumps agenda. The Deep State are all the people both in Government and Big Business who have an interest in protecting and expanding Big Government.

 

[IDL]

Yeah Eisenhower and Kennedy spoke incessantly about powers st work behind the scenes.

The deep state is certainly shown in our foreign policy. No matter who is president they all end up pushed towards war. So much of the D.C. Policy making corporations have so many lawmakers under their spell.

I don't even see it as a bad thing in principal that there are strategies and policies in place that play out over larger time frames than an election cycle (thus the presidents coming and going and there being continuity regardless). Obviously this has to be the case in order to function.

But yeah, the mechanisms behind that are not exactly advertised.

 

[Trotsky]

When people refer to the 'Military industrial complex' are they not referring to something akin to a deep state?

That term has been around for ages. It's a vague concept, but still.

Except the ones whining about this illusory phenomenon are also faithfully supporting the party that is actively trying to infuse government with more private money, and make fundraising and campaign donations less transparent. And opposing the party trying to limit private influence and make money more transparent.

It's tail chasing for idiots. Frustrating as hell.

 

[IDL]

Except the ones whining about this illusory phenomenon are also faithfully supporting the party that is actively trying to infuse government with more private money, and make fundraising and campaign donations less transparent. And opposing the party trying to limit private influence and make money more transparent.

It's tail chasing for idiots. Frustrating as hell.

If you think it is just one party then I don't know what to say.

 

[abiG.2]

So many Americans believe in the deep state because so many Americans are morons.

Who was Wilson discussing after selling out our nation to international bankers in 1913?

...we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men."

--"THE NEW FREEDOM" A CALL FOR THE EMANCIPATION OF THE GENEROUS ENERGIES OF A PEOPLE BY WOODROW WILSON, 1913

And WTF do you think the military/industrial complex is that Eisenhower warned us all of as he left office?

 

[Trotsky]

If you think it is just one party then I don't know what to say.

It is one party and one party's judicial nominees that have kept the issue from being addressed - and actively made it worse with McConnell, CU, and SpeechNow. The Democrats and the liberal court have been trying to address this for decades, but McConnell and the Roberts Court erased all of the progress made during the Brennan years.

 

[IDL]

It is one party and one party's judicial nominees that have kept the issue from being addressed - and actively made it worse with McConnell, CU, and SpeechNow. The Democrats and the liberal court have been trying to address this for decades, but McConnell and the Roberts Court erased all of the progress made during the Brennan years.

I view it as larger than just American politics, but I take it that you believe that the Democratic party in the United States is the best choice to expose or just limit the power of the MIC/Deep state/whatever you want to call it within the context of the US. Fine. I disagree and would say the power structure operates within both parties and transcends them both and the Democratic party is no better, but it isn't consequential in terms of 'does a deep state exist or not'.

 

[Mr. Shickadance]

No.

You brought up "the msm seems to be complacent"

I discussed if that were true, why it may be that way.

Yes I agree with that those are the main reasons, and not to put on my tin foil hat but also monetary reasons

 

[Happy Man]

It is one party and one party's judicial nominees that have kept the issue from being addressed - and actively made it worse with McConnell, CU, and SpeechNow. The Democrats and the liberal court have been trying to address this for decades, but McConnell and the Roberts Court erased all of the progress made during the Brennan years.

Sure, that's why the Democratic Party nominated Hillary Clinton and illegally stole the nomination from the outsider Bernie sanders.

Got it.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Deep state is simply the mega corporations using donations to keep enough politicians in their pocket to continue all systems normal

This is the actual, demonstrable, non-secret truth.

Intellectuals like Noam Chomsky have been writing about it for many decades. Unfortunately, private, corporate power has nothing to do with the "Deep State" as it is defined and imagined by Trumpublicans and associated CT nutters.

 

[Trotsky]

Sure, that's why the Democratic Party nominated Hillary Clinton and illegally stole the nomination from the outsider Bernie sanders.

Got it.

That's neither true at all, nor even relevant if it were.

 

[snakedafunky]

I guess deep done people that believe in "the deep state" or conspiracy theories are fearful of a chaotic world.
We can't really control things that happen in the world or your country at best we can react to a chaotic world.
When you grew up your life wasn't chaotic because you didn't fully understand things and your parents organised your life.
Giving you a false sense of a controllable world. Part of growing up is realizing that things are beyond your control.

Take the refugee crisis for example. A very complicated and chaotic situation in an uncontrollable part of the world.
Fuelled by different groups with different agendas we can't control.
A very chaotic situation no one really knows how to fix. Easily explained by some people that want to believe its a Marxists conspiracy to destroy the west.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Who was Wilson discussing after selling out our nation to international bankers in 1913?

The thing about international bankers is a fantasy. The book you're citing was just from his campaign speeches (before his first term), and if you read the quote in context, he says who he's talking about--monopolists. Don't try to learn history from CT sites. No excuse for that today (with the Internet).

 

[TheGreatA]

I guess deep done people that believe in "the deep state" or conspiracy theories are fearful of a chaotic world.
We can't really control things that happen in the world or your country at best we can react to a chaotic world.
When you grew up your life wasn't chaotic because you didn't fully understand things and your parents organised your life.
Giving you a false sense of a controllable world. Part of growing up is realizing that things are beyond your control.

Take the refugee crisis for example. A very complicated and chaotic situation in an uncontrollable part of the world.
Fuelled by different groups with different agendas we can't control.
A very chaotic situation no one really knows how to fix. Easily explained by some people that want to believe its a Marxists conspiracy to destroy the west.

It is also easy to believe in a chaotic world order, in order to excuse apathy and inaction in regards to doing anything to control or make sense of the chaos.

In either case we are talking about people's psychological defense mechanisms, responding to circumstances seemingly outside of their control, rather than any sort of an objective outlook into what's going on.

"Deep state" in America, to me, is hardly a conspiracy theory, more so just a plain fact that is pretty much obvious.

If you don't think that long-standing institutions won't protect themselves against a potentially destructive "will of the people", you're a fool.

We've passed the point where "democracy" is a true democracy in the sense that the people's will shall always be obeyed, regardless of the results. In fact, America has never truly been that. It operates as a republic more so than a democracy (which is why a person who gets less overall votes can still win an election, for example). Cooler heads prevailed after events such as WW2 and realized that it's probably not in anyone's best interests to blindly obey the will of the majority. Thus the institutions were strengthened to avoid scenarios where a popular strong-man leader eradicates them.

 

[abiG.2]

The thing about international bankers is a fantasy. The book you're citing was just from his campaign speeches (before his first term), and if you read the quote in context, he says who he's talking about--monopolists. Don't try to learn history from CT sites. No excuse for that today (with the Internet).

The monopolists were the international bankers who he saw as a group (or groups) of men that stole our once free democracy.

Is the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us all of as he left office real to you?

 

[Grenz]

I remember years ago listening to an interview on NPR.

The interview was with the WaPo journalist who was assigned to cover the CIA. He covered the agency for over 20 years.

During the interview, he mentioned that he believed that the CIA used to be it's own, autonomous organization that simply gathered information and presented it to policy makers. Then, the policy makers created policy based upon their findings.

However, since 2001, he said the CIA started working along side the DOD and it made him quite weary. After all, why not let the DOD run the drone programs, not in conjunction with CIA?

Plus, he also spoke about if the CIA had lost it's original goal after the Cold War ended.

For instance, he stated in his interview "Why is the CIA writing reports about the copper markets in Chile? Certainly, there are plenty of open source reports out there written by college professors (or businesses) about Chilean copper". He believed that we didn't need to send personnel down to Chile to write reports on Chile's copper mines. I assume he meant to emphasize that the cost of Chilean copper has little bearing on our national security.

In essence, he wondered if the intelligence communities should go back to their Cold War days:

- Gather information and give it to the policy makers.....don't try to create policy.
- Keep your independence.
- Keep your eye on the ball (national security)

That seems wildly inaccurate. Wasn't the CIA very directly involved in almost all covert operations (e.g. Chile, Guetemala, Nicaragua) aimed at countering communism or socialism during the Cold War? I haven't looked into this stuff for years now, but I think in Chile e.g. they ran radio stations and news outlets that would run subversive info against the socialist candidate Allende. That doesn't qualify as strictly information gathering.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

Yeah Eisenhower and Kennedy spoke incessantly about powers st work behind the scenes.

The deep state is certainly shown in our foreign policy. No matter who is president they all end up pushed towards war. So much of the D.C. Policy making corporations have so many lawmakers under their spell.

Yep.

 

[IDL]

It is also easy to believe in a chaotic world order, in order to excuse apathy and inaction in regards to doing anything to control or make sense of the chaos.

In either case we are talking about people's psychological defense mechanisms, responding to circumstances seemingly outside of their control, rather than any sort of an objective outlook into what's going on.

Yeah everything appears chaotic to someone who knows nothing. Randomness without pattern. Effects without cause.

Both extremes aren't going to be truth.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The monopolists were the international bankers who he saw as a group (or groups) of men that stole our once free democracy.

Is the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us all of as he left office real to you?

Incorrect. International bankers are not who he was referring to and not monopolists. And your response to finding out you were lied to is to try to make excuses for the liar and hold on to the false belief. That's a bad response.

Eisenhower's point is generally understood properly and referred to a real thing.

 

[Grenz]

I guess deep done people that believe in "the deep state" or conspiracy theories are fearful of a chaotic world.
We can't really control things that happen in the world or your country at best we can react to a chaotic world.
When you grew up your life wasn't chaotic because you didn't fully understand things and your parents organised your life.
Giving you a false sense of a controllable world. Part of growing up is realizing that things are beyond your control.

Take the refugee crisis for example. A very complicated and chaotic situation in an uncontrollable part of the world.
Fuelled by different groups with different agendas we can't control.
A very chaotic situation no one really knows how to fix. Easily explained by some people that want to believe its a Marxists conspiracy to destroy the west.

It's not a surprise that Western thought - at whatever level, high or low - struggles with cause and effect, particularly as it affects the individual. I agree with your point, but it's missing the part where that basic realization is turned to paranoia via enabled ignorance. The people who believe there is a 'deep state' are also very likely to believe that the deep state is something to oppose, i.e. it doesn't protect them from the chaos. Ironically the deep State does just that, at least in countries prosperous enough to have people who have so little other worries that they have time to believe in an evil deep state or the earth being flat.