Another great collage essay competition between two competing books!
Between two competing ideologies....
I do apologize. I had a review of the book by Dan Kovalik for a previous article but I didn't publish it (although it was advertised on this site).
Something told me to hold off, and here is the great reason why!
This book was published by the same company as the book that it will be fighting today (but one of the local bookstores only had the "hillary version", as it is a liberal, Clinton-sycophant type of bookstore) but maybe they also had had the book I favor, at some point, and someone just bought it, and that's why it wasn't displayed. (I would like to give this bookstore the benefit of the doubt because there are so few bookstores in the city and this one actually has a decent vibe and a slew of great titles (many of which i take pictures of and then find at the library because I cannot afford to buy books right now))
Basically two ideologies exist within "leftism" today
One is represented by the phony Democratic-party-sycophant-corporatist-neoliberal crew, who currently exploit identity politics to pursue their regime of US interventionism in the rest of the world. People who supported and continue to march for the likes of a Hillary Clinton because she is a woman and without taking into account her warmongering, imperialistic ambitions. This group would have you believe that the Russians are out to get us, interfered with our elections, and that Trump is the worst president EVER, so they can toss out whichever mediocre candidate they so choose without having to offer any real plan for change or any candidate of any real value because it's sufficient for the masses that their candidate is "not Trump"
The other ideology is represented by what I like to call "the old crew": the people that have always believed that capitalism is wrong, that US imperialism is wrong, and it doesn't matter who heads it. These people thought Bernie Sanders was "okay" and would vote for Ralph Nader again if given the opportunity. They really believe that the two party political system in this country truly is a scam, and don't run scared to vote for Dems when a supposedly more horrific Republican candidate is on deck. They are acquainted with the history of US imperialism and are critical of it
The first group want to blame Russia for Clinton's failure to win the 2016 election and attack Russia for standing up to the United States (in arenas like actually helping the situation in Syria and banning GMO's) - let's kill two birds with one stone. The projection onto Russia of culpability in election scams distracts from the fact the United States is always meddling with other people's elections and has been engineering political events for a while now, but if your understanding of politics in the US is relegated to Democrat versus Republican, wow, I have to say first, how sorry I am for you, and two, that you're really missing a lot
The US doesn't really have any enemies - it just has the peoples it has provoked into hating it, because it has interfered with their government's elections (HELLO) and has paved the way for Western corporations to further exploit their countries. If you need examples of this, you can read them in Dan Kovalik's book - you won't see head or tail of them in Malcolm Nance's
Nance's book represents the first group, and he has to rely heavily on a tone of storytelling that is both irritating and condescending. The author tells us in feigned confidence as if we were children he was letting in on a secret what it's like to be an "intelligence officer" and their tricks for determining the bloodthirsty ruthlessness of THE ENEMY. There's no context as to WHY someone is an enemy, they JUST ARE, and the insidious way Nance describes their existence is consistent proof of how awful they are (like how the mainstream media makes someone guilty by simply relentlessly repeating how awful they are)
It reminds me of the day the new bank manager at the local branch of my bank couldn't execute the little financial transaction I needed done one day, even though he assured me he could do it. Instead he just went on and on about how the bailout of the auto industry and the banks really helped our economy ( lies), and it was really pissing me off; Mr. Nance is attempting the same sort of ruse, and if you are true believer and you don't have any historical perspective, you will believe him
I cannot take seriously someone who contends that a country whose GDP is a "small fraction of America's, whose share in global trade is a mere one percent, and even whose defense budget is a tenth of the Pentagon's" (Kovalik, page 23) is capable of completely sabotaging our country's elections. A country whose own elections were interfered with BY US with the installation of Boris Yeltsin in the 90's, and also the complete disintegration of the Russian economy and society, facilitated BY US, is a threat to our democracy ( which isn't even much of a democracy to begin with). With one brush stroke Nance has declared that this large group of conspirators, this ragtag band of smaller, disparate groups, including left-wing activists and Russia Today, are all in cahoots with Russia; this is what is called a "conspiracy theory" ( a term concocted by the CIA by the way).
Basically anyone who is critical of the US government has been determined to be a Russian agent, and to not be able to see through this pretty obvious farce kinda makes you an idiot
Fidel Castro did warn other countries that to accept help from the Soviet Union was a trap the United States wants you to fall into: it's a great excuse to interfere with you, and you're usually in the throes of a liberation struggle if you're asking the Soviet Union for help
The story Dan Kovalik weaves is one of having started as a follower of anti-communist ideology ( it was the current propaganda trend when he was growing up) to disavowing this mindset when he observed how our country behaved itself in Latin America, supporting bloody dictatorships and suppressing the will of its peoples.
Malcolm Nance on the other hand just describes having been interested in espionage and foreign languages and showing us that he is STILL a follower of "anti-communism" and the narrative that Russia is a threat. He goes on and on about how complicated and significant the pattern-identification techniques of our intelligence agencies are; no evidence mind you, but "a strong confidence" that all this Russian nefariousness is true
Luckily the saga with the bank manager was over in less than a day ( and a bank teller helped me), but the US government to this day still cannot prove Russia interfered in our elections
Nance's book has no historical background and places the Russian interference story in a vacuum - you're just supposed to trust him and the fact that he's an intelligence officer. You don't need proof, you don't need to know any historical background, oh and by the way, you should trust US intelligence agencies implicitly, because they never execute surveillance programs against their own citizens and they never lie; they also never kill people
Dan will indicate that people who have worked for US intelligence agencies have left in disgust and some have decided to be whistleblowers ( Obama had a thing about punishing whistleblowers, but who cares???!? Right?) Malcolm is a die-hard spy who claims to see everyone else as a spy.
The old cold war scheme just couldn't be pulled off the same way this time. Too many people today would recognize it, so it has been re engineered and has re emerged in a new guise. This scheme has revealed the true colors of quite a few Democrats and "liberals", in a way more dramatic than in the past (because apparently pleading for the bombs to drop on Yugoslavia didn't out these warmongering liberals then). Nor did defending Bill Clinton's sexual escapades.
The more things change, the more they stay the same
Coranda Cashew constantly needs a resentment drain after reading neoliberal propaganda or her head will explode. These treatments have racked up quite the bills and she desperately needs your help. She could just stop reading neoliberal propaganda, but then she couldn't do her job.