Advancing Propaganda For Evil Agendas Is The Same As Perpetrating Them Yourself by Ms Caitlin Johnstone!
(2019-11-22 at 03:47:48 )

Advancing Propaganda For Evil Agendas Is The Same As Perpetrating Them Yourself by Ms Caitlin Johnstone

The Guardian has published an editorial titled "The Guardian view on extraditing Julian Assange: do not do it", subtitled "The United States case against the WikiLeaks founder is an assault on press freedom and the publics right to know".

The publications editorial board argues that since the Swedish investigation has once again been dropped, the time is now to oppose United States extradition for the WikiLeaks founder.

"Swedens decision to drop an investigation into a rape allegation against Julian Assange has both illuminated the situation of the WikiLeaks founder and made it more pressing," the editorial board writes.

Oh okay, now the issue is illuminated and pressing.

Not two months ago, when Mr. Assanges ridiculous bail sentence ended and he was still kept in prison explicitly and exclusively because of the United States extradition request.

Not six months ago, when the United States government slammed Mr. Assange with 17 charges under the Espionage Act for publishing the Chelsea Manning leaks.

Not seven months ago, when Mr. Assange was forcibly pried from the Ecuadorian embassy and slapped with the United States extradition request.

Not any time between his April arrest and his taking political asylum seven years ago, which the Ecuadorian government explicitly granted him because it believed there was a credible threat of United States extradition.

Not nine years ago when WikiLeaks was warning that the United States government was scheming to extradite Mr. Assange and prosecute him under the Espionage Act.

Nope, no, any of those times would have been far too early for The Guardian to begin opposing United States extradition for Mr. Assange with any degree of lucidity.

They had to wait until Mr. Assange was already locked up in Belmarsh Prison and limping into extradition hearings supervised by looming United States government officials.

They had to wait until years and years of virulent mass media smear campaigns had killed off public support for Mr. Assange so he could be extradited with little or no grassroots backlash.

And they had to wait until they themselves had finished participating in those smear campaigns.

This is after all the same Guardian which published the transparently ridiculous and completely invalidated report that Donald Trump lackey Paul Manafort had met secretly with Mr. Assange at the embassy, not once but multiple times.

Not one shred of evidence has ever been produced to substantiate this claim despite the embassy being one of the most heavily surveilled buildings on the planet at the time, and the Robert Mueller investigation, whose expansive scope would obviously have included such meetings, reported absolutely nothing to corroborate it.

It was a bogus story which all accused parties have forcefully denied.

This is the same Guardian which ran an article last year titled "The only barrier to Julian Assange leaving Ecuadors embassy is pride", arguing that Mr. Assange looked ridiculous for remaining in the embassy because "The WikiLeaks founder is unlikely to face prosecution in the United States".

The article was authored by the odious James Ball, who deleted a tweet not long ago complaining about the existence of United Nations special rapporteurs after one of them concluded that Mr. Assange is a victim of psychological torture.

Mr. Balls article begins, "According to Debretts, the arbiters of etiquette since 1769: -Visitors, like fish, stink in three days.- Given this, it is difficult to imagine what Ecuadors London embassy smells like, more than five-and-a-half years after Julian Assange moved himself into the confines of the small flat in Knightsbridge, just across the road from Harrods."

This is the same Guardian which published an article titled "Definition of paranoia: supporters of Julian Assange", arguing that Mr. Assange defenders are crazy conspiracy theorists for believing the United States would try to extradite Mr. Assange because "Britain has a notoriously lax extradition treaty with the United States", because "why would they bother to imprison him when he is making such a good job of discrediting himself?", and "because there is no extradition request."

This is the same Guardian which published a ludicrous report about Mr. Assange potentially receiving documents as part of a strange Nigel Farage-Donald Trump-Russia conspiracy, a claim based primarily on vague analysis by a single anonymous source described as a "highly placed contact with links to United States intelligence".

The same Guardian which just flushed standard journalistic protocol down the toilet by reporting on Mr. Assanges "ties to the Kremlin" (not a thing) without even bothering to use the word "alleged", not once, but twice.

The same Guardian which has been advancing many more virulent smears as documented in this article by The Canary titled "Guilty by innuendo: the Guardian campaign against Julian Assange that breaks all the rules".

You can see, then, how ridiculous it is for an outlet like The Guardian to now attempt to wash its hands of Mr. Assanges plight with a self-righteous denunciation of the Trump administrations extradition request from its editorial board.

This outlet has actively and forcefully paved the road to the situation in which Mr. Assange now finds himself by manufacturing consent for an agenda which the public would otherwise have found appalling and ferociously objectionable.

Guardian editors do not get to pretend that they are in some way separate from what is being done to Mr. Assange.

They created what is being done to Mr. Assange.

You see this dynamic at play all too often from outlets, organizations and individuals who portray themselves as liberal, progressive, or in some way oppositional to authoritarianism.

They happily advance propaganda narratives against governments and individuals targeted by establishment power structures, whether that is Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad, Maduro, Morales, Assange or whomever, but when it comes time for that establishment to actually implement the evil agenda it has been pushing for, they wash their hands of it and decry what is being done as though they have always opposed it.

But they have not opposed it.

They have actively facilitated it.

If you help promote smears and propaganda against a target of the empire, then you are just as culpable for what happens to that target as the empire itself. Because you actively participated in making it happen.

The deployment of a bomb or missile does not begin when a pilot pushes a button, it begins when propaganda narratives used to promote those operations start circulating in public attention.

If you help circulate war propaganda, you are as complicit as the one who pushes the button.

The imprisonment of a journalist for exposing United States war crimes does not begin when the Donald Trump administration extradites him to the United States of America, it begins when propagandistic smear campaigns begin circulating to kill public opposition to his imprisonment.

If you helped promote that smear campaign, you are just as responsible for what happens to him as the goon squad in President Trumps Department of Justice.

Before they launch missiles, they launch narratives.

Before they drop bombs, they drop ideas.

Before they invade, they propagandize.

Before the killing, there is manipulation.

Narrative control is the front line of all imperialist agendas, and it is therefore the front line of all anti-imperialist efforts.

When you forcefully oppose these agendas, that matters, because you are keeping the public from being propagandized into consenting to them.

When you forcefully facilitate those agendas, that matters, because you are actively paving the way for them.

Claiming you oppose an imperialist agenda while helping to advance its propaganda and smear campaigns in any way is a nonsensical and contradictory position.

You cannot facilitate imperialism and simultaneously claim to oppose it.

They work so hard to manufacture our consent because they need that consent.

If they operate without the consent of the governed, the public will quickly lose trust in their institutions, and at that point it is not long before revolution begins to simmer.

So do not give them your consent.

And for Gods sake do not do anything that helps manufacture it in others.

Words matter. Work with them responsibly.

Thanks for reading!!
Everyone has my unconditional permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I have written) in any way they like free of charge.

My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my "sweet merchandise", buying my new book "Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone", or my previous book "Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers". The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for "my website", which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I am trying to do with this platform, "click here".