Friday, May 26, 2017

Ron Jacobs — The Deep State is the State

The deep state is not some enigmatic entity that operates outside the US government. It is the US state itself. Like all elements of that state, the so-called deep state exists to enforce the economic supremacy of US capitalism. It does so primarily via the secret domestic and international police forces like the FBI, CIA and other intelligence agencies. The operations of these agencies run the gamut from surveillance to propaganda to covert and overt military actions. Naturally, this so-called deep state operates according to their own rules; rules which ultimately insure its continued existence and relevance. Although it can be argued that it was the 1950 National Security Directive known as NSC-68 along with the Congressional Bill creating the Central Intelligence Agency that launched the “deep state” as we understand it, a broader understanding of the “deep state” places its genesis perhaps a century prior to that date. In other words, a structure designed to maintain the economic and political domination of certain powerful US capitalists existed well back into the nineteenth century. However, the centralization of that power began in earnest in the years following World War Two.…
Backgrounder.

Counterpunch
The Deep State is the State
Ron Jacobs

12 comments:

Noah Way said...

Very good piece, with the exception of overestimating Trump's intelligence.

Ben Johannson said...

The deep state is not some enigmatic entity that operates outside the US government. It is the US state itself.

Then there is no deep state.

Tom Hickey said...

The deep state in this view is the unelected government. What is the USSR was called the siloviki (intel services) and nomenklatura (senior administrative bureaucracy rather than the run of the mill civil service).

Penguin pop said...

I don't think this is any mystery. Don't give pieces of incompetent shit a fancy name like Deep State. Call them for who they are. Psychopath morons.

Tom Hickey said...

The reason it is important it alerting voters to the fact that the people that run significant areas of public policy are not elected and some don't change from administration to administration.

The advantage is supposed to be providing continuity and expertise in government, but the tradeoff is giving up potentially significant democratic control over government.

This is why the terms ruling elite, ruling class, deep state, etc. are used in political science and related subjects.

The US continually criticizing this in other non-democratic or less democratic governments abroad while ignoring it at home.

Kaivey said...

These people are monsters, and yet they get into positions of power. Then the MSM backs them, I'm sure they have no idea what's happening.

Noah Way said...

It's not that they get into position of power, it's that they are in positions of power and can't readily be removed or replaced.

Elections only change a few puppets, not the underlying system. And as we've seen repeatedly, there are two kinds of puppets: gleeful followers of the program and resisters who must be brought into line.

Bob Roddis said...

It's a good thing the DEEP STATE isn't revenue constrained thanks to the marvels of MODERN MONEY.

Tom Hickey said...

Add to that the military.

Never a question of affordability with either.

And US involvement in and funding of Vietnam was arguably a factor in Nixon's decision to close the gold window for settlement of international accounts unilaterally.

The increased policy space has a variety of uses that are decided politically.

I don't think that this is a good reason for rejecting increasing policy space though.

It's a wakeup call that there is policy space for welfare instead of war.

Greg said...

Right Bob, if only we were on a gold standard then the wealthy wouldn't be able to buy politicians.

Noah Way said...

A gold standard would prevent political corruption? LOL

Bob Roddis said...

A gold standard would prevent political corruption? LOL

No, you geniuses. Getting rid of politics would prevent political corruption. There's no pillage, rape, murder or theft with private property. There's no lying permitted with contracts.


The increased policy space has a variety of uses that are decided politically.

I don't think that this is a good reason for rejecting increasing policy space though.

It's a wakeup call that there is policy space for welfare instead of war.


Those problems you want to allegedly solve with your “policy space” do not exist except for your prior use of the “policy space”. You interventionists are the cause of the problems you claim you want to resolve.

“Policy space” is nothing but vicious and totally unnecessary government violence against innocent and non-criminal people.