Most people living in the United States know little about Albert Einstein. What people do know of Einstein is usually confined to his many achievements in the realm of science. Fred Jerome’s updated version of The Einstein File: The FBI’s Secret War Against the World’s Most Famous Scientist analyzes the enormous FBI file compiled on the world-renowned scientist. The book, originally published in 2002, has been updated to include contributions from fellow Black Agenda Report editor Ajamu Baraka and scientist David Suzuki as well as additional analysis on the implications of Einstein’s file for the current political situation. Jerome’s update provides readers with a glimpse into Einstein’s political life and an overview of a period of history characterized by the emergence of US hegemony, fascism, and worldwide socialist struggle.
The update of the book couldn’t come at a more pertinent time. The FBI and its intelligence partners are attempting a public relations revival under the Trump Administration. Like the first Cold War, Russia is the US intelligence apparatus’ object of scorn. Anti-Russian sentiment has justified the never-ending intelligence “investigation” into alleged political meddling by Russia in the 2016 election. The investigation has been directed mainly at alternative political ideologies and governments that the US seeks to suppress and overthrow. However, unlike the first Cold War, to be Russian is no longer synonymous with communism. Rather than subsuming all leftist forces such as Einstein under the banner of communism, these days the FBI, CIA, and its intelligence partners prefer terms such as “Russian hacker.”
Since the end of the Cold War, the ruling class has been further weaponizing the US intelligence apparatus with the largest surveillance state in human history to suppress the movements and interests of downtrodden and oppressed people everywhere. The War on Terror enhanced the weapons at the disposal of the intelligence apparatus to greater and more commanding heights, leading to endless US-led wars on “rogue” nations and the collection of private data on every American citizen. Russiagate is an outgrowth of War on Terror’s failure to maintain popular support. Russia’s economic and political policies toward independent development and the rise in popularity of terms such as “socialism” in the US have given rise to fears of impending doom for the rulers of the US imperial project. This fear reflects the decline of US imperial influence abroad and the waning domestic popularity of both major parties. A new enemy was required to mitigate these crises, and the rulers have once again settled on Russia.
The Einstein File reminds us that the FBI has always been an enemy of all the people and a tool of the oligarchs that rule the country. It also reminds us that the War on Terror and Russiagate ultimately share a common historical lineage with the “Red Scare” of the 20thcentury. The FBI used the “Red Scare” as justification to harass, murder, infiltrate, detain, and deport “dissidents” that the organization deemed agents of “Communist Russia.” Jerome’s review of Einstein’s file reveals the extent to which the famous scientist was caught in the FBI’s war on dissent. The Hoover-led FBI collected nearly 2,000 pages worth of intelligence on Albert Einstein over two decades of his life, most of which pertained to his affiliations with progressive organizations.
Einstein’s FBI file uncovers the enormous scope of repression experienced not only by Einstein but also a range of political activists and organizations of the period. In fact, much of the file contains fabrications and exaggerations related to Einstein’s activities with what Hoover and the FBI considered “communist front groups.” Some of these groups included the Board of Guardians of Basque Children, formed during the Spanish war against fascism, and the American Crusade to End Lynching, inspired by Paul Robeson in 1946. Einstein’s file proves that for decades leading up to the official “Red Scare” of the 1950s, the FBI kept tabs on Einstein and others affiliated with socialist, anti-racist, and anti-fascist organizations. More than this, progressive and radical activists were often direct targets of laws such as Truman’s “loyalty oath” for federal employees or the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. These laws required public sector workers and union members to denounce any affiliation with the Communist Party.
The Einstein File beautifully recovers this history from the grips of an establishment narrative that has all but erased it from popular memory. Too many Americans remember the first half of the 20thcentury as a “rags to riches” story of recovery from the ruins of the Great Depression and the Second World War. By 1946, the US had become the dominant capitalist economy and military power in the world. The standard of living for millions of US, mainly white workers, were raised by the fruits of a war economy and a wave of domestic labor insurgency. Yet the FBI’s file on Einstein details his deep commitment to social justice throughout the so called “Golden Age” of US capitalism. We learn from the FBI that Einstein spoke out in opposition to racism, whether through his speeches at the historically Black Lincoln University or his organizing against the lynching of Black Americans. We also learn that Einstein was a tireless advocate for peace who never hesitated to fight Nazism and militarism wherever they arose.
The Einstein File further shows that the world’s most famous scientist was a social democrat whose specific experience with anti-Semitism in Germany and anti-communism in the US greatly influenced his political strivings. Einstein vocally rejected communism but that didn’t matter to the FBI. Einstein never leaked nuclear secrets to the Soviets not only because he disagreed with Soviet policy but also because it was the US intelligence apparatus itself that prevented Einstein from participating in the Manhattan Project (and he certainly opposed the use of the atomic bomb after witnessing the horrors inflicted on Japan). Einstein declined an invitation to the Soviet Union when many other leftists in the US visited the country. Yet by the end of his life, Einstein was the target of charges of espionage and efforts on the part of the INS to deport him from the country for his alleged ties to communism.
Einstein faced such an assault from the FBI precisely because of his strong adherence to the principle of solidarity. One of the primary historical tasks of US intelligence agencies has been to discourage solidarity between oppressed people in the United States and the downtrodden around the world. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the FBI was so obsessed with Einstein’s relationship with Paul Robeson, his opposition to white lynch mob violence against Black Americans, and his firm position against global warfare and fascism. While the FBI never took time to explain what truly motivated Einstein’s political activity in his file, we can conclude that the agency’s interest in Einstein was motivated by the larger goal of breaking the spirit of revolutionary fervor against global capital spreading across the planet at the time.
The Einstein File helps readers understand the FBI’s historic role in suppressing the efforts of communists, socialists, and progressives while ignoring or actively aiding fascists and the Klan. Jerome masterfully tells the story of Einstein’s political development through the information gathered in his FBI file. That Einstein’s anti-racist, anti-fascist, and pro-peace politics so threatened the agency gives us an idea of what and whose interests the FBI serves. In a period where the FBI and other intelligence agencies are posing as a bulwark against “Russian aggression” and “interference” in the US’ “democracy,” Jerome’s analysis reminds us that the FBI is an instrument of an oppressor class that actively works not for democracy but for war, fascism, and racial oppression. His book exposes why the FBI is an enemy of all the people and does so by documenting the dynamic political conditions of the early to mid-20thcentury that produced Einstein’s progressivism and the lessons they provide today.
Danny Haiphong is an activist and journalist in the New York City area. He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the forthcoming book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: The Fake News of Wall Street, White Supremacy, and the US War Machine (Skyhorse Publishing). He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
Source | Black Agenda Report
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MintPress News editorial policy.
Sept 7, 2018
On October 31st, 2017, the Royal Ritual took place at the Royal Albert Hall in London where Freemasons celebrated the 300th anniversary of their influence on society.
The event was presided by the Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England: Prince Edward, Duke of Kent – the grandson of King George V and Queen Mary, and the cousin of Queen Elizabeth II.
Attended by thousands of Freemasons from across the world (including 136 Grand Masters), the ceremony featured “sketches” bragging about the influence of Masonry on modern society, including its important role in the creation of the United States. It mentions several times the fact that their all-seeing eye is prominently featured on American bank notes.
Of course, all of this happens on a checkerboard pattern floor and under a gigantic compass and All-Seeing Eye. Here’s the video:
After singing “God Save the Queen”, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington (two prominent Freemasons) come out to explain how America was founded on Masonic principles.
– I hold to be self-evident, brother Franklin, all men are created equal.
– Indeed, brother Washington, all Freemasons meet as equals as we have the opportunity to create a nation in the very essence of Masonic morality. It would be wonderfully symbolic, don’t you think?
– You’ll be wanting to put the all-seeing eye on our banknotes next.
They go on to brag about the Masonic symbolism in Washington, DC.
– The plans for our new capital city already have a very Masonic feel to them, yeah.
They then talk about the great number of Masonic presidents, about how “Freemasonry will be embedded in American culture” and how the Statue of Liberty is a giant Masonic gift from French Freemasons. They also add: “Do not forget about the musicians”. Because there are lots of musicians who are Freemasons.
As seen in countless articles on this site, the music business [as well as Hollywood] is deeply embedded in occult principles (although many people in this industry are part of “darker” occult orders).
The ceremony ends with the initiation of a Masonic candidate by Prince Edward.
While this royal ritual contained absolutely nothing secret or occult (it is a public event), it nevertheless lays out in the open various facts that are often dismissed as a “conspiracy theory”.
The symbolism on the stage (which is reminiscent of an MTV music awards performance) is a clear reminder that mass media is replete with THEIR symbols, starting with the all-seeing eye. As documented on this site for the past 10 years, this symbols is now omnipresent, indicating the elite’s total control of popular culture.
Continue reading: Exposing the God of Freemasonry
“Remember you are an Englishman and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life.” — Cecil Rhodes, British imperialist, 1910
“Almost the entire population of Britain looks as though it has let itself go. Where once emotional restraint and self-control were admired, now it is emotional incontinence. It is no surprise that the British are despised around the world.” — Theodore Dalrymple, British author and psychiatrist, 2018
A new dystopia, rising from the ashes of WWII, now rears its ugly head and casts its shadow over England’s no longer “green and pleasant land”.
Merrie England! Was it ever that merry? A beautiful mirage! Maybe such a happy land never existed except in fantasy and in the perceptions of a privileged few blessed with all the felicities of the Good Life. And yet it has always existed in longing, where all utopias and earthly paradises germinate, as in the fevered imagination of William Blake who longed to build ‘Jerusalem’—Civitas Dei, or the City of God—in ‘England’s green and pleasant land’. Blake’s thoughts on this subject will be presented at the end of this article in one of the most beautiful and profoundly moving videos you are ever likely to see on the internet.
Meanwhile, let this literary gem by George Orwell on the three main races inhabiting the British Isles—the English, the Scots and the Irish—serve as a lighthearted introduction to this otherwise sombre article. “The English are not happy unless they are miserable, the Irish are not at peace unless they are at war, and the Scots are not at home unless they are abroad.”
The English, by common consensus, are the maddest of the bunch.
Once famous for their stiff-upper lip attitude to life, a characteristic still found among the educated upper classes and a conservative older generation, the British as a whole have undergone a startling change of national character in the last two decades. This is almost certainly due to the toxic influence of television, trashy Hollywood movies, and the mind-destroying excesses of the internet. The Brits have lost their self-confidence, their customary aplomb, their cheerful joie de vivre. Why? Because they have become demoralised. Thoroughly demoralised. “In every face”, to quote William Blake, you now see “marks of weakness, marks of woe”.
The narcissistic younger generation in particular, confident in their own omniscience, bear little resemblance to their parents and grandparents whom they tend to belittle as inferior beings with all the wrong ideas and attitudes.
The new Brits tend to be an emotional bunch. They get easily upset. They are outraged by six appalling things before breakfast. They insist on having their “safe spaces” in universities, for example, where no idea is allowed to penetrate that might possibly ruffle the tranquil waters of their intellectual somnolence. Dare to disagree with them even on some minor point and they will snarl at you for crossing their “boundaries”. Getting on their nerves is easy. All you have to do is exist.
British Liberal Prime Minister Herbert Asquith (1852-1928) once noted dryly, “Youth would be an ideal state if it came a little later in life.” The older I get, the more I appreciate the truth of the witty aphorism that youth is wasted on the young. Apropos of which, one is reminded of the old French adage that says it all: Si jeunesse savait, si vieillese pouvait. — “If youth but knew, if age but could.”
To attract attention nowadays, if the ads in fashion magazines are anything to go on, young men need to look darkly dangerous and young women anorexically deranged. The passport to peer approval is an air of decadence, if not degeneracy. The tragedy is that this immature attitude to life, previously confined to the young, has now infected the general population at large.
British psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple has written much on this subject. He says:
All kinds of princely personages—footballers, rock stars, actors, actresses, and the like—display their inner turmoil. They parade it as beggars in some countries display their amputated stumps. They seem to be saying, ‘We too suffer, despite our wealth, privilege, and fairy-tale lives, which you falsely imagine to be enviable and without blemish.’
Sufferers and victims are turned into heroes merely on account of their suffering or victimisation, so that those celebrities who confess to misery, drug addiction, and alcoholism, are even more to be adulated than they already were.
It’s no longer safe for a young man to flirt with a female colleague at work. Simply looking at her with interest is now classified as a “microaggression” and could get him reported for “sexual harassment”. These uppity feminists keep telling everyone around them, much to the irritation of most intelligent men, how “oppressed” their grandmothers were and how “liberated” they are now.
No wonder misogyny and male suicide rates (see below) have shown a sharp increase in recent years, keeping pace with a rise in rampant feminism and soaring hemlines that leave little to the imagination.
— § —
I was relieved to find that Dalrymple’s views on Brexit coincided with my own. The fact that 17.4 million people voted in a referendum over two years ago, in June 2016, to sever all ties with the European superstate is, according to Dalrymple, not only a triumph for democracy but also a victory of the wiser older generation over the Clueless Young. For it was the young who voted fatuously to remain tied to Europe’s apron strings, whereas it was the oldsters who voted overwhelmingly to escape the diktats of a sinister superstate that seeks to banish all borders between countries and turn Europe into a multicultural zoo.
Of these emotionally overwrought young idealists who voted to remain in the EU and lost, Dalrymple has this to say:
Nearly half of the young people who voted to remain [in Europe] either wept, or felt close to weeping, afterwards. They felt that their future had been stolen from them by those who voted for Brexit. The fact that the youth unemployment rate in Belgium and France is 25%, in Portugal 30%, in Italy 39%, in Spain 45% and in Greece 49% did not seem to worry them. They were not of the youth-unemployment class.
The British are now a traumatised nation, Dalrymple believes. The evidence for this lies all around us. We only need to open our eyes. There is a moral relativism in the air. The result? Moral anarchy. Knifing people to death in the streets or throwing sulphuric acid in their faces, disfiguring them for life, has become the crime du jour. “A sense of lawlessness and fear is sweeping across Britain,” I read in the Daily Mail today. “Violence is soaring on the streets, police are grossly overstretched and the prison system is sliding into crisis.”
The country is certainly in deep trouble when its prisoners are marching through prison corridors, brandishing machetes and clubs, while the prison officers are cowering in their back offices behind chain-locked doors.
The country’s National Health Service (NHS) is in meltdown, with vast numbers of people being denied vital operations. People are going blind because there are not enough doctors to give them cataract operations. You have to be in agony before they give you a hip replacement or repair your hernia. So how are the politicians trying to solve this problem? They are letting in more immigrants to add to the overload of patients requiring cataract operations, hip replacements and hernias! And how are these empowered pundits helping to solve the doctor shortage, a shortage entirely of their own making? They are importing more immigrant doctors who can barely speak the English language and are often medically incompetent, if not downright dangerous.
A report in today’s Daily Mail (24 August, 2018) carries the headline: ‘The UK streets where more than 3 in 4 babies have migrant mothers”. Apart from an enormous influx of immigrants from Eastern Europe, particularly from Poland and Romania, vast numbers of illegal immigrants and so-called “refugees” have swarmed in from Asia and Africa. The top five countries contributing to non-white immigration, in order of their high numbers, are Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nigeria and Somalia. Between them, these now make up as much as 7.1 per cent of the British population. (See this chart).
In 2017, 28.4 per cent of births were born to mothers outside Britain. In some parts of Britain, it was as high as three children in four. It was the largest percentage since 1969. Campaigners said the statistics were a striking illustration of the way mass migration is changing the face of the country — and placing additional pressure on public services, including hospitals, schools and housing. The proportion has risen every year since 1990.
The floodgates were thrown open with a vengeance in 1997 when the mendacious war criminal Tony Blair became prime minister after a landslide victory. Blair was later to be rewarded for his services to multiculturalism by being awarded the prestigious Charlemagne Prize in 1999 by the EU, a distinction he was to share with Angela Merkel who was to bag the same prize in 2008 and was to eclipse even Tony Blair in her misguided enthusiasm for mass immigration. This is not the place for expatiating on the crackpot theories of Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, the ideological godfather of the EU. Suffice to say that this Austro-Japanese promoter of miscegenation and mongrelisation through mass immigration was to be the first recipient of the Charlemagne Prize (in 1950), which is why it is also sometimes known as the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize. Other recipients of this coveted prize, all politically correct promoters of multiculturalism, have been Henry Kissinger (1987), Bill Clinton (2000), Pope John Paul II (2004), Pope Francis (2016), and Emmanuel Macron (2017).
Which brings us back to the Brits, now in the process of fighting for a meaningful Brexit which would help to free them from the shackles of the European superstate, hellbent on flooding every European country with as many foreigners as possible. The correlation between high levels of immigration, especially from Third World countries, and high and escalating levels of crime are now so blindingly obvious in Britain (and indeed elsewhere) that it’s hard to believe that this correlation is not only hotly denied by the authorities but denounced as “racist” if it should even be suggested. One has only to open the newspapers in Britain to see that not a day goes by when monstrous crimes are not being committed by criminals who are disproportionately of immigrant stock, mostly of African or Asian origin.
Two cases, both plucked from today’s Daily Mail, will amply illustrate this correlation. Coincidence? I don’t think so. Not unless such coincidences occur several times a week:
A mother-of-two stabbed by a knifeman targeting lone women at night was saved by her thick coat.
The victim, in her 60s, was walking home with fish and chips on Friday night when a stranger leapt out and knifed her in the stomach…. The terrified pensioner thought she had been punched as her thick clothing stopped the blade from plunging deeper into her stomach.
Yesterday her distraught daughter told how her mother might have been killed, but when her attacker went to stab her a second time, ‘she saw the glisten of the knife and just ran’.
Bleeding, she managed to stagger back to her home…. Police are linking the unprovoked attack to the stabbing of another single woman in the same area over the Bank Holiday weekend.
A spokesman for Scotland Yard said: “In both cases the suspect is described as a black male, aged around 40….”
(Abridged, see Terrified pensioner stabbed on way home)
The second case involves a bloodbath perpetrated by an out-of-control Afghan immigrant:
A mother and daughter were stabbed to death in a frenzied attack outside their home yesterday morning. Neighbours in the quiet suburban street initially thought their screams were the sound of foxes.
Last night police were hunting Janbaz Tarin, 21, for the murders of his former girlfriend Raneem Oudeh, 22, and her mother, Khaola Saleem, 49. The women were originally from Syria but have lived in the UK for at least 16 years. Tarin, who is originally from Afghanistan, worked in a corner shop.
Wendy Brown, 76, who lives nearby with her husband, said: “We have lived here for 40 years. Nothing like this has ever happened before. It is terrifying.”
(Abridged, see Manhunt after mum and daughter knifed to death)
What the native born English lady is saying, if you read between the lines, is that 40 years ago, before the invasion of her country by outlanders from foreign parts, she was living in a relatively safe and crime free country. No longer. Most of the criminals you hear of nowadays no longer have reassuringly familiar names the average white Brit can pronounce, like Winston Smith and John Brown. The five doctors mentioned in the paragraph below, for example, all convicted of sexually assaulting their white female patients, happen to be without exception of Asian origin. Coincidence? Most unlikely. Forty years ago, for a start, doctors groping and taking obscene photos of their female patients surreptitiously, were extremely rare events. Today they are all too common. And the names they bear are disproportionately foreign. The five doctors featured below—hardly a ringing endorsement of multiculturalism—all sport pretty weird names most Brits would get wrong in a spelling test: Dr Gosul Islam, Dr Rajeskumar Mehta, Dr Syed Bukhari, Dr Jaswant Rathore, and Dr Thair Altail.
The average older Brit now feels like a stranger in a strange land.
— § —
Dalrymple sees the British as finding refuge for their many sorrows in a cheerless hedonism, drinking themselves into a stupor or seeking consolation in the pleasures of the flesh. Quite a few male doctors, often of immigrant stock—see here, here, here, here, and here—have begun to subject their female patients to sexual abuse on an almost epic scale. The politicians are at it too, sexually harassing and groping their female staff in the House of Commons or watching pornography while supposedly engaged in high-powered affairs of state. These are the people running the country. Having lost control of their own impulses, they are nevertheless given licence to lord it over the lives of millions of their fellow citizens.
Is it any wonder the country is going to the dogs?
THEN (1958) . . . and NOW (2018)
— § —
The last two centuries have seen enormous technological progress but human nature is pretty much the same with one significant difference: a huge number of Brits are now committing suicide at the drop of a hat, especially young men. Suicide is now the biggest killer of men under 50, with 84 taking their own lives every week. Though not far behind in the suicide race, women are more likely than men to develop serious mental complaints and to be on medication of some kind. The number of people I notice talking to themselves in public places nowadays, twitching spasmodically or jerking their heads round from side to side like marionettes gone mad, is truly frightening.
The worst fate, according to Dalrymple, is to be an intelligent and sensitive person born into the British underclass. “The social pressure on you to fail is enormous,” he notes. “I remember a girl who wanted to study French but ‘they said I was stupid because I was clever’. Can you imagine growing up in that environment?” British education, he concludes gloomily, involves “people who come out of school knowing less than when they went in.”
The country’s cultural level has plummeted. The Brits are so degraded culturally they can’t even answer the telephone properly. They were once known for emotional constipation. Now it’s emotional incontinence.
Tolerance has become the new vice:
A society that tolerates everything is rather bad. Shouting, screaming, intimidation. We are prepared to tolerate public vomiting, but if you use the term “actress”, you are a sexist. A very well-educated lady told me public vomiting is all right: “They can clear it up.” This is how the élite thinks. They are so anxious not to seem narrow-minded or bigoted, or of being “judgmental”.
Dalrymple thinks it’s a puzzle as to why Britain has become more degraded than all other comparable countries.
He recounts an experience he had in Manchester, where he was staying at an hotel: “There was laughing and screaming outside at 1.30 in the morning. When I went out the next morning, I found that someone had been nearly murdered—he was in hospital, in a coma. You can’t tell the difference in England between people enjoying themselves and someone being murdered.”
Almost the entire population of Britain, Dalrymple notes ruefully, “looks as though it has let itself go. Where once emotional restraint and self-control were admired, now it is emotional incontinence. It is as if they had undergone potty-training in reverse.”
The person who controls himself is not only a figure of fun, but a traitor to his own best interests. “It is no surprise,” Dalrymple concludes, “that the British are despised around the world.”
— § —
I hate to see the British described in these negative terms. In fact, I have to disagree that the Brits are “despised around the world.” If anything, the opposite is true. Most white Americans still regard their British ancestors with affection, admiring their accents and taking pride in the blood and soil of their forefathers. The blood that flows through their veins, after all, is the same blood that flowed through the veins of the Pilgrim Fathers and the veins of Shakespeare, Milton and Newton. Even India secretly mourned the demise of Pax Britannica when the raj came to an end and the burra sahib, weary of conquest, packed his bags and went back home.
One virtue the Brits have always enjoyed in abundance, far more than any other country. This is noblesse oblige, an innate compassion for the underdog and a hatred of the bully. Their sense of honour, even now amid their desolation, has never left them. This virtue, needless to say, is more often to be found among the well-bred upper classes and is conspicuous by its absence among the nouveaux riches and the lower pushy types who are forced to live by their wits.
You will notice this, too, if you live long in Britain: the kindest people in the country are the older generation, especially its valiant brigade of dotty old ladies. Ever ready to drop their coins in a beggar’s bowl or buy a takeaway tea and sandwiches for some homeless bum, these charitable old dears are also most likely to fall victims and be fleeced alive by scam artists. Meanwhile, it’s the young and trendy who are the most heartless when it comes to derelicts. Never expect even a smile from them if ever you go begging, let alone a penny for your pains.
We need to cross the Atlantic to see what has happened to the Brits. The same malaise, or creeping soul sickness, that has afflicted their American cousins, has now fallen on the Brits with a vengeance. In the words of an American psychiatrist, this new plague is known as “shit-life syndrome”.
Let Guardian columnist Will Hutton explain:
US doctors [have] coined a phrase for this condition: “shit-life syndrome”. Poor working-age Americans of all races are locked in a cycle of poverty and neglect, amid wider affluence. They are ill educated and ill trained. The jobs available are drudge work paying the minimum wage, with minimal or no job security. They are trapped in poor neighbourhoods where the prospect of owning a home is a distant dream. There is little social housing, scant income support and contingent access to healthcare. Finding meaning in life is close to impossible.
Yet turn on the TV or visit a middle-class shopping mall, Hutton adds, and a very different and unattainable world presents itself. “Knowing that you are valueless, you resort to drugs, antidepressants and booze. You eat junk food and watch your ill-treated body balloon. It is not just poverty, but growing relative poverty in an era of rising inequality, with all its psychological side-effects, that is the killer.”
Many Americans are now in poor health. In physical pain. They are so depressed that they not only need antidepressants but opioid painkillers. To this they add alcohol, drinking themselves into a stupor. It’s a never-ending cycle of misery. “They have much to be depressed about”, Hutton glooms, adding the significant fact that these dead enders all tend to be ardent Trump supporters. “They, and tens of millions like them teetering on the edge of the same condition, constitute Donald Trump’s electoral base.” Mostly marginalised and maladjusted white Americans, they live in hope that their president will one day wave a magic wand and rescue them from futility.
The parallels between America and Britain, Hutton tells us, have now become obvious:
Shit-life syndrome is not just a feature of a US city such as Baltimore, where the difference in life expectancy between the richer and poorer districts is as much as 20 years, it’s a feature of our cities, too. Within the London borough of Kensington and Chelsea, the difference in life expectancy between richest and poorest is 16 years. And the trends are deteriorating.
Too many of England’s towns are becoming crucibles of shit-life syndrome. They have become inward-looking, urban islands in which despair and despondency are too prevalent. Train and bus fares are so high that travelling within them has become prohibitively expensive. Stripped of power by the most centralised system in Europe, they are disempowered and sullen about the present and apprehensive of the future.
All this can and must change.
But nothing changes.
Two years after Brexit, Theresa May—famous for her catchphrase “Brexit means Brexit”—has yet to deliver on her promise to cut free from Europe and reclaim British sovereignty.
Having stabbed the British public in the back by openly aligning herself with the Europhile enemy in recent months, though affecting a need for fair play and a desire to give the British public what it voted for on 23 June 2016, Mrs May would be only too happy to see Brexit fail.
This is what democracy has come to mean in Britain: you are free to vote only if you vote correctly. Stalin was right when he said, “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.”
VIDEO : 3 mins
‘ENGLAND’S GREEN AND PLEASANT LAND’
Then the next day to consolidate the book’s lurid claims, the New York Times, America’s so-called “paper of record” publishes an oped allegedly by an administration insider essentially “confirming” Woodward’s tell-all account.
What’s more, the sense of paranoia within the Trump administration will now be ratcheted up to levels which make normal staff working and communications almost paralyzed. It’s a perfect psy-ops to explode chaos and mistrust among Trump’s inner circle.
But who really is Bob Woodward? He is famed as one of the Washington Post reporters who exposed the Watergate affair in 1974 which forced then President Richard Nixon to quit office in ignominy. The exposé of Nixon’s wiretapping on Democrat rivals is commonly seen as the high-point of American journalism, and thus Woodward as a paragon of journalistic integrity.
But as Russ Baker contends in his groundbreaking book, Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Watergate and Nixon affair is not all that it seems. And neither is Woodward. There is credible evidence that the American Deep State of the military-intelligence apparatus used the Watergate scandal as a way to get rid of Nixon whose febrile mental state was becoming a concern to them. Woodward, who had a background in Navy intelligence was suspiciously a prodigy journalist who rapidly rose to cover what became the scandal that ended Nixon’s presidency.
Woodward’s newly published book on the Trump White House makes a damning case of a president who is allegedly despised and feared by his inner circle. It claims that staff have engineered an “administrative coup” against Trump, preventing him from taking key decisions, and generally portraying him as a farcical figure. The book seeds the concept among the public of a necessary coup against Trump.
This is where Woodward’s prestigious Watergate reputation comes into play. His role in that affair as a supposed champion of truth and of holding power to account is then invoked to give the seal of accuracy to his book on Trump. If Woodward says the president is a basket case, then it must be so, so goes the anticipated general public reaction.
In order to drive the message home, the New York Times follows up with an oped claiming to be written by an anonymous official within the Trump administration who “confirms” what Woodward’s book is claiming.
When the Woodward book came out, there were staunch rebuttals of its claims from senior White House officials. In particular the Defense Secretary James Mattis, who was supposedly one of Woodward’s main sources, saying that Trump was an idiot who wanted to assassinate Syrian President Bashar al Assad. Mattis dismissed the book and its author as having a “rich imagination”. There were also similar putdowns from Trump’s Chief of Staff John Kelly and his ambassador the United Nations Nikki Haley.
Trump himself scorned Woodward’s book, ‘Fear’, as a shoddy “work of fiction”. Thanks to the publicity, the title has become a “best-seller” within days of being published.
The pushback from the Trump White House was of course to be expected, given the claims from such an imminent journalist. That’s why the New York Times oped is a crucial capping on the claims, especially since the oped is supposedly written by a senior administration official.
The New York Times says it knows the name of the official who wrote the piece. But it is not disclosing his or her identity, as the supposed author requests.
The public therefore can’t know the authenticity of the oped. Was it really written by a Trump administration senior official? Or some low-level staff? Or maybe not even an actual member of staff? The author of the oped claims: “I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.”
But the main purpose is the sowing of grave doubt in the public mind and among Trump’s senior staff at the White House. The oped appears to confirm the claims made by Woodward about a dysfunctional president who is being handled by staff working in “resistance” to his “impetuousness” for the “safety of America”. It also goes further by saying that the dysfunction ultimately stems from Trump’s “immorality”.
Ultimately, it is virtually impossible to prove the veracity of Woodward’s book and the subsequent “confirmatory” article in the New York Times. Woodward’s book has been denied by supposedly “key sources”. The authenticity of the author of the New York Times oped is a matter of trust in that newspaper’s editors. The so-called paper of record has lately been a massive purveyor of baseless scare stories slandering Russia. For many critics it is not a reliable nor ethical source, as is claimed.
But the point is that a gravely damaging impact has been inflicted on the Trump presidency. His ability to rebuff critics with his customary braggadocio of slamming “fake news” appears this time to be mortally wounded.
This is not meant to be a defense of the Trump administration nor of this president. Trump’s White House certainly appears to be an unorthodox place, as indicated by the high turnover of senior staff over the past two years since his election.
Trump’s personality certainly comes across as impetuous and petty. His personal also life seems tainted with deceit and lewd scandals.
Nevertheless he is the president that Americans voted for. And so far, he has not done anything out of the ordinary for American presidents. He is the usual run-of-the-mill guardian of big business and the oligarch system of enriching the super wealthy. Trump, like most of his predecessors, should also be prosecuted for war crimes over his bombing of Syria and Yemen. But all those misdemeanors and crimes are par for the course for US presidents.
The one thing that Trump has done out of the ordinary, as far as the Deep State opponents are concerned, is his refusal so far to ramp up aggression with Russia. That has always been the unacceptable problem with Trump as president for the unelected imperial planners of the Deep State.
The so-called “Russiagate” charade has failed to oust Trump due to its embarrassing dearth of evidence on alleged collusion with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. The wider American public have simply not bought into that drama which has been concocted by political and media elites to nix Trump.
Given the futility of those efforts, the Deep State may have now found at last the effective instrument with which to eliminate Trump from the White House. You enlist a “star journalist” with yesteryear’s Deep State operative experience, get the supposed paper of record to quickly “confirm” the salacious details, and then wait for the desired “administrative coup” to become a popularly demanded reality.