Your characterization of the Intercept is spot on, they started repeating the same tropes found in the “msm”. I used to read TI for opinions different from my own and I liked that they took a stance different from the stuff that is force fed down our throats on any tv program.
During the Russia hoax I noticed a palpable change in reporting and it turned me off.
We should be questioning everything we hear from any source. Healthy skepticism is a great combatant against group think.
It is remarkable to see all institutions generally all move in the same direction politically. I have thought a lot on this and wondered how it could be possible for this level of coordination across so many places.
For some time I assumed so much agreement meant that their claims must be valid, or we would naturally hear more dissent, but too many contradictions and lies have piled up for me to believe this to be the case.
So the best explanation I have is that many of the people who make up these institutions come from the same backgrounds, especially with regard to their schooling. Further, the left has stigmatized the concepts of racism and bigotry to such a point that they no longer have a way to counter the accusation of either without the risk of reputations fallout, which in turn has provided the primary means to coerce and control with a common ideology across each. Finally, combined with the two points above, Trump provided the perfect villain to circle the wagons and claim that it was imperative for all to come together against such a a threat (and if you don’t your a bigot, because only a bigot wouldn’t oppose him, hence why point two is the principal means of enforcing this groupthink).
I guess social media also must be brought up too, as that has provided the primary tool to attack a persons reputation.
It’s all a bit discouraging as a former person of the left to watch this all happen as a top down exercise, replacing many of the lefts best motivations (questioning power and the war state, and fighting for the working class) with new ones that are hollow by comparison and only seem to help those in power consolidate more power.
"For a time I assumed so much agreement meant that their claims must be valid, or we would naturally hear more dissent."
This uniformity of acceptance is exactly what the establishment wants and strives to achieve. It's what Noam Chomsky's book, Manufacturing Consent, is all about; how it's done, who does it and how to recognize it. But this manufactured consent isn't limited to liberal media. The right has its own version as well and it's every bit as damaging and dangerous as the left's. Each side has its own echo chamber creating consensus through lies, misinformation and punishment of heretics.
Agreed, we saw the right's version when people criticized the Iraq war. Right now the overwhelming manufactured consent is coming from the left though as I see it (and as a former lefty it's been quite a thing to have to acknowledge for me personally).
I'm not really on any team these days, but am finding some of the more libertarian ideas more sensible in light of the current world we live in. For example I've gained a new found love of federalism and will openly support any state that acts on it's own in the face of federal laws (whether that be on a left issue as we saw with pot or a right facing issue as we are seeing with regards to 2A rules or even possibly CRT). I think this is a natural way to try and break up the group think and with covid has provided some fascinating counter examples that will no doubt inform us for years to come. It also allows people to leave states that are governing poorly to states that are governing better (and not being stuck with a single choice coming from DC, which many like myself don't feel at all represented by).
I'm with you. As a former lefty myself, I am revisiting my political POV and reconsidering some conservative and libertarian points. One thing I absolutely refuse to get down with is dehumanizing someone just because they are conservative or working class. I come from working class and am a veteran. I may dislike some of their views, but they are my fellow citizens and are human beings and it is incumbent upon me to tolerate them and to accept that we live in a pluralistic society.
I find the recent efforts on the left to dehumanize these people disturbing. It reeks of the worst kind of arrogance and sophistry - and the fact that it is coming from those whose message used to be about lifting everyone up? Just unbelievable.
I have learned a great deal over the past several years about the dangers of pursuing utopia. Coercion is always part of the cocktail and that is never good. As a balance to this trend, I am finding it hopeful that more and more left-leaning progressives and liberals are finding the current wave of behavior beyond the pale. If we can get enough people of good heart and mind to form non-partisan coalitions, we can push back and turn this toxic tide.
I am in complete agreement. Watching many institutions of the left, especially within the ranks of journalism, dehumanize working class people on the right with no power, while protecting the worst people on the left who possess a great deal of power, was one of the observations that allowed me to overcome my own cognitive dissonance. I cannot properly express how much it disgusts me.
I have some hope as well that we can turn the tide. I feel that this left we are describing became far too confident in their efforts, thanks probably to Trump, and at this point lack any pretext to what they are attempting to do (and is so out of step with what most people want).
Still, the reality is things are likely to get worse before they get better. Add with the possibility of inflation the likes of which we haven't seen in nearly five decades and it become very murky where things could go as faith in bed rock institutions that traditionally provide stability dissolves before our eyes (and is nearly non-existent on the right, outside of some religious institutions).
It's so crucial that we fight the instinct to dehumanize any groups as we continue through this difficult time.
Good points. It is a challenge to avoid group-think when you agree with a certain position. The Right certainly stained themselves (and took us several steps on the path to where we are now) with their reaction to 9/11.
I'm not convinced the "overwhelming" manufactured consent is coming from the left. It may seem that way because the more established left outlets - CNN, MSNBC, NYT are so guilty of it and they have huge audiences. But the right has its own staples for consent - Fox, OAN, etc. Tucker is the most watched cable show in the country. Our perceptions of it probably depend on which particular tribe we belong to.
I am on the political right, but I pay more attention to voices like Glenn or Matt Taibbi. I am even listening to Chomsky and Adolph Reed, Jr.
Chomsky makes a lot of good points when he talks about manufactured consent, but I think he villifies the 1960s era Conservatives (and to a lesser point Republicans) too much. Don't get me wrong, they are culpable, but the Establishment and the Elites in the US are mostly Democrats. I look at this Tablet interview with Angelo Codevilla:
"[T]he Democrats were the senior partners in the ruling class. The Republicans are the junior partners."
"The reason being that the American ruling class was built by or under the Democratic Party. First, under Woodrow Wilson and then later under Franklin Roosevelt. It was a ruling class that prized above all its intellectual superiority over the ruled. And that saw itself as the natural carriers of scientific knowledge, as the class that was naturally best able to run society and was therefore entitled to run society."
"The Republican members of the ruling class aspire to that sort of intellectual status or reputation. And they have shared a taste of this ruling class. But they are not part of the same party, and as such, are constantly trying to get closer to the senior partners. As the junior members of the ruling class, they are not nearly as tied to government as the Democrats are. And therefore, their elite prerogatives are not safe."
It's also a combination of herd mentality and coordinated pressure campaigns. JournoList (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList) was one way they coordinated this, until it was exposed. Presumably later iterations are better at hiding their existence than JournoList and Cabalist (a list for a secret cabal, get it? the irony is ha ha only serious).
Excellent defense. Reed & Co. deserve all the criticism you have dished out. They turned The Intercept into a hyper-partisan rag. The shitlibs may not be moved but I assure you that those who are truly independent see the truth. The fact that your readers departed The Intercept for your Substack proves it. Your journalist critics hate you because you took the risks they were too scared to take but you actually succeeded. To you, much respect! (PS — Please come to LA and sign my copy of your latest book, Securing Democracy. Drinks on me!)
Thanks! I'm still working on how to get signed books to every subscriber who wants one. Now that I'm first-dose immunized, I'll be able to travel to the US shortly and do it (also doing Rogan's show again, this time in person: excited about that).
If it's Moderna watch out for that second dose. I had a slightly bad reaction to it - 2 days of mild fever and chills. One of my brothers also got Moderna and it was not so bad for him. Not a reason to avoid the second dose, just don't plan anything important for the few days after you get it.
My wife and I got the J&J just before the "pause". She had no reaction other than soreness at the injection site. The next day I had strong flu symptoms, without the nausea or fever. Fine the next day.
Also please stay safe it would not shock me one bit for the Biden intelligence state to have you arrested as part of the Snowden leaks, especially given how much you criticize the DNC.
If you are ever going to Reno, Nevada, please, please let me know if there's a possibility to meet. Or Singapore (though they are locked down for now).
I too feel like Glenn took a risk. Really he made a sacrifice imho. I mean, he would be making bank and not looking over his shoulders had he kept his mouth shut and done as told. It takes courage, and self sacrifice, to care more for the truth and others than yourself. Especially at great rewards, or greater risks.
I’m sure some journalists just envy him. I’m sure some hate that he’s setting a higher standard and now they’ll have to work harder. And I’m sure some are part of the problems in our country and hate that he is fucking up their plans.
But I as a citizen in need of the truth I find it purely refreshing. Like a desperate breath of air. And I most definitely do hope it sets a new, more truthful, tone in journalism.
I agree with all of your comments. I'm sure that Glenn was anxious leaving a highly paid, secure, job. I think it's worked out well for him, but it was definitely a leap into the unknown. And I've got to think the person satisfaction in not having to compromise his principals is a reward beyond valuation. Selfishly, we have all gained enormously from the risk he took.
Here's the thing: I'm subscribed to you because you're one of the only SANE journalists who has the courage to speak the TRUTH that still exists. Those "journalists" live in an insane bubble-world where speech is violence, sanity is insanity, and there are 554 genders.
Would you really want to be associated with them? Have no credibility like them? Of course not.
No one takes them seriously because they are unserious lunatics. Keep doing what you do, Glenn, you're doing important work and they know it.
Also recommend: Matt Taibi, Max Blumenthal, Ben Norton, Rania Khalik, Chris Hedges, and (per Glenn’s recommendation) Shant Mesrobian. Any recommendations from you?
Mate is far and away better and more detail oriented when it comes to exposing the Russiagate lies than Greenwald has ever been. I guess that's no big deal to GG since by that time he was already rich and had locked away the Snowden archives so that nobody could see the remaining 99% including very important items like this one.
Guess Glenn as the main archivist of that tranche of files must've just missed this one for 4 years, huh? Or instead was he running cover for his benefactor Pierre Omidyar?
Chris Hedges is amazing, found him recently and really like his work. Lucian Truscott is another great writer, hate Salon these days but if you wade through all the shitty writers they have on staff you can find a couple of decent ones.
How do you thing Glenn Greenwald feels about Max Blumenthal and the Grayzone's reportage concerning his former Daddy Warbucks - Pierre Omidyar - the man whose $250MM cash infusion he used to establish his own platform and get rich?
Please point me to the expose on his benefactor's regime change activities or connections to the security/surveillance state during his, what, 6 years at The Intercept.
They are afraid of Glenn & Matt Taibbi. One reason I dropped RS was the ads, same ads as in NYMagazine and Times. These tell you their their targeted demographic. It wasn't me anymore.
I immediately Switched to Substack (Greenwald and Taibbi) after his resignation and my detective work (not too hard) to find out the Betsy Reed was earning some $300k ...So when I get the request for donations (and threats to cut off “free” access) I do the old Robert DeNiro Taxi Driver routine “ are you talking to me”
Comments here are definitely value added. I'm on the right, but enjoy reading thoughtful comments from folks on the left. They make me examine issues more thoroughly. I can't say that about the MSM (mostly because their comments are rote partisan tripe - not at all persuasive).
A war against a pioneering media site he founded? He's more eager than the Intercept is to start a war, against the site that he founded and did a lot to shape. If the idea that he's now likely to win the war counts in your mind as one of the better things you can say about him, you should realize that's hardly a compliment. There are lots of good things to say about Greenwald but this isn't it.
If you had checked their website you would see who works there; I don't. I'm a longtime reader of Greenwald who thought it was great when he founded the Intercept, a site which did (and still does) reflect a lot of the principles that he shares with many on the left. Perhaps you don't share those principles, but that's not my problem.
I also look at how Greenwald may treat longtime allies who have helped him in his fights for what he sees as right. There are some lingering questions there, and whatever answers may come to those questions is something that doesn't necessarily need to be discussed much here. The answers may come later (not too late) or may come sooner; the answers may be pure silence (a refusal to deal with things) or perhaps eventually something better than mere silence. And even if the answer is not pure silence it may not necessarily be audible to you and me. I support and like Greenwald, including on many of the points where he split with the Intercept -- and I'm also here to say that the answers to these lingering questions matter.
Eh. I'm still finding the word salad a bit hard to follow.
For my part, I'm always disappointed when a once-radical, formerly informative news outlet goes south. (DemocracyNow! springs to mind; that actually broke my heart a little bit.) But those things happen - inevitably. It's not the end of the world, and - at least on the readers' end - it's not personal.
An ordinary person who wants and needs solid, no-bullshit, nonpartisan journalism will always support a known quantity like Glenn Greenwald, simply because he delivers the goods. The Intercept? Whatever. I respect some of the individuals involved very much, but I don't owe the outlet itself shit - and neither do you.
It is a cautionary tale, oft told. Personnel is policy. No wealthy businessman can establish a foundation that won't, in time, come to symbolize everything that businessman disagreed with; and no journalist devoted to actual journalism can establish a media publication that won't ultimately become a narrative peddling left-liberal echo chamber.
Glenn, I am a recent subscriber and only recently knew of you on an appearance with Tucker Carlson. What I heard from you that night was “balls and strikes”. I then got on your email list and got a chance to read some of your stuff. I liked it and put my money to those that I support. The personal attacks you are getting are no different from the article you wrote about the NYC mayoral race a couple weeks ago. You seem to be taking the punches well and like your moxie punching back. I am proud to support your work and will continue to do so. Stand tall.
I actually saw the shooting in Kenosha happen live while watching a livestream. Then I gathered all the pictures and videos I could before they could be taken down or edited. The narrative that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered two innocent people and crippled a nice, upstanding member of society is bullshit.
Not to mention the blatant lie told by the MSM that Jacob Blake was an unarmed black man. He is black and a man, but unarmed? Never. He admitted it himself in an interview....but now a sufficient number of MSM sycophants are none the wiser....played just as they intended!
This is the consequence of raising generations on participation trophies and endless flattery. Add in 4 years of indoctrination, not education, by the leftist ideologues posing as professors and voila!, a self-righteous, navel-gazing younger cohort, unable to think beyond their ideological restraint and all-important feelings (of course, the feelings of others never crosses their enfeebled minds) is unleashed on the world.
The horrifying part, as you mention, is that these spoiled, pampered individuals attacking the powerless in our nation on behalf of the powerful, actually believe they are creating a better world. Seething hatred is the proper response to such individuals who so cavalierly ruin the lives of others.
"Depicting critics of liberal orthodoxies as mentally ill, a rage-driven bully, and a shadow of their former selves is a long-time tactic of guardians of establishment liberalism to expel dissidents from their in-group circles." This tactic has made it to the far corners of our culture. Last fall, urged my county bar association (in the Northeast Kingdom county of Caledonia, of all places) to pass a resolution supporting the First Amendment. It was a straight forward, non partisan resolution. I was called a "lunatic" "crazy", told to get off my computer and go lie down--with every other attorney in the county copied. This spring, when I suggested we have a county CLE on professionalism, I was subjected to a rant by an attorney (copying everyone) that I was, among other things, a bully. Personal emails from these same people said they were "worried" about my mental health, that it was "sad" how my professional skills have deteriorated. My sin? I am a Republican, vice chair of the Vermont Republican party. Bigotry is alive and well, and even celebrated, by the professional class.
The personal attacks on Glenn remind me of the old Soviet Union. If anyone did not enthusiastically recognize the superiority of the Workers Paradise they were obviously mentally ill. For their own good they were sent to Mental Hospitals where they were never heard from again.
There is a reason that Glenn Greenwald's subscribers span the political spectrum from the far left to the far right, and why most of the time those who comment here mostly agree with Glenn and each other (at least on the central issues in his articles). Unlike almost everyone else in media today Glenn's writing is based upon principals consistently applied regardless of ideological politics.
The attacks on Glenn by those at the Intercept and other left wing media outlets reveal much about them. It's clear they do not apply principals consistently. They treat their "journalism" more as a religion, and Glenn as an apostate. When the media, as the Intercept has done, sees their role as advocacy rather than as searching for and publishing facts and truth regardless of whose ox is gored, they become mere partisan hacks.
Intellectual dishonesty gets me, too. I don't believe they are morons. For the most part they are very intelligent. But when you are extremely partisan it becomes easy to lie to yourself, and they do it freely.
Your characterization of the Intercept is spot on, they started repeating the same tropes found in the “msm”. I used to read TI for opinions different from my own and I liked that they took a stance different from the stuff that is force fed down our throats on any tv program.
During the Russia hoax I noticed a palpable change in reporting and it turned me off.
We should be questioning everything we hear from any source. Healthy skepticism is a great combatant against group think.
It is remarkable to see all institutions generally all move in the same direction politically. I have thought a lot on this and wondered how it could be possible for this level of coordination across so many places.
For some time I assumed so much agreement meant that their claims must be valid, or we would naturally hear more dissent, but too many contradictions and lies have piled up for me to believe this to be the case.
So the best explanation I have is that many of the people who make up these institutions come from the same backgrounds, especially with regard to their schooling. Further, the left has stigmatized the concepts of racism and bigotry to such a point that they no longer have a way to counter the accusation of either without the risk of reputations fallout, which in turn has provided the primary means to coerce and control with a common ideology across each. Finally, combined with the two points above, Trump provided the perfect villain to circle the wagons and claim that it was imperative for all to come together against such a a threat (and if you don’t your a bigot, because only a bigot wouldn’t oppose him, hence why point two is the principal means of enforcing this groupthink).
I guess social media also must be brought up too, as that has provided the primary tool to attack a persons reputation.
It’s all a bit discouraging as a former person of the left to watch this all happen as a top down exercise, replacing many of the lefts best motivations (questioning power and the war state, and fighting for the working class) with new ones that are hollow by comparison and only seem to help those in power consolidate more power.
"For a time I assumed so much agreement meant that their claims must be valid, or we would naturally hear more dissent."
This uniformity of acceptance is exactly what the establishment wants and strives to achieve. It's what Noam Chomsky's book, Manufacturing Consent, is all about; how it's done, who does it and how to recognize it. But this manufactured consent isn't limited to liberal media. The right has its own version as well and it's every bit as damaging and dangerous as the left's. Each side has its own echo chamber creating consensus through lies, misinformation and punishment of heretics.
Agreed, we saw the right's version when people criticized the Iraq war. Right now the overwhelming manufactured consent is coming from the left though as I see it (and as a former lefty it's been quite a thing to have to acknowledge for me personally).
I'm not really on any team these days, but am finding some of the more libertarian ideas more sensible in light of the current world we live in. For example I've gained a new found love of federalism and will openly support any state that acts on it's own in the face of federal laws (whether that be on a left issue as we saw with pot or a right facing issue as we are seeing with regards to 2A rules or even possibly CRT). I think this is a natural way to try and break up the group think and with covid has provided some fascinating counter examples that will no doubt inform us for years to come. It also allows people to leave states that are governing poorly to states that are governing better (and not being stuck with a single choice coming from DC, which many like myself don't feel at all represented by).
I'm with you. As a former lefty myself, I am revisiting my political POV and reconsidering some conservative and libertarian points. One thing I absolutely refuse to get down with is dehumanizing someone just because they are conservative or working class. I come from working class and am a veteran. I may dislike some of their views, but they are my fellow citizens and are human beings and it is incumbent upon me to tolerate them and to accept that we live in a pluralistic society.
I find the recent efforts on the left to dehumanize these people disturbing. It reeks of the worst kind of arrogance and sophistry - and the fact that it is coming from those whose message used to be about lifting everyone up? Just unbelievable.
I have learned a great deal over the past several years about the dangers of pursuing utopia. Coercion is always part of the cocktail and that is never good. As a balance to this trend, I am finding it hopeful that more and more left-leaning progressives and liberals are finding the current wave of behavior beyond the pale. If we can get enough people of good heart and mind to form non-partisan coalitions, we can push back and turn this toxic tide.
I am in complete agreement. Watching many institutions of the left, especially within the ranks of journalism, dehumanize working class people on the right with no power, while protecting the worst people on the left who possess a great deal of power, was one of the observations that allowed me to overcome my own cognitive dissonance. I cannot properly express how much it disgusts me.
I have some hope as well that we can turn the tide. I feel that this left we are describing became far too confident in their efforts, thanks probably to Trump, and at this point lack any pretext to what they are attempting to do (and is so out of step with what most people want).
Still, the reality is things are likely to get worse before they get better. Add with the possibility of inflation the likes of which we haven't seen in nearly five decades and it become very murky where things could go as faith in bed rock institutions that traditionally provide stability dissolves before our eyes (and is nearly non-existent on the right, outside of some religious institutions).
It's so crucial that we fight the instinct to dehumanize any groups as we continue through this difficult time.
>>and as a former lefty it's been quite a thing to have to acknowledge for me personally
Much respect. If the pendulum swings the other direction, I hope I'll have the same integrity and clarity of vision.
Good points. It is a challenge to avoid group-think when you agree with a certain position. The Right certainly stained themselves (and took us several steps on the path to where we are now) with their reaction to 9/11.
The neocons were bad news. Still are.
I'm not convinced the "overwhelming" manufactured consent is coming from the left. It may seem that way because the more established left outlets - CNN, MSNBC, NYT are so guilty of it and they have huge audiences. But the right has its own staples for consent - Fox, OAN, etc. Tucker is the most watched cable show in the country. Our perceptions of it probably depend on which particular tribe we belong to.
Thanks for your comment. I'd like to reply but I'm pressed for time. Will be getting back later.
I am on the political right, but I pay more attention to voices like Glenn or Matt Taibbi. I am even listening to Chomsky and Adolph Reed, Jr.
Chomsky makes a lot of good points when he talks about manufactured consent, but I think he villifies the 1960s era Conservatives (and to a lesser point Republicans) too much. Don't get me wrong, they are culpable, but the Establishment and the Elites in the US are mostly Democrats. I look at this Tablet interview with Angelo Codevilla:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/angelo-codevilla
Key quote:
"[T]he Democrats were the senior partners in the ruling class. The Republicans are the junior partners."
"The reason being that the American ruling class was built by or under the Democratic Party. First, under Woodrow Wilson and then later under Franklin Roosevelt. It was a ruling class that prized above all its intellectual superiority over the ruled. And that saw itself as the natural carriers of scientific knowledge, as the class that was naturally best able to run society and was therefore entitled to run society."
"The Republican members of the ruling class aspire to that sort of intellectual status or reputation. And they have shared a taste of this ruling class. But they are not part of the same party, and as such, are constantly trying to get closer to the senior partners. As the junior members of the ruling class, they are not nearly as tied to government as the Democrats are. And therefore, their elite prerogatives are not safe."
It's also a combination of herd mentality and coordinated pressure campaigns. JournoList (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList) was one way they coordinated this, until it was exposed. Presumably later iterations are better at hiding their existence than JournoList and Cabalist (a list for a secret cabal, get it? the irony is ha ha only serious).
LOVE your last line-- so true🥰
So many liars to check. It’s frustrating
"We should be questioning everything we hear from any source"
QFT
Excellent defense. Reed & Co. deserve all the criticism you have dished out. They turned The Intercept into a hyper-partisan rag. The shitlibs may not be moved but I assure you that those who are truly independent see the truth. The fact that your readers departed The Intercept for your Substack proves it. Your journalist critics hate you because you took the risks they were too scared to take but you actually succeeded. To you, much respect! (PS — Please come to LA and sign my copy of your latest book, Securing Democracy. Drinks on me!)
Thanks! I'm still working on how to get signed books to every subscriber who wants one. Now that I'm first-dose immunized, I'll be able to travel to the US shortly and do it (also doing Rogan's show again, this time in person: excited about that).
If it's Moderna watch out for that second dose. I had a slightly bad reaction to it - 2 days of mild fever and chills. One of my brothers also got Moderna and it was not so bad for him. Not a reason to avoid the second dose, just don't plan anything important for the few days after you get it.
My wife and I got the J&J just before the "pause". She had no reaction other than soreness at the injection site. The next day I had strong flu symptoms, without the nausea or fever. Fine the next day.
It wasn't too bad for me. 1 day of feeling low energy. Similar to my shingles shot.
Yeah, that second dose got me too.
Excited to have you back in the States. It's a much more depressing America, I fear. Second dose of Moderna was a bear, so good luck with your shot!
Will spotify remove your episode after like it did for any other controversial interviews?
Spotify is Daniel Ek who had Zuckerberg at his wedding and also I believe worked at an ebay acquisition.
Maybe this tech billionaire wont be the wolf in sheeps clothing Pierre was?
/wry
What took you so long? Don't you listen to Biden?
You’ll never come to AL and I don’t blame you lol. But I would love a signed copy. You have my email 🤷🏻♀️♥️♥️
Also please stay safe it would not shock me one bit for the Biden intelligence state to have you arrested as part of the Snowden leaks, especially given how much you criticize the DNC.
If you are ever going to Reno, Nevada, please, please let me know if there's a possibility to meet. Or Singapore (though they are locked down for now).
"Your journalist critics hate you because you took the risks they were too scared to take but you actually succeeded."
Spot on! I don't think we should discount the possibility that a large part of their animus is just plain base envy.
I too feel like Glenn took a risk. Really he made a sacrifice imho. I mean, he would be making bank and not looking over his shoulders had he kept his mouth shut and done as told. It takes courage, and self sacrifice, to care more for the truth and others than yourself. Especially at great rewards, or greater risks.
I’m sure some journalists just envy him. I’m sure some hate that he’s setting a higher standard and now they’ll have to work harder. And I’m sure some are part of the problems in our country and hate that he is fucking up their plans.
But I as a citizen in need of the truth I find it purely refreshing. Like a desperate breath of air. And I most definitely do hope it sets a new, more truthful, tone in journalism.
I agree with all of your comments. I'm sure that Glenn was anxious leaving a highly paid, secure, job. I think it's worked out well for him, but it was definitely a leap into the unknown. And I've got to think the person satisfaction in not having to compromise his principals is a reward beyond valuation. Selfishly, we have all gained enormously from the risk he took.
Big time!
Here's the thing: I'm subscribed to you because you're one of the only SANE journalists who has the courage to speak the TRUTH that still exists. Those "journalists" live in an insane bubble-world where speech is violence, sanity is insanity, and there are 554 genders.
Would you really want to be associated with them? Have no credibility like them? Of course not.
No one takes them seriously because they are unserious lunatics. Keep doing what you do, Glenn, you're doing important work and they know it.
Also recommend: Matt Taibi, Max Blumenthal, Ben Norton, Rania Khalik, Chris Hedges, and (per Glenn’s recommendation) Shant Mesrobian. Any recommendations from you?
Aaron Maté, the Empire Files, and my favorite comedian Jimmy Dore and his clan.
Consortium news and Sharyl Atkisson as well.
Spiked online from the UK has some good stuff also.
Michael Tracey. There's only a handful, which is a very sad indictment of "journalism"
That we know of-- don't despair more to come 😊
Oh geeze- how could I possibly omit- Aaron Mate
🤗
Mate is far and away better and more detail oriented when it comes to exposing the Russiagate lies than Greenwald has ever been. I guess that's no big deal to GG since by that time he was already rich and had locked away the Snowden archives so that nobody could see the remaining 99% including very important items like this one.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/intercept-withheld-nsa-doc-that-may-have-altered-course-of-syria-war/233757/
Guess Glenn as the main archivist of that tranche of files must've just missed this one for 4 years, huh? Or instead was he running cover for his benefactor Pierre Omidyar?
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12/11/bfp-breaking-news-omidyars-paypal-corporation-said-to-be-implicated-in-withheld-nsa-documents/
Daniel Larison, Caity Johnstone.
Chris Hedges is amazing, found him recently and really like his work. Lucian Truscott is another great writer, hate Salon these days but if you wade through all the shitty writers they have on staff you can find a couple of decent ones.
How do you thing Glenn Greenwald feels about Max Blumenthal and the Grayzone's reportage concerning his former Daddy Warbucks - Pierre Omidyar - the man whose $250MM cash infusion he used to establish his own platform and get rich?
Please point me to the expose on his benefactor's regime change activities or connections to the security/surveillance state during his, what, 6 years at The Intercept.
https://thegrayzone.com/2019/02/20/pierre-omidyar-regime-change-cia-cutouts/
They are afraid of Glenn & Matt Taibbi. One reason I dropped RS was the ads, same ads as in NYMagazine and Times. These tell you their their targeted demographic. It wasn't me anymore.
I immediately Switched to Substack (Greenwald and Taibbi) after his resignation and my detective work (not too hard) to find out the Betsy Reed was earning some $300k ...So when I get the request for donations (and threats to cut off “free” access) I do the old Robert DeNiro Taxi Driver routine “ are you talking to me”
Same. It is such a relief to have voted with my $$$ to independent voices. Plus the comments here are thoughtful and not an Amen corner.
Is it ok to say “amen” to your comment? 😆 Total agreement here.
Comments here are definitely value added. I'm on the right, but enjoy reading thoughtful comments from folks on the left. They make me examine issues more thoroughly. I can't say that about the MSM (mostly because their comments are rote partisan tripe - not at all persuasive).
Plus a lot of the MSM has started to disable comments completely.
I can spend hours reading the comments and clicking on links or suggestions provided. It's a wealth of information on every article.
In a war between Greenwald and The Intercept, The Intercept is doomed.
At this stage, it’s a mercy kill.
Like the lone Chinese against the tanks in Tianneman one man can make a difference, even if it isnt right at that moment.
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/99667f691e2dfcfe1ca7f19b65aef27523bfc34c/0_173_2500_1500/master/2500.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=36d9ed442ceab90cc3febb7f080a2dff
A war against a pioneering media site he founded? He's more eager than the Intercept is to start a war, against the site that he founded and did a lot to shape. If the idea that he's now likely to win the war counts in your mind as one of the better things you can say about him, you should realize that's hardly a compliment. There are lots of good things to say about Greenwald but this isn't it.
I'm sorry, Randall. I'm afraid your point escapes mr. Do you work for The Intercept or something?
If you had checked their website you would see who works there; I don't. I'm a longtime reader of Greenwald who thought it was great when he founded the Intercept, a site which did (and still does) reflect a lot of the principles that he shares with many on the left. Perhaps you don't share those principles, but that's not my problem.
I also look at how Greenwald may treat longtime allies who have helped him in his fights for what he sees as right. There are some lingering questions there, and whatever answers may come to those questions is something that doesn't necessarily need to be discussed much here. The answers may come later (not too late) or may come sooner; the answers may be pure silence (a refusal to deal with things) or perhaps eventually something better than mere silence. And even if the answer is not pure silence it may not necessarily be audible to you and me. I support and like Greenwald, including on many of the points where he split with the Intercept -- and I'm also here to say that the answers to these lingering questions matter.
Eh. I'm still finding the word salad a bit hard to follow.
For my part, I'm always disappointed when a once-radical, formerly informative news outlet goes south. (DemocracyNow! springs to mind; that actually broke my heart a little bit.) But those things happen - inevitably. It's not the end of the world, and - at least on the readers' end - it's not personal.
An ordinary person who wants and needs solid, no-bullshit, nonpartisan journalism will always support a known quantity like Glenn Greenwald, simply because he delivers the goods. The Intercept? Whatever. I respect some of the individuals involved very much, but I don't owe the outlet itself shit - and neither do you.
It is a cautionary tale, oft told. Personnel is policy. No wealthy businessman can establish a foundation that won't, in time, come to symbolize everything that businessman disagreed with; and no journalist devoted to actual journalism can establish a media publication that won't ultimately become a narrative peddling left-liberal echo chamber.
Holy cow. The Intercept is going to need another $1M a year just to cover the cost of burn ointment.
Glenn, I am a recent subscriber and only recently knew of you on an appearance with Tucker Carlson. What I heard from you that night was “balls and strikes”. I then got on your email list and got a chance to read some of your stuff. I liked it and put my money to those that I support. The personal attacks you are getting are no different from the article you wrote about the NYC mayoral race a couple weeks ago. You seem to be taking the punches well and like your moxie punching back. I am proud to support your work and will continue to do so. Stand tall.
There will be no shortage of moxie or punching back where Mr. Greenwald is involved. You really are new :). I kid, welcome!
He learned about defensive driving at home.
Kind of harkins back to the grizzled old newspaperman who does give a tinker's damn whether you like him, only that you read him.
I actually saw the shooting in Kenosha happen live while watching a livestream. Then I gathered all the pictures and videos I could before they could be taken down or edited. The narrative that Kyle Rittenhouse murdered two innocent people and crippled a nice, upstanding member of society is bullshit.
Agreed. Thanks
Not to mention the blatant lie told by the MSM that Jacob Blake was an unarmed black man. He is black and a man, but unarmed? Never. He admitted it himself in an interview....but now a sufficient number of MSM sycophants are none the wiser....played just as they intended!
This is the consequence of raising generations on participation trophies and endless flattery. Add in 4 years of indoctrination, not education, by the leftist ideologues posing as professors and voila!, a self-righteous, navel-gazing younger cohort, unable to think beyond their ideological restraint and all-important feelings (of course, the feelings of others never crosses their enfeebled minds) is unleashed on the world.
The horrifying part, as you mention, is that these spoiled, pampered individuals attacking the powerless in our nation on behalf of the powerful, actually believe they are creating a better world. Seething hatred is the proper response to such individuals who so cavalierly ruin the lives of others.
Thank you Glenn. You are increasingly one of the few journalists who I read. And trust. Yours is the good fight.
I might not always agree with Glenn, but yet again he shows that he's a clear thinker who can keep his eye on the ball. Great article.
Ignore them, Glenn. With reasonable people, your reputation has only SOARED.
Just heard David Horowitz laud Glenn and Matt Taibbi on a podcast today.....just thought that was so interesting.
If one has been a reasonable person for long, one has seen the consequences of merely ignoring the unreasonable.
They haven't been good.
"Depicting critics of liberal orthodoxies as mentally ill, a rage-driven bully, and a shadow of their former selves is a long-time tactic of guardians of establishment liberalism to expel dissidents from their in-group circles." This tactic has made it to the far corners of our culture. Last fall, urged my county bar association (in the Northeast Kingdom county of Caledonia, of all places) to pass a resolution supporting the First Amendment. It was a straight forward, non partisan resolution. I was called a "lunatic" "crazy", told to get off my computer and go lie down--with every other attorney in the county copied. This spring, when I suggested we have a county CLE on professionalism, I was subjected to a rant by an attorney (copying everyone) that I was, among other things, a bully. Personal emails from these same people said they were "worried" about my mental health, that it was "sad" how my professional skills have deteriorated. My sin? I am a Republican, vice chair of the Vermont Republican party. Bigotry is alive and well, and even celebrated, by the professional class.
Love you, Glenn! Voltaire — 'It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.'
Exactly!!!! great quote 😊
Free on Jean-Jacques Rousseau: https://kathleenmccook.substack.com/p/emile-by-rousseau-lacerated-and-burned
The personal attacks on Glenn remind me of the old Soviet Union. If anyone did not enthusiastically recognize the superiority of the Workers Paradise they were obviously mentally ill. For their own good they were sent to Mental Hospitals where they were never heard from again.
Getting that vibe too. Chinese Cultural Revolution as well.
When I was reading Glenn's column, I too, thought of the old Soviet Union. (And, of Alexander Solzhenitsyn.)
https://jwvictims.org/2016/05/19/the-watchtower-steps-up-their-demands-to-shun/
There is a reason that Glenn Greenwald's subscribers span the political spectrum from the far left to the far right, and why most of the time those who comment here mostly agree with Glenn and each other (at least on the central issues in his articles). Unlike almost everyone else in media today Glenn's writing is based upon principals consistently applied regardless of ideological politics.
The attacks on Glenn by those at the Intercept and other left wing media outlets reveal much about them. It's clear they do not apply principals consistently. They treat their "journalism" more as a religion, and Glenn as an apostate. When the media, as the Intercept has done, sees their role as advocacy rather than as searching for and publishing facts and truth regardless of whose ox is gored, they become mere partisan hacks.
It's the intellectual dishonesty that gets me. Either that, or they are all morons.
Intellectual dishonesty gets me, too. I don't believe they are morons. For the most part they are very intelligent. But when you are extremely partisan it becomes easy to lie to yourself, and they do it freely.