This Substack is why I am a paid subscriber. While many may consider me right wing, I refuse to be labeled. Your description of the no-center pipeline is excellent analysis and why we ARE individuals. By that, I mean liberal, conservative, or unlabeled, we are individual sentient parties and need to continue to be free to associate our thoughts and opinions apart from categories.
I appreciate your individuality, and am particularly fond of your passion for free speech and thinking. Keep up the great work and speak more loudly, as required, to call out those who would censor our speech and thoughts!!!
Ideally, Glenn, Taibbi, Weis and some of the other new wave of independent journalists will start to connect to each other and utilize that synergy to grow a new type of news. All of our current media picks a Dem/Rep side, whereas the new generation is the people v the ruling class.
Imagine another channel to compete with MSNBC/FOX/Etc. I think it would blow the conventional channels out of the water.
Yes, a pipeline or wormhole is a good analogy. I have likened it to the arc that jumps the gap between positive and negative poles when they get too close. I have jumped that gap more than once in my political life.
IMHO, the fundamental thing that divides left-libertarians from right-libertarians is whether or not corporations should have the same rights as individuals. I am a left-libertarian. I believe corporations are not people and money is not speech.
Oh yeah says who? Your beloved childless love hating mean girl incarnate Ayn Rand? If I say I’m personally a libertarian and anarchist but society wise a socialist who are you to say whatever? See, this narrow narrow box putting in is what goes for thinking in your world, I guess. Ever enlarging the Great Divide.
So your politics are incoherent. A "libertarian socialist"? An "anarchist socialist"? This is like a woman who thinks having a double mastectomy and a hysterectomy with a testosterone cocktail makes her a man, not a chimera.
The "Great Divide" is permanent, by the way, and that's a good thing. The time for compromises is long past and wishing for one is counterproductive because the left cannot abide anything other than total conformity, or their grand scheme for making the globe anti-racist (read: "neo-racist") and feminist and divesting opponents of the trans movement of their social capital cannot allow dissent.
Your 3 standard deviations opinions of those you describe really shut down any real communication. Sorry for this b c coming together is the only way we the people will prevail.😞
Yeah, the centralization and adding more government programs vex me given how much of what the government controls is already abused. Why give them more power over your life when they have zero trust?
Yeah why give the military industrial complex 55% plus of IN AUDITABLE discretionary spending? Why give them loads and loads of $$$ to create murder mayhem, and shit planes tanks guns and allkinna shit that doesn’t work or see the light of day? Yeah why spend discretionary $$$ on stuff ppl need and will improve their quality of life like Medicare for All? Why do that? No reason when greed is your raison d'etre.
Soviet and Chinese communism are not the same as the socialism I admire, which is more like what is practiced in Denmark and such, which I believe is democratic socialism. High taxes yes which are anathema to most Libertarians. My views are based in the radical Christian message that we are all in this together, we are our brothers and sisters keepers, and a USA world of rugged individualism has created a now dog-eat-dog world about which I am very unhappy. Sister Joan Chittister, a renowned Benedictine Nun years ago during the W years said America had taken this individualism to the level of the pathological, and I could not agree more. I am also steeped in the work of Dorothy Day of Catholic Worker fame. Yet I still want personal freedom of the highest level, Freedom of speech short of crying fire in a crowded theater, and all the guarantees of our Bill of rights that make social sense. I am in favor of banning all guns for personal ownership used in wars, b c America has now become a killing field. I deplored Reagan, Clinton, W, Obama (mostly for his horrific and intolerable hypocrisy) Trump and now Biden. But Trump was the clown president this country deserved given the downward spiral in moral thinking, developing a conscience, and just plain respect for the other this country has become bereft of. I literally cried the day we Invaded Iraq, seeing VN all over again. Our civil liberties are being chained and disappeared as we speak, which is terrifying to me, a person who has done non violent civil disobedience, which is a moral imperative. I dearly love, have met and admire Chris Hedges as much or more than Greenwald, Matt, et al. So HOW WOULD YOU CLASSIFY ME? I’m open to suggestions. 🙂
Denmark is not socialist. It’s a free market capitalist system with a larger social safety net. Here’s a short video titled “Is denmark socialist?”: https://youtu.be/tzEPKrHalaY
You are not libertarian if you believe people cannot defend themselves.
You may be socialist but that is very different to free market capitalism with a social safety net. It never ends well because it’s ultimately the same ideology as communism etc it creates all the wrong incentives and democratic socialism will just mean tyranny by the mob.
I'm a 66 yo conservative who's never voted for a Dem Presidential candidate.
That was going to change in 2016 when Bernie Sanders presented as the 'anti DC' candidate. I paid no attention to Trump as I thought he was clown who didn't stand a chance of making it through the primaries.
Then, two things happened'
Hillary rigged the primaries and screwed Bernie (I think it says something about Bernie's character that he rolled over and played nice about it)
Trump was the Republican candidate.
I voted for Trump because Hillary is evil incarnate, and he became, imho, the best President of my life. I overlooked his personality flaws and focused on his policies, which were spot on,
This comment is a little difficult to write. But I’ve been thinking about it for quite a while, so here it goes…
I am an enormous fan of Glenn Greenwald, I was an early subscriber, and upgraded to founding member shortly after the first few articles I read. Every time Glenn’s new articles/interviews appear in my inbox, I am delighted. I value - in fact I’m grateful for - Glenn’s insights, understanding, and articulation of complicated and important political issues, and his nuanced and vast understanding of geopolitical issues and their context.
Honestly, I would like to give gift subscriptions to his column to friends and family. But I don’t because…
Unfortunately, (and I say this with the greatest respect and in the gentlest way possible), the tone of many of his articles and interviews tends to be at odds with - and undermines - the excellence of the content.
Glen’s tone often becomes gleefully hyperbolic and excessively derogatory. I’m not offended by this, but I am always a little disappointed. And it makes me disinclined to forward links to his articles, to friends and family. I’d love to offer these people new information and help broaden their perspectives, but I realize that Glenn’s tone would be super offputting to them - or anyone who’s even slightly skeptical of Glen’s arguments.
That tone partakes of the same sin that journalism on the left suffers from: It’s tribal. It is clubby and dismissive of the very people that we should be trying to reach out to. It’s needlessly divisive. An academic tone and professional respect are such prerequisites for an ability to reach people who are not already “in the club.”
Since I take it that reaching people and informing people is a key goal, I have a request (and I’m sure I’m gonna get slammed for this by other readers): tone it down a bit, Glenn. Just a bit. A little bit more professionalism, a little less name-calling. I’d really appreciate it. ..And then I would like to be able to gift gift subscriptions .
I admire anyone who is willing to state the truth, and we are living in times when stating the truth is dangerous. Those who don’t know this are ‘staying in line’ with the establishment media and I’m not sure even the most erudite and unemotional factual arguments could ever change their ‘beliefs’. One thing I know for sure is that the conservative/libertarian/populist camp is a very very large tent for many varying points of view.
Gosh I often think he is taking it easy on people. The level of derogatory is far less than these people in government and media deserve.
I think it’s just a sign of the times - unconscionably terrible things can be said about someone like Trump (I wasn’t ever really a Trump fan but he was certainly no worse than the parasites in Washington) yet if you say something derogatory about genuinely terrible people (which Washington is full of), then it’s somehow unacceptable
I agree, his policies were designed to move people away from reliance on ‘the state’ to empowering them through education and employment. That in and of itself is a massive threat to ‘the establishment’ and to the Democrat Party--who funnel massive amounts of taxpayer money through the Teachers Union and other quasi-government entities into their campaign coffers. Unfortunately, too many otherwise intelligent Americans blindly trust politicians and talking heads in the media. I credit the Democrat Party with successfully using various subliminal advertising techniques to reel in the gullible. One note: all politicians in the USA are “democratic”-- something separate from being a “Democrat”. Those are two completely different terms and should be used as such.
I know a bunch of ppl who did and think the same. But what did Trump actually do? Ruined our relationship with Iran, fucked over the EPA, and every agency that protects what WE ALL NEED to live healthily, separated CHILDREN FROM THEIR PARENTS FGS, and became as Taibbi says the “Insane Clown President” And he did the bidding of establishment Republicans like McConnell in the end. Trump would be a Narcissistic joke except for all the suffering caused and maintained by his tenure. Rethink please if you care about anyone but yourself or rich ppl.
…She said condescendingly instead of offering REAL ARGUMENTS BASED in FACTS, she uses AD hominid attacks which keeps HATE, Inc., in truth telling , , and the missed opportunity the antidote of TDS OF which might offer a remedy. So sad🥺…
What the fuck. "Real arguments based on facts" Everyone of your points is an ad- hominem attack. How did Trump ruin our relationship with Iran? How did he fuck over the EPA, and other agencies that protect us? Children separated from families. Show me your facts, since you vomited it up first.
I guess you don’t know what ad hominem means. I’ll enlighten you. It means attacking a person instead of their argument. I honestly don’t have the time or inclination to ad links for such a flimsy non important argument, as to your deciding I have TDS. You at least know Trump renigged on the Iran deal. SURELY you know about the hundreds of children separated from their families at the border as a deincentive for immigration. Some of whom have NOT YET been reunited with their mothers or fathers. You attacked me as a person saying “no cure for TDS”, which you might have thought only your cronies would know the meaning of. Yeah whatever the fuck. Buhbye. Done here.
Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world. When the people protested against the regime in 2009, President Obama ignored them. When the people protested against the regime in 2017, President Trump spoke out immediately in support of them. Which President did the right thing?
In fact, President Trump is rated by non-partisan historians as a good to very good President. There is near-universal agreement that his foreign policy was excellent, focused on actions against the three worst offenders against human rights: Russia, Iran, and Communist China. He led negotiations that resulted in five majority-Muslim countries recognizing Israel, an unprecedented accomplishment. He took multiple actions against Communist China, exposing their theft of intellectual property and infiltration of American institutions. And the Russians didn't dare try to invade any country, unlike when Obama was President and now under Biden.
President Trump signed the largest tax reform bill in 30 years, which lowered taxes on all but the wealthy, who now pay a higher effective rate thanks to the limit on SALT deductions. No wonder Democrats have constantly wanted to reject these reforms. That definitely was NOT support in any way for rich people, but exactly the opposite.
He had a highly positive response to COVID, stopping entry from China, getting companies to provide needed PPE, ventilators, etc., in record time, having Naval medical ships come to New York and Los Angeles faster than expected, getting public attention on the special working group he set up in late January (in late March their daily presentations reached a live audience of `10 million, thanks entirely to President Trump attending them), and got the vaccines completed in record time.
Actually the EPA needed to be reformed as it was not using scientific information in many of its decisions. And the main scientific agencies (NIH, NSF, DOE) had excellent leadership under President Trump.
Ruined our relationship with Iran? Are you kidding me? You think that 'delay-a-nuke' helped anything? At best it gave Saudi Arabia a reason to engage in it's own nuclear program and that's the last thing we need. Better nothing than that.
And what of the border? How are you supposed to stop a migration wave when Congress does nothing and states refuse to aid? All you can do is reduce incentives to cross illegally. Now you have 2+ million per year crossing as the people suffer, and as Schumer said, all for 'cheap labor.' Who does that help, especially with automation replacing jobs?
Now Trump shot himself by refusing to pardon Assange, Snowden and declassifying anything he could get his hands on in the last days of his presidency as his desire to run again overrid his ability to pull many in the swamp down. He shot himself again by refusing to spend money on the 2022 mid-terms. I fear that he'll run in 2024, loose the primary and pull a Teddy Roosevelt and lead to 4 more years of DNC madness. None of that, however, had any impact on the relative peace and prosperity we had during the Trump years pre-Covid.
Relative peace snd prosperity during the Trump years? For whom? Yeah YOU I GUESS. Ask someone in Yemen and Syria and Iraq where he assassinated Qasem Soleimani an Iranian General further enraging Muslims in the region. Ask a dying Yemeni child too skinny to even look human about your prosperity. Open your eyes to the big wide world around you of o ppl you neither care for nor know nor give ONE passing thought to that have been made to suffer horrendously for good ol’ USA actions.
So what's really going on here? We tend to depict politics as a clash of ideologies. Democrats vs. Republicans or the right vs. the left. But is that really what the political class is focused on? Those who have ever managed a glimpse inside the beast that is politics know that first and foremost, money is the driving wheel. The hand in glove relationship between a myriad of special interests and elected government provides the billions of dollars necessary to maintain the political status quo. Peddling influence has been molded into fine art by both political parties.
The political enterprise has done a masterful job of enlisting law enforcement and the US Intelligence apparatus to identify and castigate those "extremists" who dare oppose the mainstream. And let's not forget the doting press who proliferate the false dichotomy of partisan politics while marginalizing those who attempt to expose the big, long con. Mainstream politics, associated government and the press is nothing more than a giant money machine. We the people are their victims.
Money is not really the driver. Or rather, money (and other forms of power) is merely the mechanism used. As a cause, then, money is downstream from the true motivation. Another thing is at the core of their ideology ...
They believe that possession of intelligence and knowledge (and a life of busy-ness and control-grasping) make one not only functionally superior, but *morally* superior as well. That's how they can, and do, use us "lessers" as fertilizer and cannon fodder with no shame, and lie to us as easily and unconsciously as breathing.
And this is also why they have codified anti-discrimination laws, and promote a culture against many forms of discrimination, by race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, religion, etc. -- but *never* against discrimination by class or intelligence, which are every bit as real, and in 2023, far more significant in terms of aggregate effect.
Yes, their ideology is very much elitism, but money is the primary tool they use. They also use the power or influence they have as a result of their expertise and visibility, but money is far more important because it is essentially unlimited as long as they own the banking system.
Nepotism is another problem. How many people in public office, elected or appointed, are there because they have a family member, family friend or even just a friend in power? This creates an insular 'insiders club' which both gives strong advantages to the connected and provides vast barriers to those who are not connected.
Nepotism is a problem throughout society. I 1977, I was hired as a programmer by a large international corporation. I relocated first, and after my wife (who was black) graduated from college with a teaching certificate, she followed. She spent several month looking for a job, applying with the local school district and at my company. Remember, by 1977 affirmative action was in full swing, but she was not interviewed.
My co-workers encouraged me to write a letter to the personnel department at my plant. I was reluctant, but was eventually convinced to do so. I carefully worded the letter to point out that it was in the company's best interest to be responsive. Sure enough, she was promptly invited for an interview and was hired.
So, as late as 1977, affirmative action was useless for blacks seeking employment, but nepotism worked. My wife was qualified to work there and enjoyed a 13 year career at the company, but it was nepotism, not AA, that got her in the door.
Yes, one can add the mirror concept "unrelated" (whatever word is, or might be, used for that) as another of the permitted discriminations (class, intelligence, credentials) I mentioned above.
My point is that it is a specific *type* of elitism, which began with the arguably innocent and wholesome concept of meritocracy in the mid-twentieth century, but has now evolved into a tyranny of a new, purified kind. The selection mechanisms of the old boy networks of WASPS ran differently, including the concept of noblesse oblige toward the rest of society.
Yes. I was not disagreeing with you as to the driving ideology, but simply pointing out that the ideology makes little difference if they don't have the power (money) to enforce it.
Attacking money and power corrupting society is noble. No objections to it. Thank you.
However, I'm convinced it's like Whac-A-Mole. Where there's a will, there will always be a way. After watching these things since the time of Watergate, meanwhile learning during that time of the literally centuries of battles of money-vs-people, it's clear to me this isn't the way to solve it. Unless we find ways to face underlying sociopathic ideologies head-on in public, the problems will continue to metastasize.
There will always be crooks, but that's not a reason to bake them into the system with corporate charters while preventing the "nanny-state" that gave them birth from exercising any discipline over them. The BF family is a microcosm.
There's a reason why most civilizations have endorsed "retributive" justice and why most who have moved beyond at least believe in "restorative" justice. The logical consequences implied by the latter can be far greater than those implied by the former. Either will serve as a deterrent to future psychopaths who have no "free will," thus contributing to a smoother functioning society and greater aggregate wealth.
Oh the irony. Just incredible. Let’s not forget who provided the intellectual inspiration for the “Trump is the single most dangerous person” narrative, and the “GOP party is so far right they are off the chart” narrative: NOAM CHOMSKY. Glenn do you think it is time to question Chomsky’s intellectual honesty? I used to fall for him. But then I would hear clips of him talking on matters I happen to know quite a bit about and I have come to realize he is a charleton. A garden variety Marxist who rightly criticizes the US security state but whose real passion is to enslave everyone into Marxism under the false cloak of “libertarianism.”
The Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) has become a tool of corporate medicine and the Establishment. It has increased the paperwork required of physicians to the extent that many physicians have left private practice, a vacuum filled by corporations. It has established treatment protocols and used its available sticks (denial of reimbursement for therapies that work) and carrots (reimbursement for therapies that don't work like Remdesevir and ventilators) to entice hospitals to shun effective treatment and adopt deadly protocols for Covid-19. This has resulted in doctors like Paul Marik being denied hospital privileges as Sentara has done.
Until that is corrected, or the concept of M4All treatment protocols is turned over to the states or local governments, I can no longer support M4All.
Add to that, the 2022 $40 increase im Medicare cost that was added, they said, because a new, very expensive drug for Alzheimer's MIGHT soon come on line. Now, I see advertsing that says a new, very expensive drug for Alzheimer's MIGHT soon come on line (the same one?) which will necessitate another Medicare cost increase.
Or, they will make Medicare so expensive that the Medicare Advantage plans (private insurance) will be more affordable (mainly, because they drop you when you need them most).
As an ICU nurse of 40 years, i can say that ventilators do work. Where in gods name did you get such a notion? See this what turns ppl into the deaf. Statements like that. 😳
I understand that there are legitimate (as well as illegitimate) uses for ventilators when they are operated by appropriately trained staff. That was certainly not the case in the early stages of the "pandemic," when something like 80% of people placed on ventilators died.
Early in the pandemic I saw a video of a ER doctor criticizing the use of ventilators. Unfortunately, I can't find it among my many bookmarks and likely YouTube has deleted it anyway. As I recall, he was saying that placing Covid-19 patients on a ventilator was inappropriate. Perhaps it had something to do with Covid-19's progression into an "organizing pneumonia."
Placing some one on a ventilator is a serious business and is not undertaken lightly. Blood gasses out of wac, O2 saturation very low, and the dangers of respiratory arrest great are among the criteria. Believe me NO ONE WANTS to put a person on a vent every whip stitch. It doubles the work load of EVERYONE. Perhaps the 80% mortality was due to WAITING TOO LONG to put someone on a ventilator OR they were just that sick . ER docs are NOT long term critical care docs, so what was he saying that for? Not helpful. Each and every one is an individual case by case decision. This makes no sense to one who was on the front lines daily.
"What matters to them, what they want is someone who will reject and wage war against the neoliberal and neoconservative order that has dominated Washington for decades at their expense. And if you don't understand this about American or Western politics -- and these establishment journalists, by definition, don't -- then you understand nothing about American politics.": You 'nailed it' Glenn. Why else would a lifelong compassionate conservative (yes, we DO exist) like me abandon the MSM and pay for unbiased reporting . . . when I could receive all of the MSM drivel/lies I might (and don't) want for free? Unknowingly, both the so-called "left" and "right" have separately been fighting this battle against the entrenched bureaucracy (a/k/a The Deep State) for decades. The fact that it has finally been realized that we just might be more effective in moving for true change by working together literally scares the cr*p out of the elites. And, well it should. We might just pull it off this time. In closing, I cannot help but note that it was none other than former President Eisenhauer who warned the American people to beware of the MIC and the disaster he presciently saw could, and has, come to be if it was not reigned in.
Glenn pointed out: "What's amazing is that someone was willing to admit, in public, that that's how they think. But credit to Sam Harris, I suppose, for his candor in admitting all of that. "
Well, let's take a closer look what credit is due Sam Harris and his brethren ... A clear majority of the power-wielders-and-exercisers of the current elite have some very serious cultural dysfunctions, based on several indefensible principles, among them:
(1) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim that the current state-of-the-art in any science (of all kinds, natural and social) is, somehow, always at its "End of History", no matter that (when it is permitted to function) science progresses nonetheless. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(2) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim they are always in full, sole, and thus unimpeachable possession of all this End-of-History knowledge. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(3) Most importantly, they privately believe that possession of intelligence and knowledge and busy-ness make one not only functionally superior, but *morally* superior as well. They conflate functionality with morality, and thus are perplexed at the supposed conundrum of one-person, one-vote for everyone in the supposedly sophisticated West. For all their fetishizing diversity, they cannot imagine how any other state of living, and of mind, is tolerable but their own. "We need to 'Look like America'!! (Just make sure to think like Cambridge.)" That's how they can, and do, use us "lessers" as fertilizer and cannon fodder with insouciance, and lie to us as easily and unconsciously as breathing. So while they scream on and on about democracy, they are instead beyond contemptuous of it, and have absolutely no heartburn over the hypocrisy. Why, they argue in private (and lately, increasingly, sloppily, in public -- Hello, Sam Harris!), should they reason with cockroaches?
This situation is completely analogous to the clueless arrogance and ignorance that the Western world / white man had toward the rest of the world c. 1900, that today's elite loves to lecture us on and on about as if it were a living breathing problem, even though it is now 90-99% history. *Completely* analogous.
Glenn - I had to interrupt my reading of your monologue because you are making a HUGE mistake and confusing people.
Please do not conflate liberals and the left, i.e., the real left like Bernie used to be, and stop using the terms interchangeably. It's just wrong.
They are very much not the same thing. I am an unreconstructed radical hippie from the civil rights, antiwar, and anti-draft movements of the 60's and 70's. I totally resent being called a liberal as the term is used because these days "liberals" are anything but.
You are a masterful writer, but you've got to stop using liberal and left to refer to the same people.
The 'horseshoe theory' is how this flattening is invoked in Britain. It's a favourite of midwits who favour technocracy as a means of controlling pesky humans who get uppity about being crushed by neoliberalism. They seem to believe it, too. What flows from this is an ambient discrediting of 'populism' as a word. There has to be a way to delegitimise concerns about growing poverty and wealth gaps and 'populist' is a way to dismiss them, in favour of the status quo. Under which they are all comfortable.
Glen’s point about the Democratic Party embodying some of the elements of fascia governments is interesting. My point here is not to call Democrats fascist, but I’m wondering if anyone has given thought or has recollections of using the same arbitrary (as Niccolo Soldo pointed out, fascist has no real definition) language to attack the party using it. I.e. what would the impact be if the right began to call the left fascists? Would it work to eliminate the ability to use it as an attack?
The role of journalists should be adversarial to the government, and both parties in America. Aren't the Twitter Files a perfect example of that? Unfortunately, that is not how it works. Despite what you are suggesting, there is a continuum in politics of left versus right - like neocons; for example, which describes a particular foreign policy.
While a political continuum certainly can be blurred at times, it nonetheless serves to differentiate broad viewpoints. That's undeniable - and it is simply a fact that most of today's journalists have joined one side or the other which is why there is essentially a blackout of the Twitter files by the "left". Modern journalism is advocacy journalism at its worst. Adversarial journalism - which is much closer to old school "objective writing" - can restore journalism to its rightful role as the Fourth Branch of Government.
Glenn,
This Substack is why I am a paid subscriber. While many may consider me right wing, I refuse to be labeled. Your description of the no-center pipeline is excellent analysis and why we ARE individuals. By that, I mean liberal, conservative, or unlabeled, we are individual sentient parties and need to continue to be free to associate our thoughts and opinions apart from categories.
I appreciate your individuality, and am particularly fond of your passion for free speech and thinking. Keep up the great work and speak more loudly, as required, to call out those who would censor our speech and thoughts!!!
Ideally, Glenn, Taibbi, Weis and some of the other new wave of independent journalists will start to connect to each other and utilize that synergy to grow a new type of news. All of our current media picks a Dem/Rep side, whereas the new generation is the people v the ruling class.
Imagine another channel to compete with MSNBC/FOX/Etc. I think it would blow the conventional channels out of the water.
I would grow concerned, though, that like all alliances, they would become an ideological hive, the very thing they despise and attack.
This maybe is always a danger, given human nature.
Yes, a pipeline or wormhole is a good analogy. I have likened it to the arc that jumps the gap between positive and negative poles when they get too close. I have jumped that gap more than once in my political life.
IMHO, the fundamental thing that divides left-libertarians from right-libertarians is whether or not corporations should have the same rights as individuals. I am a left-libertarian. I believe corporations are not people and money is not speech.
Thank you, well said. A left Libertarian! I like it! I call myself an Anarchy/Socialist. Maybe a Libertarian/Socialist is a better moniker.😁
These categories are contradictory.
Anarchy and Libertarianism are incompatible with Socialism.
Oh yeah says who? Your beloved childless love hating mean girl incarnate Ayn Rand? If I say I’m personally a libertarian and anarchist but society wise a socialist who are you to say whatever? See, this narrow narrow box putting in is what goes for thinking in your world, I guess. Ever enlarging the Great Divide.
Ayn Rand...the Best at what she does...still.
Yeah if you are 16-25 years old...emotionally and psychologically...in1970
So your politics are incoherent. A "libertarian socialist"? An "anarchist socialist"? This is like a woman who thinks having a double mastectomy and a hysterectomy with a testosterone cocktail makes her a man, not a chimera.
The "Great Divide" is permanent, by the way, and that's a good thing. The time for compromises is long past and wishing for one is counterproductive because the left cannot abide anything other than total conformity, or their grand scheme for making the globe anti-racist (read: "neo-racist") and feminist and divesting opponents of the trans movement of their social capital cannot allow dissent.
Your 3 standard deviations opinions of those you describe really shut down any real communication. Sorry for this b c coming together is the only way we the people will prevail.😞
See below -no cut and paste easily done on my iPhone. I need to go on my comp if keeping this up
thank you. Finally a voice of clarity.
Agreed! Clarity -in a box, a very stifling small and fearful box, but clarity nonetheless...
Yeah, the centralization and adding more government programs vex me given how much of what the government controls is already abused. Why give them more power over your life when they have zero trust?
Yeah why give the military industrial complex 55% plus of IN AUDITABLE discretionary spending? Why give them loads and loads of $$$ to create murder mayhem, and shit planes tanks guns and allkinna shit that doesn’t work or see the light of day? Yeah why spend discretionary $$$ on stuff ppl need and will improve their quality of life like Medicare for All? Why do that? No reason when greed is your raison d'etre.
Socialism is collectivism and it never ends well when implemented so you may want to really look at the evidence: https://www.hudson.org/national-security-defense/100-years-of-communism-and-100-million-dead. Individualism is a better basis where everyone is free to choose what works for them rather than be decided centrally. Milton Friedman did a great series that’s on YouTube: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLt27lKoC5LS4wbD28Jkv95UUm9H7wbVO4.
Soviet and Chinese communism are not the same as the socialism I admire, which is more like what is practiced in Denmark and such, which I believe is democratic socialism. High taxes yes which are anathema to most Libertarians. My views are based in the radical Christian message that we are all in this together, we are our brothers and sisters keepers, and a USA world of rugged individualism has created a now dog-eat-dog world about which I am very unhappy. Sister Joan Chittister, a renowned Benedictine Nun years ago during the W years said America had taken this individualism to the level of the pathological, and I could not agree more. I am also steeped in the work of Dorothy Day of Catholic Worker fame. Yet I still want personal freedom of the highest level, Freedom of speech short of crying fire in a crowded theater, and all the guarantees of our Bill of rights that make social sense. I am in favor of banning all guns for personal ownership used in wars, b c America has now become a killing field. I deplored Reagan, Clinton, W, Obama (mostly for his horrific and intolerable hypocrisy) Trump and now Biden. But Trump was the clown president this country deserved given the downward spiral in moral thinking, developing a conscience, and just plain respect for the other this country has become bereft of. I literally cried the day we Invaded Iraq, seeing VN all over again. Our civil liberties are being chained and disappeared as we speak, which is terrifying to me, a person who has done non violent civil disobedience, which is a moral imperative. I dearly love, have met and admire Chris Hedges as much or more than Greenwald, Matt, et al. So HOW WOULD YOU CLASSIFY ME? I’m open to suggestions. 🙂
Irrational
Agree.
Denmark is not socialist. It’s a free market capitalist system with a larger social safety net. Here’s a short video titled “Is denmark socialist?”: https://youtu.be/tzEPKrHalaY
You are not libertarian if you believe people cannot defend themselves.
You may be socialist but that is very different to free market capitalism with a social safety net. It never ends well because it’s ultimately the same ideology as communism etc it creates all the wrong incentives and democratic socialism will just mean tyranny by the mob.
I'm a 66 yo conservative who's never voted for a Dem Presidential candidate.
That was going to change in 2016 when Bernie Sanders presented as the 'anti DC' candidate. I paid no attention to Trump as I thought he was clown who didn't stand a chance of making it through the primaries.
Then, two things happened'
Hillary rigged the primaries and screwed Bernie (I think it says something about Bernie's character that he rolled over and played nice about it)
Trump was the Republican candidate.
I voted for Trump because Hillary is evil incarnate, and he became, imho, the best President of my life. I overlooked his personality flaws and focused on his policies, which were spot on,
This comment is a little difficult to write. But I’ve been thinking about it for quite a while, so here it goes…
I am an enormous fan of Glenn Greenwald, I was an early subscriber, and upgraded to founding member shortly after the first few articles I read. Every time Glenn’s new articles/interviews appear in my inbox, I am delighted. I value - in fact I’m grateful for - Glenn’s insights, understanding, and articulation of complicated and important political issues, and his nuanced and vast understanding of geopolitical issues and their context.
Honestly, I would like to give gift subscriptions to his column to friends and family. But I don’t because…
Unfortunately, (and I say this with the greatest respect and in the gentlest way possible), the tone of many of his articles and interviews tends to be at odds with - and undermines - the excellence of the content.
Glen’s tone often becomes gleefully hyperbolic and excessively derogatory. I’m not offended by this, but I am always a little disappointed. And it makes me disinclined to forward links to his articles, to friends and family. I’d love to offer these people new information and help broaden their perspectives, but I realize that Glenn’s tone would be super offputting to them - or anyone who’s even slightly skeptical of Glen’s arguments.
That tone partakes of the same sin that journalism on the left suffers from: It’s tribal. It is clubby and dismissive of the very people that we should be trying to reach out to. It’s needlessly divisive. An academic tone and professional respect are such prerequisites for an ability to reach people who are not already “in the club.”
Since I take it that reaching people and informing people is a key goal, I have a request (and I’m sure I’m gonna get slammed for this by other readers): tone it down a bit, Glenn. Just a bit. A little bit more professionalism, a little less name-calling. I’d really appreciate it. ..And then I would like to be able to gift gift subscriptions .
Thanks.
Nobody should slam you for this.
But I happen to like his edge, and think it reflects his passion, which has enabled him to risk his life, reputation and career to fight for justice.
I admire anyone who is willing to state the truth, and we are living in times when stating the truth is dangerous. Those who don’t know this are ‘staying in line’ with the establishment media and I’m not sure even the most erudite and unemotional factual arguments could ever change their ‘beliefs’. One thing I know for sure is that the conservative/libertarian/populist camp is a very very large tent for many varying points of view.
Gosh I often think he is taking it easy on people. The level of derogatory is far less than these people in government and media deserve.
I think it’s just a sign of the times - unconscionably terrible things can be said about someone like Trump (I wasn’t ever really a Trump fan but he was certainly no worse than the parasites in Washington) yet if you say something derogatory about genuinely terrible people (which Washington is full of), then it’s somehow unacceptable
I agree, his policies were designed to move people away from reliance on ‘the state’ to empowering them through education and employment. That in and of itself is a massive threat to ‘the establishment’ and to the Democrat Party--who funnel massive amounts of taxpayer money through the Teachers Union and other quasi-government entities into their campaign coffers. Unfortunately, too many otherwise intelligent Americans blindly trust politicians and talking heads in the media. I credit the Democrat Party with successfully using various subliminal advertising techniques to reel in the gullible. One note: all politicians in the USA are “democratic”-- something separate from being a “Democrat”. Those are two completely different terms and should be used as such.
Jon...Bingo, like a Lion.
I know a bunch of ppl who did and think the same. But what did Trump actually do? Ruined our relationship with Iran, fucked over the EPA, and every agency that protects what WE ALL NEED to live healthily, separated CHILDREN FROM THEIR PARENTS FGS, and became as Taibbi says the “Insane Clown President” And he did the bidding of establishment Republicans like McConnell in the end. Trump would be a Narcissistic joke except for all the suffering caused and maintained by his tenure. Rethink please if you care about anyone but yourself or rich ppl.
there is no cure for TDS
so sad
…She said condescendingly instead of offering REAL ARGUMENTS BASED in FACTS, she uses AD hominid attacks which keeps HATE, Inc., in truth telling , , and the missed opportunity the antidote of TDS OF which might offer a remedy. So sad🥺…
hominid attacks, Bernadene?
like in neanderthal man vs. australopithecus man?
Haha auto correct insisted over and over I wanted the pre Homo sapiens sapiens. Guess there aren’t many literati in the bots of AUTO CORRECT 😝
What the fuck. "Real arguments based on facts" Everyone of your points is an ad- hominem attack. How did Trump ruin our relationship with Iran? How did he fuck over the EPA, and other agencies that protect us? Children separated from families. Show me your facts, since you vomited it up first.
I guess you don’t know what ad hominem means. I’ll enlighten you. It means attacking a person instead of their argument. I honestly don’t have the time or inclination to ad links for such a flimsy non important argument, as to your deciding I have TDS. You at least know Trump renigged on the Iran deal. SURELY you know about the hundreds of children separated from their families at the border as a deincentive for immigration. Some of whom have NOT YET been reunited with their mothers or fathers. You attacked me as a person saying “no cure for TDS”, which you might have thought only your cronies would know the meaning of. Yeah whatever the fuck. Buhbye. Done here.
Ha. You're barking up the wrong tree. Woof Woof. You ask others for proof, but clutch your pearls and fall on the fainting couch when asked for yours.
Law of the Universe, nurse Bernadene:
Don't dish it out if you can't take it.
You come at my people, I clap back.
Oh please. Now you really do sound like Troll baiting BS. So intellectual “my people”etc. I know whom to ignore from now on. Thanks.
She thinks she is on a forum where "Her Truth" is the only truth.
Done here . Ppl talking smack especially to each other is sooooo booooring. <yawn >
Iran has one of the most oppressive regimes in the world. When the people protested against the regime in 2009, President Obama ignored them. When the people protested against the regime in 2017, President Trump spoke out immediately in support of them. Which President did the right thing?
In fact, President Trump is rated by non-partisan historians as a good to very good President. There is near-universal agreement that his foreign policy was excellent, focused on actions against the three worst offenders against human rights: Russia, Iran, and Communist China. He led negotiations that resulted in five majority-Muslim countries recognizing Israel, an unprecedented accomplishment. He took multiple actions against Communist China, exposing their theft of intellectual property and infiltration of American institutions. And the Russians didn't dare try to invade any country, unlike when Obama was President and now under Biden.
President Trump signed the largest tax reform bill in 30 years, which lowered taxes on all but the wealthy, who now pay a higher effective rate thanks to the limit on SALT deductions. No wonder Democrats have constantly wanted to reject these reforms. That definitely was NOT support in any way for rich people, but exactly the opposite.
He had a highly positive response to COVID, stopping entry from China, getting companies to provide needed PPE, ventilators, etc., in record time, having Naval medical ships come to New York and Los Angeles faster than expected, getting public attention on the special working group he set up in late January (in late March their daily presentations reached a live audience of `10 million, thanks entirely to President Trump attending them), and got the vaccines completed in record time.
Actually the EPA needed to be reformed as it was not using scientific information in many of its decisions. And the main scientific agencies (NIH, NSF, DOE) had excellent leadership under President Trump.
Rf, sticking to facts, i see.
Ruined our relationship with Iran? Are you kidding me? You think that 'delay-a-nuke' helped anything? At best it gave Saudi Arabia a reason to engage in it's own nuclear program and that's the last thing we need. Better nothing than that.
And what of the border? How are you supposed to stop a migration wave when Congress does nothing and states refuse to aid? All you can do is reduce incentives to cross illegally. Now you have 2+ million per year crossing as the people suffer, and as Schumer said, all for 'cheap labor.' Who does that help, especially with automation replacing jobs?
Now Trump shot himself by refusing to pardon Assange, Snowden and declassifying anything he could get his hands on in the last days of his presidency as his desire to run again overrid his ability to pull many in the swamp down. He shot himself again by refusing to spend money on the 2022 mid-terms. I fear that he'll run in 2024, loose the primary and pull a Teddy Roosevelt and lead to 4 more years of DNC madness. None of that, however, had any impact on the relative peace and prosperity we had during the Trump years pre-Covid.
Relative peace snd prosperity during the Trump years? For whom? Yeah YOU I GUESS. Ask someone in Yemen and Syria and Iraq where he assassinated Qasem Soleimani an Iranian General further enraging Muslims in the region. Ask a dying Yemeni child too skinny to even look human about your prosperity. Open your eyes to the big wide world around you of o ppl you neither care for nor know nor give ONE passing thought to that have been made to suffer horrendously for good ol’ USA actions.
Bern... i coulda sworn, you were "done"...more then needed.
So what's really going on here? We tend to depict politics as a clash of ideologies. Democrats vs. Republicans or the right vs. the left. But is that really what the political class is focused on? Those who have ever managed a glimpse inside the beast that is politics know that first and foremost, money is the driving wheel. The hand in glove relationship between a myriad of special interests and elected government provides the billions of dollars necessary to maintain the political status quo. Peddling influence has been molded into fine art by both political parties.
The political enterprise has done a masterful job of enlisting law enforcement and the US Intelligence apparatus to identify and castigate those "extremists" who dare oppose the mainstream. And let's not forget the doting press who proliferate the false dichotomy of partisan politics while marginalizing those who attempt to expose the big, long con. Mainstream politics, associated government and the press is nothing more than a giant money machine. We the people are their victims.
Yes, the real struggle is not left vs right, Republican vs Democrat, but authoritarian vs grassroots.
Money is not really the driver. Or rather, money (and other forms of power) is merely the mechanism used. As a cause, then, money is downstream from the true motivation. Another thing is at the core of their ideology ...
They believe that possession of intelligence and knowledge (and a life of busy-ness and control-grasping) make one not only functionally superior, but *morally* superior as well. That's how they can, and do, use us "lessers" as fertilizer and cannon fodder with no shame, and lie to us as easily and unconsciously as breathing.
And this is also why they have codified anti-discrimination laws, and promote a culture against many forms of discrimination, by race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, religion, etc. -- but *never* against discrimination by class or intelligence, which are every bit as real, and in 2023, far more significant in terms of aggregate effect.
Yes, their ideology is very much elitism, but money is the primary tool they use. They also use the power or influence they have as a result of their expertise and visibility, but money is far more important because it is essentially unlimited as long as they own the banking system.
Nepotism is another problem. How many people in public office, elected or appointed, are there because they have a family member, family friend or even just a friend in power? This creates an insular 'insiders club' which both gives strong advantages to the connected and provides vast barriers to those who are not connected.
Nepotism is a problem throughout society. I 1977, I was hired as a programmer by a large international corporation. I relocated first, and after my wife (who was black) graduated from college with a teaching certificate, she followed. She spent several month looking for a job, applying with the local school district and at my company. Remember, by 1977 affirmative action was in full swing, but she was not interviewed.
My co-workers encouraged me to write a letter to the personnel department at my plant. I was reluctant, but was eventually convinced to do so. I carefully worded the letter to point out that it was in the company's best interest to be responsive. Sure enough, she was promptly invited for an interview and was hired.
So, as late as 1977, affirmative action was useless for blacks seeking employment, but nepotism worked. My wife was qualified to work there and enjoyed a 13 year career at the company, but it was nepotism, not AA, that got her in the door.
Yes, one can add the mirror concept "unrelated" (whatever word is, or might be, used for that) as another of the permitted discriminations (class, intelligence, credentials) I mentioned above.
My point is that it is a specific *type* of elitism, which began with the arguably innocent and wholesome concept of meritocracy in the mid-twentieth century, but has now evolved into a tyranny of a new, purified kind. The selection mechanisms of the old boy networks of WASPS ran differently, including the concept of noblesse oblige toward the rest of society.
Yes. I was not disagreeing with you as to the driving ideology, but simply pointing out that the ideology makes little difference if they don't have the power (money) to enforce it.
Attacking money and power corrupting society is noble. No objections to it. Thank you.
However, I'm convinced it's like Whac-A-Mole. Where there's a will, there will always be a way. After watching these things since the time of Watergate, meanwhile learning during that time of the literally centuries of battles of money-vs-people, it's clear to me this isn't the way to solve it. Unless we find ways to face underlying sociopathic ideologies head-on in public, the problems will continue to metastasize.
Here's an example I support of recent reporting that I just found. It attacks an underlying elite ideology corrupting the system in just this way: https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2022/12/16/the-faulty-moral-universe-of-sam-bankman-fried/
There will always be crooks, but that's not a reason to bake them into the system with corporate charters while preventing the "nanny-state" that gave them birth from exercising any discipline over them. The BF family is a microcosm.
There's a reason why most civilizations have endorsed "retributive" justice and why most who have moved beyond at least believe in "restorative" justice. The logical consequences implied by the latter can be far greater than those implied by the former. Either will serve as a deterrent to future psychopaths who have no "free will," thus contributing to a smoother functioning society and greater aggregate wealth.
Oh the irony. Just incredible. Let’s not forget who provided the intellectual inspiration for the “Trump is the single most dangerous person” narrative, and the “GOP party is so far right they are off the chart” narrative: NOAM CHOMSKY. Glenn do you think it is time to question Chomsky’s intellectual honesty? I used to fall for him. But then I would hear clips of him talking on matters I happen to know quite a bit about and I have come to realize he is a charleton. A garden variety Marxist who rightly criticizes the US security state but whose real passion is to enslave everyone into Marxism under the false cloak of “libertarianism.”
Thanks, Givemliberty. What you say resonates with my observations about Chomsky.
Not usually a ditto person. But, ditto.
The Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services (CMS) has become a tool of corporate medicine and the Establishment. It has increased the paperwork required of physicians to the extent that many physicians have left private practice, a vacuum filled by corporations. It has established treatment protocols and used its available sticks (denial of reimbursement for therapies that work) and carrots (reimbursement for therapies that don't work like Remdesevir and ventilators) to entice hospitals to shun effective treatment and adopt deadly protocols for Covid-19. This has resulted in doctors like Paul Marik being denied hospital privileges as Sentara has done.
Until that is corrected, or the concept of M4All treatment protocols is turned over to the states or local governments, I can no longer support M4All.
Add to that, the 2022 $40 increase im Medicare cost that was added, they said, because a new, very expensive drug for Alzheimer's MIGHT soon come on line. Now, I see advertsing that says a new, very expensive drug for Alzheimer's MIGHT soon come on line (the same one?) which will necessitate another Medicare cost increase.
They will make Medicare non-competitive with uninsured fee for service and medical tourism.
Or, they will make Medicare so expensive that the Medicare Advantage plans (private insurance) will be more affordable (mainly, because they drop you when you need them most).
As an ICU nurse of 40 years, i can say that ventilators do work. Where in gods name did you get such a notion? See this what turns ppl into the deaf. Statements like that. 😳
I understand that there are legitimate (as well as illegitimate) uses for ventilators when they are operated by appropriately trained staff. That was certainly not the case in the early stages of the "pandemic," when something like 80% of people placed on ventilators died.
Early in the pandemic I saw a video of a ER doctor criticizing the use of ventilators. Unfortunately, I can't find it among my many bookmarks and likely YouTube has deleted it anyway. As I recall, he was saying that placing Covid-19 patients on a ventilator was inappropriate. Perhaps it had something to do with Covid-19's progression into an "organizing pneumonia."
Placing some one on a ventilator is a serious business and is not undertaken lightly. Blood gasses out of wac, O2 saturation very low, and the dangers of respiratory arrest great are among the criteria. Believe me NO ONE WANTS to put a person on a vent every whip stitch. It doubles the work load of EVERYONE. Perhaps the 80% mortality was due to WAITING TOO LONG to put someone on a ventilator OR they were just that sick . ER docs are NOT long term critical care docs, so what was he saying that for? Not helpful. Each and every one is an individual case by case decision. This makes no sense to one who was on the front lines daily.
Thanks for the transcript, as always!
I must say that when reading Glenn’s transcripts it’s like reading something that was carefully thought out word for word...
...rather than having some stream of thought thrown into a live report
"What matters to them, what they want is someone who will reject and wage war against the neoliberal and neoconservative order that has dominated Washington for decades at their expense. And if you don't understand this about American or Western politics -- and these establishment journalists, by definition, don't -- then you understand nothing about American politics.": You 'nailed it' Glenn. Why else would a lifelong compassionate conservative (yes, we DO exist) like me abandon the MSM and pay for unbiased reporting . . . when I could receive all of the MSM drivel/lies I might (and don't) want for free? Unknowingly, both the so-called "left" and "right" have separately been fighting this battle against the entrenched bureaucracy (a/k/a The Deep State) for decades. The fact that it has finally been realized that we just might be more effective in moving for true change by working together literally scares the cr*p out of the elites. And, well it should. We might just pull it off this time. In closing, I cannot help but note that it was none other than former President Eisenhauer who warned the American people to beware of the MIC and the disaster he presciently saw could, and has, come to be if it was not reigned in.
Glenn pointed out: "What's amazing is that someone was willing to admit, in public, that that's how they think. But credit to Sam Harris, I suppose, for his candor in admitting all of that. "
Well, let's take a closer look what credit is due Sam Harris and his brethren ... A clear majority of the power-wielders-and-exercisers of the current elite have some very serious cultural dysfunctions, based on several indefensible principles, among them:
(1) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim that the current state-of-the-art in any science (of all kinds, natural and social) is, somehow, always at its "End of History", no matter that (when it is permitted to function) science progresses nonetheless. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(2) They publicly imply if not explicitly claim they are always in full, sole, and thus unimpeachable possession of all this End-of-History knowledge. (I don't know if Sam Harris claims this, but certainly his partners in elite crime persistently do.)
(3) Most importantly, they privately believe that possession of intelligence and knowledge and busy-ness make one not only functionally superior, but *morally* superior as well. They conflate functionality with morality, and thus are perplexed at the supposed conundrum of one-person, one-vote for everyone in the supposedly sophisticated West. For all their fetishizing diversity, they cannot imagine how any other state of living, and of mind, is tolerable but their own. "We need to 'Look like America'!! (Just make sure to think like Cambridge.)" That's how they can, and do, use us "lessers" as fertilizer and cannon fodder with insouciance, and lie to us as easily and unconsciously as breathing. So while they scream on and on about democracy, they are instead beyond contemptuous of it, and have absolutely no heartburn over the hypocrisy. Why, they argue in private (and lately, increasingly, sloppily, in public -- Hello, Sam Harris!), should they reason with cockroaches?
This situation is completely analogous to the clueless arrogance and ignorance that the Western world / white man had toward the rest of the world c. 1900, that today's elite loves to lecture us on and on about as if it were a living breathing problem, even though it is now 90-99% history. *Completely* analogous.
You are a Force for good, Glenn Greenwald. I like your studio and video format teaser to rumble. You look and sound very sharp!
Glenn - I had to interrupt my reading of your monologue because you are making a HUGE mistake and confusing people.
Please do not conflate liberals and the left, i.e., the real left like Bernie used to be, and stop using the terms interchangeably. It's just wrong.
They are very much not the same thing. I am an unreconstructed radical hippie from the civil rights, antiwar, and anti-draft movements of the 60's and 70's. I totally resent being called a liberal as the term is used because these days "liberals" are anything but.
You are a masterful writer, but you've got to stop using liberal and left to refer to the same people.
/rant off
Stay safe.
Excellent
I can’t find any of your opinions in this article for which I disagree. This was red meat for an anti republicrat of which I proudly am.
The 'horseshoe theory' is how this flattening is invoked in Britain. It's a favourite of midwits who favour technocracy as a means of controlling pesky humans who get uppity about being crushed by neoliberalism. They seem to believe it, too. What flows from this is an ambient discrediting of 'populism' as a word. There has to be a way to delegitimise concerns about growing poverty and wealth gaps and 'populist' is a way to dismiss them, in favour of the status quo. Under which they are all comfortable.
Glen’s point about the Democratic Party embodying some of the elements of fascia governments is interesting. My point here is not to call Democrats fascist, but I’m wondering if anyone has given thought or has recollections of using the same arbitrary (as Niccolo Soldo pointed out, fascist has no real definition) language to attack the party using it. I.e. what would the impact be if the right began to call the left fascists? Would it work to eliminate the ability to use it as an attack?
Mr. Greenwald
The role of journalists should be adversarial to the government, and both parties in America. Aren't the Twitter Files a perfect example of that? Unfortunately, that is not how it works. Despite what you are suggesting, there is a continuum in politics of left versus right - like neocons; for example, which describes a particular foreign policy.
While a political continuum certainly can be blurred at times, it nonetheless serves to differentiate broad viewpoints. That's undeniable - and it is simply a fact that most of today's journalists have joined one side or the other which is why there is essentially a blackout of the Twitter files by the "left". Modern journalism is advocacy journalism at its worst. Adversarial journalism - which is much closer to old school "objective writing" - can restore journalism to its rightful role as the Fourth Branch of Government.