Of course the Alphabets could 'take out' Trump, although he has his own long-serving security, but they need to have 'plausible deniability' for the hit.
That complicates matters extensively. It takes time and planning to build an asset like Lee Harvey Oswald, and there is always the terrible …
Of course the Alphabets could 'take out' Trump, although he has his own long-serving security, but they need to have 'plausible deniability' for the hit.
That complicates matters extensively. It takes time and planning to build an asset like Lee Harvey Oswald, and there is always the terrible danger the plot will fail and their hand will be revealed.
And, of course, there is the high likliehood they have already tried, a few months ago.
They're not supermen, despite all the Hollywood hype. Institutionalised incompetent fuckwits sociopaths is considerably more accurate.
And again - Trump is a BILLIONAIRE, and white. Not like some Black Panther the FBI can just assassinate by busting in the door and shooting him dead.
There is DEFINITELY a deep state (Originally a Swedish concept, I believe), of networked, privately-educated sociopaths. People so powerful they can even order the POTUS never to say "Ceasefire in Gaza" - recall that conundrum recently?
Like all such groups, it will be amorphous, some people will be in, and then out, but the existence of 'highly connected networks of the wealthy and powerful' exist in every society. In our modern, overpopulated, industrialised societies, they are organised.
"There is DEFINITELY a deep state (Originally a Swedish concept, I believe), of networked, privately-educated sociopaths."
I am afraid you are confusing the amorphous, ambiguous term "deep state" for the highly theorized concept of capital. As Joel Bakan pointed out two decades ago in The Corporation, the imperatives of capital accumulation embody the ethos of the psychopath.
No - but obviously they entwine in capitalist economies.
The deep state is more concerned with the security of the state, than the oligarchs. As Putin showed, the Russian deep state had few problems with reining in the excesses of the Russian oligarchy - although undoubtedly there was considerable pushback within the Russian deep state against such policies, due to the entwinement.
But these two things CAN be separate, and studied separately.
Att the risk of being argumentative, I wouldn't necessarily agree that capital accumulation "is" psychopathic, but it certainly can be in those who seek to be 'Oligarchs', or who are utterly uncaring as to the damage their greed is causing to the other members of the community or nation. And it has become institutionalised behaviour in the West.
Gnuneo, you certainly have the right to believe in a Deep State running things. There is a legitimate debate to be had here. But Eisenstein is not consistent on this subject. For him it’s like Schrödinger’s Cat, real and powerful in one essay, a figment of the imagination in another, depending on what point he’s trying to make at a particular time.
Naked power causes the collapse of legitimacy.
Of course the Alphabets could 'take out' Trump, although he has his own long-serving security, but they need to have 'plausible deniability' for the hit.
That complicates matters extensively. It takes time and planning to build an asset like Lee Harvey Oswald, and there is always the terrible danger the plot will fail and their hand will be revealed.
And, of course, there is the high likliehood they have already tried, a few months ago.
They're not supermen, despite all the Hollywood hype. Institutionalised incompetent fuckwits sociopaths is considerably more accurate.
And again - Trump is a BILLIONAIRE, and white. Not like some Black Panther the FBI can just assassinate by busting in the door and shooting him dead.
There is DEFINITELY a deep state (Originally a Swedish concept, I believe), of networked, privately-educated sociopaths. People so powerful they can even order the POTUS never to say "Ceasefire in Gaza" - recall that conundrum recently?
Like all such groups, it will be amorphous, some people will be in, and then out, but the existence of 'highly connected networks of the wealthy and powerful' exist in every society. In our modern, overpopulated, industrialised societies, they are organised.
"There is DEFINITELY a deep state (Originally a Swedish concept, I believe), of networked, privately-educated sociopaths."
I am afraid you are confusing the amorphous, ambiguous term "deep state" for the highly theorized concept of capital. As Joel Bakan pointed out two decades ago in The Corporation, the imperatives of capital accumulation embody the ethos of the psychopath.
No - but obviously they entwine in capitalist economies.
The deep state is more concerned with the security of the state, than the oligarchs. As Putin showed, the Russian deep state had few problems with reining in the excesses of the Russian oligarchy - although undoubtedly there was considerable pushback within the Russian deep state against such policies, due to the entwinement.
But these two things CAN be separate, and studied separately.
Att the risk of being argumentative, I wouldn't necessarily agree that capital accumulation "is" psychopathic, but it certainly can be in those who seek to be 'Oligarchs', or who are utterly uncaring as to the damage their greed is causing to the other members of the community or nation. And it has become institutionalised behaviour in the West.
Gnuneo, you certainly have the right to believe in a Deep State running things. There is a legitimate debate to be had here. But Eisenstein is not consistent on this subject. For him it’s like Schrödinger’s Cat, real and powerful in one essay, a figment of the imagination in another, depending on what point he’s trying to make at a particular time.
I replied to this above, Prokopton.