– 5 December 2016 –
In the aftermath of Trump’s election victory, the American Left is fighting bitterly to overturn, ruin, and disrupt the results. One of the ways they have tried to discredit the various anti-establishment voices is this “fake news” narrative. They seem to be wildly aiming this campaign against the Alt-Right, the #Pizzagate movement, and the alternative news media, along with Russian news outlets and their sympathizers.
On November 24, a Washington Post article warned against the horrors of various—mostly alternative—news outlets which, they say, frequently sympathize with Russia, including popular sites like Zerohedge, Infowars, and the Drudge Report. Most of my personal favorites are included, in fact. The Post cites a report by some mysterious and well-funded organization called PropOrNot which formed at the end of October to bring attention against what they view to be undue Russian influence in various irregular news sites across the political spectrum. It’s actually a useful list; I’ve found some pretty good news sites that I had never heard of. (Watch for them to break their links.)
This PropOrNot business seems to be growing teeth with the passage on 30 November of H.R. 6393: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. A seemingly ordinary and uncontroversial budget bill passed to fund our intelligence services with 390 votes in favor and only 30 opposed. Yet tucked within its verbiage is the ominous section 501, which relates to “active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence over peoples and governments.” From Zerohedge:
A quick skim of the bill reveals “Title V—Matters relating to foreign countries”, whose Section 501 calls for the government to “counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”
The section lists the following definitions of media manipulation:
- Establishment or funding of a front group.
- Covert broadcasting.
- Media manipulation.
- Disinformation and forgeries.
- Funding agents of influence.
- Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
- Terrorist acts.
As ActivistPost correctly notes, it is easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to target, threaten, or eliminate so-called “fake news” websites, a list which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that does not share the mainstream media’s proclivity to serve as the Public Relations arm of a given administration.
Curiously, the bill which was passed on November 30, was introduced on November 22, two days before the Washington Post published its Nov. 24 article citing “experts” who claim Russian propaganda helped Donald Trump get elected.
Of course some of us on the Right have grown to prefer our top news from RT.com or other Russian sites, and we have come to see the Russian perspective as the usually pro-White, pro-Christian counter to the corrupt lies and manipulations of the major American news outlets. To us, the only country in the world that seems to be moving firmly in a sensible direction is Russia. We don’t have to be propagandized to see this. We genuinely prefer the traditionalist Russian perspective and have deliberately sought it out.
Are there Russian connections to the American Right? Very likely so. Russia has a vested interest. The Obama regime has worked to isolate Russia and overthrow its government. If the U.S. can transform into an ally via Russian influence, great. But if the U.S. falls into civil war and balkanizes, that will work, too. In either scenario, the U.S. will stop working to push Russia into World War III.
Does Russia have America’s best interests in mind? I think they want us to stay out of their sphere of influence but otherwise don’t really care what we do. We should regard them the same way. Russia is following a Russia-first policy; the U.S. should focus on our own interests. The two don’t have to conflict.
Did Russian influence cause Hillary Clinton to lose? No way. Pro-union white men in the rust belt tipped the balance against Hillary. Lack of black turnout didn’t help her either. The establishment is just using this as a cover to attack the anti-establishment Right.
Perhaps the American establishment has good cause to worry about the rise of the white Right.
The pro-white, pro-Christian American establishment of the 1950’s rightly grew concerned over the growth of Marxist influence (much of it influenced by the USSR). And today’s anti-white, anti-Christian establishment likewise fears the resurgence of a popular and angry pro-white and pro-Christian movement, one that has finally inoculated itself against the Alinskyite tactics of the Left.
In the 1950’s, the Leftists successfully defeated a Joseph McCarthy who, while correct about Communist infiltration, overextended himself, with the cucks of the time successfully sabotaging his efforts. Basically the Constitution tied the hands of the Right against an enemy who uses our laws against us.
Today’s establishment isn’t about to give up without a fight like the overly-civic and overly-sensible white establishment of the 1950’s. They will attempt to repress any influential reaction against them.