ShhhOne of the essential aspects of operating an anti-authoritarian hacktivist cult is monitoring and controlling communications, both on the cult member-to-cult member level and within the minds of individual cult members. This is what is known as Milieu Control, and is not as complicated as many people think. All we’re actually talking about is controlling more or less every single word your cult members say to each other, and to non-cult members, and, ultimately, to themselves.

In an anti-authoritarian hacktivist cult, Milieu Control is best achieved through peer pressure, social stigmatization, and other group-think tactics, rather than with threats of actual violence. Implying that anyone talking to the authorities (or “outsiders” in general) about cult activities will be hunted down and brutally eviscerated by an acid-crazed kill-squad of lullaby-singing former cheerleaders with 8-inch Bowie knives may get the job done in a conventional cult — i.e. one with a psychotic Charles Manson-type leader who the members believe is both Jesus and Lucifer — but it’s liable to put off your hacktivist types, who don’t go in for religion all that much, not to mention the whole acid-crazed “killer hippie” thing.

This doesn’t mean your hacktivist cult should be entirely paranoia-free. On the contrary, paranoia is vital, as it’s virtually impossible to get any kind of decent Milieu Control without it. The point is, in a hacktivist cult, you need to keep the paranoia flowing mostly from the inside outward, at least for the vast majority of cult members. The authorities should be the primary threat that everyone lives in constant fear of. You want your cult members believing they are under constant surveillance by government agents, who are liable to storm through the doors of their squats (or parents’ houses) at any moment. Later, once you’ve got them all paranoid, and seeing “agents” everywhere they look, you can channel this outwardly-directed paranoia into a deeper inwardly-directed paranoia, which will lead them to fear your charismatic cult leader even more than they fear the authorities, and to regard him as a type of “higher” being, like a god, or prophet, or revolutionary hero, or the loving but somewhat frightening father they never had, or couldn’t ever please. But that comes later. The first priority is your outwardly-directed paranoia.

New cult members should be introduced to the concept of “security culture,” ideally involving a complicated scheme with numbered levels of “operational security,” and generally made to feel as paranoid as possible about who they talk to about cult activities. When socializing with newer cult members, make sure to drop subtle hints about “snitches” — i.e. former members who betrayed the cult by discussing “secrets” with the authorities, or “outsiders.” Starting rumors about current cult members who have fallen out of favor with your charismatic cult leader — i.e. how they might be “snitches,” or “traitors,” or parts of some elaborate government conspiracy to defame or otherwise neutralize your cult leader — is also an effective technique. In any sort of public gathering, make sure to warn that there are “infiltrators” present, as not only will this increase paranoia, it will make new cult members extremely uncomfortable and eager to prove their loyalty to the cult. Encourage new cult members not to use their real names or to refer to the real names of other cult members. Get the Tor and Signal thing going.

These are just few suggestions. Any technique that leads your cult members to enter a state of hypervigilance, or constant low-level paranoia, wherein anyone who isn’t a member of the cult is regarded as a potential threat, and possibly even a government agent, will help you to maintain control of your milieu, and ultimately the minds of your individual cult members.

Your initial investment in Milieu Control will pay off tenfold as you grow your cult and experience the inevitable intra-cult crises that every cult eventually experiences. These intra-cult crises are not to be feared — they are part and parcel of running any cult — and, if managed properly, are opportunities both to reinforce loyalty within the cult and to purge it of potential troublemakers. When the inevitable occurs and, for example, some of your less-devoted cult members rebel against your charismatic cult leader, and publicly accuse him of … well, being a cult leader, and of deceiving, exploiting and manipulating people, or touching them inappropriately, or serially drugging and anally raping them, and then bragging about it to his celebrity friends, you’re going to want to be able to depend on the rest of the cult to rush to his defense, categorically deny said accusations, and accuse the accusers of orchestrating some byzantine international conspiracy to baselessly persecute him and destroy him professionally. Assuming you’ve been controlling your milieu, you won’t have to order your cult members to do this — they will do it automatically (albeit it an embarrassingly cultish way that will seem really creepy to non-cult members, who’ll be following the drama on Twitter.com).

Not only will this reinforce unquestioning loyalty to your charismatic cult leader, and to the cult itself, among your remaining die-hard cult members, but it will escalate the intra-cult paranoia, and help create a siege-type atmosphere wherein your persecuted charismatic cult leader will achieve the kind of “martyr status” that every charismatic cult leader craves.

Once he’s done that, he’s more or less untouchable, as any future accusations will be attributed to malicious entities (e.g. government operatives or spiteful ex-cult members), and will only serve to reinforce his persecuted martyr status, at which point your hacktivist cult will have evolved to the stage where it milieu-controls itself.

All right, that does it for Milieu Control. We’ll be back, at some point, with Part 3 of our series, which will focus on another essential aspect of operating your hacktivist cult. Until then, enjoy the rest of the Summer …

 

Apparently nothing is sacred anymore, or at least not to our insubordinate in-house neo-Situationist employee, CJ Hopkins, who’s been at it again. Here’s his latest piece for CounterPunch, which we assume he thinks is terribly funny …

antiterror beach

The Dawning of the Age of Non-Terrorist Terrorism
(originally published in CounterPunch, August 1, 2016)

Of all the types of terrorist threats we are being conditioned to live in a more or less constant state of low-level fear of, the most terrifying of all has got to be the type we’ve witnessed throughout the Summer — a Summer so terrifying The Guardian is now officially calling it “The Summer of Fear.” Orlando, Nice, Würzberg, Munich, Reutlingen, Ansbach, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray … the Terror just keeps coming, and coming, like the monster in some blockbuster Hollywood movie. The most terrifying part of it is that these are no ordinary terrorist attacks carried out by ordinary terrorists at the behest of ordinary terrorist groups, but, rather, the work of a new breed of terrorist … a terrorist who has no connection to any type of terrorist groups, is not primarily motivated by Terrorism, and, basically, has nothing to do with Terrorism. Let’s go ahead and call him the “non-terrorist terrorist.”

According to the official narrative being propagated by the Western media, non-terrorist Terrorism officially began in late September 2014 with a statement by Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, a terrorist spokesman for ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, or whatever we’re calling it this week. This statement, which has since been quoted as often as humanly possible by the press, exhorted decentralized terrorist cells, aspiring terrorists, and other random individuals, to launch attacks against innocent Westerners, to wit, to “[s]mash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with a car, or throw him down from a high place …” and so on.

According to the same official narrative, the first attack by a non-terrorist terrorist was carried out in Dijon, France — yes, the place the mustard comes from — in late December 2014, three months after the al-Adnani statement. (The 2013 Boston Marathon bomb attack apparently doesn’t count anymore, as it occurred before the al-Adnani statement, and thus doesn’t fit the official narrative.) The prosecutor in the case — the French case, of course — described the perpetrator as a “barely coherent,” mentally unbalanced, middle-aged man who used his car to mow down over a dozen innocent French pedestrians while shouting Islamic stuff out the window.

This, we are learning, is part of the cunning modus operandi of the non-terrorist terrorists, the way they are able to extensively plan and carry out terrifying terrorist attacks while posing as mentally disturbed individuals, or as sexually confused or alienated loners, who have absolutely nothing to do with Terrorism. This ruse was deployed again in Orlando, where the non-terrorist terrorist went as far as to pose as a closeted homosexual; and in Nice, where the attacker maintained his cover for years as a wife-beating petty criminal; and in Würzberg, where apparently the teenage terrorist had been masquerading as an orphaned refugee, but in fact was an insidious sleeper agent sent by ISIS to attack some random train in the middle of the German countryside.

According to knowledgeable Terrorism experts, Western governments, and the mainstream media, we’re going to be seeing more and more of this — these seemingly uncoordinated attacks, both on targets like Nice, which fit the narrative, but also on targets that make no sense, and that terrorists like ISIS have never even heard of, but to which they have nonetheless dispatched their agents to attack Asian tourists with kitchen knives and hatchets while shouting “Allahu Akbar” at the top of their lungs. Who knows where the next attack will take place? Vossevangen, Norway? Demming, New Mexico? Menomonie, Wisconsin? The Outer Hebrides? Your guess is as good as mine.

The point is, as the War on Terror — which, as you probably remember, President Obama officially ended in 2013 — enters this new and more terrifying phase, we will need to prepare ourselves, both logistically and emotionally, for the dramatically heightened level of Terror engendered by the non-terrorist terrorist threat, as well as the invasive “security measures” that will be required to pretend to combat it. Fear, as ever, will be the watchword. Everyone will need to do their part to assist the authorities in identifying, indefinitely detaining, and enhanced-interrogating potential non-terrorist terrorist suspects, and anyone else who looks kind of fishy. Let’s take a look at how that will work.

How to Spot a Non-Terrorist Terrorist

The non-terrorist terrorist is difficult to identify and place on a secret government watch-list as he exhibits few — and sometimes none — of the characteristics of the conventional terrorist. Whereas the conventional terrorist is typically a devout Muslim, and a member of some notorious terrorist group, like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, or Al-Nusra Front (although the latter may not be terrorists, currently, depending on what’s going on in Syria), the non-terrorist terrorist is usually not at all religious, is not a member of any terrorist group, and has absolutely no connection to Terrorism. This lack of any type of terrorist background, or any other ties to actual Terrorism, given the current restrictive limits imposed on anti-Terror professionals by laws, national constitutions, and the like, effectively renders the non-terrorist terrorist undetainable in advance by government agents, anti-Terror police units, and corporate mercenaries, at least in developed Western countries, so they’re going to need all the help they can get in terms of surveilling and profiling everyone. With that in mind, here are some tips for identifying potential non-terrorist terrorists.

The most important thing to remember is that the non-terrorist terrorist is definitely a Muslim, or at least is vaguely Muslim-looking, or has a Muslim-sounding name. White supremacists, neo-Nazis, heavily-armed fundamentalist Christians, and garden-variety white-skinned criminals, unattractive and dangerous though they may be, do not fall into the Terror category, unless, that is, they blow up something like the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, but even that might not count anymore, as it happened before the War on Terror, and … well, once you start calling white people “terrorists,” the distinctions between things get really confusing.

In spite of the fact that he is definitely a Muslim, the non-terrorist terrorist exhibits any or all of an assortment of “non-Muslim behaviors.” He drinks, smokes, abuses drugs, is sexually promiscuous (or aspires to promiscuity), does not attend mosque, rarely prays, and otherwise appears to be just another stressed-out, debt-burdened Western consumer struggling to make sense of late-capitalist society, and to support himself — and, in some cases, his family — with some soul-crushing job at the foreign subsidiary of some global corporation he isn’t even aware of, or as an Uber-driver, or temporary security guard, or with some other type of micro-entrepreneurial activity that’s making his life a living hell, which feeds right into his other cover.

The non-terrorist terrorist often goes to great lengths to create the appearance of having had a long history of psychological and emotional problems. This cover (which the non-terrorist terrorist may begin constructing as early as his late-adolescence) may involve the feigning of a series of nervous breakdowns, or episodes of clinical depression, or suicide attempts, or other such symptoms. Don’t let this “emotionally unstable” act fool you by playing on your empathy for other human beings. If ever in doubt about a disturbed individual, or anyone expressing extremist views, or acting in any way unusual, best to just go ahead and report him, and let the authorities sort it out. You could be dealing with a non-terrorist terrorist in the process of “sudden self-radicalization.”

The “Suddenly Self-Radicalized” Non-Terrorist Terrorist

Unlike the conventional, or “actual” terrorist, the non-terrorist terrorist is often radicalized shortly before the time of his attack, or during his attack, or shortly thereafter. “Radicalization” is a tricky process, which can occur in any number of ways, e.g., over time, in structured settings, but also in purely imaginary ways that only exist in the minds of the terrorists, or the media, or anti-Terrorism experts. In any event, it’s not like the old days, when aspiring terrorists were forced to attend those terrorist training camps out in the desert, and actually get involved with Terrorism. Nowadays all it takes is the Internet, and sincere desire to radicalize yourself.

“Self-radicalization” is a growing problem, and not just among Islamic terrorists. “Radicalism” in any form that opposes or questions global Capitalism, Neoliberalism, and other Western values, is spreading like a mass psychological disorder (see Jonathan Rauch’s recent article in The Atlantic, where he diagnoses the American public’s pathological resentment of the political class). Like the child with Oppositional Defiant Disorder, sometimes even the non-terrorist terrorist — or whatever type of “self-radicalized” person — doesn’t even realize he’s becoming a terrorist, or a non-terrorist terrorist, until it’s too late.

“Self-radicalization” often begins with irrational and inappropriate resentment, which is typically projected onto affluent individuals, major corporations, investment banks, politicians, billionaires, members of the media, or the populations of other countries that happen to be invading or bombing the country of the “self-radicalizing” person in question. This misdirected pathological resentment, if allowed to fester, inevitably leads to the thinking of extremist or terrorist thoughts, which leads to the tweeting of terrorist tweets, and to terrorist Facebook posts, and so on. In no time at all, the self-radicalizing person has transformed into a full-blown non-terrorist terrorist, and is snorting up lines of pulverized Captagon, drawing half-assed ISIS flags on the walls of his apartment with indelible markers, and loading up on weapons at Walmart, or whatever passes for Walmart in his country.

This is just a preliminary check-list of the hallmark features of the non-terrorist terrorist, which the mainstream media will be adding to as The Summer of Fear approaches its climax, and presumably throughout the indefinite future, as the Age of Non-Terrorist Terrorism continues, possibly until the end of Time.

A Word of Warning Regarding Terminology

All right, I know what you’re probably thinking … you’re thinking we’ve finally reached some level of absurdity with this calling people “terrorists” thing where the term completely loses its meaning, and its ability to scare the bejesus out of people. Fortunately, this is not the case. In fact, it’s almost exactly the obverse — the more nonsensical, oxymoronic and utterly meaningless the terms we use to describe the heinous, subhuman enemies (who want to slaughter us because of our freedom) are, the more meaningful, effective and terrifying they are. This is crucial when distinguishing between, for example, our friends in Saudi Arabia and barbarous mad-dog terrorists like ISIS, both of whom chop off people’s heads for crimes like apostasy, idolatry, and adultery … but, of course, the Saudis are not savage terrorists, despite their involvement in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and … well, you can see the danger here, when you start to actually think about things.

The point is, our new “non-terrorist terrorist” designation should not in any way call into question the widely-acknowledged definition, and constant repetition, of the terms “terrorist,” “Terror,” and “Terrorism,” when applied to terrorists, whether of the “non-terrorist” or “terrorist” type. Terrorism is not a word game, or some specious semiotic construct, or an essentially arbitrary made-up label that can be slapped onto any type of violent activity or ideology we want to demonize. Terrorism is Terrorism. The word means exactly what it means … whatever that might be at this point. You can look it up on the Internet, on Google, or Wikipedia, or whatever.

And as for the “non-terrorist terrorist” designation, let’s not get all freaked out about it and make it any more confusing than it is. We can sit around and argue forever over whether the “non-terrorist terrorist” is a terrorist, but, honestly, where is that going to get us? The simple fact of the matter is, as the adjectival in the term denotes, the non-terrorist terrorist is not a terrorist … nevertheless he is a terrorist, and the fact that he is and is not a terrorist simultaneously defines what he is and makes absolutely no difference at all, at least not within the official narrative.

No, despite what terrorist apologists will tell you, calling some terrorists “non-terrorist terrorists” doesn’t mean they aren’t terrorists, or that there isn’t any such thing as “Terrorism,” except within the simulation of “reality” the global capitalist ruling classes need to maintain to keep the masses entertained and borderline paranoid, as they — i.e., the capitalists, not the masses — transform the rest of the entire planet into a combination shopping mall/labor camp.

If that were true, the “War on Terror” would be nothing but an elaborate farce, a simulacrum that was there to distract us from the sociopolitical and economic dynamics of the historical period we were actually living through … which dynamics might have something to do with something a bit more complex than “Terror,” “Evil,” “Hate,” and other empty but terror-inspiring words like that.

As stressful as things are at the moment, imagine how exhausting that would be … having to think about all that stuff, transnational Capitalism’s ideology, the manufacturing of consensus reality, all the childish narratives we would be being fed moment by moment by the corporate-owned media, and the amount of mental energy it would take to try to resist it on a daily basis … but then, seeing as you’ve made it to the end of this piece, I’m pretty sure you already have.

It appears our in-house poetic terrorist, CJ Hopkins, has published yet another lengthy essay in CounterPunch, this one exploring the atmosphere of panic the corporate media has been working so hard to propagate throughout the Western world, to prevent people from actually thinking about anything, except on the most superficial level. We’re pretty sure you know our position on that, and on this Hopkins character’s activities, generally, so without further comment, here’s the piece …

fear eyes

The Blood-Dimmed Tide of Neo-Nationalism and Other Scary Simulacra
(originally published in CounterPunch, July 12, 2016)

“Europe is caught in a vicious cycle, oscillating between the Brussels technocracy unable to drag it out of inertia and the popular rage against this inertia, a rage appropriated by new more radical Leftist movements but primarily by Rightist populism.” — Slavoj Žižek, Marxist philosopher

“The 21st century is going to be a war between nationalism and globalism.”
— Matthew Heimbach, White Supremacist

Well, it’s shaping up to be a long, hot Summer, or year, or possibly decade or two, what with all the global political chaos, racial tensions, social unrest, and the blood-dimmed tide of Neo-nationalism rising inexorably out of Spiritus Mundi like the contents of a backed-up toilet. Whatever is actually going on — which is probably not as apocalyptic, but more insidious and dystopian than it seems — the worst are certainly full of passionate intensity. Based on the miasma of mindless hysteria being pumped out at us by the corporate media, and then endlessly echoed on Facebook and Twitter, you would think the end of days was nigh. Or at least the end of Western civilization, or democracy, or America, or Capitalism … or something. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The fact is, for the global capitalist ruling classes, the transnational corporate and deep state elites — the folks who are actually running the show, to the extent that anyone is actually running it — things couldn’t be going much better at the moment. Sure, for the vast majority of us, the future is looking increasingly miserable, but try to see things from their perspective. Here we are, barely twenty-five years since the dissolution of the last real impediment to their domination of … well, pretty much everything, and just look at all they’ve managed to accomplish.

The Greater Middle East has been successfully destabilized. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, any country not playing ball with transnational Capitalism has been brought to its knees by a series of invasions, bombings, sanctions, support for insurgencies, corruption, et cetera. Iran is currently negotiating in the hope of avoiding a similar fate. Russia, following its transformation into an autocratic capitalist free-for-all for ex-KGB men and their oligarch cronies — a transformation designed by folks like Jeffrey Sachs, Lawrence Summers, the Harvard Institute for International Development, the IMF, and other shock therapists — has been more or less surrounded by the EU and NATO, and is being pressured to get with the program. China, in spite of its playing grab-ass with the U.S. Navy in the South China Sea, is deep into the global Capitalism thing. Vietnam and Laos have joined the club. Cuba is even opening for business again. South America is a work-in-progress, as ever, what with the recent neoliberal “soft” coup in Brazil, the re-neoliberalization of Argentina, the destabilization of Venezuela, and so on.

This is just a quick summary of the highlights. The point is, apart from some isolated pockets of resistance — which the corporatists will get to eventually — and the various nightmarish terrorist theme parks operating out in the imperial hinterlands, it’s one big global capitalist world … one Market under Mammon, indivisible, with privatization and austerity for most, and distractionary paranoia for all.

The Simulation of National Sovereignty

One of the most effective ways the global capitalist ruling classes distract us from the fact that they are transforming the entire planet into a combination shopping mall/labor camp is the simulation of national sovereignty. Most of us, since the late-18th Century, have been conditioned to perceive the world as a competition between sovereign nations, each pursuing its own national interests. Which, of course, it is to some extent. However, as we have all been experiencing, sovereignty isn’t what it used to be. JPMorgan Chase, ICBC, HSBC, Berkshire Hathaway, Royal Dutch Shell, AXA Group, Toyota, Exxon, Pfizer, Novartis … does anyone believe these transnational banks and corporations have any real allegiance to the “sovereign nations” they nominally reside in, or to the citizens of those “sovereign” nations? No, and yet we go on perceiving and discussing things as if they did.

We talk about the foreign and domestic policies of the government of the United States as if they had been intended to somehow benefit the “American people,” as if the offshoring of “American” jobs, the debt-enslavement of “American” college students, the real estate bubble Ponzi schemes, the commodification of healthcare, culture, and more or less every other aspect of society, not to mention the invasions and bombings of other countries, as if all this wasn’t designed to serve the long-term interests of global Capitalism, and was simply the result of series of “mistakes” on the part of incompetent and misguided politicians.

The “failure” of the invasion and occupation of Iraq is a perfect example of this way of perceiving things. Yes, of course, for the “American people,” it was, indeed, a colossal failure, a total waste of lives and money which accelerated the spread of Terrorism both within the Middle East and around the world. However, for the transnational capitalist ruling classes, who couldn’t care less about the American people, or the Iraqi people, or any other people, this “failure” was actually an enormous success, in terms of removing a major impediment to their eventual domination of the region, and upending the regional balance of power that had been established during the Cold War.

The invasion of Iraq, as you might remember, was planned well prior to September 2001. It was part of the agenda of the neoconservative “Project for the New American Century,” and deep state players like Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Robert Kagan, and other corporatist think tank-types. And of course it was … this was perfectly logical. After the USSR disintegrated, the Greater Middle East was ripe for restructuring — there was nothing to stop the military arm of global Capitalism (i.e. the US military) from moving in and beginning the process we’ve all been experiencing ever since.

Now, I’m not suggesting there’s a bunch of capitalists sitting around in a room somewhere — at the annual Bilderberg Conference, for example — consciously planning this kind of stuff. Conspiracy theories are fun and all that, but worldwide sociopolitical transformations — like the one we are in the middle of — are a bit more complex than an Oliver Stone movie, and probably have less to do with the intentions of individuals than we would like to think, even extremely creepy individuals, like the ones whose names I just ran off above.

What I am suggesting is that what we’re experiencing — and have been since the end of the Cold War — is not a series of policy “blunders,” but, rather, the emergence of a global power structure none of us really understands yet, not an empire in the classical sense, but an omnipresent power structure governed by the interests of global corporations … and not by the interests of sovereign nations. (Bona fide scholars — which I am not — have been attempting to articulate this structure, which is more complex than I’m making it sound here, given how the corporate and government spheres overlap and feed each other, Antonio Negri, Michael Hardt, Noam Chomsky, Sam Gidin and Leo Panitch, among them, each of whose books is probably worth reading … but you don’t exactly need a PhD to perceive that corporations are running the show.)

It is the interest of these corporations, and the global capitalist ruling classes (including government and deep state elites), that we do not perceive the world this way, and that we continue to believe in the sovereignty of nations, and that we think of ourselves as citizens of these nations, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Neo-Nationalism vs. Neoliberalism

The simulation of national sovereignty, in addition to acting as an ontological decoy, drawing our attention away from the fact that power is now primarily corporate, plays another essential role in the ongoing spread of neoliberal Capitalism. As the global capitalist ruling classes seize control of more and more of the planet, absorbing what little is left of society into their global simulation of society — a heterogeneously homogenous worldwide marketplace of products and services that no one really needs, the growth-obsessed production of which is destroying the entire biosphere — a considerable number of human beings are beginning to express their discontent.

In the US, UK and Western Europe, the heartlands of the global capitalist empire, after nearly four decades of globalization, deregulation, privatization, austerity measures and debt-enslavement, the working classes have finally had enough of getting pissed on and being told it’s raining, or at least, according to mainstream media, the “less well-educated” members of them have. This demeaning characterization is extremely important. The global capitalist ruling classes need to ensure that any resistance to globalization, privatization, and neoliberal Capitalism, generally, is perceived by the public as neo-nationalist, xenophobic, racist, or just plain ignorant. Not that a lot of it isn’t. It is. A lot of it is, but not all of it is. The global capitalist ruling classes need us to believe that all of it is, and that the only two options available to us are Neoliberalism and Neo-nationalism.

The corporate media is working hard to convince us that these are our only two alternatives. Their “coverage” of the Brexit referendum and its aftermath is a perfect example. Somehow, despite the doomsday campaign waged by the British liberal press, the UK voted to leave the EU, that bastion of European democracy, the one that is currently privatizing Greece in order to pay back the banks and speculators who made a killing lending billions to a country that everyone knew from day one was totally unfit for the single market, the one that is going to approve the TTIP, in some iteration, once they’ve cleaned it up. According to the bipartisan Oxbridge establishment, and their American counterparts across the pond, the only plausible explanation for the public’s failure to follow orders, and respond to a series of last-minute threats issued by Obama, Soros and Junker, is a combination of Neo-nationalism, xenophobia, and elderly dementia. The Guardian is reporting that an epidemic of British xenophobia has appeared out of thin air. Neo-nationalists, white supremacists, and other assorted racist twits, emboldened by their Brexit victory, are roving the streets in search of anyone “foreign-looking” to hurl abuse at.

Not that this isn’t actually happening. It is, and not just in Britain either. The tide of neo-nationalist sentiment is also on the rise throughout the Continent. Neo-nationalist parties haven been making gains in Austria, Hungary, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Switzerland, and elsewhere (not to mention the unabashed neo-Nazis Hillary Clinton’s State Department helped to install in the new Ukrainian government; that is, after they regime-changed the old one). Here in Germany, the AfD (the Alternatives for Germany party), a prettied-up neo-nationalist front for uglier neo-Nazi types, while still fairly marginal, has been growing steadily. In France, it’s Le Pen and the Front National. In the Netherlands, it’s Geert Wilders — who, rumor has it, has kidnapped David Lynch’s hairstylist — and the PVV (the Party for Freedom).

Meanwhile, back in the USA, from what I’ve been able to gather from the pundits, Trump and his legions of down-market racists are still threatening the very fabric of democracy, never mind that, according to very same pundits, he has absolutely no chance of winning. Worse yet, it appears a troubling number of fanatical Bernie Sanders followers are refusing to get behind Hillary Clinton, who doesn’t really need them anyway, as at this point she has the endorsement of every neoliberal and neoconservative pontificating talking head in existence, and is being sold by the liberal media as the thin blue line between “love” and “stability” and the thousand-year fascist Trumpian Reich.

But I don’t want to make light of the threat. Neo-nationalist sentiment is definitely spreading, and white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and Alt-Right creeps, like the one I quoted at the top of this piece, are making the most of it. The liberal press has been churning out a non-stop series of “What-the-Fuck-Is-Happening-to-Democracy?” features, as if they didn’t have the slightest clue. The entire intelligentsia, such as it is, appears to be completely baffled. Inexplicably, having been offered the chance to embrace a utopian capitalist future in which each and every one of us will be a thriving micro-entrepreneur marketing our asses to some global corporation, derivatives trader, or techno-oligarch, and all our outdated cultural values, religious beliefs, and personal prejudices, will either be eradicated or rendered meaningless interchangeable “lifestyle” choices and marketed back to us, a lot of people are retreating into the safety and familiarity of tribalism … as humans have done for millions of years. Yes, it’s certainly quite a conundrum, all this neo-nationalist sentiment.

None of it, of course, if you believe the punditocracy, has anything to do with global Capitalism, or the globalization of the labor market, or with the end of an historical era in which sovereign nations were actually sovereign … or with people’s desire, however clouded by ignorance, to cling to some semblance of actual democracy, as opposed to being ruled by corporations, investment banks, and their governmental proxies.

No, according to the corporate media, and to over-educated, half-bright, liberal authoritarians like Jonathan Rauch — for whom democracy is now an official disease worthy of inclusion in the next DSM — the problem isn’t global Capitalism; the problem is people, and their “neurotic hatred” of politicians, and the whole “political class,” who are simply trying to do the bidding of the global corporations that bought them. It isn’t that the entire world is undergoing a radical restructuring — the transfer of sociopolitical power from sovereign nations to corporations, and the transformation of what remains of society into one big global capitalist marketplace — and that some of us aren’t entirely thrilled. No, according to neoliberal sages like Rauch, Thomas Friedman, and numerous others, this “populist anger” is either some kind of mass behavioral syndrome or conduct disorder (e.g. “Oppositional Defiant Disorder” — think about that one for just a moment) or is symptomatic of pathological racism, xenophobia, “thought disorder,” or some other psychological condition.

The Pathologization of Political Dissent

We can expect this type of pathologization of any and all resistance to Capitalism to continue and accelerate throughout the future, as it functions as a perfect double bind. In a globally hegemonic system like ours, the system’s ideology, no longer challenged by any credible competing ideology, transcends ideology and becomes normality. The enemy of the dominant class — and thus the one projected throughout the entire system as “everyone’s enemy” — is no longer an external “foreign” enemy, but, rather, an internal, or “systemic” enemy … a deviation, an abnormality. The extremist, the terrorist, the neo-nationalist, the racist, the sociopathic child, cancer, depression, inappropriate anger, the malicious hacker, the government leaker … such are the threats to the new global order.

None of them poses a serious challenge to the reign of global Capitalism (unless you believe that the corporate elites and the US military are going to permit some Hitler-alike to undo everything they’ve been building for going on seventy years, in which case I’ve got a bridge to sell you). No, Neo-nationalism and religious fundamentalism — short some sort of global catastrophe that wipes out modern civilization — are just vain attempts to turn back the clock to 17th Century despotism. (And as trendy as the Anonymous and Snowden stuff is, hacktivism and whistle-blowing pose no significant threat to power, no more than protesters masking up and throwing bottles at riot cops).

Neo-nationalism is a simulacrum … a living, breathing representation of something that has never “really” existed, other than as a simulacrum. Islamic Fundamentalism, Christian Fundamentalism, Stalinist Communism, and every other attempt to reverse the spread of Capitalism throughout the world since the 17th Century, also fall into this category.

Simulacra serve a purpose, namely, to conceal the absence of something. Religious icons and other representations of monotheistic deities do not conceal the existence of those deities — they conceal the non-existence of those deities. (Apologies for getting all Baudrillardian, but there isn’t a better way to say this. Perhaps a more concrete example would be the “psychiatric disorder” I referred to above, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, which was first “discovered” in 1980. This “disorder” is, of course, a simulacrum, an invention of the psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries, but an actual disorder nonetheless, with categorizable symptoms, which respond to “treatment.” All these new psychiatric “abnormalities,” being simulacra, conceal the fact that it is “normality” that does not exist … and thus keep everyone obsessed with normality.)

The blood-dimmed tide of Neo-nationalism currently sweeping the Western world is a simulacrum in the classical sense. It isn’t a deceptive (i.e. “fake”) alternative concealing an authentic (i.e. “real”) alternative to globalized neoliberal Capitalism, but, rather, an all-too-real phenomenon concealing the fact that there is no alternative, and that, at present, an alternative is unimaginable … literally unimaginable, in the sense that we are not yet capable of conceiving a credible alternative system, or a way to get there.

The global capitalist ruling classes are extremely fond of this simulacrum, as it distracts us from facing where we actually are, and from working together to conceive that alternative, or even just asking the kind of questions that might help us actually get there, someday. It also keeps everyone afraid of Terrorism, Islamic Fundamentalism, Neo-Fascism, Populism, Trumpism, and pretty much any other variety of “Extremism” they can possibly think of … as if there were the slightest chance of any of these “movements” actually succeeding, and toppling global Capitalism.

All right, that’s enough reality for now. It’s time to get back to the Internet. On behalf of the global capitalist ruling classes, and their friends in politics and the mainstream media, I apologize for this lengthy interruption, and return you to their regularly-programmed hysteria …

Anonymous-hoodies

We’re going to begin our series on How to Operate an Anti-Authoritarian Hacktivist Cult by reviewing the three essentials of operating any type of cult: (1) the Charismatic Cult leader; (2) Isolation from Society; and (3) the Apocalyptic Ideology. We assume you’re already familiar with how these features function in more traditional cults, so we’ll focus on how you can make them work for you in an “anti-authoritarian” environment. This will involve a little tweaking, but not as much as you might suspect. There’s a lot to cover, so let’s get right to it.

1. The Charismatic Cult Leader (or the “Non-Leading” Leader)

Now this is crucial, as you can’t expect to operate a cult without a charismatic cult leader, or at least some sort of celebrity figurehead that people can rally around and idolize. Your cult leader is also the “public face” of your cult as far as the media is concerned, and the one who’ll be flying all over the world to all those hacktivist conferences and parties, so you definitely need to get this one right.

The tricky part is, because you’re going to be dealing with anti-authoritarian types, you can’t just go with some obvious spook with shiny black shoes and a jarhead crew cut. No, your cult leader needs to look the part, speak the anti-authoritarian lingo, and otherwise pass as an anarchist hacktivist. So you’ll be looking for a Manson-type, as opposed to someone like Jones or Miscavige (i.e. someone who can blend into the hacktivist subculture the way Manson blended into the hippie subculture).

The good news is, there are plenty of these around. Manipulative domination freaks and other such sociopaths are a dime a dozen, and they’re going to be drawn to any type of non-hierarchical group or community that suspends the rules of normal society like sharks to bleeding shipwreck survivors floating around helplessly in their orange life jackets … so it shouldn’t be too hard to find one.

What we suggest, when it comes to your cult leader, is letting nature take its course. Assemble and isolate your hacktivist community, suspend the rules of normal society, and let the sociopaths fight it out to establish themselves as de facto leader. Nine times out of ten this works. People’s ingrained authoritarianism does not just magically disappear because they read some anarchist tract online or sit around in some general assembly twinkling and monitoring vibes, and so on. In the absence of any overt hierarchy, dominant personalities dominate, and submissive personalities submit. Any potential cult leader knows this, which is why they’re so drawn to these “leaderless” groups. Which brings us to our second point.

2. Isolation from the Larger Society (or Suspension of the Rules of Society)

Isolating your hacktivist cult from society is just as important as finding the right cult leader. In fact, it may be more important, as not even the most manipulative cult leader can successfully control his devoted followers unless their ties to the outside world have been severed. This doesn’t always have to mean physical severance — e.g. a heavily-armed compound out in the desert — isolation can be a state of mind ( with everyone glued to their phones these days, “community” is almost completely virtual, so there’s really no reason to physically isolate). The crucial thing is to get your hacktivists to suspend the rules of “normal” society, which shouldn’t be too hard to accomplish, as most of these rules exist in order to encourage the type of mindless conformity and subservience your typical hacktivist hates. Once you’ve done that, the next step is easy.

What you want to do now is foster a kind of ongoing intra-cult competition wherein cult members openly vie with each other to prove who can be the most anti-authoritarian and transgress the most societal norms. This reinforces their sense of isolation, and gives them something fun to do. Sexual transgression always works well — Manson was particularly adept at this — although these days it’s getting harder to find any norms that haven’t already been transgressed. Still, we recommend going with sex, as your newer cult members (i.e. “fish”) will probably have a few taboos that they haven’t yet broken by the time they join. Invite them over for drinks or dinner, get a casual orgy going, and then make the fish the center of attention. Be sure to include their romantic partners to get the full transgressive effect! Drugs are another useful tool, the more hallucinogenic the better — e.g. LSD, DMT, psilocybin mushrooms, mescaline, et cetera — but anything paranoia-inducing will do.

Keep your eyes on the prize, however. As fun as these drug-fueled orgies can be, sex and drugs are not an end in themselves; they are simply a means of reinforcing your cult members’ isolation from society, and their estrangement from anyone who isn’t a cult member, who ideally you want them to come to regard as unenlightened and potentially dangerous. (A good example of this would be the way, in the Hollywood movie The Matrix, anyone who hadn’t taken the red pill, and learned “the truth” about “reality,” was liable to be a “potential agent,” and thus could never be entirely trusted. You want your cult members thinking of anyone who isn’t a member of the cult like that.) Which brings us to our final point.

3. The Apocalyptic Ideology

The majority of start-up cults that fail do so because they’ve somehow neglected their apocalyptic ideology. Either they fail to articulate it clearly, or it simply isn’t paranoid enough. Paranoia is the key factor here. A cult is only as strong as its enemies, even if those enemies are completely imaginary, or have no interest in the cult whatsoever. Examples of apocalyptic ideologies include: Manson’s vision of “Helter Skelter,” Jones’s “religious communalism,” and the Scientologists’ “going clear” thing. Obviously, for a variety of reasons — among them that they are batshit crazy — apocalyptic ideologies of this type are inappropriate for your hacktivist cult.

Please keep in mind that your apocalyptic ideology does not have to be a doomsday scenario. By “apocalyptic,” what we mean is “final,” but not necessarily “suicidal.” So no one has to drink any Kool-Aid, or slaughter any Hollywood celebrities, or anything quite as dramatic as that. All we’re really talking about when we talk about an “apocalyptic ideology” is an eschatological revolutionary program with a clearly defined and powerful enemy, and some half-assed vision of a better future, which everyone knows will never come about (we’ll return to this point in just a moment).

For anti-authoritarian hacktivist cults, the ideal type of apocalyptic ideology is going to be some political crusade that your hacktivist types can get obsessively involved with, and pretend they’re waging a guerrilla war against powerful government and corporatist antagonists, who are probably logging their every keystroke, watching them through their notebook cameras, and recording every word they say on their smart phones. Don’t be afraid to overdo this; the more powerful and evil the antagonist the better. You want your cult members believing they’re actually doing damage to the NSA, CIA, GCHQ, or some similarly romantic and invincible adversary.

The invincibility part is important, because you don’t want to ever win this battle, as that would be the end of your cult. The main thing is — regardless of whichever specific apocalyptic ideology you go with — it has to be something dangerous enough to draw the attention of the agencies in question, as you definitely want your well-known cult members actually harassed by the real authorities, and detained and questioned at the airport, and so on, as this establishes their credibility as dangerous jet-setting hacktivist outlaws.

It will help if you can get your celebrity figurehead to assume the role of a persecuted martyr, like Julian Assange or Edward Snowden. People eat this martyr stuff up. (Look at what Omidyar is doing with First Look, and the Edward Snowden franchise thing. The genius of it is, he’s hired a handful of extremely intelligent and talented journalists, who normally — i.e. if they didn’t work for him — given their politics, would be inclined to tear him a new asshole on a regular basis. Which, of course, is the last thing they last thing they want to do. Their extremely generous salaries aside, the way it’s going, they can string this Snowden documents thing out for literally decades, and in the meantime do their adversarial reporting, and maybe win some more Pulitzer Prizes. In terms of Baudrillardian insidiousness, it does not get any better than this.)

In any event, if you can get that going (i.e. the celebrity mascot martyr thing) we’re talking gold mine in terms of knock-on benefits … not only will you reap the intangible rewards of the whole celebrity-worship thing, but you will generate all sorts of revenue streams, e.g. t-shirts, coffee mugs, books, movies, and any other branded products you can think of.

Now you don’t want your actual cult leader to do this, as you want him free to fly around the world speaking on behalf of your celebrity figurehead, giving interviews and intimidating “snitches,” not to mention attending those drug-fueled orgies, and other day-to-day cult-related stuff. This doesn’t mean your cult leader can’t exploit the persecution angle — on the contrary, he should milk it hard, as should everyone in his inner circle. When being photographed or giving interviews, they should try to project a “persecuted” look, as if Special Forces were about to swoop down and render them off to some black-site prison. Another nice touch is demanding that journalists (or anyone trying to contact or meet with them) utilize special encryption software, remove the batteries from their cell phones, and observe other complex “anti-surveillance” measures. All of this will help to reify your apocalyptic ideology, and guarantee the long-term survival of your cult.

Well, that pretty much does it for the basics. In Part 2 of our series we’ll take a look at some other features you may want to incorporate, e.g. Milieu Control, Loading the Language, Using Shame to Control Other People, and How to Effectively Deal With Snitches … that last one being particularly useful if your cult experiences a leadership crisis. So stay tuned to this space for that.

Cult kids

Dear Consent Factory: I handle external communications for a privately-funded international NGO active in the fields of education and alternative lending strategies in developing countries. One of the major benefactors of the private foundation that owns the foreign subsidiary that owns our NGO read your How to Herd your Critics into Fake Communities and Waste Their Time series and is potentially interested in starting up one of these “anti-establishment” platforms you mentioned in Part 3 of your series. This benefactor is especially interested in the anti-surveillance cult concept you touched on at the end there. I realize this is a big ask, but we were hoping you could maybe expand a bit on the advantages of the cult concept, as opposed to the standard disinformation-and-distraction model. The benefactor’s interest in this cult stuff has nothing directly to do with the NGO I work for, by the way. I’m acting strictly as a conduit in this instance. — Just Doing My Job

 

Dear Just Doing My Job: Funny that you should write in with this request at this exact moment. As it just so happens, we’ve been planning to do one of our multi-part series on the hacktivist cult thing, and anti-authoritarian cults in general. Given the growing popularity of anti-authoritarian hacktivism among the college-educated 18-29 demographic, we figured the timing was probably right. As you mentioned we mentioned in our earlier series, starting your very own hacktivist cult (or better yet, a decentralized “movement” organized around some celebrity figurehead) is not only an extremely effective means of rendering harmless hundreds of thousands of potential critics and other such troublemakers, it’s also a serious source of revenue, once you get into anti-surveillance software, movies, TV shows, masks, and so on.

The working title of our upcoming series is How to Operate an Anti-Authoritarian Hacktivist Cult. We’ll be posting Part 1 of it later this week. You’ll definitely want to have a look, as it will probably answer most of your questions.

In the meantime, you might want to go ahead and investigate cults (and thought reform), generally. There are all kinds of different models out there (i.e. religious, new age, corporate, and so on), but the simple fact of the matter is, no matter how you dress it up, fundamentally, a cult is a cult … they operate according to the same set of principles, which we’ll be exploring in our series, of course.

We recommend you start with the classics, Manson and his “Family,” the People’s Temple, and the Church of … well, we think you know who. If you get through all those, some less well-known but no less interesting examples include … OK, we’re not allowed to mention those either, as they tend to get extremely litigious, and our attorneys are over-taxed as it is.

Please be advised, though, if you start down this road, it gets increasingly weird and paranoid, what with all the front groups, conspiracy theories, religious fanatics, and other bull goose loonies. If you find yourself sitting up at 3AM googling Dr. Michael Aquino, Sammy Davis, Jr., and the Temple of Set, odds are, it’s probably time to stop.

Clinton and Obama 4It appears CJ Hopkins, who is becoming the bane of our existence, has published another piece in CounterPunch, this one apparently aimed at insulting everyone in the mainstream media he hadn’t insulted with his earlier pieces. We’re not entirely sure where he’s going with this, but we’re happy to help him screw himself out of any prospect of career advancement. With that in mind, here’s his latest …

Welcome to “Reality,” Kids
(originally published in CounterPunch, June 14, 2016)

Last Tuesday, if you listened closely, you could hear it whoosh across the Internet, the enormous sigh of collective relief, as social liberals, center-leftists, and other “progressive Capitalism” fans received the news that it was finally over. Bernie Sanders and his fanatical legions of hopped-up, all-white hacky-sacking Bernie Bros had at last been banished from center stage, which the media immediately set about striking, and dressing over for the main event, wherein Hillary Clinton will save us all from Hitler.

I provided a preview of the upcoming season of America Saves the World Again: Trumpocalypse! in these pages earlier, so I’m not going to go through all that again. Let’s just say, it’s going to be a doozy. According to the mainstream media, Trump and his army of downmarket racists are on the march and headed your way. The Guardian reports that frightened Americans are making plans to flee the country. The New York Times, Washington Post, and a host of other “serious broadsheets” are apparently competing to see who can get in the most Weimar Germany and Hitler references. Not to be outdone, Reuters reports that Trump is both Hitler and Mussolini. The latest is, former Bernie Bros, many of them anarchists and nihilists, are rumored to be defecting to Trump, mostly out of hatred for Clinton, and presumably affluent women generally. According to the New York Review of Books, we’re in a state of “national crisis.” I’m not kidding, you can google this stuff.

All of which, of course, is fantastic news for the mainstream media and social liberals. Imagine the emotional strain they’ve been under, having to pretend to feel uncomfortable about Clinton’s shady Wall Street ties, or pretending to approve of some of Sanders’ ideas … like single-payer healthcare for all Americans, free or affordable college tuition, and regulating the investment banks.

Put yourself in their shoes for a minute and imagine being forced to pretend to care about Obama and Clinton fomenting coups, and otherwise destabilizing other countries, or assassinating pretty much anyone they like, anywhere they like, with complete impunity, or unequivocally supporting the State of Israel, and our friends in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and whichever other despotic regimes we happen to be supporting at the moment.

Not that Sanders was ever going to change the nature of U.S. foreign policy, or be able to achieve his domestic agenda. As Jeffrey St. Clair wrote in his recent piece, this was always “a rhetorical revolution.” Words, however, do not amount to nothing … not completely nothing, anyway. And Sanders has been saying a lot of stuff that folks in the international spotlight are not supposed to talk about publicly, and definitely not on television.

See, the thing about being a social liberal is, it’s incredibly important to convince yourself that you actually care about other people, and that you’re not just mouthing whatever platitudes are making the rounds in liberals circles as you enjoy the fruits of global Capitalism, which at some level you know are being made possible by destroying a lot of other people’s lives, which you need to deny or rationalize somehow. Oh yes, it’s extremely complicated, and stressful, being a social liberal. It’s so much simpler for folks on the Right, who can come right out and admit they have no qualms about killing and exploiting other people, as long as they can profit from it.

Social liberals do not have this luxury. No, in order to continue to feel good about themselves, they have to twist themselves into emotional pretzels and tell themselves all kinds of crazy stories. One of their favorites is the one about “reality,” and being “an adult,” which means being a capitalist, as Capitalism, for them, is the only reality … it’s more or less a religious thing.

Mostly, these stories do the trick, as social liberals — like most other people — tend to socialize with others of their kind, and so reinforce whatever narrative their social circle is telling itself, which, of course, is how “reality” is created.

The only problem is, when you’re a social liberal (which you probably are because part of you still has not made its peace with dominating, exploiting and destroying a lot of other people in order to profit off their suffering), is that sometimes someone like Bernie Sanders starts running around all over the country, not to mention TV and the Internet, mouthing off about the corporate plutocracy, and demonstrating how American “democracy” is really just a giant simulation to dupe people into believing they’re “free.” For social liberals of all varieties — but particularly for the affluent variety — this has been extremely embarrassing, and emotionally triggering, and they would like it to stop.

Which is why the end of the Sanders campaign comes as such a relief for social liberals, especially for those in the mainstream media who have a “respectable” image to maintain. In order to justify shilling for Clinton, they have had to resort to some ridiculous tactics, like implying that Sanders and his supporters are racists, or that Sanders’ ideas (e.g. single-payer healthcare and free college tuition) are “unrealistic.” As any American who has spent time in Europe knows — I’ve lived in Berlin for close to twelve years now — most European countries provide these two things to their citizens and residents as a matter of course. And while Sanders clearly failed to connect with the majority of African Americans and Hispanics, incompetence doesn’t make one racist, or no more than average. It just makes one incompetent.

In any event, that’s all over now … or it will be soon, once Sanders concedes, and breaks the hearts of a lot of young Americans who were trying to play by the rules of the system … those whose faith in American democracy hadn’t already been crushed by Obama’s “Hope-and-Change” con. Which is sad, but … well, we can at least look forward to Hillary Clinton’s “Love-Trumps-Hate” thing, and to eight more years of corporate plutocracy dressed up as “historic progress.” Perhaps the Nobel Prize Committee will award her the Peace Prize for her “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” and … whatever.

Welcome to “reality,” kids.

Seals Vietnam

Dear Consent Factory: I’m a fairly new associate at a global media relations firm. One of our firm’s clients, a private non-profit university located in a developing country and primarily funded by the U.S. Department of State, has got a bit of a situation that we were hoping you could help us make go away. It seems the University has recently appointed as its Chairman a distinguished former U.S. Navy Seal, former Governor and U.S. Senator, who, before he began his distinguished career in politics, was awarded a Medal of Honor citation for leading his U.S. Navy SEAL team (I don’t recall the number of the SEAL team) into a village in this very same developing country and murdering men, women and children in sort of a stomach-turning “Manson Family” manner. Pregnant women were among the victims. Some disembowelment may have been involved. In any event, the client is catching some flack from the press for appointing this guy, mostly from the usual left-wing sources. The New York Times is helping us out, but our client is worried that this story might have legs. What do you think is best approach here? — Struggling to Get This Stubborn Stain Out

 

Dear Struggling to Get This Stubborn Stain Out: First off, this problem is entirely manageable. We deal with this type of thing all the time. Many powerful and important public figures have, at one time or another, murdered a few people … or in some cases quite a number of people, although usually not with their own hands, which is probably your biggest challenge here — the last thing you want is for people to start forming vivid mental images of your client’s Chairman and his Navy Seal buddies stabbing pregnant women in the belly and shooting little kids in the head, and so on.

What we normally recommend in situations like this is the wait-it-out (or “zen”) approach. While, admittedly, this doesn’t sound too sexy, if the client can be patient, it usually works. People these days are increasingly inured to whole “atrocity” and “war crime” thing. Also, it sounds like whatever gruesome mass murder your client’s new Chairman committed took place several decades ago. People’s memories don’t go back that far. Most people don’t even remember that it was The New York Times that sold them the “Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction” story back in 2002-2003, or that Hill+Knowlton invented the whole “Iraqis Pulling Kuwaiti Babies Out of Their Incubators” story back in 1990, before the first U.S. invasion of Iraq. The details about all that came out later, but by that time nobody gave a hoot. The point is, people still think of The New York Times as “the paper of record,” and Hill+Knowlton is doing just fine. And these are just a couple of examples.

If the zen approach doesn’t work, we recommend advising your client to: (a) get out in front of the story, i.e. re-publicize and re-refute the original accusations however your client’s mass murdering Chairman did that the first time, which we assume was effective, or he wouldn’t have gone on to enjoy that distinguished career in politics (it looks like the NYT is already working on this); (b) dig up and/or invent any and all dirt on whomever it was that made the original allegations against your client’s Chairman, or published the original story — as we’re sure you’re aware, almost everybody has something dirty or shameful in their backgrounds somewhere; and (c) get some rumors going about how your client’s baby-murdering Chairman is the victim of some dark conspiracy to ruin his reputation — astroturfing is the way to go here (i.e. posting on Twitter and other social media), the goal being simply to muddy the waters, rather than to actually refute the facts.

At the same time, it wouldn’t hurt to have some of your media contacts publish and/or broadcast the following: (a) inspiring lifestyle-type features on the Navy Seals — but any such features need to be totally unrelated to your client’s guy; (b) negative retrospective pieces on whichever ethic group or nationality your client’s Chairman’s victims belonged to, especially if they highlight any despicable and/or barbarous tactics the enemy may have been using at the time; and (c) any other pro-military or war-glorifying content you can think of, but again, nothing directly related to your client’s mass murdering Chairman!

However, we’d strongly recommend the wait-it-out approach first. Give it a week or so. Given the volume of nonsense people are barraged with on a moment-by-moment basis these days, odds are this little stink will blow over, and soon enough no one will even remember it ever happened.

***

Ask the Consent Factory® is a free online advice column for professionals in the media relations, public communications, perception manipulation and fact management fields. To solicit advice from Ask the Consent Factory, please use this Contact Form. Please keep all enquiries anonymous and exercise discretion when referring to any powerful corporations or public figures who might want to retributively sue us.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: