Yuri Bezmenov was Right

Back in 2008 I posted a video of Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov discussing the tactics of “ideological subversion” as executed against the West by agents and followers of communism. A bit of the transcript of that video:

Ideological subversion is the process, which is legitimate, overt, and open; you can see it with your own eyes. All you have to do, all American mass media has to do, is to unplug their bananas from their ears, open up their eyes, and they can see it. There is no mystery. [It has] nothing to do with espionage. I know that espionage intelligence-gathering looks more romantic. It sells more deodorants through the advertising, probably. That’s why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond-type of thrillers.

But in reality, the main emphasis of the KGB is not in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion and [the] opinion of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money, and manpower [are] spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process, which we call either ‘ideological subversion,’ or ‘active measures’—‘[?]’ in the language of the KGB—or ‘psychological warfare.’ What it basically means is, to change the perception of reality, of every American, to such an extent that despite of the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their families, their community and their country.

It’s a great brainwashing process, which goes very slow[ly] and is divided [into] four basic stages. The first one [is] demoralization; it takes from 15-20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years which [is required] to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy, exposed to the ideology of the enemy. In other words, Marxist-Leninist ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students, without being challenged, or counter-balanced by the basic values of Americanism (American patriotism).

The result? The result you can see. Most of the people who graduated in the sixties (drop-outs or half-baked intellectuals) are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, [and the] educational system. You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them. They are contaminated; they are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind[s], even if you expose them to authentic information, even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. In other words, these people… the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To [rid] society of these people, you need another twenty or fifteen years to educate a new generation of patriotically-minded and common sense people, who would be acting in favor and in the interests of United States society.

The demoralization process in [the] United States is basically completed already. For the last 25 years… actually, it’s over-fulfilled because demoralization now reaches such areas where previously not even Comrade Andropov and all his experts would even dream of such a tremendous success. Most of it is done by Americans to Americans, thanks to [a] lack of moral standards.

As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him, even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents and pictures. …he will refuse to believe it…. That’s the tragedy of the situation of demoralization.

Most of the American politicians, media, and educational system train another generation of people who think they are living at the peacetime. False. United States is in a state of war; undeclared, total war against the basic principles and foundations of this system. And the initiator of this war is not Comrade Andropov of course – it’s the system. However, ridiculous it may sound, [it is] the world Communist system, or the world Communist conspiracy. Whether I scare some people or not, I don’t give a hoot. If you’re not scared by now, nothing can scare you.

OK, got your tinfoil hats on nice and tight? Did you see this bit today?

Socialst “JournoListas”

The now closed down JournoList, has caused considerable controversy in recent weeks. According to its opponents, JournoList, teamed up some 400 prominent “progressive” journalists in an effort to smooth Barack Obama’s path to the White House.

There have been accusations that “Journolitstas”, deliberately sought to downplay Obama’s association with the marxist Rev. Jeremiah Wright and tried to smear conservatives, or opposing journalists as “racists”.

This post looks at 106 reported “Journolistas” to look for connections or common threads.

Of the known “Jounolistas” and organizations listed below, many can be linked back to two interrelated groups Democratic Socialists of America, the U.S.’s largest marxist based organization and D.S.A.’s “brain” the Washington DC based, far left “think tank” the Institute for Policy Studies

Between them. D.S.A. and the I.P.S. dominate or influence several organizations affiliated to JournoList

And then it goes on to list the members and their affiliations. With links.

Newsweek was pretty much right:

It’s been twenty-five years since Bezmenov delivered his warning, and his recommendation to escape what was coming:

So basically America is stuck with demoralization and unless… even if you start right now, here, this minute, you start educating [a] new generation of American[s], it will still take you fifteen to twenty years to turn the tide of ideological perception of reality back to normalcy and patriotism.

Instead, we continued along the same path he warned against for another twenty-five years – another generation. Not all of us are Socialists now, but we have apparently reached the critical number of the ideologically subverted. Enough people have absorbed the “beautiful idea” that no external agents are required. We have a supersaturated solution that results in the spontaneous organization of the faithful.

After all, it’s for our own good!

And Bezmenov’s warning?

The next stage is destabilization. This time [the] subverter does not care about your ideas and the patterns of your consumption; whether you eat junk food and get fat and flabby doesn’t matter any more. This time—and it takes only from two to five years to destabilize a nation—what matters [are] essentials: economy, foreign relations, [and] defense systems. (My emphasis.) And you can see it quite clearly that in some areas, in such sensitive areas as defense and [the] economy, the influence of Marxist-Leninist ideas in [the] United States is absolutely fantastic. I could never believe it fourteen years ago when I landed in this part of the world that the process [would have gone] that fast.

The next stage, of course, is crisis. It may take only up to six weeks to bring a country to the verge of crisis. You can see it in Central America now.

And, after crisis, with a violent change of power, structure, and economy, you have [the so-called] period of normalization. It may last indefinitely. Normalization is a cynical expression borrowed from Soviet propaganda. When the Soviet tanks moved into Czechoslovakia in ’68, Comrade Brezhnev said, ‘Now the situation in brotherly Czechoslovakia is normalized.’

This is what will happen in [the] United States if you allow all these schmucks to bring the country to crisis, to promise people all kind[s] of goodies and the paradise on earth, to destabilize your economy, to eliminate the principle of free market competition, and to put [a] Big Brother government in Washington, D.C. (My emphasis.)

Never mind. Everything’s fine. Go back to sleep. Your Government-Issued unicorn will be delivered in the morning.

Unless there’s another “unexpected” downturn in the economy.

Sorry About the Hiatus

Saturday I made a trip to the range with the M25 and the 5R, and today was my 15th wedding anniversary.

The reloading problem is taken care of, as is the scope mounting issue, but my first handloads for the M25 weren’t all that stellar. I also tried out some new handloads for the .38 Super. Berry’s 124 grain hollowpoints don’t work very well with the feedramp on the Witness. 1,300fps though, and nice, tight little groups when it did feed.

I did Vicious Circle Thursday night, and got all gun-geeky afterward with Aepilotjim discussing handloads. I’m a little concerned that the loads I’m testing are a bit too stressful for the M25. I started off with 45.5 grains of Reloder 15 in a Lake City “LR” case – the case used for the M118LR round – under the Lapua Scenar 155 grain BTHP, touched off by a CCI #34 military primer. It’s a very slightly compressed load, and if my chronograph is to be believed it yielded an average velocity of 2890fps and a standard deviation of 16.4 out of the M25, and 2920fps and a standard deviation of 10.8 out of the 5R.

My standard load for the 5R is 46.4 grains of RL-15, same bullet, Lapua case and CCI benchrest primers. THAT load over the same chronograph, produces 2790fps out of the 5R with a Sd of less than 10fps. The difference being that the latter load out of the 5R typically groups well under 1MOA at 200 yards. (I busted some rocks out at a laser-measured 650 yards just for fun with that load.) The Lake City-cased load grouped about 1.75MOA. Out of the M25, a bit over 2MOA.

Part of the performance difference, both velocity and accuracy, may be reduced case volume due to the use of a small-base sizing die and military brass (the M118LR brass is not supposed to be as thick as standard Lake City 7.62 brass, but still). The smaller case dimensions after sizing may also adversely affect bore concentricity out of the 5R, too. The military “magnum” primer probably has some effect as well. However, Jim pointed out that Reloder 15 is a much slower powder than is normally recommended for the Garand/M-14 gas piston design. I did a little research previously, and the standard powder for the M118LR load is Reloder 15, but in the Sandbox they discovered that high temperatures were causing the standard load to be too hot for the M-14 based rifles, and this resulted in bent op-rods. The correction was to reduce the powder charge. The M118LR uses a 175 grain Sierra Matchking bullet. I’m using a 155 grain bullet, and pushing it a LOT faster. Hmmm….

The plan is to try to find one load that both rifles like. That might not be possible, I acknowledge, but it’s my intention to try.

Quick! Somebody Tell the Cult™!

Instapundit links this fascinating news:

One-fourth of Democrats think Jesus will ‘definitely return’ in 40 years

Thanks to the Pew Research Center, we now may have an idea who is buying up all those “Left Behind” books. Many of them appear to be … Democrats?

Yes, that’s right. As part of a larger survey about Americans’ predictions for the next 40 years, just over 1,500 people were asked whether they thought that Jesus Christ would return to the earth during that timeframe. Interestingly enough, it is self-identified Democrats who appear to have more certitude that this will happen than Republicans.

According to the poll, 26% of Democrats believe that the Second Coming “will definitely” happen within the next four decades. In comparison 19% of Republicans believe this.

But, but, I thought it was the Republicans who were the Bible-hugging knuckle-dragging Neanderthals who clung to their guns and religion, and it was the Democrats who were all scientisty and stuff! (Read the whole thing. Really interesting.)

An Army of Martin Luthers

With apologies to Professor Reynolds . . . .

Over the weekend I read Angelo M. Codevilla’s outstanding American Spectator essay, America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution. It is a detailed dissertation on the rise of the American “Ruling Class” and the majority “Country Class” that lives under their (*cough*) benign compassion. In the first QotD, I pulled this excerpt:

Never has there been so little diversity within America’s upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America’s upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and “bureaucrat” was a dirty word for all. So was “social engineering.” Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday’s upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.

Today’s ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits.

Just a couple of days before, as another Quote of the Day, I pulled a couple of paragraphs from a 1981 Time magazine article on the power of the National Rifle Association, pointing out the clichés and negative slant, and referred to both Professor Brian Anse Patrick’s book The National Rifle Association and the Media: The Motivating Force of Negative Coverage, and the piece I wrote about it back in January of 2008 – The Church of the MSM and the New Reformation. If you haven’t read my essay, I recommend you do, but I’ll try to boil it down a bit here.

There is most definitely a bias to the way that members of the media treat news stories. That bias Professor Patrick says – and has evidence to back – is what he calls administrative control bias, defined:

Administrative control in this usage means rational, scientific, objective social management by elite, symbol-manipulating classes, and subclasses, i.e., professionalized administrators or bureaucratic functionaries. The thing administered is often democracy itself, or a version of it at least. Here and throughout this chapter terms such as “rational,” “objective,” “professional,” and “scientific” should be read in the sense of the belief systems that they represent, i.e. rationalism, objectivism, professionalism, and scientism. Scientism is not the same as being scientific; the first is a matter of faith and ritualistic observance, the other is difficult creative work. William James made a similar distinction between institutional religion and being religious, the first being a smug and thoughtless undertaking on the part of most people, the second, a difficult undertaking affecting every aspect of a life. The term scientistic administration would pertain here. Note that we move here well beyond the notion of mere gun control and into the realm of general social control, management and regulation.

Compare this to Professor Codevilla’s assessment of the “Ruling Class”:

Its attitude is key to understanding our bipartisan ruling class. Its first tenet is that “we” are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained. How did this replace the Founding generation’s paradigm that “all men are created equal”?

The notion of human equality was always a hard sell, because experience teaches us that we are so unequal in so many ways, and because making one’s self superior is so tempting that Lincoln called it “the old serpent, you work I’ll eat.” But human equality made sense to our Founding generation because they believed that all men are made in the image and likeness of God, because they were yearning for equal treatment under British law, or because they had read John Locke.

It did not take long for their paradigm to be challenged by interest and by “science.” By the 1820s, as J. C. Calhoun was reading in the best London journals that different breeds of animals and plants produce inferior or superior results, slave owners were citing the Negroes’ deficiencies to argue that they should remain slaves indefinitely. Lots of others were reading Ludwig Feuerbach’s rendition of Hegelian philosophy, according to which biblical injunctions reflect the fantasies of alienated human beings or, in the young Karl Marx’s formulation, that ethical thought is “superstructural” to material reality. By 1853, when Sen. John Pettit of Ohio called “all men are created equal” “a self-evident lie,” much of America’s educated class had already absorbed the “scientific” notion (which Darwin only popularized) that man is the product of chance mutation and natural selection of the fittest. Accordingly, by nature, superior men subdue inferior ones as they subdue lower beings or try to improve them as they please. Hence while it pleased the abolitionists to believe in freeing Negroes and improving them, it also pleased them to believe that Southerners had to be punished and reconstructed by force. As the 19th century ended, the educated class’s religious fervor turned to social reform: they were sure that because man is a mere part of evolutionary nature, man could be improved, and that they, the most highly evolved of all, were the improvers.

Thus began the Progressive Era. When Woodrow Wilson in 1914 was asked “can’t you let anything alone?” he answered with, “I let everything alone that you can show me is not itself moving in the wrong direction, but I am not going to let those things alone that I see are going down-hill.” Wilson spoke for the thousands of well-off Americans who patronized the spas at places like Chautauqua and Lake Mohonk. By such upper-middle-class waters, progressives who imagined themselves the world’s examples and the world’s reformers dreamt big dreams of establishing order, justice, and peace at home and abroad. Neither were they shy about their desire for power. Wilson was the first American statesman to argue that the Founders had done badly by depriving the U.S. government of the power to reshape American society.

The cultural divide between the “educated class” and the rest of the country opened in the interwar years. Some Progressives joined the “vanguard of the proletariat,” the Communist Party. Many more were deeply sympathetic to Soviet Russia, as they were to Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. Not just the Nation, but also the New York Times and National Geographic found much to be imitated in these regimes because they promised energetically to transcend their peoples’ ways and to build “the new man.” Above all, our educated class was bitter about America. In 1925 the American Civil Liberties Union sponsored a legal challenge to a Tennessee law that required teaching the biblical account of creation. The ensuing trial, radio broadcast nationally, as well as the subsequent hit movie Inherit the Wind, were the occasion for what one might have called the Chautauqua class to drive home the point that Americans who believed in the Bible were willful ignoramuses. As World War II approached, some American Progressives supported the Soviet Union (and its ally, Nazi Germany) and others Great Britain and France. But Progressives agreed on one thing: the approaching war should be blamed on the majority of Americans, because they had refused to lead the League of Nations. Darryl Zanuck produced the critically acclaimed movie [Woodrow] Wilson featuring Cedric Hardwicke as Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, who allegedly brought on the war by appealing to American narrow-mindedness against Wilson’s benevolent genius.

Franklin Roosevelt brought the Chautauqua class into his administration and began the process that turned them into rulers. FDR described America’s problems in technocratic terms. America’s problems would be fixed by a “brain trust” (picked by him). His New Deal’s solutions — the alphabet-soup “independent” agencies that have run America ever since — turned many Progressives into powerful bureaucrats and then into lobbyists. As the saying goes, they came to Washington to do good, and stayed to do well.

As their number and sense of importance grew, so did their distaste for common Americans. Believing itself “scientific,” this Progressive class sought to explain its differences from its neighbors in “scientific” terms.

And they still do. But what Professor Patrick explains is that the members of the media have done, in their self-appointed place as “rational,” “objective,” “scientific” professionals, assumed the vestments of the secular clergy:

Previous to objective journalism, baldly partisan news media were the norm; under objectivity news became a scientific tool of social progress and management. The elite press continues also to serve this function, connecting administrators and managers not only ot the world they seek to administrate but also to other managers with whom they must coordinate their efforts. So in this sense social movement-based critiques have been correct in identifying a sort of pseudo-pluralism operating in the public forum, a pluralism that is in reality no more than an exclusive conversation between elite class subcomponents – but this over-class is administrative in outlook and purpose.

We should not think of this way of thinking and interpreting reality as an entirely deliberate process. We are dealing here with the diffusion of a hermeneutic that accompanies an organizational and cultural style, a scientific management method of proven effectiveness, with wonderful social benefits and also terrible side effects. Journalists, like everyone else, steep in this hermeneutic throughout their education and upbringing; moreover they work in and serve organizations that arose in response to administrative needs. High-level journalists especially have survived a rigorous selection process that favors those who are most suitable and effective for this environment. Journalists are probably no more conscious of the hermeneutic that fish are conscious of the water around them.

And, again I will have to disagree with Professor Patrick on this point, as the recent Journolist exposés have vividly illustrated. The major players in major media have been actively organizing in order to sway public opinion. It’s not a case of “Oh well, they all just think alike.” It’s a case of “We all think alike, and YOU’D BETTER TOO!” Their job, as they see it, is to tell the unwashed masses what they ought to know and believe, and keep from them anything that they shouldn’t know or believe.

But they’re rapidly losing control. Readership and viewership are declining. Alternative sources are slowly growing. The disaffected are getting informed. And pissed.

Bernard Goldberg nailed his version of the 95 Theses to the doors of the Wall Street Journal in 1996. Gutenberg’s 1440 movable-type press was finally superseded by the Internet starting about 1995. Now there are thousands, tens, hundreds of thousands of people who bypass the traditional Gatekeepers of what is or isn’t news, and more connect every day. We are Prof. Codevilla’s “Country Class,” the people despised by the “Ruling Class” who have been protected by the Media Clergy for the last ten decades or so while they grasped for the power to tell us how we ought to run our lives.

They wish to be our masters, but take it from a proud American redneck: those sumbitches ain’t been BORN.

Another Reason to Attend GBR-V

I’ve attended all four Gun Blogger Rendezvous so far, and never won a gun there. I gave one away, but I’ve not won one yet. Maybe this year will be different.

Now I’m not a fan of Tactical Tupperware™ but neither would I turn my nose up at a free GLOCK. Mr. Completely has the details, but on this one you must be present to win.

I wonder if it will be one of their certificates for any standard Glock? I think I like the one Robb Allen just got, a Glock 20 in 10mm Auto. Ten millimeter speaks to me for some reason . . . .

I’ll be present. Will you?

Quote of the Day – Accurate Assessment Edition

In the short term at least, the country class has no alternative but to channel its political efforts through the Republican Party, which is eager for its support. But the Republican Party does not live to represent the country class. For it to do so, it would have to become principles-based, as it has not been since the mid-1860s. The few who tried to make it so the party treated as rebels: Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. The party helped defeat Goldwater. When it failed to stop Reagan, it saddled his and subsequent Republican administrations with establishmentarians who, under the Bush family, repudiated Reagan’s principles as much as they could. Barack Obama exaggerated in charging that Republicans had driven the country “into the ditch” all alone. But they had a hand in it. Few Republican voters, never mind the larger country class, have confidence that the party is on their side. Because, in the long run, the country class will not support a party as conflicted as today’s Republicans, those Republican politicians who really want to represent it will either reform the party in an unmistakable manner, or start a new one as Whigs like Abraham Lincoln started the Republican Party in the 1850s.

American Spectator – Angelo M. Codevilla, America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution