Blinken is a Victorian era colonizer on par with Cecil Rhodes, Theodore Hertzl, etc. it's just he was born in a modern time. He has all the liberal vocabulary and the fascist bloodlust those guys did.
Because it's an example of resistance to the way western economics works since 1492, killing brown and black people and taking their stuff. If Gaza wins with everything arrayed against it, that sets an example for everyone else. It gives them hope. It's a weather wane that they can't have go the other way. In fact, I think that's why they show us the atrocities and do a shitty job covering them up. It's to show us what happens if we get "uppity"
Billionaire CEOs didn't just reach Mayor Adams in a private chat urging him to arrest pro-Palestine Columbia students, they also offered PRIVATE staff to help NYPD. The Mayor accepted.
Members of the group also coordinated with Israel's war cabinet, UN ambassador and former PM.
Or the Boeing whistleblowers who keep being unalived.
Then this thing from Blinken: not directly threatening starvation, but implying what will happen if you go against them.
Then was also thinking about how imperialist media has accused Russia of being a gangster state before and the whole "every accusation is a confession" thing.
Fair enough. I guess I am so used to platforms where wording can be a problem, it's gotten me in the habit of self-censoring more online in general (like reddit really got into my head with how on some subreddits, a post you made could be automatically hidden without you even knowing, presumably because of something in the wording that set off a filter).
I wonder if that's on purpose. I remember during Snowden's revelations people talking about that before. Even if they can't technically see every person's text messages, hear all their phone calls, read all their emails, it still leads to a self-censorship due to the Chilling Effect. Maybe it's not related, but it feels like similar concepts.
I learned a new phrase today, thanks. I could see that being intentional to an extent, for sure. Certainly the alphabet agencies have done far worse over the decades, so it's not like it's a stretch to imagine western imperialism trying a thing like that. Would also fit with the general theme of gangster/mafia-like, where the threat isn't necessarily made explicit, but you are steered toward drawing the conclusion about what can happen. So that people develop certain kinds of fears without those in power having to go full mask off to induce those fears directly. Which, loosely related, but reminds me of how in horror writing, it's often the case that the audience's imagined version of the monster through implication is scarier than the real monster. And so much time is spent activating the imagination without showing the monster directly. I know there are also uses of this kind of thing through history, such as military tactics to make an army look bigger than it is or that sort of thing.
In fitting with this, I remember that Mao quote:
All reactionaries are paper tigers. In appearance, the reactionaries are terrifying, but in reality, they are not so powerful. From a long-term point of view, it is not the reactionaries but the people who are powerful.
Intimidation and appearance of threat can be more powerful in its effect than the threat itself. Important for us to remember that. That we need to ground ourselves in what the threats substantively are, so we don't let runaway imagination intimidate us into subservience to imperialism.
You're welcome! Glad you liked it, because I couldn't remember it for the life of me and took me a couple internet searches before I could remember the name of that term lol
Honestly, if the US directly goes after agrarian infrastructure across the global south (it already undermines it, and always has, particularly through the IMF) the same needs to be done back in turn to it. Mutually assured destruction should apply to more than just nukes- they can see how they like them apples.