Jonathan Ferguson
Anti-Maoist. United Front. Freedom for ALL faiths.

So, You’re Gonna Write for Moscow’s Fake News Rags? Read My Experience First!

Cropped. Kremlin.ru, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Cropped. Kremlin.ru, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

I was bitter, and I was alienated. That only made me a more juicy and seductive target for good ol’ Vlad the Impaler and his creepy buddies!

Image by hafteh7 from Pixabay

NOTE FROM JONATHAN:

I’m just interrupting my United Front series a little bit today, to talk about another hybrid warfare dictatorship: Putin’s Russia! The Peking Fake News Industrial Complex is quite dangerous, but the Moscow one is pretty shocking in its own right…

Sweet dreams, my friends.

Why Putin Stabs Fake News Writers in the Back!

I often find the Joker a captivating figure: if he was a Jungian archetype (which he most certainly is!) he’d be the trickster, the Loki, the coyote, the hyena.

But not everybody does!

And it’s no surprise to learn that the more tactical or strategic person who writes for the Putinist, Maoist or Jihadist Fake News Industrial Complexes are, for that very reason, not viewed very kindly by the Hybrid Warfare oligarchies of today.

There are really three kinds of people who write for outlets like Sputnik, Russia Today, Iran Press TV, and other such Fake News mills:

Category 1: True believers

I suspect true Putinists may be few and far between, but I’m sure they exist; probably pretty hard to tell apart from category 2.

Same applies to Maoist Supremacists aka TANKIES, and Jihadist Theocrats as well.

Category 2: Opportunists 

People who act as overt and explicit Kremlin shills, or CCP stooges, or the like, but without any real belief in what they are doing.

Again, hard to tell from the outside whether they truly are Category 2, or Category 1.

Category 3: Disruptors

This is the trickiest one of all.

Category 3 will be on the fence at best with regards to the powers behind the outlet that is either paying them, or if not paying them, at least giving them a platform.

Disruptors are basically pessimistic about the media in their countries of origin, and believe they now have an opportunity to say things that wouldn’t be possible to say at home.

Now some of these things may well be worth saying, and others may not.

And some of them may indeed be possible to say at home, and others may not.

Either way, and crucially, this kind of strategic and tactical behaviour is a DEAD END!

Why?

Because of the greatly asymmetrical power relationships between both parties.

Putin, Erdogan, Xi, Khameini, Kim (not yet, but you never know do ya!) don’t want people who are ‘on the fence’ or ‘uncertain’ or ‘uninterested’ or ‘apathetic.’

They demand absolute and unconditional loyalty, not mere transactional relationships.

And if naturally follows from this that anyone who is a Category 3 writer, a Disruptor, will be fair game for any amount of covert brutalisation.

Putin, like any other dictator, is deeply contemptuous of any strategic or transactional writer, because as a cynic on human nature, he doesn’t believe it is either possible or desirable for someone to act other than cynically; but as the Kremlin, the CCP and their ilk don’t necessarily go out of their way to broadcast that fact, the accusation tends to come out of the mouths of neoliberals instead, and this is obviously something that plays into the hands of the Kremlin.

If Moscow and Peking think cynicism but don’t say it, while neoliberals say cynicism but don’t think it, this ultimately makes the neoliberal community look bad, and lets the hybrid warfare dictatorships off the hook.

Let’s not forget, of course, that because dictators (just like neoliberals) have only a very dim awareness of legitimate, genuine national loyalty and authentic patriotism that is universalist in character, instead of mere loyalty to the state, their attitudes towards Westerners who write for Sputnik & co. is similarly dismissive and contemptuous as the attitudes neoliberals have shown to these individual all their lives.

When you think about it from this angle, writing for any news outlet linked to a known dictatorship is dicing with death.

Image by hafteh7 from Pixabay

I would warn anyone who is thinking of taking this path that unless you’re a Tankie, a Jihadist, a Putinite or some other kind of unhinged Kool Aid cultist (and if you are, you’re probably not reading this anyway!) you are getting deep into something you don’t fully understand and in all probability, nobody on earth will ever comprehend in all the depths of the keepers of dark counsels.

You may not mind too much, if at all, being a permanent ‘object of interest’ for the intel orgs in your own country, or even their allies.

You might even be enthralled by the idea!

Hey, I get it.

I was bitter once as well.

I was bitter, and I was alienated.

That only made me a more juicy and seductive target for good ol’ Vlad the Impaler and his creepy buddies!

Cropped by Jonathan Ferguson. Kremlin.ru, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Because after all, it’s not GCHQ, DHS, or similar organisations you have to worry about the most (although you should, a little).

It’s these dictatorships.

Remember: in this messy, fucked-up little hive mind of theirs, they don’t see you as acting strategically, or as behaving in some kind of contractual or pragmatic manner.

On the contrary:

Regardless of how indifferent, or even contemptuous, you are to them, they don’t see it that way.

From their perspective, they see even one article or one interview, let alone a blogging profile, be it paid or unpaid, as an act of throwing in your lot with them.

Whatever you think you are doing is irrelevant: the only thing that matters, at far as the bare, brute, inescapable practicality of it, is what they think.

Harsh?

Some would call it realism.

Remember here that you are dealing with people who would laugh out loud at the very thought of your attempts to justify yourself as a Category 3 writer, aka Disruptor.

There is only one Disruptor in their universe, and that is Putin!

Or Xi.

Or Khameini.

Or Erdogan.

Or whoever else it may be…

Thus far, thus grim.

But how does this actually work out in practice?

Well first of all, Putin’s bots will try to make sceptical of, or even disbelieve outright, in the very existence of bots and of hybrid warfare.

They will try and make you believe it’s ‘just a conspiracy theory,’ or else take a ‘both-sider’ approach, but either way, you will be lured into automatically discounting establishment narratives, if of course you’re willing to be thus enticed.

How do bots and hacks do this?

Well, first of all, in a classic act of psychological manipulation, they will call you a bot, in order to degrade the credibility of the very notion itself, and to try and make you believe that ‘bots’ are nothing but a bad faith establishment conspiracy theory.

Certainly, I very easily succumbed to that one when they pulled it on me: you can easily grasp the tactics I am talking here.

It can be extraordinarily effective.

Secondly, they will point out serious flaws in existing neoliberal narratives on hybrid warfare.

Sadly, this is not hard to do, given the mainstream media and other elite figures have often manifested some very poor handling of this topic; not to mention the commonly cynical attititudes of so many people today; if this is in turn encounters your good formal education or wide ranging reading or deep curiosity about the world or cutting sense of humour, this can end up creating a perfect storm.

Thirdly, they will exaggerate or otherwise distort these very same points, in order to further cause disruption; mocking the often perfectly obvious faults and follies of the (often rather low-hanging fruit!) figures who speak out against hybrid warfare, stupidities and imbecilities both past and present…

All the while, knowing exactly which buttons to push among a (quite understandably!) restive public.

Fourthly, they will pay close attention to your social media accounts, as well as to specific causes you’re interested in, and relentlessly close in on you, day and night.

We can call this ‘Double Hijacking,’ in the sense that they will play both sides of a dispute, in order to generally cause chaos, as distinguished from promoting a particular viewpoint.

It is, I hope, becoming increasingly well known nowadays that while ‘propaganda’ is often associated in the mind of the public with forming a uniform consensus narrative at home, there is another kind of propaganda, which is designed to destroy any possibility of consensus abroad:

It is a way, not to convince people, but to confuse them, not to provide an alternative viewpoint, but to divide public opinions and to ultimately undermine our ability to understand what is going on and therefore take decisions if decisions need to be made.

One of the examples from my own experience is the attempt by Moscow to hijack the Autism Wars.

The neoliberal status quo of Neurodiversity (don’t ask!), Social Model of Disability (don’t ask!) and anti-cure nonsense (pretty self-explanatory) was for a while disrupted by a number of people who wanted to provide alternative narratives.

However, it proved impossible at that time to create a coherent, unified movement; looking back, I am even more sure than when I wrote my post-Autism Wars meditations that a lot of the wacky crap going on was due to an infiltration of the anti-neurodiversity movement by malignant forces.

However, this is not just about the odd saboteur here and there; the internet has been flooded with partisan automated and semi-automated accounts, deliberately playing both sides of the topic.

Of which more later…

What the Kremlin wanted to do was to make it impossible to either sustain the hegemonic, neoliberal, woke, postmodern autism consensus, and to make any viable alternative emerge.

So if Putin was Chinese, he’d be Mao; if he was Russian (which to the detriment of Russia, he is) he’d be more Trotsky than Stalin, although there are rumours he likes to play it both ways the odd time! But we won’t go there… Well, except HERE, in this story…

Anyroad, the point is clear.

The GRU, the IRA and other similar thug mafias do pay very close to attention to whoever has written even once on their sites (or in my case, has even had a user profile).

Perhaps even more so than UK, US or other Western intel do!

And while anyone who has written on Sputnik or similar is obviously fair game for psy-ops, it’s safe to say that Moscow have a particular interest in pursuing those who do not act as an overt shill for Putin, and who tend to sidestep the issue of actual full-blown Kremlin apologism.

Such figures are seen as equally risible and contemptible as explicit United Russia fanboys, and there is often less to lose for going after them.

Odd as it might sound, although it’s not really that odd when you think about it with a reptile brain rather than anything more refined and empathetic, Moscow want any writer to be as embittered and fearful as they possibly can, but not to the point where they’re completely neutralised by ill health and poverty.

Although to be honest, if they do manage to completely wipe you out in that way, you are basically collateral damage to them.

If one toy is broke, they can always get another!

You are nothing to them.

Let’s think carefully about what all this means here:

All the bad faith personal attacks hostile social media accounts have made when they directly antagonise you, all the Double Hijacking of causes dear to your heart, all the deliberate defamation and bad faith personal attacks that will inevitably leak out later offline, all the death threats they’ve made to you or about groups of people, and perhaps most sickening of all, all the ‘friendly’ and ‘supportive’ retweets and Facebook friend accounts you took to be people who were on your side…

All of this comes overwhelmingly from malignant forces, who are counting on the likelihood you will remain enthralled to the idea that hybrid warfare is just a corrupt and dishonest msm and metropolitan elite conspiracy theory, rather than a legitimate threat that has often been ineffectively and worse still, condescendingly communciated.

Moscow have the damn sense to keep their bloody traps shut when it comes to such condescension, while the neoliberals (who are notoriously poor judges of human psychology, including of course some of their undercover operatives) just can’t help themselves from being every bit as hi-information, smug and literally minded as the Kremlin could possibly desire.

Scarce wonder, then, that everything the militant centrists have done has come to naught thus far.

Fortunately, however, there is an alternative.

The Third Forum Intellectual is the intellectual who knows that Neoliberalism is moribund, but that current ideological and political eruptions are themslves largely transitory and transitional in character.

The Third Forum Intellectual is not defined by loyalty, so much as by intelligence, wisdom, prudence and foresight.

Unlike the Neoliberal, he is willing to learn from his errors.

Unlike the Putinist, he is willing to accept there is something to learn to begin with!

Now, to conclude these biographical meditations:

I am aware of course of the importance of moral universalism, and much indeed could have been said above along those lines.

However, I have decided to drag it into the gutter and talk about myself (while still to some degree embedding it in the universal) because I am only too well versed in the wilful idiocy and stupidity of the proverbial empty vessels of the age, and unless you say something anecdotal, it doesn’t seem to carry much cachet.

So for what little it is worth, I have provided the above as food for thought.

For some, it will evoke some sleepless nights…

Originally published here.

When are all the edgelords finally gonna join forces and wage war on Moscow and Peking?

About the Author
Jonathan Ferguson is an honorary Yorkshireman, originally from Northern Ireland. Unfortunately however, it is utterly impossible (or at least something of a thankless task!) to note the slightest trace of Swiftian bantz and blarney in his scrupulously highminded and middle of the road prose style. He is also a Chinese graduate of the University of Leeds (BA, MA) and King's College London (PhD). On a deeper level, he is a curious mind and a recovering cynic; or to put it another way, an Orthodox Christian. He is a very hardline critic of the CCP and its allies, although beneath the contrarian tone, it all comes from a deep place of love. If you like (or love, or even absolutely HATE!) his work, then by all means comment on his work, or write to him in the personal comment box on his Times of Israel profile... Or alternatively, in the very worst, ne plus ultra cases of radical fanfatuation, just click "HERE" to become a Patron!
Related Topics
Related Posts
Comments