Pro-Hillary type identity politics recruited in favor of CIA's chief torturer by the US neoliberal regime

globinfo freexchange

The deeply irrational nature of the neoliberal priesthood shined again in the case of CIA's chief torturer Gina Haspel, widely known as 'bloody Gina'.

Through another great campaign, the neoliberal apparatus attempts to smear anyone who opposes 'bloody Gina' as being, for example, misogynist. The method is known: the neoliberal tools highlight that the Central Intelligence Agency will have its first female Director, and, of course, this is something that everyone should welcome as a progressive step forward. Yet, at the same time, through a kind of trick, these tools make Gina's terrible record of tortures and war crimes magically disappear.

Well, how about the women who have the courage to condemn Gina's awful record, like the woman in the following video? Are they misogynists too?

Or, how about Kamala Harris, who clearly had 'bloody Gina' in the corner for that awful record? Is she misogynist too?

Sounds familiar?

It is worth to remember that 'identity politics' were used extensively by the establishment, especially during the primaries of the Democratic party in the US in favor of Hillary Clinton and against the biggest threat for the establishment, Bernie Sanders. As pointed in previous article:

The establishment becomes highly predictable, which is a sign of saturation. It is remarkable how the establishment mechanisms use similar narratives everywhere to expel undesirable politicians and policies.

Just one paragraph from the article My Hail Bernie Pass by Fred Baumgarten, describes almost the whole situation: “Now that I’m proclaiming my support for Sanders, I expect the vitriol to be no less intense, though maybe from some other quarters with different arguments. Secretly my friends will suspect that maybe I’m a misogynist, too, and don’t want a female president. I’ll be accused of being 'impractical' and 'hopelessly idealistic,' and of 'wasting' my vote. And I’ll still be held personally responsible for getting Trump elected!”

One of the most successful psychological techniques used by the mechanisms of the establishment, is the bombardment of mind with isolated words, or, phrases, ending up to become powerful symbols. These symbols are frequently so powerful that manage to prevail over the ability of mind to build a rational hierarchy. Which, many times, equals to heavy misjudgment.

For example, the fact that the United States will have the opportunity to be governed "for the first time in their history by a female president", often prevails over what this president truly represents, especially among the female voters. The election of Hillary will give a superficial satisfaction to many Americans, that the United States will become an even more progressive society (after Obama term), while in reality, Hillary will certainly follow the "politics as usual", totally aligned with the neocon agenda.

Psychological methods also use "logical leaps" to force the individual to bypass a certain rational hierarchy. The example in Baumgarten's paragraph above is characteristic: even his friends will suspect that he is a misogynist, just by saying that he will support Sanders instead of Clinton. The political arguments, which is the main issue in such a process, since they determine the policies that will have direct effect to millions of Americans, are bypassed through this absurdly simplified "logical leap": You vote for Sanders = You are probably a misogynist.