Tell Your Liberal Friends They Can Give Up On Their Russia Conspiracy Theories Now
Stick a fork in it, it’s done. There is no longer any reason for any sane person to believe the Russian hacking narrative, and therefore any of the anti-Russia sentiment that was built upon it. Tell all your liberal friends and family that they can let go of all the psychotic conspiracy theories coming out of Rachel Maddow’s perpetually indignant face and go back to their comfortable vanity politics and virtue signalings, because the dead horse they’ve been flogging has officially left the building.
The still completely unproven conspiracy theory that Russian hackers stole emails from Democratic insiders with the specific goal of handing Donald Trump the election was initiated by the CIA in December of last year when it anonymously leaked those allegations to the Washington Post, whose owner has received hundreds of millions of dollars directly from the CIA. Later that month this same CIA-funded mainstream publication would then publish an article by a recently-retired CIA operative arguing strongly that the CIA shouldn’t have to provide the American people with any proof of these allegations. This consistent refusal to show the public one shred of proof of the allegations of Russian hacking or Trump’s ties to the Russian government already had the intelligence community in “Saddam has WMDs” territory due to the obvious political implications and the alarming way the corporate media instantly and unquestioningly jumped on board with the unproven allegations in the exact same way as they did in the buildup toward the unforgivable Iraq invasion.
Then came Vault 7.
With the revelation that the CIA has been deliberately collecting programs which give it the ability to forge signs of hacking activity from many other nations, the Russian hacking narrative went completely out the window. It is an indisputable fact that the CIA has an extensive history of lying to the American people at every turn about everything from torture to regime changes to spying on Congress to assassination attempts, and now we learn that they actively cultivated an arsenal that would give them the ability to fabricate the very evidence that was alleged to have been used to ignite this entire Russia controversy in the first place. There is now an entire planet full of potential suspects for the pre-election leaks, and all of the other reasons we’ve been given for escalating tensions with Russia by increased sanctions, NATO troop amassment, etc. have been premised upon those now completely empty hacking allegations. Let’s take a minute to rip apart all the remaining reasons Americans are being given for why Russia should be treated as an enemy:
“We should treat Russia as an enemy because they invaded Crimea!”
No they didn’t. Saying Russia “invaded” Crimea is like me saying my friend “invaded” my home when I invited her over for tea. The overwhelming majority of Crimeans reported in an American poll during the 2014 annexation that they preferred to be with Russia than Ukraine and that they believed the Ukrainian government should honor the annexation. A year later a German poll revealed that this public opinion was still the case. This should have completely ended the Crimea debate once and for all; America has toppled entire governments with the stated goal of spreading democracy, but when the people of a strategically valuable region like Crimea wants something that’s strategically disadvantageous, majority rule suddenly goes out the window? No. That’s stupid. Shut up.
Secondly, what in God’s name does Crimea have to do with Russian election meddling in America? How come nobody ever talks about this? The seemingly infinite number of MSNBC acolytes I encounter online often mention Crimea and the “election hacking” in the same breath— why? What do they have to do with one another? What do these fictional email hackers have to do with amassing troops on Russia’s borders in the largest military mobilization since World War 2? The marriage of these two completely unrelated concepts is held together by nothing but the same corporate media propaganda that manufactures consent for all military engagements.
Thirdly, the Crimean annexation was in 2014. Why are so many Americans pretending to care about this all of a sudden? At the time, a survey showed that only one in six Americans were capable of finding Ukraine on a map, let alone the tiny Crimean peninsula. Where did all these armchair Crimea experts come from all of a sudden? Could it be that the fear of a Trump presidency and all the horrors they were promised would come with it led people to get sucked into the McCarthyite Russia hysteria, and they began allowing the talking heads on TV to program their geopolitical perspectives? I think so.
“We should treat Russia as an enemy because they joined Assad in Syria!”
No you shouldn’t. Syria and Russia have been allies for generations, and Russia only became directly involved in the Syrian conflict at the request of the Syrian government in late 2015, after the only people fighting Assad were known jihadi extremists with ties to ISIS and Al Nusra/Al Qaida. Since that time the international terrorist factions opposing Assad have suffered a great number of losses, and if left to their own devices Syria and its allies will bring stability to the region and the refugee crisis will be over. This is something everyone should want.
And, again, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Russian hacking we now have no reason to believe even happened. It’s a completely unrelated factor being woven into other unrelated factors by corporate media propagandists to create the appearance of a single cohesive narrative, but it isn’t. It’s completely disjointed. Russia helping out a longtime ally and annexing a territory that was literally begging to be annexed has nothing to do with hackers on the other side of the planet. If you think Russia should have allowed its ally to be ravaged by international terrorist forces where a violent islamist regime would be installed much to the detriment of the millions of Christians living there, then you’re nuts. If you try to tell me it’s got something to do with your fake Russian hacking narrative, then you’re brainwashed.
I suppose it could be argued that Russia wanted to install Trump because he wouldn’t interfere with their behavior in Syria and Crimea, but there’s no reason anyone should interfere with their behavior in Syria or Crimea. They're not doing anything wrong, and the intelligence community knows it. The intelligence community cares about Syria and Crimea because they’re both strategically important locations, not because they care about Syrians or Crimeans. If you believe America has a God-given right to claim any strategically advantageous territory as its own anywhere on the globe, that’s called imperialism and you should go join the British navy in the eighteenth century where that garbage belongs. If you believe America should stop causing military conflicts over these territories and mind its own damn business, join the club.
“We should treat Russia as the enemy because they circulated propaganda on the internet to advance their government’s agendas!”
This one barely deserves a response. Your government gave itself the legal ability to conduct psy-ops on you in 2013, America. Having one more flavor of propaganda in the pot at the very least might get you questioning the narratives you’re being spoon fed.
“We should treat Russia as an enemy because Trump is trying to sell America out to them!”
What does that even mean? I hear this constantly when debating this subject, and nobody has ever once been able to tell me what “selling America out” would look like, specifically. It’s just this amorphous notion on the periphery of every corporate media consumer’s mind that they can’t quite bring into consciousness when asked about it. It’s one of those unquestioned assumptions that simply does not hold water when examined critically.
If I might venture a guess, I imagine that if I could get one of these deep state acolytes to de-compartmentalize enough to examine this idea consciously, they would find that “selling America out to Russia” actually just looks like not being aggressive toward Russia. It is generally a good idea for two nations not to antagonize one another. It becomes an even better idea when both of those nations are armed with enough nuclear weapons to end all life on earth many times over.
“Well, Trump is definitely conspiring with the Russian government!”
There is absolutely no evidence for this. If there were, the CIA would have found it by now. There is currently no more reason to believe Trump is conspiring with the Russian government than there is to believe that Rachel Maddow is conspiring with the Russian government. There is no evidence for either of these things.
“Russia’s doing everything they can to get out of their sanctions and sell fossil fuels!”
This is one of the newer lines that’s being used, and it’s easily the most ridiculous. It’s another one of those sub-narratives that just doesn’t hold up to any amount of scrutiny. You mean they want money instead of sanctions?? Those evil monsters!
“But Trump made a policy change advocating noninterventionism in Ukraine!”
So did Obama. There really is no factual basis for tying Trump to Russia. I’m sorry Democrats, but Trump is a mess you’re not going to be able to impeach your way out of. Try creating a party that serves the will of the people instead of the will of the plutocrats. That’s all it’ll take for you to stop losing, I promise. The Republicans are very beatable if you can actually find a way to distinguish yourselves from them that doesn’t involve a new Cold War.
“But people in his administration lied about meeting with Russian diplomats!”
This is the only argument that has even a grain of truth in it. It is a stretch to say that they all “lied”, but surely some people in the Trump administration have been less than forthcoming about their interactions with Russian diplomats. But then, so have Democrats. Claire McCaskill did the exact same thing in the exact same way, saying she’s never met with the Russian ambassador in a tweet that was disproven by internet sleuths who didn’t even have the benefit of wiretapping and anonymous Washington Post leaks to prove her wrong. Why is this? Why are people on both sides of the aisle doing everything they can to look as anti-Russia as possible?
I think the answer to this is obvious. Until the DNC leaks came out, interacting with Russian diplomats was considered something normal for politicians to do. Because guess what? There was no Russia hysteria before then. None. After the end of the Soviet Union and prior to the latter half of 2016, Americans thought very little about Russia, and nobody cared when politicians met with Russians. This manufactured McCarthyist feeding frenzy was deliberately manufactured extremely recently on the back of what turns out to be a complete absence of reliable evidence, and now all of a sudden everyone is terrified to volunteer the information that they interacted with Russian politicians.
So the only solid thing that we can find in this chaotic tumult of baseless assertions and empty fearmongering is the fact that people in Washington are less than forthcoming about their interactions with Russians, because a false narrative has instilled a completely arbitrary sense of enmity with that nation. You can’t escalate tensions with a nuclear superpower on evidence like that. That’s not even evidence, it’s just a weird dynamic created by the establishment. This is stupid. This should stop.
It’s very difficult to convince people they’ve been suckered by propaganda, but the more we all loudly refuse to buy into the lies the establishment power structures are feeding us, the easier it becomes to break the spell. Let’s keep screaming at this thing. The mind virus we’re up against will call us “Putin’s puppets”, call us agents of the Kremlin, call us anything to stop us from exacerbating the cognitive dissonance its host is already experiencing, but we can’t stop. We’ve got to keep making noise. We’re almost there. This thing’s coming undone.