Is there a Deep State in the United States? Does it exist?
NOTE: We’ll cover why the probability is high, and let you decide. However, We aren’t going to say one way or another whether or not the Deep State exists, all we are going to do is lay out how it would work and let you decide! But we also aren’t going to re-hash what is covered in our other articles. So if we don’t address the potential depths of a Deep State presence in the United States, go check out the articles below:
Conspiracies and Prophecies a Matter of Good vs. Evil
Is Dr Fauci A Deep State Medical Instrument?
The successful means by which the Deep State would thrive, would be by those in high positions such as Government working with those in high positions of power in the private sector, or the reverse. Imagine if someone in the government wanted to pass legislation not to serve the will of those they represent, but because it benefits them or the other party. This legislator’s oath is to the people right?
Let’s imagine that this happens:
Charlene the legislator gets a call from a high profile journalist at a major mainstream news outlet. The journalist makes a deal with Charlene to get the scoop on what is in the works as far as legislation goes, and in turn the journalist offers to give Charlene information on stories before they are reported. This harmless symbiotic exchange seems like no big deal right?
That is and until the the media gets a scoop on something that Charlene doesn’t like, relays it to her before they go public with the story, and Charlene quashes it because she has other ideas in mind.
Now Charlene’s relationship with the media is not exclusive. She has agreements like this with board members of mainstream media, social media, content delivery networks, major cellular/mobile device networks and the big tech companies that have the app stores, employee unions in all the major trades, the entertainment industry, financial institutions, hedge funds, major internet service providers, major freight carriers, pharmaceutical companies, healthcare and all of these private sectors businesses that have the ability to shepherd/influence and or manipulate us. We as a society need to think differently, a few calls to a few of these big name companies, and some sweetheart deals are made to get us all where we need to be. Thanks Charlene!
In order to make us all believe that we as a society have shifted views, or need to shift our view, the mainstream media selectively chooses who they interview for stories, they point the lens and create the story, and report it over and over making it seem bigger than it really is, and they get paid celebrities to share there thoughts (TMYK and other public service announcements). They also then choose the context in which they phrase things, and the major networks can change the plots and characters in their programming to program us, and low and behold that imaginary B**** Charlene has mass paradigm shifted the entire view of society by colluding with private sector entities…
What do private sector entities get out of this? The big ones get the sweetheart deals, while the small ones remain non-essential during things such as a global pandemic. Hey why not, this is just a fictitious story. But not only that, these big corporations are granted special immunity by legislation. Things such as section 230 if you are a social media platform, or immunity from lawsuits if your vaccine manufacturer. The list goes on…
Does that happen? Some of it… We just literally made up that scenario using our imagination, and then we decided… Let’s look this up on DuckDuckGo.
We found Laura Joffre who wrote a blog titled The Relationship Between Journalists and Politicians (which is not even about the US) who wrote the following:
“One argument is that politicians are the ones controlling what is published by journalists. This view sees politicians as “Primary definers” (Hall et al [1978], cited in Phillips, 2015). Hall and his colleagues claim that some narratives tend to take precedence over others in the media, because certain sources, considered as having a particular authority, are always cited and their views repeated in the press, and thus define the news agenda and influence public opinion.“
Then Joffre adds another argument stating:
“First of all, journalists have power on public opinion, that lies in the fact that they provide the information on which citizens will be able to judge…“, and she went on to say “candidates…”
Now in terms of the existence of this SINGLE fictitious Deep State politician, Charlene wields the potential to request anything open to our collective judgement to be influenced by literally every possible private sector entity that can create the dynamic for us to need, desire, or demand change. How?
Charlene gets the mainstream media and or social media on board with censorship. The community standards being used as an excuse to de-platform those whose opinions create resistance to your agenda. Maybe a few democrats will put pressure on big cable/satellite providers and ask them not to carry channels that broadcast thoughts contrary to their agenda. The mainstream media is in her pocket and they shapes popular opinion, creating grassroots movements, and all of a sudden society is on board, with her New Deal. We didn’t need it before, but suddenly we just cannot live without it. This is how Charlene gets the green light to implement the agenda that was NOT something that society needed nor cared about. The need was tailor made, so that we were moved to demand change that Charlene wanted in the first place. Mass peer pressure.
But could it work another way? Joffre also wrote:
“Looking at these arguments, one would be tempted to believe that one side has the upper hand on the other. However, Berkowitz (2009) argues that the relationship between the journalist and the politician-source is flexible and changeable, and rather approaches a negotiation where the two parties are trying to get the most of each other, in a process of give-and-take“
Where’s the give-and-take in the fictitious example that we’ve created thus far with Charlene? Well as of now Charlene seems to be the only getting something out of this Deep State agreement. BUT hold on! The censorship and de-platforming of speech that is hated ends up demonetizing alternative sources of entertainment and information. Non-mainstream media many enjoy in place of that which the mainstream media produces and programs for us for the purpose of programming us.
With alternative sources of information and entertainment gone, and social distancing a current mandate, those who were seeking it, do not find it. The mainstream media has no retention department, and they finds themselves not losing as much of their captive audience to alternative entertainment sources, and thus because of this, they agree to help Charlene, because they keep losing consumers, and this is the only alternative for retention in dying business model where consumers vote with their attention.
These mainstream media companies–just like the tobacco companies–know there content is addictive to us all due to the hormonal response we get when reacting to the experience. They have a brand, and they need us to consume it. Independent conservative thought leaders online cannot be censored by the mainstream news, because they can’t choose to cut away if the person being interviewed is destroying their narrative.
If the mainstream media sees themselves as being responsible for controlling and shaping the narrative for the purpose of getting us all in on grassroots movements in the name of social justice, then the biggest threat to them is alternative media. With the existence of alternative media, the ability of mainstream media to deliver the promises they make to Charlene is diminished. The mainstream media asks Charlene to do something, and she reaches out to the social media platforms, they get what they need.
Charlene doesn’t need to pass an unconstitutional law that breaches the first amendment… The private sector being a domestic threat to our first amendment isn’t subject to respecting our first amendment, and private sector companies are free to run their businesses how they like, unless there is a law prohibiting them, and Charlene is going to make sure they have immunity.
In conclusion, the Deep State only really has to be ONE politician with the power and influence needed to make sweetheart deals happen. Furthermore if that one individual just ceases to continue the behavior, suddenly the Deep State no longer exists. But on the premise that it’s an ongoing problem, just IMAGINE if this one powerful person were blackmailed, extorted, and the sweetheart symbiotic deals were not just self serving, but life preserving, and beneficial to nations that hate the United States. This Deep State politician is owned. Who has the ability to own this politician? A foreign nation? A cartel? A human trafficking ring? Of course all of this is just made up…
