{"id":186002,"date":"2021-05-31T12:00:28","date_gmt":"2021-05-31T11:00:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=186002"},"modified":"2021-05-29T04:04:47","modified_gmt":"2021-05-29T03:04:47","slug":"how-the-usa-does-regime-change-propaganda","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2021\/05\/how-the-usa-does-regime-change-propaganda\/","title":{"rendered":"How the USA Does Regime-Change Propaganda"},"content":{"rendered":"

28 May 2021 – In the case of Saddam Hussein, it was by lying about \u201cWMD\u201d and about Saddam\u2019s being behind Al Qaeda.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the case of Muammar Qaddafi, it was by lying about Qaddafi\u2019s being hated (instead of supported) by most Libyans.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the case of Bashar al-Assad, it was by lying about Assad\u2019s being hated (instead of supported) by most Syrians.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the case of Xi Jinping, it is by lying about Xi\u2019s being a dictator.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the case of Vladimir Putin, it is by lying about Putin\u2019s being a dictator.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

However, all such allegations, except the case against Saddam, were irrelevant under international law, and provided no legal basis for an invasion or sanctions by any foreign country. (Furthermore, all of those allegations were lies.) Regarding Iraq, the U.S. regime lied to allege the presence of a nuclear-bomb program there, and this allegation pertained to US\u2019 own national security; so, that allegation concerning Iraq would have been a possible justification to invade, if it hadn\u2019t been a lie<\/a>. (Truthfulness is always a requirement under international law.)<\/p>\n

But in the other instances, no danger to USA\u2019s national security was even being alleged. The U.S. regime alleged that the foreign leaders it wanted to overthrow were \u2018violating the human rights of the people\u2019 there, but the U.S. Government routinely violates the human rights of its own population and imprisons a higher percentage of them than any other country \u2014 including all of the ones it criticizes \u2014 does<\/a>; so, any such allegation by the U.S. regime is perhaps even worse than a pot calling the kettle black, because this particular \u201cpot\u201d is blacker than any of the others.<\/p>\n

What foreign countries say about \u2018human rights\u2019 in any other country provides no grounds in international law for the accusing country to invade that country. If a given national leader should be replaced, that regime-change shouldn\u2019t be foreign-imposed (for example, U.S. and its allies \u2014 the champions of foreign regime-change operations \u2014 should have nothing<\/em> to do with it), but instead it should be done only by patriots within that given nation \u2014 and not assisted (much less instigated) by the CIA, MI6, or etc., since that would make it be imperialism. A basic principle of international law is that law within<\/em> any nation doesn\u2019t fall within the purview of international law: it\u2019s simply not<\/em> an international matter.<\/p>\n

International law is supposed to concern only<\/em> international relations \u2014 no internal (domestic) matters (unless the U.N. General Assembly and Security Council specify there to be an exception \u2014 such as if they rule that a genocide is being perpetrated within a given nation). Other<\/em> countries (such as the rulers of the USA) might not like the ruler of a given nation, but this doesn\u2019t give those foreigners any right to perpetrate regime-change there, such as the U.S. and its allies routinely do (and have done ever since 1948).<\/p>\n

Consequently: the way that the US and its allies do sanctions, coups, invasions, and other regime-change operations, is by deceiving their own<\/em> publics \u2014 it is always being done by means of propaganda, lying to their own people<\/em>. To this extent, any imperialistic nation is actually a regime, not<\/em> a democracy, because imperialism is always, and even intrinsically<\/em>, based upon lies, which the given nation\u2019s rulers use in order to fool their own citizenry, so that those \u2018citizens\u2019 are actually those rulers\u2019 \u201csubjects,\u201d not<\/em> authentically citizens, of that actual dictatorship. (And then they lie by referring to their subjects as \u2018citizens\u2019, instead of as \u201csubjects,\u201d so as to be able to continue fooling them throughout the future, to continue the myth of their own nation\u2019s being a \u2018democracy\u2019.)<\/p>\n

The foreign-imposed regime-change operations are always based upon lying. It\u2019s the basic tool of any dictatorship. And the public never learns that they\u2019ve been suckered by their rulers.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why it happens again and again, and the public fall for it again and again. The public never learn from their own government\u2019s lying; they just fall for it, again and again. They trust their Government, \u2018their\u2019 \u2018democracy\u2019, and its \u2018news\u2019-media (actually propaganda-media).<\/p>\n

In the world today, what country doesn\u2019t call itself<\/em> a \u201cdemocracy\u201d? Do any democracies actually exist?<\/em> A nation that engages in imperialism is certainly<\/em> a dictatorship \u2014 its government lies routinely, to its own subjects. That cannot<\/em> be a democracy. A \u2018democracy\u2019 that\u2019s built upon lies is a dictatorship. Democracy can be built only<\/em> upon the public\u2019s being truthfully informed regarding every issue that\u2019s of governmental importance. Does such a nation exist? Where does it exist?<\/p>\n

The biggest<\/em> lying is done about international matters. Unfortunately, most people don\u2019t care about international matters, but only about domestic (or intra<\/em>national) matters. So, it\u2019s easy for dictators who rule an imperialistic regime to fool their public \u2014 i.e., to enslave them mentally. It\u2019s what the public there are actually accustomed<\/em> to.<\/p>\n

\u2014\u2014<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s take, as an example, the case by the Anglo American regime against Russia\u2019s leader, Putin. The U.S. and its allies allege that Alexei Navalny, who has long aspired to replace Putin as Russia\u2019s leader, is in prison in Russia because Navalny is so popular there that in a fair-and-square election, Navalny would beat Putin.<\/p>\n

The dominant public image of Navalny in the United States and in its allied countries is that of his being an anti-corruption campaigner in a very corrupt Russia, and his being Russia\u2019s most-popular opponent against Russia\u2019s President Vladimir Putin, and therefore blocked by Putin from running against Putin, and who has even been poisoned by Putin, but \u2014 amazingly \u2014 survived that poisoning by Putin, and is therefore now being imprisoned by Putin, so as to prevent Navalny from being able to run against Putin in a free and fair democratic election in Russia.<\/p>\n

However, the dominant public image of the Russian Alexei Navalny inside Russia is that of his being a CIA-MI6 asset who is a racist-fascist traitor who would sell-out his country for anything so long as he could become its leader, just like Benedict Arnold was in early U.S. history, when the then U.S. Vice President Arnold worked with the intelligence services of Britain\u2019s King George III in order to become Anglo America\u2019s leader so as to restore the United States to British control. (That ploy, by Arnold, failed, of course.)<\/p>\n

Typical of the view regarding Navalny that\u2019s popular in the U.S. and in its allied countries is a news-report from Reuters on May 6th, titled \u201cDefiant but cornered: Jailed Kremlin critic Navalny\u2019s movement is on the ropes\u201d<\/a>. It opens:<\/p>\n

He has been poisoned, jailed and his close aides are either being prosecuted or have fled abroad. His anti-Kremlin opposition movement is now also likely to soon be outlawed as extremist.<\/em><\/p>\n

Yet Alexei Navalny and his supporters continue to work on ways to remain a thorn in President Vladimir Putin’s side, even as one of his most important financial backers says the movement in its current form is finished and will take time to rebound.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the eyes of the Kremlin, the only half-meaningful political weapon the Navalny camp has left is its campaign for tactical, or what it calls “smart” voting against the ruling United Russia party in a parliamentary election in September, according to three people close to the Russian authorities.<\/em><\/p>\n

Navalny’s supporters are set to be barred from that election via a court case, due to unfold later this month, and planned legislation unveiled on the parliamentary website on Tuesday that would ban “extremists” from running for office.<\/em><\/p>\n

A court, meeting in secret, is considering a request from Moscow prosecutors to have Navalny’s network designated “extremist” for allegedly plotting a revolution, state media have reported. Russia’s financial monitoring agency has already added the network to a list on its website of groups involved in “terrorism and extremism”.<\/em><\/p>\n

In response, Navalny’s movement has redoubled its call for sympathisers to vote for other opposition parties in September, however unpalatable they may consider them.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Typical of the view of Navalny that is popular inside Russia itself are the following:<\/p>\n

An RT news-report on 1 February 2021 headlined \u201cTop Navalny aide asked alleged British spy for millions in funding, intelligence video released by Russia’s FSB claims to reveal\u201d<\/a>. Back in 2012, Russia\u2019s equivalent of US\u2019 FBI had a hidden camera in position filming, and recording, Navalny\u2019s top aide trying to persuade a person he thought to be an MI6 (UK\u2019s CIA) agent that MI6 should annually donate tens of millions of dollars to Navalny\u2019s organization because doing this would provide billions of dollars of benefit to UK corporations if Navalny would then succeed and become Russia\u2019s leader.<\/p>\n

Navalny is also known in Russia as a far-right ethnic supremacist. Here is a video that he posted to youtube on 19 September 2007, under the title of \u201c\u041d\u0410\u0420\u041e\u0414 \u0437\u0430 \u043b\u0435\u0433\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0437\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044e \u043e\u0440\u0443\u0436\u0438\u044f\u201d meaning \u201cPEOPLE for the legalization of weapons\u201d:<\/p>\n

httpv:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=oVNJiO10SWw<\/p>\n

He was saying there that all Russians should get guns in order to kill Muslims who are infesting Russia, which would be like swatting big flies or stamping on big cockroaches. Later, he decided that demagoguing against Russia\u2019s \u201ccorruption\u201d was far likelier to win him the backing of the U.S and its allies than demagoguing against Russia\u2019s Muslims would. This was when U.S.-and-allied \u2018news\u2019-media began presenting him as the \u2018democratic\u2019 alternative to Vladimir Putin, who has always been vastly more favorably viewed by Russians than Navalny has been.<\/p>\n

On 5 September 2020, right before the latest Russian Presidential election, the internationally respected Levada polling organization in Russia reported<\/a> that the top choice of Russians to lead the country was Putin at 56%, the second-from-top choice was Zhirinovsky at 5%, and Alexey Navalny (shown there as \u0410\u043b\u0435\u043a\u0441\u0435\u0439 \u041d\u0430\u0432\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u044b\u0439), was the third-from-top choice, at 2%. In the 2018 Presidential election, Zhirinovsky polled at 13.7%, Grudinin polled at 12.0%, and Putin polled at 72.6%.<\/a> The actual election-outcome was Putin 76.69%, Grudinin 11.7%, and Zhirinovsky 5.65%. There were many polls and Navalny was never any serious contender for Russia\u2019s Presidency<\/a>. The U.S. regime lies as it usually does (at least about international matters).<\/p>\n

That\u2019s what Russians know about Navalny. And, of course, it\u2019s very different from what the publics in U.S.-and-allied countries know (or, at least, believe) about him.<\/p>\n

Here is some recent propaganda that\u2019s published by U.S.-and-allied regimes about Navalny:<\/p>\n

On May 22nd, Japan Times<\/em> ran a Reuters report, \u201cHow Russia’s new gulag tries to break convicts like Alexei Navalny\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On May 23rd, the Wall Street Journal<\/em> headlined \u201cRussia\u2019s Navalny Fights to Stay in Public Eye in Putin Standoff\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On May 4th, the Washington Post<\/em> columnist Vladimir Kara-Murza headlined \u201cRussia just took a big step back toward the Soviet Union\u201d<\/a>, and said: \u201cLast week, for the first time since the Soviet era, the Kremlin officially classified opposition to its rule as a criminal offense. \u2026 Moscow prosecutors\u00a0suspended\u00a0the activities of the nationwide organization of Alexei Navalny, Vladimir Putin\u2019s most prominent opponent. Navalny is currently incarcerated in a prison camp after surviving\u00a0a state-sponsored assassination attempt\u00a0last year.\u201d<\/p>\n

Navalny, though he actually is favorably viewed by only around 2% of Russians (as indicated in polls there), is widely publicized in U.S.-and-allied media as having instead the highest support by the Russian people of anyone who might challenge Vladimir Putin for Russia\u2019s leadership. It\u2019s a lie<\/a>, and always has been. Other politicians have far higher polled support in Russia.<\/p>\n

For example, a Russian poll conducted in the days following Alexey Navalny\u2019s alleged novichok poisoning showed the following level of support for him then, if a Russian election for President would be held at that time: Vladimir Putin 56%, Vladimir Zhirinkovsky 5%. Alexei Navalny 2%. In the 2018 Presidential election, Zhirinovsky polled at 13.7%, Grudinin polled at 12.0%, and Putin polled at 72.6%.<\/a> The actual election-outcome was Putin 76.69%, Grudinin 11.7%, and Zhirinovsky 5.65%. There were many polls and Navalny was never any serious contender for Russia\u2019s Presidency<\/a>. The U.S. regime lies as it usually does (at least about international matters).<\/p>\n

To say that Navalny has enough public supporters for him to have become elected as Russia\u2019s President is like alleging that the former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke had enough public supporters for him to have become elected as Anglo America\u2019s President.<\/p>\n

But some people in the US still think that Saddam Hussein was hiding WMD in 2002.<\/p>\n

This is how the USA does regime-change propaganda, every time: lies.<\/p>\n

These lies come from the regime that spends around half of all of the entire world\u2019s military spending<\/a>, and the regime that imprisons the world\u2019s highest percentage of its subjects (or \u2018citizens\u2019)<\/a>. It\u2019s the \u2018land of the free\u2019, and exports its \u2018freedom and democracy\u2019 everywhere.<\/p>\n

And that\u2019s how the USA does regime-change operations: by sheer lies.<\/p>\n

Like all imperialism throughout history, it\u2019s based on lies \u2014 propaganda. And, like in all imperialistic regimes throughout history, their public believes these lies, every time, time after time. They don\u2019t learn the truth, because they\u2019re never taught the truth. (Dissenters are suppressed, not<\/em> hired. In any dictatorship, the financial incentives support the liars, not<\/em> the truth-tellers.)<\/p>\n

___________________________________________<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/em>Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of\u00a0 <\/em>They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/a>,<\/em> of\u00a0<\/em>Christ\u2019s Ventriloquists: The Event that Created Christianity<\/a>, and\u00a0of<\/em>\u00a0Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

* In the case of Saddam Hussein, it was by lying about \u201cWMD\u201d and about Saddam\u2019s being behind Al Qaeda.
\n* In the case of Muammar Qaddafi, it was by lying about Qaddafi\u2019s being hated (instead of supported) by most Libyans.
\n* In the case of Bashar al-Assad, it was by lying about Assad\u2019s being hated (instead of supported) by most Syrians.
\n* In the case of Xi Jinping, it is by lying about Xi\u2019s being a dictator.
\n* In the case of Vladimir Putin, it is by lying about Putin\u2019s being a dictator.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":112456,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[65],"tags":[867,1126,1050,504,372,1190,70],"class_list":["post-186002","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-anglo-america","tag-anglo-america","tag-hegemony","tag-imperialism","tag-international-relations","tag-propaganda","tag-regime-change","tag-usa"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/186002","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=186002"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/186002\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/112456"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=186002"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=186002"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=186002"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}