The Washington Post has published another article warning its readers that the Russians are “hacking our minds”, this one authored by CNN’s Fareed Zakaria.

“Russia hasn’t just hacked our computer systems. It’s hacked our minds.” blares the ridiculous, propagandistic headline for an article about “the Russian model” of propaganda which “rests on the principle that people get convinced when they hear the same message many times from a variety of sources, no matter how biased.”

Which is funny, since this is not the first time WaPo itself has repeated this cartoonish narrative about Russian mind-hackers.

The problem is not just that Russia has hacked America’s computer systems. It seems to have hacked our minds.

My latest column: https://t.co/iVFK7u2F4o

— Fareed Zakaria (@FareedZakaria) December 18, 2020

“Russia and other adversaries may not need to hack the election if they can hack something else: our minds.”

From The Washington Post. Democracy Dies in Darkness. pic.twitter.com/RkURiogRUc

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) October 4, 2020

Just two months ago the Washington Post editorial board published an article titled “The U.S. may be safe from foreign interference in this election. But what about perception hacking?“, which opens with the line “Russia and other adversaries may not need to hack the election if they can hack something else: our minds.”

The paranoid screed unironically argued that Russia is using its super powerful propaganda engine to make people paranoid and doubtful of US electoral systems, which could actually have an adverse effect on the US election. As though telling people their mental and perceptual faculties are being hacked by a hostile foreign enemy with the goal of influencing the election would not make them paranoid and doubtful of US electoral systems.

Zakaria’s piece builds on this already established theme by parroting the still completely evidence-free claim that Russia was responsible for the far-reaching cyber intrusion into the IT company SolarWinds, whose cybersecurity we recently learned was left so unprotected that its update server’s password was literally “solarwinds123”.

“But what about the perhaps more insidious Russian efforts at disinformation, which have helped to reshape the information environment worldwide?” Zakaria asks. He then does a few mental gymnastics to tie Russia’s propaganda campaign to Donald Trump, because of course he does, and leaves the reader with the closing line, “The problem is not just that Russia has hacked America’s computer systems. It seems to have hacked our minds.”

Nothing to see here. In the West, it’s perfectly normal and not at all compromising for a news agency like @Reuters to employ a CIA agent to ensure that the company can “meet the disparate needs of the U.S. Government.” https://t.co/I5DJH04Beq pic.twitter.com/qjxtJcwFDB

— Ali Abunimah (@AliAbunimah) December 17, 2020

WaPo keeps hammering this narrative about powerful Russian mind-hackers as though Russia is the only nation with an existing propaganda campaign on the world stage and not one of the weaker ones doing so. The US government itself openly uses propaganda on foreigners with programs like Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia and Voice of America, which actually serve the more important function of presenting the illusion that those are the only form of US government propaganda.

In reality the plutocratic class which owns the mass media works closely with the US government and sets up its institutions to only elevate voices which advance narratives that are favorable to the status quo those plutocrats have built their kingdoms upon. WaPo itself is owned by the richest man in the world who is also a CIA contractor and sits on a Pentagon advisory board. The unofficial propaganda operations of the oligarchic empire give it a massive edge in international narrative control that dwarfs both official US propaganda programs and anything the Russian government could ever come up with.

Among some very stiff competition, one of the dumbest recurring themes in western imperialist media is the idea that world affairs, entire electoral and governmental systems, and even our very minds, are being controlled by a nation with the same GDP as South Korea. Russia does not have an especially strong sway over the world stage, it just happens to be one of the few remaining power structures which have resisted absorption into the US-centralized empire and is being targeted with a propaganda campaign aimed at changing that.

Russia is not hacking your mind. If anyone is hacking your mind, it’s the vast globe-spanning power structure loosely centralized around the United States which has been aggressively propagandizing you into supporting the continuation of status quo politics since you were born.

The dawn of political insight comes when you realize that propaganda is not just something that is done by other nations to other people. It is done by your own rulers, in your own nation, and it is being done to you.

caitlinjohnstone.com

Fareed Zakaria’s comments in a March 28 Washington Post article and like-minded monologue on his CNN show GPS of March 31, drew criticism from Democratic Party Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (who is a 2020 US presidential candidate), Caitlan Johnstone and The Duran. Some additional thoughts on this matter come to mind.

In line with Johnstone, Gabbard and The Duran, it’s not hyperbole to characterize Zakaria as carrying on like a geopolitical shock jock, for goading US President Donald Trump to confront Russia over Venezuela. That take from Zakaria concurs with CNN’s geopolitically correct establishment approach over a balanced presentation. A recent CNN segment on Russia’s Arctic presence serves as one of numerous examples. The image is given of an aggressive Russia in an area where the US is comparatively limited. Never mind noting the overall greater global degree of US military prowess to Russia, with an acknowledgement that the Arctic is (on the whole) geographically more relevant to Russia than the US.

Trump should be rightfully criticized for contradicting the not as aggressive foreign policy (when compared to the neocons and neolibs) which he supported during his presidential campaign. That position has been advocated by Gabbard and Republican Party Kentucky Senator Rand Paul.

Venezuela is a problematical situation, involving an internationally recognized government and opposition – with each having limited support. Omitting some key points, Zakaria exaggerates the Russian military support to the Venezuelan government, while portraying Russian President Vladimir Putin as a troublemaker, seeking to disrupt US interests. There’re several related points which (put mildly) second guess this spin.

The US government has been militarily propping up the anti-Russian leaning Kiev regime with aid and advisers. Ukraine borders Russia. Venezuela doesn’t border the US. If anything, the record shows that Putin has sought better relations with the US, only to face obstacles from the latter.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Russia ranks fourth in military spending behind the US, China and Saudi Arabia. In that category, SIPRI notes that the US spends more on its armed forces than the next seven highest spending countries combined – as America faces challenges with its healthcare, infrastructure, environment and schools.

Zakaria depicts Syria as another country where Russia (as suggested by Zakaria) has pretty much had its way with the US. On the flipside, some in Russia and elsewhere have said that the Russian government has been somewhat passive towards US action in Syria, against the preference of the internationally recognized Syrian government.

With Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya in mind, Venezuela and Syria concern murky situations, which could get worse via adventurist regime change pursuits. On the matter of using military force abroad, the Russian government didn’t seek the regime change route in the 2008 war in the Caucasus (initiated when Georgian forces attacked Russian military personnel and civilians in South Ossetia), as well as Crimea’s 2014 reunification with Russia (following the coup against Ukraine’s democratically elected president) and the civil war in Donbass (whose rebel fighters are overwhelmingly from the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR).

Zakaria is perfectly aware of these points (at least most of them). He exhibits a kind of Jekyll and Hyde approach, which can serve to cover all angles, while at the same time making him look (upon close scrutiny) as being a bit disingenuous. His CNN GPS show is top heavy with the likes of Bret Stephens, Tom Friedman, Richard Haas, Jane Harmon and Anne Marie Slaughter. The counter to such views don’t get anywhere near as much air time on GPS and other CNN shows.

Consider a March 31 aired GPS segment (taped on March 29) Zakaria did with Russian analyst Andrey Kortunov, who explained Russia’s relationship with Venezuela along the lines of what’s noted in this essay. In this particular exchange, Zakaria doesn’t offer any disagreement to what Kortunov said. As if that segment never existed, Zakaria, in his high profile GPS monologue and Washington Post article, resorts to the simplistic rant of a xenophobic, big power chauvinist. Just the kind of journalism typically not getting called out within US mass media.

As of this writing, Fox News host Tucker Carlson hasn’t responded to Zakaria goading Trump to confront Russia. Concerning Russia related issues, Carlson remains the most even handed among his 24/7 US cable TV news peers. On the Fox Business Network (a Fox News affiliate) Lou Dobbs’ April 5 segment with Jack Keane (at about the 26:35 mark of this video) has the facile inaccuracies which are frequently presented on CNN and MSNBC.