Obama confidant’s spine-chilling proposal (Cass Sunstein)

[dkf]

FRIDAY, JAN 15, 2010 03:16 AM HST

Cass Sunstein has long been one of Barack Obama’s closest confidants. Often mentioned as a likely Obama nominee to the Supreme Court, Sunstein is currently Obama’s head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs where, among other things, he is responsible for “overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs.” In 2008, while at Harvard Law School, Sunstein co-wrote a truly pernicious paper proposing that the U.S. Government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites — as well as other activist groups — which advocate views that Sunstein deems “false conspiracy theories” about the Government. This would be designed to increase citizens’ faith in government officials and undermine the credibility of conspiracists. The paper’s abstract can be read, and the full paper downloaded, here.

Sunstein advocates that the Government’s stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups.” He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called “independent” credible voices to bolster the Government’s messaging (on the ground that those who don’t believe government sources will be more inclined to listen to those who appear independent while secretly acting on behalf of the Government). This program would target those advocating false “conspiracy theories,” which they define to mean: “an attempt to explain an event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role.” Sunstein’s 2008 paper was flagged by this blogger, and then amplified in an excellent report by Raw Story‘s Daniel Tencer.

There’s no evidence that the Obama administration has actually implemented a program exactly of the type advocated by Sunstein, though in light of this paper and the fact that Sunstein’s position would include exactly such policies, that question certainly ought to be asked. Regardless, Sunstein’s closeness to the President, as well as the highly influential position he occupies, merits an examination of the mentality behind what he wrote. This isn’t an instance where some government official wrote a bizarre paper in college 30 years ago about matters unrelated to his official powers; this was written 18 months ago, at a time when the ascendancy of Sunstein’s close friend to the Presidency looked likely, in exactly the area he now oversees. Additionally, the government-controlled messaging that Sunstein desires has been a prominent feature of U.S. Government actions over the last decade, including in some recently revealed practices of the current administration, and the mindset in which it is grounded explains a great deal about our political class. All of that makes Sunstein’s paper worth examining in greater detail.

* * * * *

Initially, note how similar Sunstein’s proposal is to multiple, controversial stealth efforts by the Bush administration to secretly influence and shape our political debates. The Bush Pentagon employed teams of former Generals to pose as “independent analysts” in the media while secretly coordinating their talking points and messaging about wars and detention policies with the Pentagon. Bush officials secretly paid supposedly “independent” voices, such as Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher, to advocate pro-Bush policies while failing to disclose their contracts. In Iraq, the Bush Pentagon hired a company, Lincoln Park, which paid newspapers to plant pro-U.S. articles while pretending it came from Iraqi citizens. In response to all of this, Democrats typically accused the Bush administration of engaging in government-sponsored propaganda — and when it was done domestically, suggested this was illegal propaganda. Indeed, there is a very strong case to make that what Sunstein is advocating is itself illegal under long-standing statutes prohibiting government ”propaganda” within the U.S., aimed at American citizens:

http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

White House Picks Panel to Review NSA Programs

A group of veteran security experts and former White House officials has been selected to conduct a full review of U.S. surveillance programs and other secret government efforts disclosed over recent months, ABC News has learned.

The recent acting head of the CIA, Michael Morell, will be among what President Obama called a "high-level group of outside experts" scrutinizing the controversial programs.

Joining Morell on the panel will be former White House officials Richard Clarke, Cass Sunstein and Peter Swire. An announcement is expected Thursday, a source with knowledge of the matter told ABC News' Jon Karl.

The group will "consider how we can maintain the trust of the people [and] how we can make sure that there absolutely is no abuse,"

http://abcnews.go.com/politics/t/blogEntry?id=20030899

[spin]

1. Why does this not surprise me? (n/t)

[OnyxCollie]

2. Cass Sunstein, conspiracy entrepreneur.

Sunstein and Vermeule (2008) describe “an effort to explain some event or practice by
reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have managed to conceal their role” (p. 4)
as a conspiracy theory, a pejorative term which denotes a faulty epistemology, rumors, and
speculation. Furthermore, it is asserted that such analysis overestimates the ability of government
bureaucracies to carry out “sophisticated and secret” (p. 6) plans in an open society. Alternately,
Parenti (2010) quoting Karp (1973) suggested that:

When it can be established that when a number of political acts work in concert to
produce a certain result, the presumption is strong that the actors were aiming at the result
in question. When it can be shown that the actors have an interest in producing these
results, the presumptions become a fair certainty- no conspiracy theory is needed.

Sunstein and Vermeule (2008) assume a well-intentioned government may decide to
defuse conspiracy theories “if and only if social welfare is improved by doing so” (p. 15), yet
they concede that governments themselves may be purveyors of conspiracy theories. Parenti
(1993) suggested the beneficiaries of said social welfare may be an entire class interest.
Following this reasoning, conspiracy theories may be eliminated to prevent exposure of
particular factions, or they may be furnished to enable a certain objective. According to Parenti
(2010), the term conspiracy theory can be used to dismiss: “(1) the idea of a conscious design by
policy makers; (2) a hidden, but knowing intent; (3) a secret plan; (4) a secret interest.”

[Eleanors38]

34. Over 40 yrs ago, U.S. intelligence organizations famously noted

the "paranoid" propensities of radicals, and pushed plans and actions which took advantage of that "paranoia."

[okieinpain]

3. this is why sometimes higher education is bad, the man has too much time on

his hands and needs to do something to justify his pay check. wonder how he feels about his brown shirt program now that the people are outside the door with tar and feathers. lol.

[CreekDog]

4. so how does this work? some posters will not be amateurs like us, but paid pros?

[dkf]

6. "Pros". Lol.

[winter is coming]

9. Makes sense. n/t

[msanthrope]

12. Why not name the posters you think are 'pros' and report them to the Admin? nt

[CreekDog]

14. you're asking me to predict the future?

um ok.

[msanthrope]

15. No--since Cass wrote his proposal in 2008, I'm sure you have at least 5 years of examples to report.

Come on now....here's your chance. Don't hesitate to name names!!!

[Fumesucker]

20. You Better Believe It!

LoZoccolo
graham4anything
OperationMindCrime


You're welcome.

[uponit7771]

5. FUCKIN OBAMA!! :rolleyes: Come on "a source with knowledge of the matter" this is another sit and

...wait situation

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Yep

That caught my eye to.

*flush*

[dkf]

11. Are you here to disrupt a "conspiracy theory"?

[uponit7771]

16. Can't, fud and wingers are starting 4 a minute...hard work no doubt

[mick063]

32. The environment is ripe for conspiracy theory

It is what happens when trust is lost. Conspiracy theory is merely a symptom of greater disease. Our leadership is an incubator for conspiracy theories. Such theories never go away with the growing lack of trust. Many will take root and persist.

"Whack a Mole" with conspiracy theories is the future of DU because of the lack of faith. The lack of trust.

[forestpath]

8. Obama's choice of pals is so very revealing about who he really is.

[winter is coming]

10. +1. Also, the choice to repackage the problem instead of fixing it. n/t

[840high]

18. +1

[JTFrog]

19. Really? I remember Palin saying the same fucking thing in 2008.

FFS.

[forestpath]

21. So all of Obama's horrible picks should get an automatic pass?

How stupid. Going by that criteria somebody like Larry Summers is A-OK too.

Fuck that shit.

[JTFrog]

22. Fuck Sarah Palin.

And fuck that whole "palin' around" horseshit.

Mimicking the batshit crazy Obama Derangement crowd is pretty far from constructive criticism.

[Octafish]

24. So why the fuck bring her up, JTFrog?

The post is about Cass Sunstein and the people on Team Obama, like Larry Summers and Jacob Lew and Penny Pritzker.

Maybe you have heard of them, but most of America, if not most of DU, have no idea about what they're all about.

[JTFrog]

26. Well it's a message board,

so I posted what I thought. I'm rather sick and tired of seeing folks here attack Obama with right wing talking points. Once upon a time Democratic Underground was a refuge from that shit.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

28. There's no problem unless you do not know you can easily find the "refuge" that you want in the BOG.

[JTFrog]

29. Yea, the underground of the underground. n/t

[Octafish]

33. Understood. The thing is the right wing and the ultra rich are both served by President Obama.

The Cabinet and his most trusted advisors are largely in the thrall of Wall Street and War Inc.

Trickle-Down Economics is still the law of the land and not much new in the way of a New New Deal.

All that has nothing to do with Sarah Palin, other than the fact she criticizes the president, too, although for her own insane reasons that have nothing to do with reality.

[forestpath]

27. You didn't answer my question. Are we not allowed to criticize any crappy Obama picks

just because of Palin's Ayers bullshit of 5 years ago?

Does her insane schtick somehow sanitize Obama's anti-99% choices and innoculate them against criticism?

Does it? If so, why? And Obama never nominated Ayers for anything - and Ayers is no way comparable to Obama's choice here, so your comparison is even more pointlessly stupid.

No, you just can't take any Obama criticism and go around attacking those who criticize your hero, which is my definition of ODS.

[baldguy]

23. Funny that this type of insinuation only is allowed to be done with Obama.

We never hear/see criticism of "Snowden's choice of pals..." or "Greenwald's choice of pals ...". Or, if we do then Obama's enemies are the first to dismiss it & denigrate the person who brings it up.

[DefenseLawyer]

13. COINTELPRO started officially in 1956

This "idea" doesn't sound any different to me.

[PCIntern]

17. My claim to fame:

I seriously dated the young lady who became Sunstein's ex-wife when we were high schoolers.

I mention that every time his name is brought up so in case he's Googling, he'll see it.

On edit...the first sentence needs to be rephrased but I'm too tired to do that.

[rug]

25. Was there any discussion then of cognitive infiltration?

[PCIntern]

35. Mmmm...no....

she was/is very brilliant and was GORGEOUS. No bs. you can find her pic online as an 'older' lady.

[BlueToTheBone]

30. Just in time! They dumped the ban on propaganda

being spewed to US citizens.

[AzDar]

31. K & R

[Demo_Chris]

36. Yes, but what does this have to do with "transphobia"?