Manipulative Propaganda and the Assange Trial
A sigh of relief is never a definitive overthrow of the anxiety, but rather an interlude, a breath of fresh air before the descent into the murky underground world of incoherence.
A momentary sigh of relief was released on Monday morning when British judge Vanessa Baraitser ruled not to extradite Julian Assange by request of the United States government and Department of Justice.
A sigh of relief is never a definitive overthrow of the anxiety, but rather an interlude, a breath of fresh air before the descent into the murky underground world of incoherence.
The lack of coverage and lack of honest rhetoric from the United States power dynamic, is the origin of this gaping absence of truth and logic.
As has been previously established, the prevailing factor that allows the government to forcibly shove the man’s face below the water line is the utter censorship or misrepresentation of the man and the circumstances. Perhaps most revealing in this decade plus time frame is the U.S. government’s shifting and varying methods of trying to tarnish Assange’s character, paired with the consistency of the dichotomy of Assange’s innocence and inhumane treatment.
Baraitser ruled the way she did not because she sees this incremental assassination as a potential doomsday scenario for journalism or because she found Assange or WikiLeaks to be noble. She ruled, primarily, based on two reasons. For one, she ruled against sending the activist to the United States based on the inhumane conditions universally associated to the nation’s prison system. The second rode entirely on the concern over Assange’s mental health.
The United Kingdom is one of the submissive henchmen nations of the United States’ global power dynamic. However, in the good spirit of trans-Atlantic stereotypes, the one way the British differentiate themselves from the Americans is noting the difference between civilized society and a hot bed of barbarism. And yet, in accordance with the power structure, the British see no issue with complying with this elaborate and sordid smear on a journalist using confinement strategies that are barely better than those of the United States.
Baraitser noted that since being moved to custody within the United Kingdom at Belmarsh, Assange was removed from “isolation in healthcare,” given access to friends and family, and a “trusting relationship” with the prison psychologist. None of this is definite, and it’s likely Assange was not treated exceptionally well. However, it stands to reason that confinement in the United States would, without a doubt, be the most damning destination imaginable.
You don’t need to be a high level magistrate to know that the U.S. prison system is notorious. The two spotlight issues of the US prison system is its bizarre and perturbing ties to the history of slavery and the formal industrial schemes that thrive from the system.
In pretty lucid terms, the Constitution states that slavery is justified as punishment. The 13th Amendment states clearly: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist in the United States” (emphasis my own).
To force a human being into slavery is something absolutely horrific and shows one of the dimmest aspects of humanity. However, as vicious as it is, the primary reason for it at the very top of the cruel phenomenon is capital. With the system set up on that foundation, the power obsession then unfolds.
Money is power, and that could not be more true today. As we see in politics, media, pop culture, and business, wealth and status are not only the biggest indicators of power, but the enduring reinforcements that keep power propped up.
The Prison Industrial Complex, just like that ghastly Military Industrial Complex, is a black hole that perpetually threatens the American dream. It’s a scheme, devised by some of the most powerful people who generate egregious amounts of wealth from it. Big name industry names are involved: Sherwin Williams manufactures paint for prison walls and develops compliance guides for prison design and construction; Aramark produces prison food, commissary items, and cleaning supplies, among others; and the manufacturers of Post-It notes are famous for utilizing prison labor.
Prison labor is nothing new, of course. Among the items produced by prisoners are license plates, body armor, and mattresses. Many of the prisoners are paid less than $1 a day, about $0.12 to $0.40 per hour. Refusal to work results in punishments such as solitary confinement, suspension of visitation rights, among others. In fact, the United States Bureau of Prisons oversee that all prisoners work (except when medical reasons prevent the ability to do so).
The Prison Industrial Complex is no secret. It’s not something you have to delve very deep into on the internet in order to retrieve basic information on it. The United States are the masters of media, and thus the deciding hand of characterization of other countries, specific individuals, organizations, and, of course, themselves. With that kind of power to dictate what apparitions appear in the mirror, it’s not that the US power dynamic censors these facts, but they never give any reason for an average citizen to research and substantiate the topic. They rely of distractions that drown out those kinds of corrupted norms of our government, whether it’s hollow entertainment, propagandized news outlets, or living/working conditions that leave no moment to think or elaborate on the scandalous realities.
The extradition trial for Julian Assange was either left out completely or blatantly misrepresented. However, the former is the favored method because it’s hard to spout deceitful gibberish when you’re lying; eventually people catch on.
The arrest and investigation of David Morales, the CEO of the Spanish security firm employed by the Ecuadorian Embassy where Assange had been before being arrested in April 2019 is one of those telling signs. In October of that year, Morales was taken in and reports confirm not only the clear and blatant surveillance of Assange, but Morales’ coordination with the CIA.
The CIA was spying in order to accumulate potential evidence for the extradition trial. Morales’ collaborative effort was always hinted at, being quoted at times, by people involved with the company, saying things like how there is “a plan to try and sell to the American friends.” The surveillance focused on Assange’s visitors, primarily American and Russian nationals.
All the while, with the cameras and the array of bugs that likened the the embassy to the BBC 1 Soundstage, Assange was treated with conditions that UN torture specialist, Nils Melzer, has called “inhumane” and “torturous.”
The concern over Assange’s mental health was that other major factor in the ruling. Concern over suicide was an increasing topic of deliberation, as the worry grew more and more with the declining mental health of Assange.
The years-long attempts at character assassination, the spying, and the ruthless tactics of the hunt all contributed to Assange’s descent into the thorny pit of psychological hell.
Adding to the argument, Assange’s defense brought forth a recent diagnosis of the WikiLeaks founder. The resulting diagnosis signaled that Assange has Asperger’s, noting that he exhibited “autistic-like traits.” This diagnosis enhanced the case that extradition would be an explicit death wish cast upon Assange for the autism spectrum includes more focus and rumination on personal circumstances.
Reportedly, Assange dreaded the idea of extradition, he dreaded the idea of max-security imprisonment, of solitary confinement, of unjust banishment. Naturally so. Condemning the man to that kind of destination, one enveloped in darkness and vice-gripped with despondency, is a sordid thought.
The power of the United States government—their unalienable beliefs that they are to be obeyed by all and that all actions are rightly justified—writes its own story. Melzer said, following the extradition ruling, that “the whole narrative that had been spread about Assange for so long was not supported by evidence.”
No, it was supported by influential power.
What we have witnessed is a decade plus worth of intentionally misleading propaganda. It should be noted that not all propaganda is bad; in fact, in its simplest form means the spread of information. Propaganda about tobacco products, drinking and driving, seatbelts, and healthy eating are all forms of propaganda that serve a universal good for society. Propaganda, much like opening your mouth, is only bad when it is deceitful.
Propaganda gives us the freedom to accept or not accept the message, but we have to recognize that ourselves. That is inherently hard for humans, the social and tribal creatures we are. Evolutionarily speaking, tribal/identity politics and groupthink are almost natural to human rationalization. Survival depends on fitting into a community, and instinct drives us into those circles in any way that works. Power is always an overarching reason for why one should be listened to, and until people attempt to see past the facade of authority, the flock of panicked sheep will continue to trek onward.
Therefore, the important thing to remember is that all information—all propaganda—should be examined and analyzed in order to decipher if it’s honestly beneficial or intentionally deceptive, and thus if it should or shouldn’t be agreed with. Nothing should be listlessly assumed— not in a reality where you can go from volunteering at the local soup kitchen to being mangled by a pack of wild boars in your front yard.
Mark Crispin Miller, an NYU professor caught in the crossfire of purity policing, gave a really good quote on Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper’s podcast Useful Idiots:
“We can always easily spot the propaganda that we don't agree with. You ask any liberal, what's propaganda? They'll say, ‘Oh, Fox. Fox News.’ You ask any conservative what's propaganda? They'll say, ‘MSNBC.’ They're both right. Both are propagandistic, but what they can't see is the propaganda that they agree with because they think it's just information. They think it's just the truth.”
Glenn Greenwood, the journalist who primarily published Edward Snowden’s revelations, made a good point on how this concoction of propaganda and groupthink exists in reality. He wrote in a tweet that United States liberals (those who affect the label of “liberal” as in being blindly subservient to the Democratic establishment, not those who exhibit true liberalism) “don’t realize how isolated in the world they are: [they are]!the only ones on the side of Pompeo, [the] CIA and the [Department of Justice]. But that’s 100% who they are.”
When he says that’s “who they are” he means they are victims of deceptive propaganda through their tribal attachment and subsequent groupthink— that they are individuals who do not think for themselves. They blindly adhere to the thinking of the Democratic establishment because they have never once thought the Democrats have done anything wrong. That’s because the Democrats maintain that falsehood. And the cycle continues.
In contrast with the rest of the world, the delusion of these “liberals” and “patriots” (because, likewise, it’s no doubt that there are those on the right who genuinely buy into the idea that Assange’s work, as well as Snowden’s, are threats to the safety of the military and national security— of course, it’s ironic that those deploying thousands of troops to foreign lands to fight in pointless, endless wars are declaring concern for troop safety) are evident.
Following Baraister’s ruling, Mexico’s president, Andés Manuel López Obrador offered political asylum to Assange. Obrador noted that it is in accordance with the tradition of Mexico that they take on the “responsibility” to protect people from political persecution.
The United States power dynamic sees Mexico’s humanist offering as criminal, as aiding a national security threat despite it being a clear instance of hypocrisy, as Greenwald and others have noted. If the US takes in someone threatened by political persecution, they are doing some charitable act despite some other government (the one hunting that individual) seeing the act as criminal.
The power dynamic gets to exploit and abuse its influence so long as those manipulated by it continued to go along with the deception. It’s just like Hegel’s slave-master dialectic, that there is a mutually reliant relationship between the two. That the master and slave cannot exist without the other.
It’s foolish to believe the United States power dynamic, or any powerful force, would relinquish its power. But to believe that we can wake up enough people to dismember that power dynamic that relies on mindless acceptance of the status quo.
The final paragraph of Judge Baraitser’s ruling stated: “I order the discharge of Julian Assange, pursuant to section 91(3) of the EA 2003.” However, as was expected, the US government will appeal the ruling.
In the mean time, Assange will have his bail hearing tomorrow (on Wednesday, January 6) in the morning. Defendants usually stay in custody amidst the appeal, so Assange could remain there until the government’s appeal wraps up.
The sigh of relief comes primarily from the fact that Julian Assange will be United with his partner, Stella Moris, and his children. He will have access to his core support group of friends and family. And he will be one step closer to escaping the cat’s claw.
“Julian’s freedom is tied to all of our freedoms,” Moris said following Monday’s ruling.
Overall, however, the fact that this sort of barbaric effort took place on the backs of the will of five major governments, and that the ruling was not at all an embrace of journalistic freedom means we should not celebrate. There are just too many who are still being lulled to sleep and sucked into delusional dreamlands to rest easy now. The threat of abused power is not going away— it might be getting more elusive.
While The Huxleyan intends to remain free to the public, there are paid subscription offers (which would be more of a donation than receiving access to anything in particular) at $5/month, or $45/year. As always, donations are welcome and appreciated via Venmo (@john-pongratz). Again, as those are just options, everything remains free. Thank you for reading and be sure to subscribe, comment, and share!