Towards a Working Definition of the Deep State

After “Fake News,” one of the terms that is being increasingly being thrown around by the non-mainstream media is that of a “Deep State.” In this blog, I shall try to lay out a contribution to the understanding of that concept, which should help towards developing a working definition thereof. The term, as used by non-mainstream media, President Trump and his supporters has, usually, a rather negative connotation. It seems to refer mainly to an alleged “cabal” of American left-wing operatives, as well as men and women in power, who support Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Democrat policies. These operatives are normally found to be in the US intelligence community and the US Department of State. In television and film dramatizations, usage of the term “Deep State” is mainly limited to intelligence agencies, in the US and other countries. In that sense, the “Deep State” are those members of the intelligence community that have real power. As they are “deep,” they are, as a rule,

The Future of Higher Education

Yesterday, the BBC portal carried a most interesting story, revolving around the new joint Harvard/MIT programme for online education ( ). The gist is that, after more than a decade of various experiments with “online” or “long-distance” learning by "lesser" universities, the heavyweights of the higher education world are throwing their hats in to the ring, in what is likely to be a huge gamechanger. The Harvard/MIT gamechanger is the following: once these and similar universities enter the online education business, this will no longer be the province of shady, letterbox universities or decent university “cash cows.” Online teaching will include the best of the best and, once the best of the best become available to the world, the world will not settle for less. The masses will be able to watch star professors previously available only to a select few, for little or no money. What are the implications for the rest of higher

The Ego Trip of the False Individualist and the Sour Seeds of Revolution (Part Two)

As regards yesterday's individuality, one must limit the argument, at this point, to Western or quasi-Western democracies. Though we like to think that we are oppressed, mankind has more opportunities for individual expression than ever before! Just twenty years ago, there was NO internet. Accordingly, there was NO Facebook and NO YouTube-no outlet where we could express ourselves for all the world to see. Today, we have all of the artistic tools at our disposal that we had twenty years ago-PLUS some that we did not. If we speak about the oppression of government, twenty years ago, could we just “log on” to a web site and download the text of the budget of our country? Could we read the annual report of any major company in the world? Could we access libraries halfway around the world at the click of a mouse or the touch of a screen? Granted, there are several social groups that suffer unabated oppression in many countries. I have in mind, first and foremost, the LGBT p

The Ego Trip of the False Individualist and the Sour Seeds of Revolution (Part One)

From the No-Globals, through the Occupy Wall Street Movement, on to the Stop ACTA Movement, the revolutionaries of our time are not linked by a common thread. They are linked by a common rope, off of which only a few individual threads succeed in peeling off. The slogans and the publicly manifested roots of today's mass protests are well-known. There is a struggle. A struggle against a faceless, nameless, new world order (although the New World Order is a name, it is not the name of any actual order, much less a definition or description thereof, novelty not being, in and of itself, substance).  According to revolutionary legend, that new world order (or New World Order) seeks to dominate and enslave the human race. It aims to crush hard-earned and battle-won human rights. It desires the elimination of privacy and individuality. Just like Huxley's nightmarish Brave New World, it wants to make us all the same or, at best, all the same within a given social class.

Serbia as the Spear of Destiny in the Coming (or Ongoing) Global Conflict?

I could not help laughing bitterly out loud when I read, on the website of B92, one of Serbia's leading media outlet, a story picked up from Alex Jones' Infowars ( ). The fact that a reputable, mainstream media outlet relies on Alex Jones as a news source was not the reason I was laughing this time, oddly enough. The gist of the (conspiracy) story is as follows: the shadow powers in America, possibly the CIA or a similar organisation, have procured the services of the leaders of Serbia's "Otpor" (Resistance) movement-yes, the same one that was instrumental in bringing down Milosevic in 2000! The part of the conspiracy theory that connects Otpor to foreign agents is well-known. This is not, of course, the first time that allegations of Otpor involvement outside of Serbia have been made. Serbian "know-how" has also been linked by some media o

Fascist Liberalism or Why The World Got Screwed in 1914

I'm back! Sorry to have been away so's the day job that's been giving me a headache, you see. My trouble of the day comes from a joke a man made last night: he told me that he is politically a "fascist liberal." Go figure.... As we say in Serbia: every joke is half true. That got me wondering...what, if anything, could fascist liberalism be and how did we get to making such jokes in the first place? The absence of ideology from modern politics is plain to see. We have right wing parties that speak for the workers, left wing parties that are "business friendly".... Nobody wants to make any radical moves either to the left or to the right.... The revolutionaries of our day are people who fight against existing structures without any idea of their own (the anti-global movement, or how to present being an urban bum as a political statement). Alternatively, they fight for causes based on evidence churned out by the global elite (e.