The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NYT: How Mexican Big Shots Geld the Mexican Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times:

Using Billions in Government Cash, Mexico Controls News Media

By AZAM AHMED DEC. 25, 2017

MEXICO CITY — Running a newspaper, radio station or television outlet in Mexico usually means relying on a single, powerful client that spends exorbitant sums on advertising with a simple warning: “I do not pay you to criticize me.”

That client is the government of Mexico.

President Enrique Peña Nieto’s administration has spent hundreds of millions of dollars a year in government money on advertising, creating what many Mexican media owners, executives and journalists call a presidential branding juggernaut capable of suppressing investigative articles, directing front pages and intimidating newsrooms that challenge it.

Despite vowing to regulate government publicity, Mr. Peña Nieto has spent more money on media advertising than any other president in Mexico’s history — nearly $2 billion in the past five years, according to government data compiled by Fundar, a transparency group. It found that his administration spent more than twice the generous media budget Mexican lawmakers allotted it for 2016 alone.

So Mexico doesn’t have a lot of outright press censorship. There is much bribery to reward cooperation, some dirty tricks censorship such as hacking of independent-minded websites, and the occasional exemplary murder of nosey reporters.

One obvious question that this article would seemingly raise in the minds of readers, but which goes unmentioned in the text, is why in the world would the New York Times want to risk importing this kind of culture of corruption by getting in bed financially with Mexico’s most skilled player at the Mexican Way, billionaire Carlos Slim?

In the eight years that the NYT has been financially yoked with Slim, there has been, for instance, no coverage in the NYT of his heirs, the Slim Gemayel dynasty, having close family ties to fascism through their mother’s infamous Lebanese Phalangist warlord clan, the Gemayels.

Another question would be why don’t there seem to be well-known Mexican on-line publications safely ensconced north of the border in San Diego or San Antonio? I used to follow a bilingual lefty magazine published in the U.S. called El Andar, but it’s out of business.

My general impression is that Mexican elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting Mexican intellectuals. For example, back in the 1970s, Mexican college professors were paid about as well in cash as American college professors, so they tended to have numerous servants. Heavyweight Mexican writers tended to be appointed ambassadors and live the really good life abroad at embassies.

A further curious aspect of Mexican public life is how little it generates in the way of legitimate political refugees. Can anybody name a famous Mexican who is living in the U.S. in exile because he tells too much truth about Mexico?

 
Hide 74 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Steve,

    Just wondering about the coincidence of this New York Times article’s criticism of Mexico and the fact that Carlos Slim will reportedly cut his NYT stake nearly in half (CNBC 19 Dec 2017).

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    @Dan Hayes

    Slim could be cutting his losses, his equity investment was linked to his debt holdings, that would have given him total ownership if the NYT had gone bankrupt. But the surge in leftism following 2016 has given them enough subscription revenue to dodge the hangman.

    Bezos has gotten far more political impact from buying the Post, he might well become the most powerful monopolist in American history. Rockefeller and Carnegie were never media barons, and it was the "yellow journalists" that exposed them into philanthropic donations.

    Replies: @Perspective

  2. Carlos Slim sells off half of New York Times shares for $240M

    By Keith J. Kelly

    December 19, 2017 | 10:00pm | Updated

    https://nypost.com/2017/12/19/carlos-slim-sells-off-half-of-new-york-times-shares-for-240m/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @newrouter

    Who on earth would be buying?
    Like buying deck chairs on the Titanic.
    After hitting the 'berg.

    Replies: @Patrick Harris

  3. I remember reading years ago that the PRI had a habit of appointing troublesome agitators as governors of provinces. Co-opting worked better than punishing.

    • Replies: @Lugash
    @Christopher Chantrill

    Yes, to a point. Activists would agitate against one of Mexico's myriad social problems, gain some followers, catch the attention of the PRI, and then get some goodies to quiet down and keep their followers in line. Something as big as a governorship was reserved for party bigwigs. Not sure how it operates now, problably "Ship 'em norte".

    On Topic, Mexico's Finest:

    https://nypost.com/2017/12/21/teen-youtube-star-gunned-down-after-hurling-insult-at-cartel-boss/

    , @CJ
    @Christopher Chantrill

    In the 1970s and early 1980s the PRI used to systematically buy off student activists and community organizers by giving them jobs as bureaucrats. There were entire office buildings in Mexico City full of ex-activists, each with their own office. Apparently very little actual work was expected of them, and some of them were old enough to have children who had followed the same career path. A Mexican student I met at a Canadian university filled me in on this practice; he had a relative who was “employed” in this way. He told me the practice had gotten jump-started after the 1968 Olympic protests.

    , @NOTA
    @Christopher Chantrill

    It’s like the old cynical comment that the Catholic Church could have avoided all the unpleasantness of the Protestant reformation if they’d just appointed Martin Luther a bishop at the right time....

    , @Bill Jones
    @Christopher Chantrill

    I heard Consuls in the US.

  4. How do American big shots geld the press?

    Journalist and future Il Duce:
    Recruited by MI5: the name’s Mussolini. Benito Mussolini
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/13/benito-mussolini-recruited-mi5-italy

    Adolf Hitler was living in a homeless shelter when he became a government informant paid to infiltrate left wing parties and eventually organize one.

    • Replies: @Roderick Spode
    @George

    Those damn left-wingers in the Nazi party... If not for them, Western Europe would have been liberated from socialism long ago by the holy traditionalist empire of the conservative paragon, Joe 'Gipper' Stalin.

    Dems r teh reel racis

    Replies: @fnn, @Hibernian

  5. It would seem to me that Mexico is just practicing a less sophisticated form of message control that is commensurate with its generally lower standard of living, i.e. outright bribes in the form of advertising payoffs and the occasional strong-arm tactics. Whereas here in America, the money is sanitized by funneling it through a maze of government agencies, obscure grant windows, foundations, think tanks, endowments, shell companies, and other financial subsidiaries, until it becomes ritually purified; and the threat of shunning, silencing, un-personing, and career track devastation are enough to keep any dissenters in line. Not there are many dissenters anyway, since all practitioners of the journalistic craft are carefully vetted by the universities, the professional organizations, and the internship process so as to ensure that they are bonded and certified PC.

    But, since in both cases, after normalizing for the degree of sophistication, the process is essentially the same, it appears to be an intrinsic feature of modern societies rather than an aberration. It should not be surprising that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Most journalists would rather eat than be martyrs for truth.

    Indeed, there really cannot be any such thing as a “free press” that does not depend on money and protection from another source who may seek to influence it. What there can be, however, is meaningful opposition to Leviathan’s press corps, but only if people are willing to put some effort into it.

    In plain English, this means that people have to be willing to pay for it. It is unrealistic to expect anything to materialize from the efforts of a few heroic bloggers who, after exhausting themselves at their daily wage slavery, stay up late into the night trying to fight the power by tapping away at their keyboards for stuff-all. Nothing against the heroes, mind you; but it is a poor reflection on the people they are trying to lead, when the latter will not lend their encouragement and financial support. There are entire books that could be written right now, and there are people with the talent to write them, but they are lacking in the time and the means. If only such support were forthcoming, we could genuinely change the face of American culture.

    This is why I’m supporting Steve’s fundraising drive with my limited abilities and I entreat everyone else here to do the same. There was a time when journalists would produce extremely well-written and and well-researched monographs, traveling to foreign lands, hanging about the encampments of battlefields, diving into industries and governments. We can make it to be so again, and the books we write will influence a generation and will shine out across time. We have the will to do so, we just need the means.

    • Agree: Gapeseed, utu
    • Replies: @NOTA
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Journalism has to be paid for somehow. If it’s private ads, then the journalists can be independent of the government, but they’re beholden to the advertisers. If it’s donations, they’re beholden to donors. With modern internet ads, they’re dependent on Google and Facebook, and also required to serve up ads whose whole purpose is to violate the readers’ privacy.

    I suspect lots of small donors is the least corrupting source of revenue available now.

  6. A further curious aspect of Mexican public life is how little it generates in the way of legitimate political refugees. Can anybody name a famous Mexican who is living in the U.S. in exile because he tells too much truth about Mexico?

    No political refugees come to mind, but there are a fair number of people who live abroad due to kidnapping fears.Guillermo del Toro is perhaps the most famous example:

    Del Toro went on to recount the aftermath of the kidnapping of his father, Federico del Toro, by criminals in Guadalajara. After a ransom of $1 million was paid by del Toro’s friend James Cameron, Federico was freed following 72 days in captivity.

    http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/Guillermo-del-Toro-Shares-Harrowing-Kidnapping-6633345.php

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @syonredux

    Mexican actress Kate del Castillo stays out of Mexico for political reasons:

    She met 'El Chapo'. Now, Kate del Castillo is afraid to return to Mexico


    The new Netflix series “Ingobernable” — “Ungovernable” — is set in Mexico.

    But when it came time to start filming the Spanish-language drama last summer, the show’s star had a problem: She couldn’t go there without risking arrest.

    Kate del Castillo, one of Mexico’s best-known actors, was wanted by authorities for having met with Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, Mexico’s best-known drug lord, while he was on the run in 2015.

     

    Their relationship, based on mutual fascination and formed over a series of secret text messages, became Guzman’s undoing, eventually landing him in a U.S. prison awaiting trial on charges of drug trafficking and murder.

    Less publicized are the problems it has caused for Del Castillo, who was vilified by Mexican officials for befriending Guzman, and who said her career has suffered in the fallout.
     

    Guzman escaped again in July 2015 and three months later invited Del Castillo to visit him in a hideout in the mountains of Sinaloa. They shared tequila and spoke about his life late into the night. Actor Sean Penn, whom Del Castillo had invited along, later wrote about the experience in Rolling Stone.

    The clandestine meeting helped Mexican authorities trace the drug lord’s location — and recapture him a few months later.

    It also embarrassed President Enrique Peña Nieto, raising the question of how his government had not been able to find Guzman sooner.

    Del Castillo was already unpopular with Peña Nieto’s Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, because she had campaigned for an opposition candidate in the 2000 presidential election. After her meeting with Guzman, she said, she became the target of a “witch hunt” by the government.

     
    http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-kate-del-castillo-20170406-story.html

    Replies: @syonredux

  7. @syonredux

    A further curious aspect of Mexican public life is how little it generates in the way of legitimate political refugees. Can anybody name a famous Mexican who is living in the U.S. in exile because he tells too much truth about Mexico?
     
    No political refugees come to mind, but there are a fair number of people who live abroad due to kidnapping fears.Guillermo del Toro is perhaps the most famous example:

    Del Toro went on to recount the aftermath of the kidnapping of his father, Federico del Toro, by criminals in Guadalajara. After a ransom of $1 million was paid by del Toro’s friend James Cameron, Federico was freed following 72 days in captivity.

     

    http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/Guillermo-del-Toro-Shares-Harrowing-Kidnapping-6633345.php

    Replies: @syonredux

    Mexican actress Kate del Castillo stays out of Mexico for political reasons:

    She met ‘El Chapo’. Now, Kate del Castillo is afraid to return to Mexico

    The new Netflix series “Ingobernable” — “Ungovernable” — is set in Mexico.

    But when it came time to start filming the Spanish-language drama last summer, the show’s star had a problem: She couldn’t go there without risking arrest.

    Kate del Castillo, one of Mexico’s best-known actors, was wanted by authorities for having met with Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, Mexico’s best-known drug lord, while he was on the run in 2015.

    Their relationship, based on mutual fascination and formed over a series of secret text messages, became Guzman’s undoing, eventually landing him in a U.S. prison awaiting trial on charges of drug trafficking and murder.

    Less publicized are the problems it has caused for Del Castillo, who was vilified by Mexican officials for befriending Guzman, and who said her career has suffered in the fallout.

    Guzman escaped again in July 2015 and three months later invited Del Castillo to visit him in a hideout in the mountains of Sinaloa. They shared tequila and spoke about his life late into the night. Actor Sean Penn, whom Del Castillo had invited along, later wrote about the experience in Rolling Stone.

    The clandestine meeting helped Mexican authorities trace the drug lord’s location — and recapture him a few months later.

    It also embarrassed President Enrique Peña Nieto, raising the question of how his government had not been able to find Guzman sooner.

    Del Castillo was already unpopular with Peña Nieto’s Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, because she had campaigned for an opposition candidate in the 2000 presidential election. After her meeting with Guzman, she said, she became the target of a “witch hunt” by the government.

    http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-kate-del-castillo-20170406-story.html

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @syonredux

    Del Castillo's show ",Ingobernable," has a cast that is of, shall we say, racial interest. Here's the guy who plays the President of Mexico:


    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/78/bc/d6/78bcd6f960f6e5f1e46fb2b368e04842.jpg

    Kate del Castillo plays the Mexican First Lady:


    http://www1.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Kate+Del+Castillo+AFI+FEST+2008+Red+Carpet+MYIIy_Zr1rxl.jpg

    So, not exactly representative of the Mestizo masses....but a pretty accurate depiction of Mexico's White elite....

  8. @syonredux
    @syonredux

    Mexican actress Kate del Castillo stays out of Mexico for political reasons:

    She met 'El Chapo'. Now, Kate del Castillo is afraid to return to Mexico


    The new Netflix series “Ingobernable” — “Ungovernable” — is set in Mexico.

    But when it came time to start filming the Spanish-language drama last summer, the show’s star had a problem: She couldn’t go there without risking arrest.

    Kate del Castillo, one of Mexico’s best-known actors, was wanted by authorities for having met with Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, Mexico’s best-known drug lord, while he was on the run in 2015.

     

    Their relationship, based on mutual fascination and formed over a series of secret text messages, became Guzman’s undoing, eventually landing him in a U.S. prison awaiting trial on charges of drug trafficking and murder.

    Less publicized are the problems it has caused for Del Castillo, who was vilified by Mexican officials for befriending Guzman, and who said her career has suffered in the fallout.
     

    Guzman escaped again in July 2015 and three months later invited Del Castillo to visit him in a hideout in the mountains of Sinaloa. They shared tequila and spoke about his life late into the night. Actor Sean Penn, whom Del Castillo had invited along, later wrote about the experience in Rolling Stone.

    The clandestine meeting helped Mexican authorities trace the drug lord’s location — and recapture him a few months later.

    It also embarrassed President Enrique Peña Nieto, raising the question of how his government had not been able to find Guzman sooner.

    Del Castillo was already unpopular with Peña Nieto’s Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, because she had campaigned for an opposition candidate in the 2000 presidential election. After her meeting with Guzman, she said, she became the target of a “witch hunt” by the government.

     
    http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-kate-del-castillo-20170406-story.html

    Replies: @syonredux

    Del Castillo’s show “,Ingobernable,” has a cast that is of, shall we say, racial interest. Here’s the guy who plays the President of Mexico:

    Kate del Castillo plays the Mexican First Lady:

    So, not exactly representative of the Mestizo masses….but a pretty accurate depiction of Mexico’s White elite….

  9. Also, the Mexicans have built their own extremely effective wall…

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @B36

    That is an awesome graph. I would love to see it by all countries and color coded by race or continent.

  10. I wonder how many families have controlled Mexico since Europeans arrived. A Spanish sociologist figured out that 21 families have controlled Guatemala since 1531. Another 25 or so families married into the core, but remained on the periphery of power. Guatemala is small, but that’s still an impressive run. It means high degree of adaptability over the centuries.

    Has anyone mapped the ruling families of Mexico?

  11. All good points, as always, but in fairness — in light of your repeated discussions about Carlos Slim and the Times — does his presence really impact the paper’s coverage? Although he owns (or did until recently) a significant percentage of the shares, they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.

    Do you think he outright exercises editorial influence? Or that the editors don’t want to piss him off under some vague sense of loyalty (or self-preservation)? Something even more subtle than that? It’s certainly juicy to consider the dynamics, but what do you think is really going on?

    There are other plausible explanations for why the Times doesn’t critique Carlos Slim or Mexican oligarchy writ large, incuriousity or ideology being two of them.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @EdwardM

    Arthur Sulzberger Jr. sounds pretty gratefully to Carlos Slim in this 2009 essay:

    http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1894410_1893837_1894158,00.html

    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    @EdwardM

    Agreed. There's no shortage of young, incurious ideologues with limited life experience who will dutifully churn out the Party line.

    Media has always been ideological but journalism used to be a respectable outlet for bookish working-class individuals to become writers. That's how we got men like Jimmy Breslin, Mike Royko, Charlie Reese and Pete Dexter (who was beaten nearly to death by a group of Irish hooligans in Philadelphia).

    The sheer incuriousness of current journalism is pretty baffling. Here's a blog post I did on a goggle-eyed Tom Friedman, wandering around the migrant-markets of Niger, unable to solve the equation 2 + 2.

    Like somebody else said, there are a lot of books and monographs that could be written.

    , @syonredux
    @EdwardM


    they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.
     
    Not quite sure that the "triple parentheses" are warranted:

    Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. (born September 22, 1951) is an American journalist.[1] Sulzberger became the Publisher of The New York Times in 1992, and Chairman of the Board of The New York Times Company in 1997, succeeding his father, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger.[2] On December 14, 2017, he announced he would be ceding the post to his son Arthur Gregg "A.G." Sulzberger, effective January 1, 2018.[3]
     

    Sulzberger was born in Mount Kisco, New York, the son of Barbara Winslow (née Grant) and Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger Sr., the grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.]
     

    Sulzberger's mother was of mostly English and Scottish origin and his father was of Jewish origin (both Ashkenazic and Sephardic).[4] His parents divorced when he was 5 years old. Sulzberger was raised in his mother's Episcopalian faith; however, he no longer observes any religion.[5]

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Ochs_Sulzberger_Jr.

    A.G. Sulzberger (born August 5, 1980) is an American journalist and the deputy publisher of The New York Times.[1] He is the son of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the chairman of The New York Times Company and the publisher of The New York Times.[2][3]

    In December 2017, it was announced that he would succeed his father as publisher of The New York Times at the beginning of the following year.[4]

     


    Sulzberger was born in Washington, D.C., the son of Gail Gregg and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the grandson of Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger Sr., the great-grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.[2] His paternal grandfather was Jewish and his paternal grandmother a Presbyterian; his mother's family were Congregationalist.

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Gregg_Sulzberger

    Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian, @Anonymous

    , @Bill Jones
    @EdwardM

    I thought Slim owned a fair chunk of NYC debt, too. That is potentially more leverage than non-voting stock.

  12. @newrouter
    Carlos Slim sells off half of New York Times shares for $240M

    By Keith J. Kelly

    December 19, 2017 | 10:00pm | Updated

    https://nypost.com/2017/12/19/carlos-slim-sells-off-half-of-new-york-times-shares-for-240m/

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Who on earth would be buying?
    Like buying deck chairs on the Titanic.
    After hitting the ‘berg.

    • Replies: @Patrick Harris
    @Anonymous

    Print news as a whole is contracting, but the "failing" NYT has been doing quite well for several years.

  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Worth remembering: Carlos Slim may have been the largest individual shareholder of NY Times Class A securities (at ~17% of Class A shares) but he has never owned any of the company’s Class B shares–which actually govern the company and set policy.
    The Sulzberger family controls the NYT, and has for a very long time.

  14. Heh, I hear that half a million dollars in Russian ads on Facebook could neutralize those billions the Mexican government is spending.

  15. Another question would be why don’t there seem to be well-known Mexican on-line publications safely ensconced north of the border in San Diego

    As you observe, Mexico has a free press. The biggest outlets get bribed into submission, but the smaller press is free to publish what it wants, far-right or communist or reformist or rebel. The only price is that you give up the political advertising.

    Every city has newspapers, dailys in the large cities, monthlies in small, that exists shamelessly to promote each political party and is subsidized by the supporters. But independents are never prohibited.

    Mexico’s press is much freeer than France’s or Germany’s. During the Franco dictatorship, Mexico became an artistic powerhouse by offering succor to Spanish writers and artists. It was the American-inspired tradition of openness, even in a conservative Catholic nation, that made that possible.

    Carmen Aristegui is an interesting case. A top investigative journalist, she dug too deep into president Calderón’s past and was fired by MVS News. She was eventually reinstated but chafed at the limits on her and then left for CNN where she makes big money but has never returned to doing such interesting work.

    • Replies: @utu
    @(((Owen)))

    even in a conservative Catholic nation

    Mexico is the most anti-Catholic Catholic country. That communists and Trotskyist found refuge in Mexico is not an accident. It is also most anti-European and anti-Spanish Latin American country. The elites are anti-Catholic and thoroughly penetrated by masonic organization. Thousands of Catholic priest were executed during Cristeros period. I think it is still illegal for a priest to appear in public dressed in cassock or perhaps something changed since pope's visit. It was no accident it was John Paul II first visit abroad.

    Replies: @Anon

    , @syonredux
    @(((Owen)))


    . During the Franco dictatorship, Mexico became an artistic powerhouse
     
    Well, perhaps in the medium-watt range.....
  16. Luis Estrada’s La Dictadura Perfecta is about the practice of the Mexican major media press.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZriH9uEDgsI

  17. @Christopher Chantrill
    I remember reading years ago that the PRI had a habit of appointing troublesome agitators as governors of provinces. Co-opting worked better than punishing.

    Replies: @Lugash, @CJ, @NOTA, @Bill Jones

    Yes, to a point. Activists would agitate against one of Mexico’s myriad social problems, gain some followers, catch the attention of the PRI, and then get some goodies to quiet down and keep their followers in line. Something as big as a governorship was reserved for party bigwigs. Not sure how it operates now, problably “Ship ’em norte”.

    On Topic, Mexico’s Finest:

    https://nypost.com/2017/12/21/teen-youtube-star-gunned-down-after-hurling-insult-at-cartel-boss/

  18. Mexico isn’t the third world.

    If Americans knew enough about the world to understand that one sentence they would realize 1) we have no moral duty to take Mexico’s worst and 2) how terrifying the rest of the world is and how insane it is to open your borders to the teeming masses of humanity (such as it is)

    • Agree: (((Owen)))
  19. @George
    How do American big shots geld the press?

    Journalist and future Il Duce:
    Recruited by MI5: the name's Mussolini. Benito Mussolini
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/13/benito-mussolini-recruited-mi5-italy

    Adolf Hitler was living in a homeless shelter when he became a government informant paid to infiltrate left wing parties and eventually organize one.

    Replies: @Roderick Spode

    Those damn left-wingers in the Nazi party… If not for them, Western Europe would have been liberated from socialism long ago by the holy traditionalist empire of the conservative paragon, Joe ‘Gipper’ Stalin.

    Dems r teh reel racis

    • Replies: @fnn
    @Roderick Spode

    Good one. Hitler was a premature cultural Marxist. :)

    , @Hibernian
    @Roderick Spode

    The Nazi Party began as an economically leftist socially rightist party.

  20. I wish Sailer got a bit more curious about what is going on here in the US and how the media are being funded. How does NYT make its money? How much of it comes from ads? Who does advertise? Why some companies are compelled to advertise? Is it possible that some private organization must advertise to support the Fourth Estate? And if they do not they may have problems with one of government regulatory agencies?

    Media and entertainment industry have the most important job. How to keep the American cattle in line without resorting to electrical fences and physical oppression? Actually the entertainment industry is more important than news at least in the construction and maintenance of the Zeitgeist, i.e, the system of beliefs and values. People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That’s where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    @utu


    People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That’s where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.
     
    Yes! I've said this about 6 million times. It's The Agenda™. The news media is a sideshow to the rest of the MSM.

    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they're only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Perspective, @stillCARealist

  21. The overwhelming majority of media outlets in the U.S.A: Newspapers, radio, and television are financially dependent on the political advertising dollars showered on them during election cycles.

    It is a matter of survival for them not to alienate political and corporate advertisers. It would be naÏve to think that this was not part of the softball coverage of Trump during the Republican primaries and the General election. Coverage of Trump made political talk must-see TV. MSNBC’s ratings, SNL’s ratings, Fox News’s viewership is all up. With increased viewership come increased advertising rates.

    Truly challenging contrarian (heretical?) perspectives like many of those published here on unz.com untouchable by large corporate advertising budgets. It is extremely unlikely that any S&P 500 company would risk association with unz.com by advertising here. No Dow 30 company would ever do so.

    If, however, a media outlet with a mass audience is careful to avoid all such heretical positions, they’ll remain eligible for advertising dollars.

    Advertising dependent media is the reason an American version of the BBC’s “Top Gear’ wasn’t viable: it simply could not afford to antagonize an automobile manufacturer and be shut out of its advertising budget.

    Journalistic independence in the U.S.A. is an imposture; it’s almost entirely illusory.

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    @Ickenham


    It is extremely unlikely that any S&P 500 company would risk association with unz.com by advertising here. No Dow 30 company would ever do so.
     
    Heck, even lowly grad students can't afford to be associated with Unz.com. Look what happened to Razib Khan!
  22. @EdwardM
    All good points, as always, but in fairness -- in light of your repeated discussions about Carlos Slim and the Times -- does his presence really impact the paper's coverage? Although he owns (or did until recently) a significant percentage of the shares, they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.

    Do you think he outright exercises editorial influence? Or that the editors don't want to piss him off under some vague sense of loyalty (or self-preservation)? Something even more subtle than that? It's certainly juicy to consider the dynamics, but what do you think is really going on?

    There are other plausible explanations for why the Times doesn't critique Carlos Slim or Mexican oligarchy writ large, incuriousity or ideology being two of them.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @The Anti-Gnostic, @syonredux, @Bill Jones

    Arthur Sulzberger Jr. sounds pretty gratefully to Carlos Slim in this 2009 essay:

    http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1894410_1893837_1894158,00.html

  23. @Christopher Chantrill
    I remember reading years ago that the PRI had a habit of appointing troublesome agitators as governors of provinces. Co-opting worked better than punishing.

    Replies: @Lugash, @CJ, @NOTA, @Bill Jones

    In the 1970s and early 1980s the PRI used to systematically buy off student activists and community organizers by giving them jobs as bureaucrats. There were entire office buildings in Mexico City full of ex-activists, each with their own office. Apparently very little actual work was expected of them, and some of them were old enough to have children who had followed the same career path. A Mexican student I met at a Canadian university filled me in on this practice; he had a relative who was “employed” in this way. He told me the practice had gotten jump-started after the 1968 Olympic protests.

  24. @(((Owen)))

    Another question would be why don’t there seem to be well-known Mexican on-line publications safely ensconced north of the border in San Diego
     
    As you observe, Mexico has a free press. The biggest outlets get bribed into submission, but the smaller press is free to publish what it wants, far-right or communist or reformist or rebel. The only price is that you give up the political advertising.

    Every city has newspapers, dailys in the large cities, monthlies in small, that exists shamelessly to promote each political party and is subsidized by the supporters. But independents are never prohibited.

    Mexico’s press is much freeer than France’s or Germany’s. During the Franco dictatorship, Mexico became an artistic powerhouse by offering succor to Spanish writers and artists. It was the American-inspired tradition of openness, even in a conservative Catholic nation, that made that possible.

    Carmen Aristegui is an interesting case. A top investigative journalist, she dug too deep into president Calderón’s past and was fired by MVS News. She was eventually reinstated but chafed at the limits on her and then left for CNN where she makes big money but has never returned to doing such interesting work.

    Replies: @utu, @syonredux

    even in a conservative Catholic nation

    Mexico is the most anti-Catholic Catholic country. That communists and Trotskyist found refuge in Mexico is not an accident. It is also most anti-European and anti-Spanish Latin American country. The elites are anti-Catholic and thoroughly penetrated by masonic organization. Thousands of Catholic priest were executed during Cristeros period. I think it is still illegal for a priest to appear in public dressed in cassock or perhaps something changed since pope’s visit. It was no accident it was John Paul II first visit abroad.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @utu

    Laughing here, but I doubt you'll make a dent. Mexico, masonic by birth, has the same problems than the U.S.: the elites are hostile to the population. But it really is not a white vs brown thing. It is a secret-power-impunity thing. It is the <1% thing. And how they brainwash people.

    If I remember my numbers: US Freemasons: 5 mill, UK: 700,000 France: 70,000 Mexico: 50,000 (of course these are tough numbers, but the historian was good and masons keep records). As some other commenter pointed out, there is a link between Wasps, Jews, Communists and now gender ideologues. As per historic modus operandi, a small percentage of globalists are masons, the rest are useful and well-paid. Sometimes there is in-house fighting, with for example, Mexico wanting to maintain control of oil resources from the greedy US elites. Same in other sectors.

    The first globalist Mexican president, Salinas de Gortari (a very low IQ fellow) was the one who reinstated relations with Vatican in 1992, fifteen years after John Paul II's visit. Otoh, I wouldn't say Mexico is anti-Spain or Europe, or even anti-US for that matter, it depends on the particular group and historical context.

    As to the main thrust of the article, it is good click bait. But I'd paraphrase Sailer and say: "My general impression is that American elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting American intellectuals. " The difference with Mexico is that since US elites are higher IQ, they do a generally better job at brainwashing the masses into not noticing.

    Replies: @utu

  25. @B36
    Also, the Mexicans have built their own extremely effective wall...

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DR2nWkiWAAYX0Yk.jpg

    Replies: @Anonym

    That is an awesome graph. I would love to see it by all countries and color coded by race or continent.

  26. @Roderick Spode
    @George

    Those damn left-wingers in the Nazi party... If not for them, Western Europe would have been liberated from socialism long ago by the holy traditionalist empire of the conservative paragon, Joe 'Gipper' Stalin.

    Dems r teh reel racis

    Replies: @fnn, @Hibernian

    Good one. Hitler was a premature cultural Marxist. 🙂

  27. @utu
    I wish Sailer got a bit more curious about what is going on here in the US and how the media are being funded. How does NYT make its money? How much of it comes from ads? Who does advertise? Why some companies are compelled to advertise? Is it possible that some private organization must advertise to support the Fourth Estate? And if they do not they may have problems with one of government regulatory agencies?

    Media and entertainment industry have the most important job. How to keep the American cattle in line without resorting to electrical fences and physical oppression? Actually the entertainment industry is more important than news at least in the construction and maintenance of the Zeitgeist, i.e, the system of beliefs and values. People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That's where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.

    Replies: @Lurker

    People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That’s where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.

    Yes! I’ve said this about 6 million times. It’s The Agenda™. The news media is a sideshow to the rest of the MSM.

    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they’re only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Lurker

    "Entertainment is Propaganda"

    , @Perspective
    @Lurker


    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they’re only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.
     
    Exactly, very few read the news and even fewer exercise any kind of discernment. Worse, I've noticed when it comes to politics, everyone seems to believes they're an expert. This explains Trump derangement syndrome, it is socially fashionable to deride the man as a form of socializing.
    , @stillCARealist
    @Lurker

    An equal amount of propaganda and subversion takes place in the commercials, at least, that's what I observe in the few times a year I see any television.

    I'm working towards a goal, in this upcoming year, to become as conservative as is humanly possible for a Californian. This means I'll get offended, both morally and intellectually, at nearly all TV and most internet ads. So all I can do is read good books, watch sermons and lectures, and play 2048 on my Kindle. I'm open to any and all suggestions for good reading.

    Replies: @Zimriel

  28. Is that ‘geld’ in the sense of ‘gelding’ a stallion? – hardly an accurate description of the Pussifiers-in-Chief at the NYT or ‘geld’ in the sense of Danegeld, geld – gold -money a very heavy tribute exacted as protection money, more in the way in which the NYT/globalist establishment works?

  29. Bill DeBlasio thinks government funding of media would provide “more fair” coverage.

    https://nypost.com/2017/12/20/de-blasio-thinks-a-city-funded-news-outlet-is-a-good-idea/

  30. @Lurker
    @utu


    People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That’s where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.
     
    Yes! I've said this about 6 million times. It's The Agenda™. The news media is a sideshow to the rest of the MSM.

    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they're only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Perspective, @stillCARealist

    “Entertainment is Propaganda”

  31. @EdwardM
    All good points, as always, but in fairness -- in light of your repeated discussions about Carlos Slim and the Times -- does his presence really impact the paper's coverage? Although he owns (or did until recently) a significant percentage of the shares, they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.

    Do you think he outright exercises editorial influence? Or that the editors don't want to piss him off under some vague sense of loyalty (or self-preservation)? Something even more subtle than that? It's certainly juicy to consider the dynamics, but what do you think is really going on?

    There are other plausible explanations for why the Times doesn't critique Carlos Slim or Mexican oligarchy writ large, incuriousity or ideology being two of them.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @The Anti-Gnostic, @syonredux, @Bill Jones

    Agreed. There’s no shortage of young, incurious ideologues with limited life experience who will dutifully churn out the Party line.

    Media has always been ideological but journalism used to be a respectable outlet for bookish working-class individuals to become writers. That’s how we got men like Jimmy Breslin, Mike Royko, Charlie Reese and Pete Dexter (who was beaten nearly to death by a group of Irish hooligans in Philadelphia).

    The sheer incuriousness of current journalism is pretty baffling. Here’s a blog post I did on a goggle-eyed Tom Friedman, wandering around the migrant-markets of Niger, unable to solve the equation 2 + 2.

    Like somebody else said, there are a lot of books and monographs that could be written.

  32. @Lurker
    @utu


    People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That’s where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.
     
    Yes! I've said this about 6 million times. It's The Agenda™. The news media is a sideshow to the rest of the MSM.

    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they're only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Perspective, @stillCARealist

    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they’re only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.

    Exactly, very few read the news and even fewer exercise any kind of discernment. Worse, I’ve noticed when it comes to politics, everyone seems to believes they’re an expert. This explains Trump derangement syndrome, it is socially fashionable to deride the man as a form of socializing.

  33. The really funny part of this story is that Mexico’s government is likely getting little bang from its peso. The PRI wins the elections it does with precinct-level pork-barrel, control of local power brokers/union bosses, and by splitting the opposition.

    Astroturfing support from dead-tree media in a country that prefers its news in meme format is a really poor investment.

    Anyone who reads Spanish knows that Enrique Pena Nieto has essentially no grassroots support on social media. None of the cool people you follow would ever shill for him lest they lose a huge chunk of their followers, and credibility, in real-time.

    If you want an example of a Latin American politician who was truly effective at organizing a potent combination of hasbara and fervent true-believer fanbois on social media, it was Hugo Chavez.

  34. @Lurker
    @utu


    People are more propagandized by watching soaps, sitcoms and movies than by watching news. That’s where the most effective and unnoticeable because almost painless brainwashing takes place.
     
    Yes! I've said this about 6 million times. It's The Agenda™. The news media is a sideshow to the rest of the MSM.

    How many people actually watch/read news? Most people can find endless diversions from it online, on TV, they're only going to pick up odd snippets here and there or maybe on the radio in the car. They get their opinions handed them by the reat of the media.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Perspective, @stillCARealist

    An equal amount of propaganda and subversion takes place in the commercials, at least, that’s what I observe in the few times a year I see any television.

    I’m working towards a goal, in this upcoming year, to become as conservative as is humanly possible for a Californian. This means I’ll get offended, both morally and intellectually, at nearly all TV and most internet ads. So all I can do is read good books, watch sermons and lectures, and play 2048 on my Kindle. I’m open to any and all suggestions for good reading.

    • Replies: @Zimriel
    @stillCARealist

    @Lurker - consider the moldbuggery blog. Start with the "Open Letter" series.

  35. @Anonymous
    @newrouter

    Who on earth would be buying?
    Like buying deck chairs on the Titanic.
    After hitting the 'berg.

    Replies: @Patrick Harris

    Print news as a whole is contracting, but the “failing” NYT has been doing quite well for several years.

  36. Most of the traditional news media is going bankrupt. Facebook, Twitter, and Google are sucking up all the ad dollars — which is the background to the latest EU Competition Authority multi-billion dollar fine to Google for promoting its own products in search above others and forbidding it from offering preview snippets to online newspaper articles.

    The NYT (there was an analysis by Jeff Jarvik IIRC) had more revenue in 1990 from merely paid advertising in print in a month than a whole year of paid online advertising in 2010. Again, IIRC. This makes sense as the FT reports that half or more ad views are merely bot visits pretending to be real people for click farming. P&G even dropped their entire online ad budget with no effect on sales.

    MSNBC and CNN don’t really care about viewers, they get money not from advertising but cable and satellite carriage fees that form the bulk of their revenues, ditto ESPN. Cutting the cord cuts their revenue stream and makes their SJW posturing actually costly. This guaranteed revenue stream is why the NFL Network hired the senior VP who apparently spent his entire day on Twitter with prostitutes and porn stars.

    TV is the worst, as it pursues young women 18-34 as the most desirable demographic for advertisers (they spend the most and no advertiser cares about men as women make or influence 85% of purchase). Thus the CW with minuscule ratings has “superheroes” who mostly mope around about women who are the “real stars” of the shows — along with the usual night-time soaps. All that’s lousy, pozzed, and cucked about TV is driven by the relentless need to pander to the WORST impulses of young women 18-34.

    Gab.ai being a more open platform might well challenge Twitter particularly with Twitter’s purge of the non-cucked as a sample platform to various online news challengers. We will see.

  37. @Ickenham
    The overwhelming majority of media outlets in the U.S.A: Newspapers, radio, and television are financially dependent on the political advertising dollars showered on them during election cycles.

    It is a matter of survival for them not to alienate political and corporate advertisers. It would be naÏve to think that this was not part of the softball coverage of Trump during the Republican primaries and the General election. Coverage of Trump made political talk must-see TV. MSNBC's ratings, SNL's ratings, Fox News's viewership is all up. With increased viewership come increased advertising rates.

    Truly challenging contrarian (heretical?) perspectives like many of those published here on unz.com untouchable by large corporate advertising budgets. It is extremely unlikely that any S&P 500 company would risk association with unz.com by advertising here. No Dow 30 company would ever do so.

    If, however, a media outlet with a mass audience is careful to avoid all such heretical positions, they'll remain eligible for advertising dollars.

    Advertising dependent media is the reason an American version of the BBC's "Top Gear' wasn't viable: it simply could not afford to antagonize an automobile manufacturer and be shut out of its advertising budget.

    Journalistic independence in the U.S.A. is an imposture; it's almost entirely illusory.

    Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    It is extremely unlikely that any S&P 500 company would risk association with unz.com by advertising here. No Dow 30 company would ever do so.

    Heck, even lowly grad students can’t afford to be associated with Unz.com. Look what happened to Razib Khan!

  38. The United States cannot offer a safe haven to political refugees from Mexico, and probably cannot for those from China.

  39. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    Just wondering about the coincidence of this New York Times article's criticism of Mexico and the fact that Carlos Slim will reportedly cut his NYT stake nearly in half (CNBC 19 Dec 2017).

    Replies: @Maj. Kong

    Slim could be cutting his losses, his equity investment was linked to his debt holdings, that would have given him total ownership if the NYT had gone bankrupt. But the surge in leftism following 2016 has given them enough subscription revenue to dodge the hangman.

    Bezos has gotten far more political impact from buying the Post, he might well become the most powerful monopolist in American history. Rockefeller and Carnegie were never media barons, and it was the “yellow journalists” that exposed them into philanthropic donations.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Perspective
    @Maj. Kong

    With the hysteria dying down (is it?), hopefully fewer will renew their NYT subscription next year. Was the increase in subscriptions the main reason for adverting bankruptcy? If true, they are in a tenuous position.

    Replies: @Maj. Kong

  40. @(((Owen)))

    Another question would be why don’t there seem to be well-known Mexican on-line publications safely ensconced north of the border in San Diego
     
    As you observe, Mexico has a free press. The biggest outlets get bribed into submission, but the smaller press is free to publish what it wants, far-right or communist or reformist or rebel. The only price is that you give up the political advertising.

    Every city has newspapers, dailys in the large cities, monthlies in small, that exists shamelessly to promote each political party and is subsidized by the supporters. But independents are never prohibited.

    Mexico’s press is much freeer than France’s or Germany’s. During the Franco dictatorship, Mexico became an artistic powerhouse by offering succor to Spanish writers and artists. It was the American-inspired tradition of openness, even in a conservative Catholic nation, that made that possible.

    Carmen Aristegui is an interesting case. A top investigative journalist, she dug too deep into president Calderón’s past and was fired by MVS News. She was eventually reinstated but chafed at the limits on her and then left for CNN where she makes big money but has never returned to doing such interesting work.

    Replies: @utu, @syonredux

    . During the Franco dictatorship, Mexico became an artistic powerhouse

    Well, perhaps in the medium-watt range…..

  41. @EdwardM
    All good points, as always, but in fairness -- in light of your repeated discussions about Carlos Slim and the Times -- does his presence really impact the paper's coverage? Although he owns (or did until recently) a significant percentage of the shares, they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.

    Do you think he outright exercises editorial influence? Or that the editors don't want to piss him off under some vague sense of loyalty (or self-preservation)? Something even more subtle than that? It's certainly juicy to consider the dynamics, but what do you think is really going on?

    There are other plausible explanations for why the Times doesn't critique Carlos Slim or Mexican oligarchy writ large, incuriousity or ideology being two of them.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @The Anti-Gnostic, @syonredux, @Bill Jones

    they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.

    Not quite sure that the “triple parentheses” are warranted:

    Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. (born September 22, 1951) is an American journalist.[1] Sulzberger became the Publisher of The New York Times in 1992, and Chairman of the Board of The New York Times Company in 1997, succeeding his father, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger.[2] On December 14, 2017, he announced he would be ceding the post to his son Arthur Gregg “A.G.” Sulzberger, effective January 1, 2018.[3]

    Sulzberger was born in Mount Kisco, New York, the son of Barbara Winslow (née Grant) and Arthur Ochs “Punch” Sulzberger Sr., the grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.]

    Sulzberger’s mother was of mostly English and Scottish origin and his father was of Jewish origin (both Ashkenazic and Sephardic).[4] His parents divorced when he was 5 years old. Sulzberger was raised in his mother’s Episcopalian faith; however, he no longer observes any religion.[5]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Ochs_Sulzberger_Jr.

    A.G. Sulzberger (born August 5, 1980) is an American journalist and the deputy publisher of The New York Times.[1] He is the son of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the chairman of The New York Times Company and the publisher of The New York Times.[2][3]

    In December 2017, it was announced that he would succeed his father as publisher of The New York Times at the beginning of the following year.[4]

    Sulzberger was born in Washington, D.C., the son of Gail Gregg and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the grandson of Arthur Ochs “Punch” Sulzberger Sr., the great-grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.[2] His paternal grandfather was Jewish and his paternal grandmother a Presbyterian; his mother’s family were Congregationalist.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Gregg_Sulzberger

    • Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian
    @syonredux

    So, Judaising Protestant ancestry. An ancestral line of shabbos goys. So we should draw a bright line somewhere? How and where, exactly?

    No, I think the parentheses should stay right where they are. It's a corporate (((them))) versus us deplorables so far as I can see, judging from the story slants and the perennial editorial positions.

    , @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    Okay then, just double parens for the Sulzbergers.
    Katharine Graham was similarly cagey about her heritage.

    But in both cases, when push comes to shove ....

  42. @syonredux
    @EdwardM


    they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.
     
    Not quite sure that the "triple parentheses" are warranted:

    Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. (born September 22, 1951) is an American journalist.[1] Sulzberger became the Publisher of The New York Times in 1992, and Chairman of the Board of The New York Times Company in 1997, succeeding his father, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger.[2] On December 14, 2017, he announced he would be ceding the post to his son Arthur Gregg "A.G." Sulzberger, effective January 1, 2018.[3]
     

    Sulzberger was born in Mount Kisco, New York, the son of Barbara Winslow (née Grant) and Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger Sr., the grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.]
     

    Sulzberger's mother was of mostly English and Scottish origin and his father was of Jewish origin (both Ashkenazic and Sephardic).[4] His parents divorced when he was 5 years old. Sulzberger was raised in his mother's Episcopalian faith; however, he no longer observes any religion.[5]

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Ochs_Sulzberger_Jr.

    A.G. Sulzberger (born August 5, 1980) is an American journalist and the deputy publisher of The New York Times.[1] He is the son of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the chairman of The New York Times Company and the publisher of The New York Times.[2][3]

    In December 2017, it was announced that he would succeed his father as publisher of The New York Times at the beginning of the following year.[4]

     


    Sulzberger was born in Washington, D.C., the son of Gail Gregg and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the grandson of Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger Sr., the great-grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.[2] His paternal grandfather was Jewish and his paternal grandmother a Presbyterian; his mother's family were Congregationalist.

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Gregg_Sulzberger

    Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian, @Anonymous

    So, Judaising Protestant ancestry. An ancestral line of shabbos goys. So we should draw a bright line somewhere? How and where, exactly?

    No, I think the parentheses should stay right where they are. It’s a corporate (((them))) versus us deplorables so far as I can see, judging from the story slants and the perennial editorial positions.

  43. OT, but on the topic of Pervnado:

    Amazon And Google Employees Busted In Asian Sex Trafficking Sting

    Maybe they didn’t feel safe looking for woman at work, so instead they became “prostitution hobbyists”. Or maybe they were just looking for a good time. In any event, this being Seattle, I’m sure the call girls in question were hand-crafted, artisanal prostitutes.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Mr. Anon

    "In any event, this being Seattle, I’m sure the call girls in question were hand-crafted, artisanal prostitutes."

    Could you please elaborate?

  44. President Trump won the election because he implicitly attacked the conspiracy of the Mexican ruling class and the ruling class of the American Empire on immigration. The Alt-Right must make what has been implicitly stated an explicit theme in future political campaigns.

    Carlos Slim bought a big chunk of the NY Times and the NY Times stayed very quiet about the shady shenanigans of Carlos Slim and the rest of the Mexican ruling class. Less than twenty years ago the NY Times was writing editorials stating that illegal immigration was lowering wages for workers in the United States. The Carlos Slim-controlled NY Times has stayed mum about the wage suppressing effects of immigration recently.

    Tweet from 2015:

  45. @Maj. Kong
    @Dan Hayes

    Slim could be cutting his losses, his equity investment was linked to his debt holdings, that would have given him total ownership if the NYT had gone bankrupt. But the surge in leftism following 2016 has given them enough subscription revenue to dodge the hangman.

    Bezos has gotten far more political impact from buying the Post, he might well become the most powerful monopolist in American history. Rockefeller and Carnegie were never media barons, and it was the "yellow journalists" that exposed them into philanthropic donations.

    Replies: @Perspective

    With the hysteria dying down (is it?), hopefully fewer will renew their NYT subscription next year. Was the increase in subscriptions the main reason for adverting bankruptcy? If true, they are in a tenuous position.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    @Perspective

    I don't see the hysteria dying down at all.

    The GOP has had the House and a majority of Midwestern governors since 2010. Fatigue has set in, and no economic miracle has been delivered.

    The Dem base just stole a Senate seat in the reddest state outside of Utah.

    If the GOP wants to gain Senate seats and keep the House, the Dems must be baited into campaigning for impeachment. Gingrich tried that in 1998, Pelosi might be dumb enough for a sequel.

    ---

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/05/04/new-york-times-digital-subscriptions-continue-to-drive-growth/#5caf70ea295c

  46. @Christopher Chantrill
    I remember reading years ago that the PRI had a habit of appointing troublesome agitators as governors of provinces. Co-opting worked better than punishing.

    Replies: @Lugash, @CJ, @NOTA, @Bill Jones

    It’s like the old cynical comment that the Catholic Church could have avoided all the unpleasantness of the Protestant reformation if they’d just appointed Martin Luther a bishop at the right time….

    • LOL: BB753
  47. @Intelligent Dasein
    It would seem to me that Mexico is just practicing a less sophisticated form of message control that is commensurate with its generally lower standard of living, i.e. outright bribes in the form of advertising payoffs and the occasional strong-arm tactics. Whereas here in America, the money is sanitized by funneling it through a maze of government agencies, obscure grant windows, foundations, think tanks, endowments, shell companies, and other financial subsidiaries, until it becomes ritually purified; and the threat of shunning, silencing, un-personing, and career track devastation are enough to keep any dissenters in line. Not there are many dissenters anyway, since all practitioners of the journalistic craft are carefully vetted by the universities, the professional organizations, and the internship process so as to ensure that they are bonded and certified PC.

    But, since in both cases, after normalizing for the degree of sophistication, the process is essentially the same, it appears to be an intrinsic feature of modern societies rather than an aberration. It should not be surprising that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Most journalists would rather eat than be martyrs for truth.

    Indeed, there really cannot be any such thing as a "free press" that does not depend on money and protection from another source who may seek to influence it. What there can be, however, is meaningful opposition to Leviathan's press corps, but only if people are willing to put some effort into it.

    In plain English, this means that people have to be willing to pay for it. It is unrealistic to expect anything to materialize from the efforts of a few heroic bloggers who, after exhausting themselves at their daily wage slavery, stay up late into the night trying to fight the power by tapping away at their keyboards for stuff-all. Nothing against the heroes, mind you; but it is a poor reflection on the people they are trying to lead, when the latter will not lend their encouragement and financial support. There are entire books that could be written right now, and there are people with the talent to write them, but they are lacking in the time and the means. If only such support were forthcoming, we could genuinely change the face of American culture.

    This is why I'm supporting Steve's fundraising drive with my limited abilities and I entreat everyone else here to do the same. There was a time when journalists would produce extremely well-written and and well-researched monographs, traveling to foreign lands, hanging about the encampments of battlefields, diving into industries and governments. We can make it to be so again, and the books we write will influence a generation and will shine out across time. We have the will to do so, we just need the means.

    Replies: @NOTA

    Journalism has to be paid for somehow. If it’s private ads, then the journalists can be independent of the government, but they’re beholden to the advertisers. If it’s donations, they’re beholden to donors. With modern internet ads, they’re dependent on Google and Facebook, and also required to serve up ads whose whole purpose is to violate the readers’ privacy.

    I suspect lots of small donors is the least corrupting source of revenue available now.

  48. Yeah, the Mexican press is yoked, but probably not as yoked as ours.

  49. From a few years ago:

    “There are at least six Mexican journalists living in exile in the United States.

    According to Reporters Without Borders, between 2007 and 2013 at least 14 journalists fled Mexico: In addition to the six who went to the United States, two went to Canada and the rest to Europe.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/22/opinion/sunday/exiled-mexican-journalists-face-red-tape-and-doubt-in-us.html

    I don’t think they’re counting high-profile journalist Anabel Hernández, currently living in Berkeley after receiving numerous death threats based on her narco and corruption books.

    Also, award winning Dallas News reporter Alfredo Corchado has had to flee Mexico due to death threats and other security concerns.

  50. One of the two major newspapers in my area is an aggressive and literate publication. It’s still independently owned by the descendants of the liberal German immigrant who founded the paper 150 years ago. The editors will go to court to chase stories; they’ll editorialize in detail about the corruption that’s infested my area for a long time. The paper’s owners also own one of the three major TV stations here.

    How does the public respond to the paper’s truth-telling? Judging by comments beneath some of the harder-hitting editorials, there’s a significant fraction of the public that is okay with corrupt government, is okay with a few big shots pulling the strings, and, apparently is ruffled that the paper has the temerity to print the dirty truth about local decision-making.

    My point? The major, mainstream media got that way and stay that way because they’re appealing to large numbers of our fellow citizens. Those folks, our neighbors, are okay with having their thought processes massaged or short-circuited.

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    @JackOH

    Yup. When propaganda works, it's usually because the target demographic wants it to work; not necessarily because the logic is airtight, or because the evidence is very convincing. Russiagate is a perfect example of this. The propaganda that works best is that which flatters the target demographic: 'You are superior. You are blameless. Are your problems are caused by those idiots over there.'

    Replies: @Maj. Kong, @JackOH

  51. I think there must be something in the Mexican water (besides E. coli and giardia) that breeds such slavish loyalty to the state. Maybe Fred Reed is paid off with boxes of Imodium?

  52. Geldez, not Valdez, is coming.

    But no come from Geldez.

    In some ways, isn’t NYT just hiding behind Slim? That way, whatever is wrong with NYT can always be blamed on Slim.

    The thing is other newspapers owned by other people have the same editorial policies.

    WAPO and NYT, what’s the difference? Or La Times or Houston Chron or Boston Globe or Chicago Tribune, etc.

    Same globalist crap.

  53. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    My general impression is that Mexican elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting Mexican intellectuals… Heavyweight Mexican writers tended to be appointed ambassadors and live the really good life abroad at embassies.

    And they have something in common with Jewish intellectuals.
    Whatever may be wrong with them, they can always point their fingers at the Bigger Evil.

    Mexican intellectuals call this evil, ‘Gringos’, and Jewish intellectuals call it ‘Wasps’.

    NYT should call it Grisps…. though, to be sure, Slim is to Mexico what Jews are to the US: Semitic overlord.

  54. @stillCARealist
    @Lurker

    An equal amount of propaganda and subversion takes place in the commercials, at least, that's what I observe in the few times a year I see any television.

    I'm working towards a goal, in this upcoming year, to become as conservative as is humanly possible for a Californian. This means I'll get offended, both morally and intellectually, at nearly all TV and most internet ads. So all I can do is read good books, watch sermons and lectures, and play 2048 on my Kindle. I'm open to any and all suggestions for good reading.

    Replies: @Zimriel

    – consider the moldbuggery blog. Start with the “Open Letter” series.

  55. Azam Amed has been writing a bunch of great articles about Mexico in the NY Times over the last year or so. Devastating stories about corruption and hypocrisy in Mexico.

    Great stuff that really must be getting under the skin of the – “if it hurts Mexico we won’t say it because it might help Trump” – crowd.

    I guess he’s Arab…?? Slim and Peña Nieto had a falling out a few years ago over telecommunications reforms.

    Mexico Graft Inquiry Deepens With Arrest of a Presidential Ally

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/world/americas/mexico-corruption-pri.html

    Mexico’s Government Is Blocking Its Own Anti-Corruption Drive, Commissioners Say

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/world/americas/mexico-corruption-commission.html

    In Mexico, Not Dead. Not Alive. Just Gone. With the drug war’s “disappeared” numbering in the tens of thousands, some families take up the search for loved ones on their own.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/world/americas/mexico-drug-war-dead.html

    Luck, Not Tougher Building Standards, Spared Mexico in Quake

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/23/world/americas/mexico-city-earthquake-buildings.html

    A Scion of Mexico Fights Corruption, and Becomes a Target

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/30/world/americas/mexico-claudio-gonzalez-laporte.html

    Spyware in Mexico Targeted Investigators Seeking Students

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/world/americas/mexico-missing-students-pegasus-spyware.html

    Using Texts as Lures, Government Spyware Targets Mexican Journalists and Their Families

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/world/americas/mexico-spyware-anticrime.html

    In Mexico, ‘It’s Easy to Kill a Journalist’

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/29/world/americas/veracruz-mexico-reporters-killed.html

    While Scolding Trump, Mexico Seeks to Curtail Citizens’ Rights

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/world/americas/mexico-trump-pena-nieto-wall-drug-war.html

  56. @Christopher Chantrill
    I remember reading years ago that the PRI had a habit of appointing troublesome agitators as governors of provinces. Co-opting worked better than punishing.

    Replies: @Lugash, @CJ, @NOTA, @Bill Jones

    I heard Consuls in the US.

  57. @EdwardM
    All good points, as always, but in fairness -- in light of your repeated discussions about Carlos Slim and the Times -- does his presence really impact the paper's coverage? Although he owns (or did until recently) a significant percentage of the shares, they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.

    Do you think he outright exercises editorial influence? Or that the editors don't want to piss him off under some vague sense of loyalty (or self-preservation)? Something even more subtle than that? It's certainly juicy to consider the dynamics, but what do you think is really going on?

    There are other plausible explanations for why the Times doesn't critique Carlos Slim or Mexican oligarchy writ large, incuriousity or ideology being two of them.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @The Anti-Gnostic, @syonredux, @Bill Jones

    I thought Slim owned a fair chunk of NYC debt, too. That is potentially more leverage than non-voting stock.

  58. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    @(((Owen)))

    even in a conservative Catholic nation

    Mexico is the most anti-Catholic Catholic country. That communists and Trotskyist found refuge in Mexico is not an accident. It is also most anti-European and anti-Spanish Latin American country. The elites are anti-Catholic and thoroughly penetrated by masonic organization. Thousands of Catholic priest were executed during Cristeros period. I think it is still illegal for a priest to appear in public dressed in cassock or perhaps something changed since pope's visit. It was no accident it was John Paul II first visit abroad.

    Replies: @Anon

    Laughing here, but I doubt you’ll make a dent. Mexico, masonic by birth, has the same problems than the U.S.: the elites are hostile to the population. But it really is not a white vs brown thing. It is a secret-power-impunity thing. It is the <1% thing. And how they brainwash people.

    If I remember my numbers: US Freemasons: 5 mill, UK: 700,000 France: 70,000 Mexico: 50,000 (of course these are tough numbers, but the historian was good and masons keep records). As some other commenter pointed out, there is a link between Wasps, Jews, Communists and now gender ideologues. As per historic modus operandi, a small percentage of globalists are masons, the rest are useful and well-paid. Sometimes there is in-house fighting, with for example, Mexico wanting to maintain control of oil resources from the greedy US elites. Same in other sectors.

    The first globalist Mexican president, Salinas de Gortari (a very low IQ fellow) was the one who reinstated relations with Vatican in 1992, fifteen years after John Paul II's visit. Otoh, I wouldn't say Mexico is anti-Spain or Europe, or even anti-US for that matter, it depends on the particular group and historical context.

    As to the main thrust of the article, it is good click bait. But I'd paraphrase Sailer and say: "My general impression is that American elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting American intellectuals. " The difference with Mexico is that since US elites are higher IQ, they do a generally better job at brainwashing the masses into not noticing.

    • Replies: @utu
    @Anon

    "My general impression is that American elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting American intellectuals. " The difference with Mexico is that since US elites are higher IQ, they do a generally better job at brainwashing the masses into not noticing.

    The carrots, as everything in the US, are bigger.

    US Freemasons: 5 mill

    This large number here may indicate a typical process occurring in the US which is trivialization and opening to the masses of ideas and activities that in Europe were reserved for the elites. A common man in American, even a blue collar worker can be a mason, can undergo Freudian psychoanalysis and even be overtly gay. It is American take on German Gleichschaltung and Soviet uravnilovka.

    Replies: @Anon

  59. There are some US based sites which cover the Mexican drug war and which I think are run by Mexicans living in the US: Narco News, Drug War Chronicles, and Blog Del Narco.

  60. @Anon
    @utu

    Laughing here, but I doubt you'll make a dent. Mexico, masonic by birth, has the same problems than the U.S.: the elites are hostile to the population. But it really is not a white vs brown thing. It is a secret-power-impunity thing. It is the <1% thing. And how they brainwash people.

    If I remember my numbers: US Freemasons: 5 mill, UK: 700,000 France: 70,000 Mexico: 50,000 (of course these are tough numbers, but the historian was good and masons keep records). As some other commenter pointed out, there is a link between Wasps, Jews, Communists and now gender ideologues. As per historic modus operandi, a small percentage of globalists are masons, the rest are useful and well-paid. Sometimes there is in-house fighting, with for example, Mexico wanting to maintain control of oil resources from the greedy US elites. Same in other sectors.

    The first globalist Mexican president, Salinas de Gortari (a very low IQ fellow) was the one who reinstated relations with Vatican in 1992, fifteen years after John Paul II's visit. Otoh, I wouldn't say Mexico is anti-Spain or Europe, or even anti-US for that matter, it depends on the particular group and historical context.

    As to the main thrust of the article, it is good click bait. But I'd paraphrase Sailer and say: "My general impression is that American elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting American intellectuals. " The difference with Mexico is that since US elites are higher IQ, they do a generally better job at brainwashing the masses into not noticing.

    Replies: @utu

    “My general impression is that American elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting American intellectuals. ” The difference with Mexico is that since US elites are higher IQ, they do a generally better job at brainwashing the masses into not noticing.

    The carrots, as everything in the US, are bigger.

    US Freemasons: 5 mill

    This large number here may indicate a typical process occurring in the US which is trivialization and opening to the masses of ideas and activities that in Europe were reserved for the elites. A common man in American, even a blue collar worker can be a mason, can undergo Freudian psychoanalysis and even be overtly gay. It is American take on German Gleichschaltung and Soviet uravnilovka.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @utu

    @ opening to the masses ideas that in Europe were for elites..

    Perhaps. Though I remember reading that Gianni Agnelli complained that there was no use being a Freemason anymore, because he would meet his tailor there. Another possible factor would be that freemasonry is 'stabilizing' in US and UK, so it is more of an open secret.

    It branched into cover organizations in the 20th C, like Council of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bnai Brith and Bildeberg. It was, from what I can surmise, working great through the nineties, though in Mexico it seems to have become somewhat dormant of late, whereas in France it elected Macron. Maybe you have seen this:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qgKstc6M-_Q

    Oh, and I am no IQer, to the contrary, was just joking.

  61. @syonredux
    @EdwardM


    they are lower-class shares such that the (((Sulzbergers))) have all the control.
     
    Not quite sure that the "triple parentheses" are warranted:

    Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. (born September 22, 1951) is an American journalist.[1] Sulzberger became the Publisher of The New York Times in 1992, and Chairman of the Board of The New York Times Company in 1997, succeeding his father, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger.[2] On December 14, 2017, he announced he would be ceding the post to his son Arthur Gregg "A.G." Sulzberger, effective January 1, 2018.[3]
     

    Sulzberger was born in Mount Kisco, New York, the son of Barbara Winslow (née Grant) and Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger Sr., the grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.]
     

    Sulzberger's mother was of mostly English and Scottish origin and his father was of Jewish origin (both Ashkenazic and Sephardic).[4] His parents divorced when he was 5 years old. Sulzberger was raised in his mother's Episcopalian faith; however, he no longer observes any religion.[5]

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Ochs_Sulzberger_Jr.

    A.G. Sulzberger (born August 5, 1980) is an American journalist and the deputy publisher of The New York Times.[1] He is the son of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the chairman of The New York Times Company and the publisher of The New York Times.[2][3]

    In December 2017, it was announced that he would succeed his father as publisher of The New York Times at the beginning of the following year.[4]

     


    Sulzberger was born in Washington, D.C., the son of Gail Gregg and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr., the grandson of Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger Sr., the great-grandson of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and the great-great-grandson of Adolph Ochs.[2] His paternal grandfather was Jewish and his paternal grandmother a Presbyterian; his mother's family were Congregationalist.

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Gregg_Sulzberger

    Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian, @Anonymous

    Okay then, just double parens for the Sulzbergers.
    Katharine Graham was similarly cagey about her heritage.

    But in both cases, when push comes to shove ….

  62. @Perspective
    @Maj. Kong

    With the hysteria dying down (is it?), hopefully fewer will renew their NYT subscription next year. Was the increase in subscriptions the main reason for adverting bankruptcy? If true, they are in a tenuous position.

    Replies: @Maj. Kong

    I don’t see the hysteria dying down at all.

    The GOP has had the House and a majority of Midwestern governors since 2010. Fatigue has set in, and no economic miracle has been delivered.

    The Dem base just stole a Senate seat in the reddest state outside of Utah.

    If the GOP wants to gain Senate seats and keep the House, the Dems must be baited into campaigning for impeachment. Gingrich tried that in 1998, Pelosi might be dumb enough for a sequel.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/05/04/new-york-times-digital-subscriptions-continue-to-drive-growth/#5caf70ea295c

  63. Jorge Castañeda just published an editorial about this New York Times piece by Azam Ahmed. He notes, as I did, that this same journalist recently wrote another major article about PRI party corruption in the financing of state elections in 2016.

    He speculates it has nothing to do with Carlos Slim or any other conspiracy. He believes the Times is naturally focusing on Mexico now because of the Trump presidency. And with the resources at the disposal of the Times, it’s inevitable they’ll be finding a lot of corruption that’s not being reported by the local Mexican media.

    http://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/opinion/los-medios-mexicanos-y-the-new-york-times.html

  64. @JackOH
    One of the two major newspapers in my area is an aggressive and literate publication. It's still independently owned by the descendants of the liberal German immigrant who founded the paper 150 years ago. The editors will go to court to chase stories; they'll editorialize in detail about the corruption that's infested my area for a long time. The paper's owners also own one of the three major TV stations here.

    How does the public respond to the paper's truth-telling? Judging by comments beneath some of the harder-hitting editorials, there's a significant fraction of the public that is okay with corrupt government, is okay with a few big shots pulling the strings, and, apparently is ruffled that the paper has the temerity to print the dirty truth about local decision-making.

    My point? The major, mainstream media got that way and stay that way because they're appealing to large numbers of our fellow citizens. Those folks, our neighbors, are okay with having their thought processes massaged or short-circuited.

    Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    Yup. When propaganda works, it’s usually because the target demographic wants it to work; not necessarily because the logic is airtight, or because the evidence is very convincing. Russiagate is a perfect example of this. The propaganda that works best is that which flatters the target demographic: ‘You are superior. You are blameless. Are your problems are caused by those idiots over there.’

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    @Seamus Padraig

    The Russian scandal is also useful at dividing the GOP base. Older Boomers still think Russia is Communist. And there is no one defending good relations with Russia, even outright paid shills.

    , @JackOH
    @Seamus Padraig

    Seamus, you sound like you have political experience, or good instincts. It can take a heap of moral energy for someone to read a newspaper article or watch a TV news segment and say to himself, "There's something wrong with that story. It doesn't make sense. I'm going to find out what's really going on." The Russia "thing" is a very good example. Thanks for your reply.

  65. @Seamus Padraig
    @JackOH

    Yup. When propaganda works, it's usually because the target demographic wants it to work; not necessarily because the logic is airtight, or because the evidence is very convincing. Russiagate is a perfect example of this. The propaganda that works best is that which flatters the target demographic: 'You are superior. You are blameless. Are your problems are caused by those idiots over there.'

    Replies: @Maj. Kong, @JackOH

    The Russian scandal is also useful at dividing the GOP base. Older Boomers still think Russia is Communist. And there is no one defending good relations with Russia, even outright paid shills.

  66. @Mr. Anon
    OT, but on the topic of Pervnado:

    Amazon And Google Employees Busted In Asian Sex Trafficking Sting

    Maybe they didn't feel safe looking for woman at work, so instead they became "prostitution hobbyists". Or maybe they were just looking for a good time. In any event, this being Seattle, I'm sure the call girls in question were hand-crafted, artisanal prostitutes.

    Replies: @BB753

    “In any event, this being Seattle, I’m sure the call girls in question were hand-crafted, artisanal prostitutes.”

    Could you please elaborate?

  67. @Seamus Padraig
    @JackOH

    Yup. When propaganda works, it's usually because the target demographic wants it to work; not necessarily because the logic is airtight, or because the evidence is very convincing. Russiagate is a perfect example of this. The propaganda that works best is that which flatters the target demographic: 'You are superior. You are blameless. Are your problems are caused by those idiots over there.'

    Replies: @Maj. Kong, @JackOH

    Seamus, you sound like you have political experience, or good instincts. It can take a heap of moral energy for someone to read a newspaper article or watch a TV news segment and say to himself, “There’s something wrong with that story. It doesn’t make sense. I’m going to find out what’s really going on.” The Russia “thing” is a very good example. Thanks for your reply.

  68. @Roderick Spode
    @George

    Those damn left-wingers in the Nazi party... If not for them, Western Europe would have been liberated from socialism long ago by the holy traditionalist empire of the conservative paragon, Joe 'Gipper' Stalin.

    Dems r teh reel racis

    Replies: @fnn, @Hibernian

    The Nazi Party began as an economically leftist socially rightist party.

  69. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    @Anon

    "My general impression is that American elites long preferred the carrot to the stick when it comes to corrupting American intellectuals. " The difference with Mexico is that since US elites are higher IQ, they do a generally better job at brainwashing the masses into not noticing.

    The carrots, as everything in the US, are bigger.

    US Freemasons: 5 mill

    This large number here may indicate a typical process occurring in the US which is trivialization and opening to the masses of ideas and activities that in Europe were reserved for the elites. A common man in American, even a blue collar worker can be a mason, can undergo Freudian psychoanalysis and even be overtly gay. It is American take on German Gleichschaltung and Soviet uravnilovka.

    Replies: @Anon

    @ opening to the masses ideas that in Europe were for elites..

    Perhaps. Though I remember reading that Gianni Agnelli complained that there was no use being a Freemason anymore, because he would meet his tailor there. Another possible factor would be that freemasonry is ‘stabilizing’ in US and UK, so it is more of an open secret.

    It branched into cover organizations in the 20th C, like Council of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bnai Brith and Bildeberg. It was, from what I can surmise, working great through the nineties, though in Mexico it seems to have become somewhat dormant of late, whereas in France it elected Macron. Maybe you have seen this:

    Oh, and I am no IQer, to the contrary, was just joking.

  70. and Bildeberg

    Jozef Retinger a super international eminence rise to many leaders and governments and who was one of the cofounders of Bilderberg after WWII in his earlier years in 1917 was involved in Mexico:

    In 1917, Retinger travelled to Mexico, where he became an unofficial political advisor to union organizer Luis Morones and President Calles.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutarco_El%C3%ADas_Calles
    The effects of Calles’s policy on the Church were profound. Between 1926 and 1934, at least 4,000 priests were killed or expelled; one of the most famous was the Jesuit Miguel Pro.[23] Where there were 4,500 priests in Mexico prior to the rebellion, in 1934 there were only 334 priests licensed by the government to serve fifteen million people, the rest having been eliminated by emigration, expulsion, execution and assassination.[23][24] By 1935, seventeen states had no priests at all.

    Anti-Catholic campaign of Calles government and the Cristeros war is not well know in the US. Perhaps if Americans including the Sailerites knew more about it they could see that Mexican and American governments and elites are really in cahoots also in the area of the immigration. They are behind the re-engineering of societies along the plans that has been conceived long time ago.

    It is good to meet somebody who is not an IQist in this neighborhood.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @utu

    @ They are behind the re-engineering of societies along the plans that has been conceived long time ago.

    Bingo. I recently had the joy of encountering Paul Beatriz Preciado, and her gem ''Countersexuality". And couple that with transhumanism! Life as raw material .. the beginning of fear.

  71. In 2014, Ulfkotte published the book Gekaufte Journalisten (German Bought Journalists), in which he stated that the CIA and other secret services pay money to journalists to report stories in a certain light. According to Ulfkotte, the CIA and German intelligence (BND) bribe journalists in Germany to write pro-NATO propaganda articles, and it is well understood that one may lose their media job if they fail to comply with the pro-Western agenda.

    Journalists for Hire: How the CIA Buys the News by Dr. Udo Ulfkotte Ph.D Ph.D. (June 01,2016)
    Hardcover $997, Paperback $2,796

    Ulfkotte died from a heart attack on 13 January 2017 at the age of 56.

  72. @utu
    and Bildeberg

    Jozef Retinger a super international eminence rise to many leaders and governments and who was one of the cofounders of Bilderberg after WWII in his earlier years in 1917 was involved in Mexico:

    In 1917, Retinger travelled to Mexico, where he became an unofficial political advisor to union organizer Luis Morones and President Calles.
     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutarco_El%C3%ADas_Calles
    The effects of Calles's policy on the Church were profound. Between 1926 and 1934, at least 4,000 priests were killed or expelled; one of the most famous was the Jesuit Miguel Pro.[23] Where there were 4,500 priests in Mexico prior to the rebellion, in 1934 there were only 334 priests licensed by the government to serve fifteen million people, the rest having been eliminated by emigration, expulsion, execution and assassination.[23][24] By 1935, seventeen states had no priests at all.
     
    Anti-Catholic campaign of Calles government and the Cristeros war is not well know in the US. Perhaps if Americans including the Sailerites knew more about it they could see that Mexican and American governments and elites are really in cahoots also in the area of the immigration. They are behind the re-engineering of societies along the plans that has been conceived long time ago.

    It is good to meet somebody who is not an IQist in this neighborhood.

    Replies: @Anon

    @ They are behind the re-engineering of societies along the plans that has been conceived long time ago.

    Bingo. I recently had the joy of encountering Paul Beatriz Preciado, and her gem ”Countersexuality”. And couple that with transhumanism! Life as raw material .. the beginning of fear.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS