Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama confidant's spine-chilling proposal - Cass Sunstein wants the government to "cognitively.."
Salon ^ | Jan. 15, 2010 | Glenn Greenwald

Posted on 01/17/2010 1:52:32 PM PST by neverdem

Cass Sunstein wants the government to "cognitively infiltrate" anti-government groups

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

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

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

* * * * *

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

As explained in a March 21, 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, "publicity or propaganda" is defined by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) to mean either (1) self-aggrandizement by public officials, (2) purely partisan activity, or (3) "covert propaganda."  By covert propaganda, GAO means information which originates from the government but is unattributed and made to appear as though it came from a third party.

Covert government propaganda is exactly what Sunstein craves.  His mentality is indistinguishable from the Bush mindset that led to these abuses, and he hardly tries to claim otherwise.  Indeed, he favorably cites both the covert Lincoln Park program as well as Paul Bremer's closing of Iraqi newspapers which published stories the U.S. Government disliked, and justifies them as arguably necessary to combat "false conspiracy theories" in Iraq -- the same goal Sunstein has for the U.S.

Sunstein's response to these criticisms is easy to find in what he writes, and is as telling as the proposal itself.  He acknowledges that some "conspiracy theories" previously dismissed as insane and fringe have turned out to be entirely true (his examples:  the CIA really did secretly administer LSD in "mind control" experiments; the DOD really did plot the commission of terrorist acts inside the U.S. with the intent to blame Castro; the Nixon White House really did bug the DNC headquarters).  Given that history, how could it possibly be justified for the U.S. Government to institute covert programs designed to undermine anti-government "conspiracy theories," discredit government critics, and increase faith and trust in government pronouncements?  Because, says Sunstein, such powers are warranted only when wielded by truly well-intentioned government officials who want to spread The Truth and Do Good -- i.e., when used by people like Cass Sunstein and Barack Obama:

Throughout, we assume a well-motivated government that aims to eliminate conspiracy theories, or draw their poison, if and only if social welfare is improved by doing so.

But it's precisely because the Government is so often not "well-motivated" that such powers are so dangerous.  Advocating them on the ground that "we will use them well" is every authoritarian's claim.  More than anything else, this is the toxic mentality that consumes our political culture:  when our side does X, X is Good, because we're Good and are working for Good outcomes.  That was what led hordes of Bush followers to endorse the same large-government surveillance programs they long claimed to oppose, and what leads so many Obama supporters now to justify actions that they spent the last eight years opposing.

* * * * *

Consider the recent revelation that the Obama administration has been making very large, undisclosed payments to MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber to provide consultation on the President's health care plan.  With this lucrative arrangement in place, Gruber spent the entire year offering public justifications for Obama's health care plan, typically without disclosing these payments, and far worse, was repeatedly held out by the White House -- falsely -- as an "independent" or "objective" authority.  Obama allies in the media constantly cited Gruber's analysis to support their defenses of the President's plan, and the White House, in turn, then cited those media reports as proof that their plan would succeed.  This created an infinite "feedback loop" in favor of Obama's health care plan which -- unbeknownst to the public -- was all being generated by someone who was receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in secret from the administration (read this to see exactly how it worked).

In other words, this arrangement was quite similar to the Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher scandals which Democrats, in virtual lockstep, condemned.  Paul Krugman, for instance, in 2005 angrily lambasted right-wing pundits and policy analysts who received secret, undisclosed payments, and said they lack "intellectual integrity"; he specifically cited the Armstrong Williams case.  Yet the very same Paul Krugman last week attacked Marcy Wheeler for helping to uncover the Gruber payments by accusing her of being "just like the right-wingers with their endless supply of fake scandals."  What is one key difference?  Unlike Williams and Gallagher, Jonathan Gruber is a Good, Well-Intentioned Person with Good Views -- he favors health care -- and so massive, undisclosed payments from the same administration he's defending are dismissed as a "fake scandal."

Sunstein himself -- as part of his 2008 paper -- explicitly advocates that the Government should pay what he calls "credible independent experts" to advocate on the Government's behalf, a policy he says would be more effective because people don't trust the Government itself and would only listen to people they believe are "independent."  In so arguing, Sunstein cites the Armstrong Williams scandal not as something that is wrong in itself, but as a potential risk of this tactic (i.e., that it might leak out), and thus suggests that "government can supply these independent experts with information and perhaps prod them into action from behind the scenes," but warns that "too close a connection will be self-defeating if it is exposed."  In other words, Sunstein wants the Government to replicate the Armstrong Williams arrangement as a means of more credibly disseminating propaganda -- i.e., pretending that someone is an "independent" expert when they're actually being "prodded" and even paid "behind the scenes" by the Government -- but he wants to be more careful about how the arrangement is described (don't make the control explicit) so that embarrassment can be avoided if it ends up being exposed.  

In this 2008 paper, then, Sunstein advocated, in essence, exactly what the Obama administration has been doing all year with Gruber:  covertly paying people who can be falsely held up as "independent" analysts in order to more credibly promote the Government line.  Most Democrats agreed this was a deceitful and dangerous act when Bush did it, but with Obama and some of his supporters, undisclosed arrangements of this sort seem to be different.  Why?  Because, as Sunstein puts it:  we have "a well-motivated government" doing this so that "social welfare is improved."  Thus, just like state secrets, indefinite detention, military commissions and covert, unauthorized wars, what was once deemed so pernicious during the Bush years -- coordinated government/media propaganda -- is instantaneously transformed into something Good.

* * * * *

What is most odious and revealing about Sunstein's worldview is his condescending, self-loving belief that "false conspiracy theories" are largely the province of fringe, ignorant Internet masses and the Muslim world.  That, he claims, is where these conspiracy theories thrive most vibrantly, and he focuses on various 9/11 theories -- both domestically and in Muslim countries -- as his prime example.

It's certainly true that one can easily find irrational conspiracy theories in those venues, but some of the most destructive "false conspiracy theories" have emanated from the very entity Sunstein wants to endow with covert propaganda power:  namely, the U.S. Government itself, along with its elite media defenders. Moreover, "crazy conspiracy theorist" has long been the favorite epithet of those same parties to discredit people trying to expose elite wrongdoing and corruption. 

Who is it who relentlessly spread "false conspiracy theories" of Saddam-engineered anthrax attacks and Iraq-created mushroom clouds and a Ba'athist/Al-Qaeda alliance -- the most destructive conspiracy theories of the last generation?  And who is it who demonized as "conspiracy-mongers" people who warned that the U.S. Government was illegally spying on its citizens, systematically torturing people, attempting to establish permanent bases in the Middle East, or engineering massive bailout plans to transfer extreme wealth to the industries which own the Government?  The most chronic and dangerous purveyors of "conspiracy theory" games are the very people Sunstein thinks should be empowered to control our political debates through deceit and government resources:  namely, the Government itself and the Enlightened Elite like him.

It is this history of government deceit and wrongdoing that renders Sunstein's desire to use covert propaganda to "undermine" anti-government speech so repugnant.  The reason conspiracy theories resonate so much is precisely that people have learned -- rationally -- to distrust government actions and statements.  Sunstein's proposed covert propaganda scheme is a perfect illustration of why that is.  In other words, people don't trust the Government and "conspiracy theories" are so pervasive precisely because government is typically filled with people like Cass Sunstein, who think that systematic deceit and government-sponsored manipulation are justified by their own Goodness and Superior Wisdom.


UPDATE:  I don't want to make this primarily about the Gruber scandal -- I cited that only as an example of the type of mischief that this mindset produces -- but just to respond quickly to the typical Gruber defenses already appearing in comments:  (1) Gruber's work was only for HHS and had nothing to do with the White House (false); (2) he should have disclosed his payments, but the White House did nothing wrong (false: it repeatedly described him as "independent" and "objective" and constantly cited allied media stories based in Gruber's work); (3) Gruber advocated views he would have advocated anyway in the absence of payment (probably true, but wasn't that also true for life-long conservative Armstrong Williams, life-long social conservative Maggie Gallagher, and the pro-war Pentagon Generals, all of whom mounted the same defense?); and (4) Williams/Gallagher were explicitly paid to advocate particular views while Gruber wasn't (true:  that's exactly the arrangement Sunstein advocates to avoid "embarrassment" in the event of disclosure, and it's absurd to suggest that someone being paid many hundreds of thousands of dollars is unaware of what their paymasters want said; that's why disclosure is so imperative).

The point is that there are severe dangers to the Government covertly using its resources to "infiltrate" discussions and to shape political debates using undisclosed and manipulative means.  It's called "covert propaganda" and it should be opposed regardless of who is in control of it or what its policy aims are.


UPDATE II:  Ironically, this is the same administration that recently announced a new regulation dictating that "bloggers who review products must disclose any connection with advertisers, including, in most cases, the receipt of free products and whether or not they were paid in any way by advertisers, as occurs frequently."  Without such disclosure, the administration reasoned, the public may not be aware of important hidden incentives (h/t pasquin).  Yet the same administration pays an MIT analyst hundreds of thousands of dollars to advocate their most controversial proposed program while they hold him out as "objective," and selects as their Chief Regulator someone who wants government agents to covertly mold political discussions "anonymously or even with false identities."


UPDATE III:  Just to get a sense for what an extremist Cass Sunstein is (which itself is ironic, given that his paper calls for "cognitive infiltration of extremist groups," as the Abstract puts it), marvel at this paragraph:

So Sunstein isn't calling right now for proposals (1) and (2) -- having Government "ban conspiracy theorizing" or "impose some kind of tax on those who" do it -- but he says "each will have a place under imaginable conditions."  I'd love to know the "conditions" under which the government-enforced banning of conspiracy theories or the imposition of taxes on those who advocate them will "have a place."  That would require, at a bare minumum, a repeal of the First Amendment.  Anyone who believes this should, for that reason alone, be barred from any meaningful government position.


UPDATE IV:  Paul Krugman has replied to the part of this post which pertains to him and Jonathan Gruber; my response to that is here.

TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: agitprop; bho44; bhoczars; casssunstein; glenngreenwald; greenwald; infiltrate; january; military; obama; palin; propaganda; propagandawar; sunstein; treason; veterans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-258 next last
To: raybbr; MNJohnnie

LOL! I just heard about Sunstein’s proposal on WABC, 770 AM, NYC, a little while ago. So I searched the news. Aaron Klein(sp?) got a new gig on Sunday from 4:00 to 6:00 PM. Sunstein needs to be fired ASAP.

21 posted on 01/17/2010 2:10:18 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Sunstein qualifies as a perfectly normal individual in liberal circles. I mean, who wouldn’t want to let pets sue their owners in a court of law?

Yet those extremist “Tea Baggers” are the real weirdos! (sarc)

22 posted on 01/17/2010 2:10:57 PM PST by NoobRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam
Let’s all keep our eyes peeled for newly-registered FReepers who don’t like cheese.

WallStreetCapitalist Since Oct 16, 2009

23 posted on 01/17/2010 2:11:08 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tawiskaro


24 posted on 01/17/2010 2:12:30 PM PST by clintonh8r (Obama's America: we treat citizens like terrorists, and terrorists like citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem


First the GOOD NEWS!

Cass is out!

And the BAD NEWS?

Say "Hello" to his replacement!


In an effort to assure the public that Obama would use these new powers ONLY in emergencies, Goebbels told AP that “ve vould, fur example, haf to shut down ze internet only fur zings like a fire in ze Reischstag – er -- Capitol, ze federal invasion uf Texas or other renegade states, another uf zos sthupid Tea Parties, a march on Vashington by Jim Thompson und his band uf ruffians und zealots – you know zings uf zat sort.” Und, uf course, zer vill alvays be zat qvestion ve lufed to ask citizens ‘VER ARE YOUR PAPERS?’ LOL.”

25 posted on 01/17/2010 2:13:47 PM PST by Dick Bachert (N)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
He certainly “gets it” with respect to Sunstein’s ugly agenda...

Salon deserves at least some credit for putting up with Paglia as their resident iconoclast. I'm somewhat surprised (but pleasantly) to see that they're actually allowing a second one to “defile” their sacred web pages...

Although I'm familiar with the author's name, I'm not intimately familiar with the rest of his body of work - it's entirely possible that this piece is an aberration which will not be repeated (or tolerated) in the future...

Are any unrepentant lefties openly standing up and supporting Sunstein on this? I know that Sunstein's ideas and plans are well within the mainstream of leftist thought, and they are probably readying a "Hero of the Revolution" award for Sunstein as I write this, but they usually try to hide their agenda out of view of 'normal' people...

26 posted on 01/17/2010 2:15:25 PM PST by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
If this is accurate, then it, along with the talk about the government ‘bailing out’ the newspapers should give every American real pause. These ideas are pernicious, foreign, and thorougly un-American. They are an existential threat to liberty.
27 posted on 01/17/2010 2:19:35 PM PST by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Hey Cass!

Why don't you infiltrate where the Sun don't Stein?

28 posted on 01/17/2010 2:19:57 PM PST by paulycy (The Liberals' DOUBLE-STANDARDS are HATE CRIMES.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: timetostand
And by the way what kind of name is C ass anyway?? Bring it!


Lewis Cass (after whom this creep was named) was a general, explorer, governor (Michigan Territory), Senator (Michigan), etc. (I'm sure I'm leaving out lots.)

29 posted on 01/17/2010 2:20:57 PM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

30 posted on 01/17/2010 2:21:37 PM PST by Vaquero (BHO....'The Pretenda from Kenya')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

No disrespect intended to the Good General!

31 posted on 01/17/2010 2:24:34 PM PST by timetostand (Ya say ya wanna revolution -- OK!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo
Although I'm familiar with the author's name, I'm not intimately familiar with the rest of his body of work - it's entirely possible that this piece is an aberration which will not be repeated (or tolerated) in the future...

It's the same for me. I rarely go to Slate or Salon unless I link to it without checking.

32 posted on 01/17/2010 2:25:56 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I am certain that this is already being done. We had a troll here for a while who registered during the campaign and kept it up until around the inauguration. She wouldn't say anything overt but just kept asking questions challenging the credibility and accuracy of statements. She never had anything that espoused conservtive viewpoints although she wasn't overtly a lib either. Just those niggling little questions which cast doubt on the veracity of facts which shaped opinions.
33 posted on 01/17/2010 2:28:41 PM PST by Jemian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: timetostand

Sensitive topic, as I’ve been called “Cass” as a nickname. :-)

34 posted on 01/17/2010 2:29:06 PM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All

Has anyone here read ORWELL???

Does anyone know what the Marxist Hegelian Dialectic is???

I fear that America’s ignorance is going to destroy us.

Will this verse become prophetic?

Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

35 posted on 01/17/2010 2:30:53 PM PST by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; jimrob

We always suspected that the Clinton-era White House had staffers in the basement monitoring and/or disrupting FR in the really “old” days here. Late 1990’s.

36 posted on 01/17/2010 2:31:14 PM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Cass Sunstein is literally, and clinically, criminally insane. No wonder Obama chose him. He belongs in a mental hospital under heavy sedation. Mark my words. if this man is allowed power, it will lead to disastrous and evil results.

37 posted on 01/17/2010 2:31:29 PM PST by DGHoodini (Iran Azadi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

Probably both.

38 posted on 01/17/2010 2:32:35 PM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Beck was not able the flush Cass Sunstein because he speaks in Weaselese. “Cognitively infiltrate” Sheesh!! It is harder to show him as the pernicious creep he is because few understand what he is writing.

39 posted on 01/17/2010 2:32:46 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

I understand and direct and narrow my disrespect to Cass Sunstein! My apologies :)

40 posted on 01/17/2010 2:33:33 PM PST by timetostand (Ya say ya wanna revolution -- OK!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-258 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson