I’ve read many discussions in which certain ideas are denounced as CIA sabotage. I find myself torn between the two camps that form whenever this happens, usually because I have no idea what a CIA psyop actually looks like and have no reference for what a Marxist solution to, say, the question of what anti-colonial society actually looks like. It’s not an easy question, and it’s made all the more murky with the knowledge that plants and saboteurs absolutely exist.
Is there an ascribed methodology to identifying CIA propaganda?
One can study the methodology the CIA has demonstrated throughout it’s various documented “ops”. The general rule of thumb is an idea and/or argument which not only benefits the bourgeois state, but as well is expressed in the same formatting of the CIA’s notorious faux leftist tendencies (Trotsky, Goebbels, Gene Sharp, the New Left, etc…) as well as displays a methodical participation in bad faith. The last point is because leftism is very broad and even those whose theories are most in line with Marxist thought still have spots of neoliberal faux leftism throughout. We have all been deeply liberalized since birth and purging these tendencies is a process.
A psyop would be an action aimed at a theoretical deviation which benefits the current neoliberal bourgeois state and follows the line of thought of faux leftism.
The reason why we are seeing such topics arise is the collapse of neoliberalism in the core as well as the separation and ‘coming of age’ (independent development) of the conscious proletarian class within it. We are defining what we stand for, and with all of the culture talk going on I for one am excited for us to have a pivot to introduce into that currently pointless conversation. It could inspire a culture to economics pipeline for the unconscious in our class; to really separate ourselves from the bourgeoisie in that discussion of which the bourgeois insist on echoing throughout the streets of the nation.