The New Left

In my third book, The New Cyberwar, I referenced some of the tactics of the Russians in the Ukraine, Crimea which they took without a fight, and in the Baltics.  The parallels with the New Left in the demononstrations going on in my neighborhood today are making me wonder if the people who ran the influence campaign in the U.S have stopped trying to disrupt the political process that we use to elect a President.

The Russians were quick to have their surrogates in Ukraine and the border areas in the Baltics see the signs that the Nazis were back in a big way, and all they had to do was look at their government leaders.  They had posters and billboards made that showed a shadow over the territory with a swastika covering the western part and the Russian flag covering the east.  The press loyal to the Russians interviewed women who were part of a traveling circus of people claiming to have sons killed in the combat, or had troubles of various ilks with the host government.  They were wives and mothers concerned about their government actions. Pictures of some of these women were shown in several towns, and each time they represented some other interest and used other names.

They bought press outlets (and are still buying some in Europe) to make sure they got the right messages out in the way the wanted.  They seized some and harassed others.  They picked reporters for their loyalty to the cause and not for their ability to report facts as they occurred.  Some fake news stories were circulated, including one indicating Jews were to be registered in the same towns the Nazi had killed thousands.  Local resistance was shouted down at public gatherings by an array of "concerned citizens" many of whom were not recognized by locals.

They criminalized the behavior of their adversaries.  People questioned the business dealings of banks and financial institutions that might be owned or have ties with the the national leaders.

They disrupted public meetings where their political opponents were speaking - even some in other countries, like Germany and France.  It was OK to disagree, as long as they followed the line of disagreement that was allowed.  They supported political candidates who favored their position and discredited any that didn't.

We have a host of people assembled in Washington D.C today who are representing different views about our political process.  Some of them are there because we allow free speech and tolerate different points of views.  Some of the professional agitators are there to satisfy somebody's agenda, but not their own.  They are paid to be unhappy.  We should be more concerned about who is paying them than what they are doing.  Too much of what we are seeing is close to what happened over the last few years in areas near Russia.