buzzword of Obama era is ‘transparency’

by on May 12, 2009 33

I'm sorry if that is old news. My sister explained it to me yesterday. Transparency is a value borne by the new media. People want to know where you're coming from and how you reached your conclusions.
Transparency is the sign that the playing field is level, and we meet in the discourse as equals, thanks to the millions brought into the discourse by the internet. Transparency is also the manner of the internet. Spengler has learned this lately, throwing off one of the masks that we initially thought the internet would make so common, and writing as David Goldman. The lesson is the opposite of the anonymity we initially ascribed to the internet; on the internet people want to know who you are and what you are about... Watch as even writers for the old media begin to shed their mantle of authority.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Beyondoweiss, US Politics

{ 33 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Strahl says:
    May 12, 2009 at 1:31 pm

    Shed their mantle? That implies they are in control in some way. Their 'mantle' which wasn't earned anyways, will be taken from them. Taken. Not shed.

  2. Ed says:
    May 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm

    Transparency, yes. And the Zionists have oceans of blood on their hands to hide, starting not in 1948, but 1917; and starting not in the Levant, but in Russia. But so does the two-party regime. And Obama is picking up right where Bush left off, and merely incidental to the technology that has opened society up. So let's not in any way give Obama credit for the accomplishments of the internet, which is the result of private enterprise. (Look at this blog, for example. Would the government ever have initiated such a controversial undertaking?) The torture issue and Obama's unwillingness to get to the bottom of who knew what and when demonstrates he's merely a Party functionary out of step with the transparency-era Zeitgeist.

  3. Ed says:
    May 12, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    Also, let's see if the Obama administration is willing to throw open the books on the banker bailout programs he supported when Bush was president, and accelerated when he took office. Big Government is never transparent, and never will be. It has too much corruption to hide.

  4. Richard Witty says:
    May 12, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    Your conclusion on the blogosphere is innaccurate. It is not transparency in the slightest. It is a failing. Information is unreliable as to fact, context, significance, implication for decision prospects. The reputable press is important. It is incomplete, but that is NOT an either/or conclusion. To be informed requires more research, not more propaganda.

  5. average joe says:
    May 12, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Your conclusion on the MSM is inaccurate. The bias of the MSM is a big reason why your old school chum, Phil, set up this blog. There is no transparency at all regarding Israel and the true nature of the "special relationship." The information available on this subject in the MSM is absolutely unreliable. The internet is at present the only way to get beyond what amounts to a hasbara choke hold on the MSM in the interest of all the USA's citizens, and in the larger interests of the whole world. Although one has to weed through all the quarter-baked stuff on the internet, it is the only place where the average citizen can get needed information to be an informed citizen–additional to C-SPAN. Americans reliance on the MSM got us into the Iraq War, and supported the erosion of our domestic civil rights in the name of national security; as well, will get us into a war with Iran, hence WW3. You support the US version of Pravda.

  6. Mooser says:
    May 12, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    "Transparency, yes. And the Zionists have oceans of blood on their hands to hide, starting not in 1948, but 1917; and starting not in the Levant, but in Russia." Zionists are responsible for the 1917 Russian Revolution and subsequent Communist reginme? Now, Ed, I think we should get this very clear: Do you blame the Zionists for Communist Russia, or just "the Jews"? Or both? Wow, Ed, it occurs to me that if either the Zionists or "the Jews" are responsible, given the amount of destruction and death involved, even by the 1930's, can we reaqlly blame Hitler for responding to a clear and present danger? I'd love to have your views on this.

  7. Mooser says:
    May 12, 2009 at 3:16 pm

    To be informed requires more research, not more propaganda. Richard, did you know the Palestinians have been buying up surplus store mannequins from all over the world, in all sizes? All they have to do is put some Palestinian schmottas on them and spatter some borscht around and take a picture! Instant propaganda. And there's a spray which uses gingko oil to produce an essence of death and decomposition, the Israelis invented it, but the Arabs stole it. Really, Witty, all that Gaza death and destruction is only as real as you think it is. And you know better.

  8. Mooser says:
    May 12, 2009 at 3:52 pm

    Hey Richard, remember that old joke about the photograph? The Zionist complains: "This photograph doesn't do me justice" And the rest of the world replies: "It's mercy you want, not justice!"

  9. MRW says:
    May 12, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    Mooser:

    Zionists are responsible for the 1917 Russian Revolution and subsequent Communist reginme? Now, Ed, I think we should get this very clear: Do you blame the Zionists for Communist Russia, or just "the Jews"? Or both?

    Mooser: Bolsheviks. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999...

    Wow, Ed, it occurs to me that if either the Zionists or "the Jews" are responsible, given the amount of destruction and death involved, even by the 1930's, can we reaqlly blame Hitler for responding to a clear and present danger? I'd love to have your views on this.

    Mutually exclusive. One has nothing to do with the other. A point in history: Winston Churchill — Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920, page 5 — "Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People" Scroll to the bottom.

  10. MRW says:
    May 12, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    Whoops! Here's the Winston Churchill link: http://www.library.flawlesslogic.com/ish.htm

  11. Ed says:
    May 12, 2009 at 4:08 pm

    Hitler's moral failing was that he mirrored the Communists instead of transcending them. re Bolshevick Jews and Zionist Jews, you make a fair point. Zionist Jews and Bolshevik Jews are indeed different strains. Russian and E. European Zionist Jews tended to be more religious, closed and conservative, whereas Soviet Bolshevik Jews were more political and generally wanted to extinguish the Christian religion. The latter amazingly tended to view Zionist Jews as impractical and somewhat backward due to their own religion, but were still bonded to them through shared ethnicity and a shared persecution complex — and of course their shared, if hidden, Jewish supremacist views. Bolshevik Jews were generally birthed by Zionist Jews, who transmitted their contempt for Christianity and gentiles to their offspring, which the Bolshevik Jews put into political action. Therefore Zionist Jews do share a measure of responsibility for the Soviet holocaust, but the lion's share of blame would have to go to Bolshevik Jews.

  12. tommy says:
    May 12, 2009 at 4:23 pm

    Mr. Weiss makes an important point. If this blog were named the Anonymous Not Zionist or was published with by a special interest organization, it would not have the same credibility it now enjoys. What makes blogs more credible than media enterprises is transparency. Headlines, story placements and op-ed theme decisions at media companies are made by nearly anonymous editors and publishers in board room meetings to promulgate their institutional agendas. Blogs are better at communicating the opinions of individuals transparently, without interference or an agenda from an institution.

  13. Ed says:
    May 12, 2009 at 4:46 pm

    Hitler's moral failing was that he mirrored the Communists instead of transcending them, just as the GOP mirrors the Dems instead of transcending them. re Bolshevick Jews and Zionist Jews, you make a fair point. Zionist Jews and Bolshevik Jews are indeed different strains. Russian and E. European Zionist Jews tended to be more religious, closed and conservative, whereas Soviet Bolshevik Jews were more political and generally wanted to extinguish the Christian religion. The latter amazingly tended to view Zionist Jews as impractical and somewhat backward due to their own religion, but were still bonded to them through shared ethnicity and a shared persecution complex — and of course their shared, if hidden, Jewish supremacist views. Bolshevik Jews were generally birthed by Zionist Jews, who transmitted their contempt for Christianity and gentiles to their offspring, which the Bolshevik Jews put into political action. Therefore Zionist Jews do share a measure of responsibility for the Soviet holocaust, but the lion's share of blame would have to go to Bolshevik Jews.

  14. Shafiq says:
    May 12, 2009 at 4:58 pm

    Plus they're more accountable with the commenting system. How many Op-ed authors actually read or care about the comments their article receives?

  15. LeaNder22 says:
    May 13, 2009 at 12:32 am

    Look, MRW. Mooser is correct. Jews were surely overrepresented in the Bolshevik leadership, but hardly among the larger membership. The problem is that the Nazi propaganda the equation theory Bolsheviks = Jews isn't even close to true. But it surely was their best propaganda tool. (Or Henry Ford's for that matter – that's what Ed reminds me of quite often). It is obvious and has been shown that the Nazis forged the numbers, to make them appear to be up to 90%, to justify their equation. Besides it makes no sense to look at the many Jews among the revolutionaries without looking at the policies towards Jews of both Alexander III and Nicolas II. Why do you think so many Jews emigrated in such high numbers between 1880 and 1928? If I use the numbers given in the Wiki article on Russian Jews from the late 19th century census 43,65 % left during these decades? What percentage of the about 5,2 million do you think had leadership jobs under the Communists? A rather tiny group comparatively? Besides if the general impression after reading a recent German study is that they hardly were the majority among the leaders on the average, in spite of their prominent participation. What is your point? What percentage of them would justify a kin liability? Or is this not what you are driving at? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Bolshevism#Je... As always the pattern is complex, the closer you look. You'll find e.g. one of the most feared commissars was Jewish but was also assassinated by a Jew. … Most importantly Ed. shouldn't forget Russia wasn't the first revolution, the revolutionaries in France broke down the churches too. No Jews among them. So why did they hate the Christian religion as Christians? The reason why I can visit only the ruins of the Cluny abby, with all its grandeur and riches. And although this often made me sad in France, I have quite a bit of an idea why this happened.

  16. tommy says:
    May 13, 2009 at 1:58 am

    Thanks LeaNder22.

  17. Jacobwolfen says:
    May 13, 2009 at 4:15 am

    Sorry, but this blog has no credibility. But you do have a valid point. Blogs like this one are better at communicating the opinions of individuals transparently, without interference from the need to be factual..

  18. Ed says:
    May 13, 2009 at 4:19 am

    No, not all Bolsheviks were Jews, just as not all Neocons were Jews. But Jews impacted the Bolshevik agenda and Bolshevik thought probably to a comparable degree as Jewish Zionists impacted Neoconservatism thought and agenda. Stalin wasn’t a Jew, and neither was Bush. Does that mean Weiss is full of it to tie Neconservatism and the Iraq war to the Jewish Zionist agenda?

  19. Ed says:
    May 13, 2009 at 4:20 am

    What percentage of Germans born after 1945 were Nazis? Yet they all have been subjected to “kin liability” by being forced to pay reparations to Jewish nationalists in Israel. (And how much of that money has been used to persecute Palestinians?) Kin liability is a concept that organized Jewry promotes and venerates, just so long as they are the ones being paid, but fight tooth and nail when they are the ones with liability. It‘s all about money And I notice Zionists in Israel are now promoting the intellectual framework to assign kin liability to ALL Catholics for the Holocaust: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=124202... I guess they’re looking for more cows to milk now that Germans are moving toward getting them off of the tit. Maybe Spielberg can make a sequel to Schindler’s List with a sappy Catholic wailing for forgiveness to follow up on the sappy, wailing German (a role that LeaNder pathetically likes to play out herself every day.)

  20. Ed says:
    May 13, 2009 at 4:33 am

    The Jewish Bolsheviks invented "kin liability' on a mass scale and acted as judge, jury and executioner to millions of Christians. They continue this MO in racist-Marxist Israel by regularly subjecting Palestinians to collective punishment. I child should be able to recognize the pattern.

  21. Saleema says:
    May 13, 2009 at 10:57 am

    Because it lacks credibility, Jacobwolfen is so worried about it, and likes to come on here practically every day. You must have a lot of time on your hands to visit something that has no credibility whatsoever in your eyes.

  22. LeaNder22 says:
    May 13, 2009 at 11:58 am

    It‘s all about money Ed, the whole world is about money and has been for a long time. You are for free enterpreneurs what else is it then about than money? I was very interested in religious orders for a while. The Cistercians, the white monks, in a way fought the representative and ostentatiously rich Cluny abbey. But just as them they found themselves getting richer and richer on their lay brothers shoulders, whom they kept behind a high jube, a rood screen in their churches. Didn't even give them a chance to understand their songs and prayers. Since I know the tradition of the Christian, especially the Catholic church quite well, I sometimes wonder what positive changes you expect from a return to a "Christian America". Aren't Christians interested in money too, isn't anybody since it is a necessary means to survive? What foundations are the laws concerning talents and money built on in the Christian faith? And just as the diverse Christian representative kept more or less ties to worldly powers, shared power or dominated it over the ages, I am sure quite a few gentile Americans welcomed the neocon ideas with quite a bit of fervor. Don't you? Actually, I will read your link. On German ground it is interesting that predominantly Catholic towns and villages didn't vote for the Nazis, while apparently Protestant places nearby did to a high degree. The problem is that the Catholic center party was so stupid to let Hitler trick them and later get entangled. On the other hand some Jesuits were quite fond of the equation theory we discussed above. I didn't think Spielberg's Schindler's List was pathetic, I actually consider it among the best movies he has ever done. The only critique I had was that I would have preferred a slower entrance showing some kind of hierarchy of humiliation of which the SS myrmidon's with their guns were only the peek. Besides, I never questioned or complained about German reparations, what I complained about was that it was a too easy solution to the problem. You have to understand that in most fields this superficial offer made sure a basic continuity of people and structures could be hid beneath a cloak of silence. And that wasn't good for some of us as it surely wasn't good for the other side of the issue.

  23. LeaNder22 says:
    May 13, 2009 at 12:16 pm

    The Jewish Bolsheviks invented "kin liability' on a mass scale and acted as judge, jury and executioner to millions of Christians. Except that not the "Jewish Bolsheviks" invented this "kin liability" but all Bolsheviks. Are you aware of the close ties of the Czar and the church? Especially it's post Alexander II apocalyptical variances? The Jew=Antichrist another frequent equation? Are you aware that Sergei Nilus apocalyptic visions which at one point contained the Protocols as an appendix is a much published "holy man" of the Orthodox church in post perestroika Russia? What is your basic knowledge about Russian history below the "Jewish Bolsheviks" – or the equation Jews=Bolsheviks, which was the main propaganda tool of the Nazis much more than the Protocols, obviously. It's hard to give up cherished prejudices, isn't it. The problem is if you use it you move close to the mindset of the Nazis and that's the point were I get very sensitive. Something you don't seem to be able to understand.

  24. Citizen says:
    May 13, 2009 at 1:25 pm

    LeaNder22, have you read Solzinitzin's (sic?) book on the relationship of Russians with Jews over a few centuries? It might help you to understand Ed. All we have available is inclusion of about 20 pages of that book in English, as part of a group of S's articles. You, if memory serves, have the whole book available in German translation.

  25. mediawatch says:
    May 13, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    You are confusing this blog with standard hasbara rhetoric and omission of salient facts raining down on the US populace daily from the MSM.

  26. Citizen says:
    May 13, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    True, the Jews were "hardly among the larger membership." But the Bolshevik leadership was very disproportionately of Jewish background, including in the dreaded secret police, the Red Army, and leadership councils. Big Jews like Schiff also funded the early party, etc. No propaganda relies on pointing out average members of the opposition–it always seeks to finger the leaders of the opposition, and then relies on association. True, there are many historical reasons why Russian Jews eagerly joined the red revolution, as there are many historical reasons why, especially after WW1 victor's justice and shit-canning Wilson's promised agenda (bought with how many doughboy's lives?) that a small number of German rebels grew into the Nazi Power. Reread Ed's point regarding the American neocons; the point is not even that there may have been more Russian leaders than Jewish leaders–why wouldn't there be considering the relative demography? His point was the gross disproportionate Jewish number, same as with the PNAC spear in the USA. No scientist ignores a pattern. That doesn't mean it's conclusive, but it should be held out to the light in the interest of effective etiology. The answer to the question, "Why did they hate the Christian Religion as Christians?" is the same as the answer for the question, "Why did a Jew assassinate a feared Jewish commissar?" One should delve into jewish activity as it is always organized, no matter which side of an issue, same as it's long been PC to delve into Christian activity, no matter which side it. Ed makes the largest point–there should be no PC, only open and public inquiry. In the USA no time at all is spent on history texts K-12 thru university on origins of proponents of early Communism–while much time is spent on origins of Nazi Germany. Issues such as Ed raises would never be allowed in USA classrooms. But at least here it's not illegal to do so as a full-grown adult–Germany of course has no free speech at all in this area. Etiology is arrested in both cases, but in Germany more so…

  27. LeaNder22 says:
    May 13, 2009 at 5:36 pm

    Don't worry about spelling we have many different transliterations of his name too. I may actually read him one day. We have already two translations, which is peculiar since the first edition was published only in 2002. And even more peculiarly the second edition with new translaters is published by the same publisher. But strictly my mentors on Russian history have warned me. Solschenizyn (=German, the more precise German transliteration: Solženicyn, I think you make it: Solzenitzyn) seems to have used mainly 19th century literature and has completely ignored more recent research. Why? You are aware that most Russian Jews became part of the Russian empire after the Austrians, Prussians and Russians "swallowed" their respective part of Poland? That's when his narrative starts, according to the German title in 1795. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poland_(1...

  28. LeaNder22 says:
    May 13, 2009 at 5:57 pm

    Citizen, I have not much time, since I have to finish something. But one last note. What I liked about the book I read on the topic, title in translation: Jewish Bolshevism Reality and Myth …, was that the author managed to create quite a dense historical atmosphere. … What do you make of the fact that we Germans have no free speech but Solzenitsyn is published in Germany but not in the US? It is correct that the above mentioned book only could be published by a right wing publisher and now is listed among books I probably will never read. But that is similar in the States, no? Who would publish such a book? Jacob Schiff is an interesting and complex figure. But as far as I know he didn't finance Russian revolutionaries, he enormously funded the Japanese against the Russians, the main threat, the pan-asiatic threat from a Russian perspective at the time. And as the conditions got worse due to pogroms and the revolution he helped Russian Jews to emigrate. The Germans actually sponsored Lenin. They had their own interests in mind. He was meant to weaken the Russian home front for the benefit of the German Kaiser in WWII. He was sent back there to help the Germans to their victory. You have to be very careful with Jacob Schiff, he figures high in not so reliable narratives and conspiracy fiction.

  29. Ed says:
    May 13, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    LeaNder always accuses her opposition of cherry-picking their data in order to validate their pre-determined conclusions, but that's all she really ever does on behalf of her Judeophilia. Just another self-flagellating German leftist playing out the role of Schindler written for her by Hollywood. "Boo-hoo, I could have done so much more. Here, take this reparations money. It might save untold numbers of Jewish nationalist socialists in Israel. Boo-hoo-hoo. Kill all the Palestinians you want. It's all penance. Boo-hoo-hoo-hoo." You apostate-Christian leftists are utterly without conscience.

  30. rykart says:
    May 13, 2009 at 11:05 pm

    Obama's statesmanlike musings on "transparency" http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/whi... The only thing transparent about this president is his fraudulence!

  31. rykart says:
    May 13, 2009 at 11:08 pm

    hey everyone..my parole officer, Philip Weiss, has slapped an ankle bracelet on me to ensure my comments do not wander outside the margins of approved discourse, so please don't get me riled up!

  32. andrew says:
    May 14, 2009 at 7:55 pm

    racist-Marxist Israel — !!! You're not doing a very good job of hiding it.

  33. andrew says:
    May 14, 2009 at 9:17 pm

    This sounds like a very tortured attempt to clean up Ed's discourse linking Jewish bolshevism and Israel. Are Jews disproportionally represented in Britain or Canada? When the Brits adopted Zionism, were Jews disproportionally powerful in Britain? In fact some notable supporters of Zionism like Balfour, Lloyd George and Sykes were hostile to Jews themselves. That's a real etiological pattern you've struck. A month ago, I got an anti-Israel letter printed in a local hasbara paper. This letter actually advocated the right of return for the Palestinian refugees. And it was printed in a paper run by zionists. Would they print me if I went on about looking scientifically at common patterns of Jewish behavior, instigating colonial conquests and revolutions and such? Probably not. They printed my letter because they know damn well what I'm talking about and hey, they welcome differences of opinion. I stuck to objective facts that every one is aware of, not kooky bullshit you have to take an honest, non-PC look at. If you want to prove the existance of a Jewish conspiracy, have fun. If you want to oppose Israel, try doing that instead.

Leave a Reply