How To Tell If Someone Is Controlled Opposition

[Dennis Leahy]

(This isn't the latest article from Caitlin Johnstone, but it's a good one. I think she is a bright analyst.)

read the full article here (https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/02/11/how-to-tell-if-someone-is-controlled-opposition/)







How To Tell If Someone Is Controlled Opposition (https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/02/11/how-to-tell-if-someone-is-controlled-opposition/)




-by Caitlin Johnstone

-----(snippets from the article)------------



Every day in my article comments and social media I get people warning me that this or that journalist, activist or politician is "controlled opposition", meaning someone who pretends to oppose the establishment while covertly serving it. These warnings usually come after I've shared or written about something a dissident figure has said or done, and are usually accompanied by an admonishment not to ever do so again lest I spread their malign influence. If you've been involved in any kind of anti-establishment activism for any length of time, you've probably encountered this yourself.


Paranoia pervades dissident circles of all sorts, and it's not entirely without merit, since establishment infiltration of political movements is the norm, not the exception. ...
...

...

The trouble with this paranoia and suspicion is that it doesn't seem to function with any kind of intelligence. I have received such "controlled opposition" warnings about pretty much every prominent dissident figure in the English-speaking world at one time or another, and if I believed them all there'd be no one in the world whose words I could share or write about, including my own. I myself have been accused at different times of being a "plant" for the CIA, the Russians, Assad, the Chinese Communist Party, the Iranian mullahs, the alt-right, Trump, Pyongyang, and the Palestinians, which if all true would make me a very busy girl indeed.
...
...

So since I know that infiltration and manipulation happens, but I don't find other people's whisperings about "controlled opposition" useful, how do I figure out who's trustworthy and who isn't? How do I figure out who it's safe to cite in my work and who to avoid? How do I separate the fool's gold from the genuine article? The sh!t from the Shinola?


Here is my answer: I don't.


I spend no mental energy whatsoever concerning myself with who may or may not be a secret pro-establishment influencer, and for good reason. ...
...
...
{{read the full article here (https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/02/11/how-to-tell-if-someone-is-controlled-opposition/)}}

[yelik]

I agree it is not worth being concerned about people that have a closed mind to something that is new or goes against the establishment propaganda, which is used to un-educate and dumb down the people – these people are easy to spot sooner or later without much effort

[norman]

I usually find the tricky innuendos of who the establishment is, that this 'opposition' is about, to be a clue.

I don't know about America, for sure, but in Britain the establishment, at least the public political face of it (switch on a BBC radio 4 program any time of day, any time of the week, to hear it ), is a kind of primary/junior school femifascism.

So, you tell me, what's the establishment ?, what's the opposition ?, and what's the 'controlled' opposition ? :)

[PurpleLama]

One thing I would be certain to do, if I was controlled opposition, would be to post a thread about controlled opposition.

Seriously, though, I love Caitlin Johnstone.

[Bubu]

Why is there controlled opposition? What is their purpose? How do they help advance the agenda of their creators? Can you give an example of how they could be use by their creators?

It would be a lot easier to spot them if we can first address this questions.

[Agape]

Broader “social media” platforms offer no warranty to the backgrounds of opinion and the opiner as long as those remain “anonymous Joes n Janes” there’s only predictable audacity and (im)plausible deniability of opinion, in every move we make: something like throwing message in bottle to huge sea.

Getting concerned about ones “safety” for any anonymous poster( or let’s say, poster without long traceable history) is truly useless. It’s not the messenger who is important, it’s the message.

In one to one and personal communication it’s all little different as people do reveal their opinions and press on the “important lifeline” buttons sooner or later, guess we all do unless we can maintain utmost decency and discretion and it’s truly the best to protect ones personal life and that of our near and dear ones as pupil of an eye so to say.

I’d say the following ..every party, side, institution, organisation or agency who have say 1000 payed activists/agents are followed by an army of 100 000 unpayed, volunteering activists/agents.
Sometimes and very often, there’s little if any difference between group A( who are payed) and group B( who are “merely volunteering”) even if those of group B act unprofessionally they may be people with real skills and talents in particular area, real opinions and more leisure time ( chuckle);)

But people do reveal their true opinions( and if they’re siding with someone which does not always look/sound like “working for somebody”) after some time.
What influencing looks like is not like , say “I am working for ABC and want you to work with me”, it’s never straight and honest.
It usually sounds like “I strongly prefer ABC against XYZ”. “XYZ is full of dirt ..”

And then they go on throwing dirt and suspicions on and around XYZ and MNO and others who aren’t in their ABC group/direction.

ABC gets mentioned rarely but with respect. Sometimes only once or twice to underly its true importance, mystery behind it but it gets mentioned with love.”Love-that-could-be-yours if you also were so smart as they are to follow only ABC and disregard all the dirty rest”.

They do tell themselves off because they’re influenced/payed ( even if just emotionally) for their “carrier” and opinion so they’re predestined.

While you or I may keep open minds of all things the most- those people don’t like open minds other than a metaphor in their dictionaries and books of koans.
They do not believe in open minds of all things.
They do believe in themselves and ABC because /and as long as ABC believes in them.

ABC is old ..hierarchical ..it’s always been here OR it’s been here through the latest, checkable and verifiable (by their assessment ) historical epoch.

XYZ are too loose in their views to be considered seriously and MNOs are junk :ROFL:
who are just posters compared to ABCs.

ABC is here to watch over XUZ and MNO because they are entertaining groups and people who ( in ABCs opinion) lack any control structure.

Most of ABC is boring, unimaginative stuff , work and controls. If they could not watch over XYZ and MNO they’d die slow painful death empty of meaning.

But hell, they do believe in themselves being the only righteous of rights ( and leftest of left) since they’re best of all, no matter what their particular ABC is about and they always do let you know times-to-times what they think about you truly :)


So in short ..and true to the article in opening post ..unless you’re working for ABC ..you’ll probably end up categorised in one of the self-parodising corners anyway suspecting that you’re suspicious of working for ...whomever ..whomever is out there yet prepping to detonate ABCs lives, trains or computers ..

it’s better not to even if it helped. Better to wake up to another day of live adventures at no ones cost since not working for anyone,
life is HUGE.

But shh ..it’s a secret :ROFL:




P.S.: No allusions to any news agency have been made by me in this post. Playing with alphabet letters hoping it’s not a crime yet but I don’t know 🙏

[Bubu]

"It’s not the messenger who is important, it’s the message."

coudnt agree more. that would be the answer to my questions. But then at times it helps to identify the CO so you dont waste a single sec. on them. Normally they tell you what is so very obvious. At times they first tell you the truth and then when they become so popular to the target audience they start garbage dissemination.
But yes life is HUGE and thanks for telling us one secret.:ROFL:

[Justplain]

The question about 'why there is controlled opposition' is, if you control both sides of an argument you can do two things. First you can create a diversion so that another issue that you really want to go unnoticed goes unnoticed. The other reason is that you can steer the discussion in a direction that you like. For instance, using the ATTIP UFO example, we know that was a disinfo campaign due to so many cia operatives involved, and this story was spinning a yarn of an evil alien space invasion that would likely have been ramped up if Hillary Clinton had been elected.

In both of these scenarios, truth is being obstructed, so this is negative behaviour that civilized, moral people would never do.

Regarding how to deal with infiltrators, etc. First thing is whether their message resonates with the truth, and if so, then who cares too much who they are working for. Secondly, if you are concerned with a person's background or message, even a basic internet background search on the topic or person can yield very enlightening information. I guess it's just whether you have the time to bother.

[Mike Gorman]

Additionally, the process of argument and analysis involves disagreements, and playing 'Devil's Advocate' to draw out people-this can be mistaken for 'Trolling' and playing with people.
We are often dealing with abstruse, and complex topics, we are confronted by many claims, and many who are on some kind of a quest to promote themselves, truth is a slippery eel

[shaberon]

In a way, anything anyone says is just noise, so, mentally, you don't want to get stuck to any of it.

Without using individual names, I believe there are a few schools of thought that can be flushed out and exposed rather easily. Unfortunately, this is what gets repeated in emotionally-charged articles. Constitutes the majority of anything to be found.

But not everything is controlled opposition, false flag, etc., and so a lot of this world of instant communication is a swamped wasteland.

"Intelligence" is a weird game like juggling water.

[Bubu]

I guess every post in this thread points to the simple "go for the message not the messenger" and I am happy with that.

[PurpleLama]

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the-revolution-has-no-hollywood-ending-f254501b4b9d

Here is the latest from CJ.

The Revolution has no Hollywood Ending