Glenn Greenwald Resigns

Glenn Greenwald, a brilliant journalist, has resigned today from the news outlet he himself had founded because of censorship.

Here is his letter of resignation.

Greenwald is being censored by Biden supporters to advance the Biden candidacy. Is anybody still surprised that this isn’t the side I want to be on?

23 thoughts on “Glenn Greenwald Resigns”

  1. Saw that this morning– it does make you stop and take a breath.

    I hope this is the beginning of a new day for journalism. Corporate media’s been in decline for a long time now. Independent journalists exist, but struggle to make a living. We seem to be reaching an inflection point. Corporate operations are becoming increasingly irrelevant, and increasingly not believed. And smaller operations like The Hill, Matt Taibbi, and even basic aggregate-and-comment people like Tim Pool, are finally figuring out how to function as business operations.

    It could go very wrong and all keep sliding down into darkness, of course, but… it could also be the beginning of a bright new age of journalism.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I’m sorry to say this Clarissa but in my experience the other side will suffocate real journalism just as badly as the left, but differently. To explain:

    A few years ago, I published articles relating to society, economics, politics etc on social media, and was popular. By popular I mean that 5000 word articles on economics, the housing market etc that I only published on my own page would be shared hundreds of times and read by several thousand people in a week.

    Anyway, the reaction from left leaning people wasn’t dissimilar to what is described by Greenwald above. In my experience, they didn’t want to disagree, they wanted to delete. They didn’t want to debate, they wanted to cancel. They didn’t want to offer anything themselves – they just wanted you to disappear and apologise for life.

    So you’d think that the right would be better. Yeah. No. Really, no.

    In my experience what people on the right do is sit back and let independent thinkers be, simultaneously, trailblazers, thought leaders, and bullet sponges/cannon fodder, where they (we) are expected to write clear things that are universally declared to be true, attacked by the left (simply because they don’t like whatever has been written, truth be damned) and then, after the independent writer has been beset by a few hundred half mad leftists, their article will be re-written by someone on the right in some large publication and the independent originator either never mentioned, or derided.

    The reason that the independent writer is never mentioned is because, in my experience, the right has amidst its ranks the same proportion of mediocre, uninspired, uninspiring selfish hacks as does the left. Journalism means nothing. The journalist means nothing. But self interest – self interest is everything.

    From the perspective of the creative, what is happening today is much less about left vs right as it is about capable vs incapable, or the naturally productive vs the inherent freeloader.

    Anyway not to ruin the surprise but what happens next is that the really inspiring writers drop out one by one due to disincentivisation, followed by a short celebration by the left that their (imaginary) “foe” has been vanquished, who then begin writing (garbage) unopposed that is yawned at by the public, followed by sharp declines in readership/viewership and importantly, participation.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. That’s a very interesting comment, George. I think there’s definitely something to the idea that we are witnessing a rebellion of smug mediocrities. It’s definitely the best time for the incapable, envious sort.

      Like

      1. Clarissa, since you have much more exposure to all things communism than I do, may I ask if anyone from your past, or any other person who is particularly knowing in these kinds of group systems ever even made the joke that communism is based on incapable people banding together to take from those who are more capable?

        I don’t mean to oversimplify, but from my perspective and based on my reading, almost every form of collectivism is based on the same general pattern, whereby the so-called “haves” are singled out by the mob and consumed/annihilated, followed by the next in line of “haves” being singled out and consumed/annihilated, on and on until everybody in the society is so broke and so miserable that finally someone comes along and says “it was better to be poor in a society run by capable ‘haves’ than to be rich in a society run by broke and starving idiots” without being killed for it.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “communism is based on incapable people banding together to take from those who are more capable”

          That sounds a bit too Ayn Rand… in practice the biggest weakness of communist governments (when they’re not flat out evil murder machines) is that too many normal relations of cause and effect are severed. Competence and conscientiousness mostly don’t help a person and incompetence and sloppiness don’t hurt them. Getting ahead requires a combination of willful blindness, hypocrisy and ruthlessness while actually being able to do anything well is of secondary concern. These leads to a lot of street smart mediocrities getting ahead while the truly intelligent have to learn to camouflage themselves of simply drop out.
          Smaller more irrelevant institutions can stumble along for a long time this way but as organizing principles for society the results are devastating (sooner rather than later).

          Like

          1. Cliff Arroyo, I’d like to respond but will wait to see if Clarissa says something first because I’m particularly interested in her perspective due to where she is from. It’s part of how I learn. Respectfully and everything of course 🙂

            When I do say something later, as a reminder to myself, I’ll probably compare hierarchies.

            Like

            1. In the USSR, anybody who tried to stand out or, say, invent something useful or come up with an idea to improve productivity was beaten down relentlessly.

              Both of my parents are workaholics who keep inventing smart things to make stuff work better. They were both hounded for it in the USSR. “Be like everybody else, don’t stand out” was the recipe for success. The most valuable skill was passing unnoticed.

              Like

              1. Clarissa, may I ask why. What drove those others to beat down anyone who was different, or to be so insistent that they should be like everyone else?

                Like

              2. You know the “Internationale”? It promises that “those who are nothing will become everything.” So that’s how it was. The nothings aggressively persecuted everybody who was a little bit more or wanted to be.

                Like

              3. There were smart people, of course. But they had to pretend to be dim simpletons.

                There’s this great novel by the dissident Soviet writer Dudintsev where a Lysenkoist scientist has to fake being uneducated, clownish, and incapable of speaking correctly in order to rise through the ranks.

                It’s similar to how very educated people in the US say “I be like…” to affect a background in poverty that they don’t have. It pays to pretend to be a certain kind of historically marginalized group.

                When successful US academics get together and argue about which one of them is more proletarian, it’s the same thing.

                Like

              4. Cliff Arroyo, now that Clarissa has more or less replied, I could ask you the same or similar. You stated:

                “too many normal relations of cause and effect are severed. Competence and conscientiousness mostly don’t help a person and incompetence and sloppiness don’t hurt them. Getting ahead requires a combination of willful blindness, hypocrisy and ruthlessness while actually being able to do anything well is of secondary concern. These leads to a lot of street smart mediocrities getting ahead while the truly intelligent have to learn to camouflage themselves of simply drop out.”

                My question is why. What goes through an incompetent persons mind to go to work every day, to witness another person do something incompetently, and not to do anything – yet, when a person does something with competence, they are somehow spurred into action and exert energy to stop good things from happening. What is the thought process, specifically?

                Like

              5. I don’t know “the Internationale” and so will find it. Another question though. Lets say that one of the nothings who had become something made a bad mistake that was known only to one or two people. How did the one or two people bend that person to their will. Was blackmail/the threat of being revealed the main method, or did that method backfire? Was there any value in knowing about the mistake?

                Like

              6. Typical trade union mentality. Trade unions attempt to increase the price of labor by restricting supply. Obviously workaholics must be punished because they provide too much labor. Unions generally restrict the amount of labor any individual worker is allowed to do in the same way OPEC restricts the amount of oil any member country can produce in order to maintain the price.

                Like

        2. “communism is based on incapable people banding together to take from those who are more capable”

          No. As Chairman Mao so indelicately put it “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”

          Lenin was evil but he wasn’t either stupid or incapable. Successful communist revolutions didn’t happen because dumb people with dumb ideas somehow lucked into being on top of the political heap. In fact, it’s hardly about ideas at all except insofar as they supply the ideological glue that binds leaders and fighters together in struggle. What’s decisive in any revolution is the balance of military and paramilitary force.

          Like

          1. I understand that, although all political systems – not just communism – ultimately rest on a monopoly of force. What I want to know is what people think about the idea that communism is a particular kind of gangsterism whereby hierarchies of affiliation/quid pro quo behaviour/recognition of mutual incompetence supplant the kinds of competency based hierarchies generally found in liberal democracies. And more importantly – why.

            Apologies for the late reply btw. I only just saw this now 🙂

            Like

    2. // A few years ago, I published articles relating to society, economics, politics etc on social media, and was popular.

      Do you also have a blog? Would love to read it or some of those articles if they remain online.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. No, none of it really exists anymore. Most of the articles were located on Facebook, and were deleted without warning and for no reason around 2 years ago when so-called “conservative” voices were being “purged” (ie censored).

        To explain, I live in a smallish sized administrative city that is mostly financed by a large government that pours a lot of money into expanding blue collar and military jobs through contract work, which means that only a few administrators handle many billions of dollars.

        In turn, what that does is breed a kind of small-town style of corruption, except that the amount of money is at least an order of magnitude above the usual sums spent, squandered or stolen in your usual small towns.

        In addition to that, the city is very isolated compared to the remainder of the country, which makes it a kind of regional outpost that more sophisticated or urbane people tend to avoid or depart from, while those across the country who are less capable or who have a dark history see it as a kind of last resort.

        In other words, money and low class people flow into the city, while those with brains or better options flow out.

        Anyway, for a mixture of reasons, I stayed, and casually wrote articles to an audience of relatively ignorant people who had a small town (bad) attitude and general desire to bicker or call you names.

        The result of that is that my writing style was simple enough for the average 15 year old to understand, while every statement made was based on some kind of reference so as to defend against whichever imbecile in the horde wanted to screech that something was incorrect that day.

        As it turns out, simple yet well referenced writing, while being nothing particularly special in terms of novel ideas, is super popular amongst blue collar workers and military contractors, yet despised by administrators and public servants who are accustomed to being the smartest one in a room full of idiots.

        After a couple of years, it ended up being that my writings shifted community attitudes and election results by as much as a medium sized newspaper, which, when coupled with the generally moderate or conservative tone of my writings, led to my being caught up in the mass censorship of early 2019.

        Nice thing to say though, thanks 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “money and low class people flow into the city… an audience of relatively ignorant people who had a small town (bad) attitude… my writing style was simple enough for the average 15 year old to understand… imbecile in the horde wanted to screech…”

          “Hoy-day, what a sweep of vanity comes this way!” (Shakespeare)

          “The fly on the back of a water buffalo thinks that it’s taller than the buffalo” (Filipino proverb)

          Like

          1. Suggesting my words to be vain without first finding out where I live is a little arrogant and perhaps a little vain in and of itself, since sometimes, a statement of fact is a statement of fact, and nothing more than that.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.