Five part documentary on the state within a state in the United States – what those who comprise it think of the citizens of that nation and how they behave towards them and what they think of and how they behave towards others around the world. A study of megalomania, lies and mass deception, greed and absolute brutality – for that reason, highly recommended.
For me, the worst instances of the behaviour of this state within a state discussed in this series (particularly because of their implications) are the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (at the beginning of Part 4, which is appropriately named ‘Necrophilous’. The part begins with an excellent quotation.).
The exposure of the justification given for those bombings is consistent with what I already knew and have posted about (‘War Crime or War Winner? The Truth about the Bomb’ – an article written by Murray Sayle).
Oppenheimer’s megalomaniacal false modesty (quietly spoken, sage-like, eyes downcast – knowing not to look at the camera, to prevent his eyes being read) as he links the destructive power of the bomb to Indian religion is truly repulsive.
J.Robert Oppenheimer and General Groves at Trinity Test Ground Zero, 1945. The white canvas overshoes were to prevent fallout from sticking to the soles of their shoes.
The coup in Australia on 11.11.75 is discussed from thirty minutes into Part 1.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/counter-intelligence/
materialism, mysticism and art 
Very interesting Phil. Thanks. What a mess.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks Peter. The link was sent to me today and I have just finished watching all five parts. I think they are excellent, particularly the inspiring words spoken towards the end of Part 5. All the best, Phil
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting intro! As in the goddess Kali’s ‘destructive power’ yes. Thanks for sharing this. Looking forward to watching them all.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hi Jason,
The series shows how dangerous the US capitalist class is that controls its state and currently dominates the world. Rather than being a wildcard and an aberation, Trump is their exemplar and was put into power by that class to represent their interests, not those of the soybean farmers of Iowa (I could give you a quotation from Mein Kampf which, abstracted from its context, reads like a pro-socialist analysis). Their ramping up of pressure against China to try to contain its rise (which attempt will fail) will develop into the greatest contest of the 21st century, which in turn will see the world develop from capitalism to socialism (Engels’ general reading in 1894 of the impact of the development of China on the West will be shown, I think, to be correct). As English is the language of capitalism, Mandarin may well become the language of socialism.
LikeLiked by 2 people
What are the significant implications of the world going from capitalism to socialism?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Jason,
I agree with the Marxist position that just as the level of development of the productive forces necessitated the development from feudalism to capitalism, their further development (and the waste, pollution and destruction concomitant with this) is what will necessitate international socialism – i.e. not because people ‘like’ socialism (my point is that ‘matter’ [objective reality] precedes and is reflected in consciousness, not the other way round).
Under socialism, the means of production will be socially not privately owned and exploitation will no longer be disguised as a moral principle.
I also agree with Marx’s refusal to theorise life under socialism beyond broad writing on economic organisation and some general remarks (for which he has been criticised). As a materialist he focused on what existed.
Certainly new forms of not only economic but social and political organisation will develop. The use of technology will be pervasive and profound.
In my view, China carries the lessons, earned at great cost, of two socialist revolutions – the first in Russia and the second – its own. The reforms of Deng Xiaoping have been immensely successful, raising hundreds of millions into a level of affluence being eviscerated in the West, where Lenin’s minimal NEP (because of his hatred for the bourgeoisie) failed.
The Chinese Communist Party continues to carefully and successfully experiment in its development of socialism ‘with Chinese characteristics’ in a huge nation that not so long ago was far behind the West in economic development. The lessons learned will be of benefit to the world.
True socialism, however, can only be international and again, this will happen not because I like socialism (Trotsky wrote of ‘barbarism or socialism’) but because of necessity (a little while ago I watched the documentary ‘Attenborough and the Empire of the Ants’ in which his subject was a ‘super’ colony of ants of different species in the Jura which cohabited peacefully, to the benefit of that colony – where other colonies of different species waged internecine warfare. Very interesting). What do you think?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Phil, I think you articulated your point of view very well. Not sure how to make heads and tails of this global situation myself, once we factor in the acceleration of natural disasters, we can end up with a completely different kind of end game, unforeseen from our vantage point. Either way priorities will change midstream and we may be forced to paddle the ship into the whirlpool.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’m not sure any society is strictly an example of socialism or capitalism. Most economies are state-controlled and have a mix of social structures. Mu suspicion is that it is a mistake to think in terms of these ‘isms’ except as extreme theoretical examples. US citizens seem to have a difficulty when issues are not framed clearly in black and white terms, which of course in real life they never are. It looks like a kind of fundamentalism and seems to be highly divisive.
I would cite the case of football (soccer). A while back when it was still early days for soccer in the US it was suggested that for US consumption the game would have to have a deciding mechanism to ensure there could never be a draw. A small issue, but somehow it seems to reveal a frame of mind.
LikeLiked by 1 person