FOR ASPIRING JOURNALISTS, historians or politically-engaged citizens, there are few more productive uses of one’s time than randomly reading through the newsletters of I.F. Stone, the intrepid and independent journalist of the Cold War era who became, in my view, the nation’s first “blogger” even though he died before the advent of the internet. Frustrated by big media’s oppressive corporatized environment and its pro-government propaganda model, and then ultimately blacklisted from mainstream media outlets for his objections to anti-Russia narratives, Stone created his own bi-monthly newsletter, sustained exclusively by subscriptions, and spent 18 years relentlessly debunking propaganda spewing from the U.S. Government and its media partners.
What makes Stone’s body of work so valuable is not its illumination of history but rather its illumination of the present. What’s most striking about his newsletters is how little changes when it comes to U.S. Government propaganda and militarism, and the role the U.S. media plays in sustaining it all. Indeed, reading through his reporting, one gets the impression that U.S. politics just endlessly replays the same debates, conflicts, and tactics.
Much of Stone’s writings, particularly throughout the 1950s and into the 1960s, focused on the techniques for keeping Americans in a high state of fear over the Kremlin. One passage, from August of 1954, particularly resonates; Stone explained why it’s impossible to stop McCarthyism at home when – for purposes of sustaining U.S. war and militarism – Kremlin leaders are constantly being depicted as gravely threatening and even omnipotent. Other than the change in Moscow’s ideology – a change many of today’s most toxic McCarthyites explicitly deny – Stone’s observations could be written with equal accuracy today.
Current Prices on popular forms of Silver Bullion
If Communists are some supernatural breed of men, led by diabolic master minds in that distant Kremlin, engaged in a Satanic conspiracy to take over the world and enslave all mankind—and this is the thesis endlessly propounded by American liberals and conservatives alike, echoed night and day by every radio station and in every newspaper—the thesis no American dare any longer challenge without himself becoming suspect—then how to fight McCarthy?
If the public mind is to be conditioned for war, if it is being taught to take for granted the destruction of millions of human beings, few of them tainted with this dreadful ideological virus, all of them indeed presumably pleading for us to liberate them, how can we argue that it matters if a few possibly innocent men lose jobs or reputations because of McCarthy?
Two vital points stand out here: 1) the key to sustaining fears over a foreign adversary is depicting them as all-powerful and ubiquitous; and 2) once that image takes root, few will be willing to question the propaganda for fear of being accused of siding with the Foreign Evil: “the thesis no American dare any longer challenge without himself becoming suspect.”
This tactic – depicting adversaries as omnipotent super-villains – was key to the War on Terror. Radical Muslims were not just violent threats; they were uniquely menacing, like Bond-film bad guys.
When photos emerged showing how the U.S. Government was transporting terror suspect Jose Padilla to his trial by placing blackened goggles and earphones over his face, one U.S. commentator justified it by explaining it was necessary to prevent him from “blinking in code” to his terrorist comrades to activate plots. When asked why terror suspects were bound and gagged for long inter-continental flights to Guantanamo, a U.S. military official said that these are “people who would chew through a hydraulic cable to bring a C-17 down.” They possessed powers of dark magic, and where lurking everywhere, even when you couldn’t seem that. That’s the reason to fear them so much that one submits to any claim and any policy in the name of crushing them.
