This contradiction is often explained as pragmatism. But another, less-examined framework suggests these are not compromises, but the consistent execution of a “no-win” doctrine—a policy of managed conflict designed not to defeat enemies, but to maintain a permanent “equilibrium.”
This is the playbook of an elite, bipartisan U.S. foreign policy establishment, crystallized in the organization that has shaped it for a century: the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
Continue reading on Jewish Home News.
The Police State We Voted For
Privacy was on the ballot. We chose convenience
It argued that Western democracies were on a quiet, evolutionary path toward a form of “global fascism,” built on a foundation of total surveillance, militarized policing, and sophisticated information control. The author, Michael Nield, envisioned a future where a small elite would micro-manage society using a technological and legal apparatus of totalitarianism, concealed from a public that would otherwise reject it.
To some, it read like a dystopian fantasy.
Two decades later, an examination of federal law, biometric industry growth, and domestic policing data shows that the document’s core warnings have been validated, and in some cases, surpassed. The architecture of a 21st-century surveillance state has been erected, not by a secret cabal, but through a series of legal, commercial, and cultural shifts that incrementally traded privacy for convenience and civil liberties for promises of security.
Continue reading on Jewish Home News.
No comments:
Post a Comment