Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Intelligence Squared" channel.

DM talks about migrants - the symptom of neoliberalism - in order no NOT have to talk about neoliberalism. Serves the agenda of the few incl. their rich owners AND the sell their rag. - If you want to unify a large group of poeple that do not intimately know each other (close knit communities) haven a common enemy is the easiest and most powerful way to have group cohesion, to emotionally engage people and rally them behind an agenda.
2
Divide and Conquer: They write about migrants - the symptom of neoliberalism - in order no NOT have to talk about neoliberalism. "The DM gave a voice to disenfrenchised people..." - NO - the DM exploits and manipulates the justified grievances and makes sure those people never ever identify the problem correctly - the problem that is at the top.
2
It is in the human DNA (survial of the species behavior !) - If you want to unify a large group of people that do not intimately know each other (close knit communities) haven a common enemy is the easiest and most powerful way to have group cohesion, to emotionally engage people and rally them behind an agenda. That is the only way one can quickly unify really large numbers - for instance if those at the top want to manipulate those they rule over (openly or covertly) to go to war with them. After all that includes the risk of being harmed, dying, the necessity to kill and harm foreigners, and many hardships. So the incentive, the motivation better be good. The Daily Mail also uses that instinct to make and secure profits. If people banded together on an agenda to improve the live for the little people (natives, migrants EU and otherwise) they would be incredibly powerful. Of course that too would be a business model for a newspaper, holding the government to account - when they let the people in to make sure IT WORKS FOR EVERYONE. Neither NEOLIBERAL LABOUR nor the Tories had any interest in REGULATION immigration and easing the tensions by properly funding the necessary public programs. but not when it is owned by rich people). And it is more work and somewhat more instable to unite people behind something to FIGHT FOR. Fighting UNITED AGAINST is the more powerful instinct and it can be whipped up right away. (Social cohesion was very important in the small groups of hunters and gatherers, being "against" and stand united they defended the vulnerable from predators, wildfires, going after the big prey, ….
2
William Binney co-developed the NSA spying programs before he turned whistle blower on the surveillance state. One of his recent interviews:. IF the emails had been HACKED, the NSA with their 24/7 giant surveillance aparatus would be able TO TRACK the electronic delivery of those data packages (where they came from and point of destination). AND CIA or NSA could safely publish that information - it is NOT giving away methods or sources. (as I mentioned Binney knows these systems inside out). Also he said that the CIA depends very much on the NSA for such information (intelligence derived from data collection). And that the official statements of the CIA and how they claim to be sure that it was a hack, it was done not only by Russian hackers but also on orders of the Russion government. As they do NOT present that info to confirm their claims, he concludes that they do not have any traces. Which in turn means, it did not happen with remote electronic access, he is quite determined on that. The other possibility: someone with inside access (and that could be inside the DNC, but also the IRS, FBI or CIA thanks to the new surveillance state) accessed that info, stored the data on a thumbdrive and handed the data over in phisical form. So it is a leak not a hack. That is the only logical explanation why the NSA cannot find proof of hacking (= remote electronic access). This also lines up with the statement of the former British ambassador* now working for or with Wikileaks. He said that he met with the source and the data (email content) was handed over to him (in a park in Washington if I remember correctly) * He was abassador in Uzbekistan and took offense with the brutal torture methods and human rights violations of their dictator. The British government and corporations liked the dictator because - surprise - fossil fuels. So the ambassador got fired - which in my opinion means the guy has some integrity - so I would trust his word on the leaked data as well. As British ambassador he could have had a cosy and wealthy life (if just his conscience had been a little bit more "flexible")
1
1:32:20
1
People "love to hate". There is a certain morbid enjoyment in feeling annoyed and being given licence to look down on "the other". Moreover: Anger is a more empowering, reviving emotion than feeling helpless and confused. ("Justice can fight better for its cause when righteous anger lends a helping hand.") Yes, newspapers are in it to sell. (But then drugs, porn, .. a lot of things sell well). Btw: even in the days when "print" was still doing well established newspapers got 30 % of their revenue from selling the papers and 70 % from advertisers - in some countries like Austria they also get public funding to help free speech, etc.). so the product that "was sold" was alway "access to the mind of the readers" - and it was sold to the advertisers. And one way to attract many readers that are necessary for the profits is to appeal to their instincts and the lowest denominators. ("Othering" and scapegoating CAN be promoted very successfully - it DOES WORK - it is part of the human psyche. That is no reason one should appeal to it.) Sex sells - yes, see porn, see advertising industry - does that mean a newspaper should use that ? Another way mainstream media are important: They help to shape public opinion. In case the owners of the newspaper are rich people they can make sure the policies that benefit THEM get the megaphone. The yellow press can also be useful to deflect the anger and attention of citizens that suffer fromIn that way they are VERY usuful for the ruling elites - and there is a reason the lobbies and the CIA infiltrate mainstream media. With the internet mainstream media lost control of the narrative partially. The ruling class and media are highly irritated. So now "fake news" are the pretext to reign in the genie that jumped out of the bottle.
1
So DM stories how the NHS does not work - sure ! - Informing the readers how the NHS had the leanest budget for a wealthy nation (among the lowest worldwide, certainly in Europe, it is not even close). Nope ! And that THEN the Tories had started DEFUNDING that highly cost-efficient system. The NHS has been over the course of 10 years run into the ground. Either for fierce ideological reasons or (and that is my assumption) to make the piece of the pie available for the buddies of the Tories. The "investors" who could not make a profit so far (apart from investments in pharma). Healthcare is 7 - 11 % of the GDP in any wealthy country (17 % in the insance private for profit U.S. system). That is a LOT of the economy. With the NHS services are provided and the people who do the work have wages and (should have) orderly work conditions. BUT: no one is going to make a huge profit of something that the consumers / patients have no choice but using. Healthcare is not a "nice to have, can do without service" which one can forego if one thinks the service is not good, or whoever delivers it rips off the public. Or the fact that the Tories simply destroyed the supply of UK trained doctors and nurses. Limiting the open spots for training (nurses) or making it very costly to become a doctor. A recent Independent article: NHS recruited 100 doctors in India (*) they were well qualified BUT 40 of them were refused the work permits. The NHS says they NEED those doctors. (* way to go for a first world country: stealing the experts that a developing country has trained at their costs, because they are too greedy, or too stupid to plan 10 years ahead. And if one starts out in medicine today it takes at least 10 years to be ready to go as doctor. The well trained doctors CAN leave the U.K., the NHS does have a shortage because the "economically resposible" allegedly "conservative" government was incapable or unwilling to predict that new doctors would be needed. The actions of the Tories show that they do not care if the NHS works for the population - the politicians have private services, (and the Blairites could not be bothered to scream bloody murder !) And it is not like the DM would call them out on it (which would be quite powerful). No - the owners of the DM are part of the investor class. They can't wait that the NHS is sufficiently undermined to "justify" privatization "as the only solution" to "save" it. Which means then could the profiteers could - finally, finally - get their hands on that part of the economy.
1
Daily Mail employee: the DM is for the people who have to keept their money together, immigration brings their wages down, schools, houses ... - so.... the DM constantly write how the government better fund Social housing and the NHS better, that there MUST be a minimum wage and worker protection, has a crusade against the zero hour contracts, and has been askind the government for years to use the possibilities they have under EU law to reduce immigration ... amiright ?? Nope - their rich owners profit of these conditionas like all of the upper class, but they correctly identify that there is a disgruntled segment = target audience. And by appeling to their worst instincts - kicking down instead of kicking upwards they a) make money b) secure the conditions in society which are allegedly caused by the immigrants. they talk about migrants - the symptom of neoliberalism - in order no NOT have to talk about neoliberalism.
1