The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

A calm, intelligent definition of "DEEP STATE" Options
TheParser
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:57:45 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,293
Neurons: 20,138
To: Fair-minded readers


If you read about American politics, you will hear the term "Deep State."



*****

Many people who support President Trump believe that the Deep State is trying to destroy him (by leaking secret information, for example).
Many people who do not support President Trump hope that the Deep State will destroy him (by leaking secret information, for example).

*****

This morning on TV, I heard a simple definition of "Deep State." This TV host defined it as the "permanent government."

a. When a new president moves into the White House, there are still many, many government employees who always keep their jobs no matter who the president is.

*****

Now here is a more detailed explanation:

The term "Deep State" is what some people feel is a relationship between the intelligence agencies [spies], the military generals, financial interests [Wall Street], Silicon Valley, and the federal bureaucracies [the many people who work in government offices].

There is the belief that some of the people in those places are working together or separately to do everything possible to destroy President Trump.


*****

My source gives this fascinating background.

The term "Deep State" comes from the Turkish derin devlet, "a clandestine [secret] network, including military and intelligence officers, along with civilian allies [friends], whose mission was to protect the secular [non-religious] order established, in 1923, by" Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who is considered the founder of Modern Turkey.



Credit for this detailed explanation goes to the March 20, 2017, issue of The New Yorker magazine.
Kunstniete
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 12:09:33 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 1/25/2017
Posts: 902
Neurons: 104,088
Location: Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Lets talk a bit more about conspiracies? Some people still believe that the earth is flat, while others claim that HIV was intentionally invented as a weapon. I could continue with "Chemtrail"-follower or else, but I guess you got my point Whistle

The value of choice is not in the size of the action but in its effect.
tunaafi
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 12:30:57 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 4,135
Neurons: 52,132
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
TheParser wrote:

Many people who do not support President Trump hope that the Deep State will destroy him (by leaking secret information, for example)


Evidence?
TheParser
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 12:33:16 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,293
Neurons: 20,138
Kunstniete wrote:
Lets talk a bit more about conspiracies?



Hello, Kunstniete:

I am sorry for the sarcastic tone of your comments, but at least you did NOT personally attack me, so I am delighted to answer you.

Here is more about that NEW YORKER article:

1. That magazine is 100% anti-Trump.

2. It agrees with you that there is NO "Deep State" trying to destroy President Trump.

3. It IS intellectually honest enough, however, to admit that presidents have, indeed, met resistance from elements within their own government.

a. President Eisenhower spoke about the "military-industrial complex."

b. President Johnson "felt pressure from the Pentagon" during the Vietnam War.

c. President Obama's Syria policy "was rebuked" by some people in the State Department.


(I might also add that some reports CLAIM that some generals, who were not pleased with President Obama's Syria policy, were sharing secret information with allies.)

*****

I think that all of us should be truly humble.

We all know that many, many Americans dislike and fear President Trump.

It seems to be common sense that at least some people are doing everything possible to destroy him.

No, the so-called Deep State in the United States is NOT the same as the Deep State in Turkey, Pakistan, and Egypt (as the NEW YORKER points out).

But I think that it is fair to believe that there ARE some people in influential positions who are doing what they can to destroy President Trump.
Kunstniete
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 1:02:20 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 1/25/2017
Posts: 902
Neurons: 104,088
Location: Berlin, Berlin, Germany
TheParser wrote:
But I think that it is fair to believe that there ARE some people in influential positions who are doing what they can to destroy President Trump.


I agree with you, but this is not uncommon. I bet that you have those elements in every democratic government and/or state. It's not limited to Trump, however, since he is absolutely inexperienced with politics he possibly heard about these elements just now.
I know this isn't related to Trump, but the "glyophosate fight" within the last 2 years in the EU is a nice example which shows the influence of these elements at a higher level.
And lets not forget about the people who really make the laws:
"Too often government responds to the whispers of lobbyists before the cries of the people." (Andrew Mark Cuomo)



The value of choice is not in the size of the action but in its effect.
progpen
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 6:25:27 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,362
Neurons: 161,012
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
TheParser wrote:
Kunstniete wrote:
Lets talk a bit more about conspiracies?



Hello, Kunstniete:

I am sorry for the sarcastic tone of your comments,


I'm not sorry for the sarcastic tone. In fact, we need much more sarcasm. Much much more sarcasm.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ― Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 10:34:23 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 26,242
Neurons: 139,836
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Yes - it is the same everywhere (or, at least, in all democracies).

The government comes and goes, ministers change every couple of years (in the USA, the president changes too).

In Britain, the continuity of government depends on "civil servants". These are not the elected or appointed 'Minister of Transport' or 'Minister of Agriculture' - who is an MP and will only hold the job for a year or two - but are career clerks and so on.
These are the "Permanent Under-Secretaries" for the various departments of government, and are the ones who actually run the place on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis.

If a newly-appointed Minister doesn't know what the hell he's doing and is about to destroy the work of years, yes, the long-term workers in the department will be obstructive, slow, and generally a block.

As I see the President has targeted the intelligence community, the press, the environmental 'ministry' (or whatever it's called over there), the health service and so on, I'm sure that the heads of those areas will be trying to obstruct him.

Here, there's also the House of Lords - which has lifetime members.
You have a different system.

I know (by their own admission) a bunch of members of the USA 'upper house' deliberately blocked anything President Obama tried to do.
The whole Republican party tried to destroy him with propaganda and 'politicking'.

I'm sure there are equivalent groups trying to destroy Mr Trump.

It's not a conspiracy, it's just the normal day-to-day workings of American politics.


Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:33:28 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 6,211
Neurons: 36,961
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
As Drago says, the leaking is normal everyday business in the American government.

I am copying a post where I digressed on another thread today where it seems to me to be more like "Deep State" except that it is not a secret that it is happening and the sources are known so it is not really a conspiracy theory. However, a great deal of money is involved in swaying opinion to match the spender.


Hope123 wrote:
Thanks for the links, Andrew.


I found the link I read this morning about the Koch brothers and what the author reveals is to me the real meaning of 'Deep State'? And Trump says he is independent of this? According to the article, Mike Pence is a recipient of Koch money and was C. Koch's first choice for president in 2012. I wonder how much of this type of thing goes on in the Canadian government. There has to be some of it here too.


I would like to hear any opinions if any American has anything to add about the American government and the Koch brothers in this article which was written from a Canadian standpoint.

"Fighting Fake News about (Canadian) Healthcare"

Anything in brackets is my commentary. The rest is paraphrasing. The link is here so you can check for yourself.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2017/03/16/fighting-fake-news-about-canadian-health-care-mcquaig.html

In an opinion piece, the author explains that whenever "Americans start tinkering with their deeply dysfunctional healthcare system... right wing commentators seek to denigrate our (Canadian) system." (Trump himself slammed it several times last fall.)

A negative example or two is magnified as if to be representative of Canadian healthcare. (I also remember when Obamacare was being introduced how a Canadian woman was paid to exaggerate her claim of having to go to the US for care. Her tumor was deemed to be benign and so she had to wait a bit while the cancer patients were taken care of. Instead she went to the States and then didn't like it when OHIP wouldn't cover her US bills. Republicans made an ad to discredit Canadian healthcare and Obamacare making it seem her care was urgent when it wasn't.)

The analyst who gave (theParser - it really WAS fake news) the fake news that years ago said that all Ontario hospitals had to shut down for the month of December as they had run out of money was from the right wing Cato Institute which C. Koch established in 1974.

This author says the state of healthcare in the US is symptomatic of the Republican taste for capitalism and we have less of that in Canada. She says there is a "virulent " strain now in the Republican Party nurtured by a few dozen billionaires led by the Koch brothers, who have amassed a combined $84.5 billion.

She mentions that the Koch brothers, who hate government and any sharing of wealth, have invested "massively" in "think tanks, academic programs, front groups, political action groups, and campaigns, lobbyists, and politicians - documented by Jane Mayer in her book "Dark Money - that operate behind the scenes. (That to me would be the real meaning of Deep State. I have no real knowledge of these facts. But - Why would anyone who has so much need more and try to stop others from having a crumb from the pie? Sick!)

And Trump says he is independent of this? Well, Mike Pence is a recipient of Koch money and was C. Koch's first choice for president in 2012.

Koch money explains why Republicans are trying to justify stripping health coverage to pay for a $600 B worth of tax cuts for the rich. Some even consider the plan to be too generous to the disadvantaged.

:::::


(Anyhow, Canadians are sick and tired ourselves of feeling the reverberations of these machinations up here when our greedy people try to stir up for-profit ideas. It is not statistically true, (less than 0.1%) that we routinely flock to the US for care. We are always working to improve it to keep it sustainable, but we love and take pride in our universal healthcare system.

So American Republican lawmakers, please STFU about Canada's healthcare, now and in the future.)

edited - sorry I got carried away to different topics ...



I'm Dancing as Fast as I Can.
Kunstniete
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 3:36:12 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 1/25/2017
Posts: 902
Neurons: 104,088
Location: Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Drag0nspeaker wrote:
In Britain, the continuity of government depends on "civil servants". These are not the elected or appointed 'Minister of Transport' or 'Minister of Agriculture' - who is an MP and will only hold the job for a year or two - but are career clerks and so on.
These are the "Permanent Under-Secretaries" for the various departments of government, and are the ones who actually run the place on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis.

If a newly-appointed Minister doesn't know what the hell he's doing and is about to destroy the work of years, yes, the long-term workers in the department will be obstructive, slow, and generally a block.


And this as a real major problem. I don't know about other countries, but in Germany you can be any minister if you know how to do it. You don't need special education of a particular field, you just need to know the right persons. You want to be health minister but have not the foggiest idea about medicine? No problem, just make yourself a name & talk to the right persons at the right moment. That's why we have a woman who was first minister for families/seniors/youth, then for work & social things and finally minister of defense. Actually she studied medicine but was never applied for minister of health because that department is not big and meaningful enough to boost a political career. Brick wall

By the way: with all that gender-equalization thing, why is there no "ministeress" but only a minister for both man & woman?

The value of choice is not in the size of the action but in its effect.
will
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 6:23:56 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/29/2009
Posts: 1,017
Neurons: 4,081
To fair minded, right-handed readers, between 1.72m and 1.87m tall, born in a month containing an M, with a full head of hair in a natural shade – specifically excluding blue or green.

A friend of my neighbours oral hygienist is a guest on these forums, but is too terrified to post. They have asked me to calmly and intelligently point out that progpen is 127% correct when he says we need more much much more sarcasm.

I’m even...... sorry, my oral neighbour of my hygienist friend...... is tempted to express.... the genius of progpen’s wonderful comment in full caps, large coloured font, centred and surrounded by emojis.


Kunstniete wrote:
Lets talk a bit more about conspiracies? Some people still believe that the earth is flat, while others claim that HIV was intentionally invented as a weapon. I could continue with "Chemtrail"-follower or else, but I guess you got my point


You missed a trick here. You could have used a number of conspiracies that Trump is actually currently basing Government policy and appointments on, such as climate change denial or MMR / Autism anti-vaccine scaremongering… or any one of his paranoid delusions, or the vice president’s young Earth creationism. Actually, now I think about it, it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump has at some point stated a belief that the Earth is flat and I just missed it. Anxious


.
TheParser
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 8:06:06 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,293
Neurons: 20,138
Kunstniete wrote:

"Too often government responds to the whispers of lobbyists before the cries of the people." (Andrew Mark Cuomo)




An excellent point!

You have probably already heard about the President's budget proposals.

The lobbyists are already lining up to fight them tooth and nail.
Hope123
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 9:32:16 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 6,211
Neurons: 36,961
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Quote Will - "You missed a trick here. You could have used a number of conspiracies that Trump is actually currently basing Government policy and appointments on, such as climate change denial or MMR / Autism anti-vaccine scaremongering… or any one of his paranoid delusions, or the vice president’s young Earth creationism. Actually, now I think about it, it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump has at some point stated a belief that the Earth is flat and I just missed it. Anxious "

Policy based on conspiracy theories plus weird new conspiracy terms eagerly embraced by followers... It is not hard to see the influence of Bannon here when terms are being used and coapted from other sources, even other countries. Bannon was/is a film maker and ex executive of Breitbart.

Now the normal workings of a government are a conspiracy theory called "Deep State", the regular press doing their jobs are "the enemy of the people", and we have "alternative facts". I hope it doesn't end up that Breitbart and the National Enquirer are the only two media sources left.

The agencies listed in the OP that are supposed to be working together are the ones that have voiced a concern about something Trump has done and he has tweeted about them disparagingly. Sarcasm - so obviously they must be in cahoots with each other or are releasing the Truth separately to conspire against the president. I mean, that just makes sense. Brick wall

From Snopes - The New York Times wrote a piece about Russians being "wiretapped" on January 20. Levin and then On March 3, Breitbart, picked up the story and connected other unconnected events together, and on March 7 the president tweeted the theory that there was a conspiracy theory against himself.

I'm Dancing as Fast as I Can.
Hope123
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 9:38:18 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 6,211
Neurons: 36,961
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
TheParser wrote:
Kunstniete wrote:

"Too often government responds to the whispers of lobbyists before the cries of the people." (Andrew Mark Cuomo)




An excellent point!

You have probably already heard about the President's budget proposals.

The lobbyists are already lining up to fight them tooth and nail.


It is not just the lobbyists who are going to fight it. It is what is supposed to happen in a democracy so the best possible outcome for ALL people is arrived at. "I read somewhere by somebody that it seems" that everything is being cut except the defence dept and the money to pay for the initiative to build a wall.

I'm Dancing as Fast as I Can.
Kunstniete
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 10:00:05 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 1/25/2017
Posts: 902
Neurons: 104,088
Location: Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Hope123 wrote:
It is not just the lobbyists who are going to fight it. It is what is supposed to happen in a democracy so the best possible outcome for ALL people is arrived at.


Wow. This is SO idealistic I can't believe. Don't get me wrong, of course this is how it's supposed to be. But if most people don't agree with something their politicians have decided, what will happen? Mostly nothing. People will fuss about it, but finally they endure it.

Berlin is not safe enough for bicycling? Lets start a referendum, we only need 30.000 signatures! Hey, we got >100.000 signatures, what now? Oh well, the Berlin government has not enough power of decision to change something, so the referendum was entirely useless.

That's the way politics are made. Public involved in the making of laws is possibly the worst nightmare of most politicians. And yes, there are many more examples.

The value of choice is not in the size of the action but in its effect.
Sarrriesfan
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 11:10:16 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/30/2016
Posts: 566
Neurons: 3,697
Location: Luton, England, United Kingdom
Kunstniete wrote:
Drag0nspeaker wrote:
In Britain, the continuity of government depends on "civil servants". These are not the elected or appointed 'Minister of Transport' or 'Minister of Agriculture' - who is an MP and will only hold the job for a year or two - but are career clerks and so on.
These are the "Permanent Under-Secretaries" for the various departments of government, and are the ones who actually run the place on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis.

If a newly-appointed Minister doesn't know what the hell he's doing and is about to destroy the work of years, yes, the long-term workers in the department will be obstructive, slow, and generally a block.


And this as a real major problem. I don't know about other countries, but in Germany you can be any minister if you know how to do it. You don't need special education of a particular field, you just need to know the right persons. You want to be health minister but have not the foggiest idea about medicine? No problem, just make yourself a name & talk to the right persons at the right moment. That's why we have a woman who was first minister for families/seniors/youth, then for work & social things and finally minister of defense. Actually she studied medicine but was never applied for minister of health because that department is not big and meaningful enough to boost a political career. Brick wall

By the way: with all that gender-equalization thing, why is there no "ministeress" but only a minister for both man & woman?


In some fields they are dropping female only suffixes in the name of equality, for example actress has fallen out of favour with performers of both genders often described as actors in print and visual media, with awards like the Oscars being notable exceptions.

I have always like 'Yes Minister' and 'Yes Prime Minster' as an example of civil servants in action, it was one of Baroness Thatchers favourite shows as she felt it accurately portrayed the issue.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8keZbZL2ero

I lack the imagination for a witty signature.
Hope123
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 12:41:05 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 6,211
Neurons: 36,961
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Kunstniete wrote:
Hope123 wrote:
It is not just the lobbyists who are going to fight it. It is what is supposed to happen in a democracy so the best possible outcome for ALL people is arrived at.


Wow. This is SO idealistic I can't believe. Don't get me wrong, of course this is how it's supposed to be. But if most people don't agree with something their politicians have decided, what will happen? Mostly nothing. People will fuss about it, but finally they endure it.

Berlin is not safe enough for bicycling? Lets start a referendum, we only need 30.000 signatures! Hey, we got >100.000 signatures, what now? Oh well, the Berlin government has not enough power of decision to change something, so the referendum was entirely useless.

That's the way politics are made. Public involved in the making of laws is possibly the worst nightmare of most politicians. And yes, there are many more examples.


I did not make myself clear that I was talking about the members of government who are involved in passing the budget, not the general public.

But in any protest, the outcome has nothing to do with whether or not one should fight. Otherwise one just rolls over and plays dead.
Yes, one often gets a form letter back from the government, and petitions are often ignored, but I am not so sure policy is never affected by protests.

But just because a small minority is vocal, does not mean that the majority should still not rule in a democracy.

I understand that even if they do nothing, at least the UK government has to look at petitions with signatures over a certain number.



Americans would have to tell you whether or not Budget bills are easily passed and what Appropriation Bills have to do with it. I don't know anything about how they do it - but I always hear a lot of hype and fighting etc at budget time with some bills not being passed and the threatening of or actually happening of the government even being shut down. I don't really pay much attention.

Edited to Add - Apparently it is different from how we do it as Congress can make changes to budget. Canadians are hoping they will change the 97% cut in the funds allocated for Great Lakes Clean Up. So yes, I hope they fight it - but sensibly and not just for the pleasure of blocking, as was publicly done in the past eight years.

Edited - I got this link when I researched - it is only Wiki but if one is really interested I'm sure one can find government sources as proof.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_shutdown_of_2013



I'm Dancing as Fast as I Can.
Romany
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:38:26 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 12,164
Neurons: 36,969
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

Kunstniete,

You've got things a little muddled: 'Minister' is gender free. If you say 'I'm off to see the Minister' there is no gender assignation.

If we put 'ess' that means that 'Minister' is a male Public Servant, and 'Ministeress' is a female Public Servant. That's EXACTLY what we DON'T want to do. We don't say 'Doctoress' or 'Writeress' or 'Chemistess' or 'Dentistess'...either.
progpen
Posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 5:57:45 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,362
Neurons: 161,012
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
Romany wrote:

Kunstniete,

You've got things a little muddled: 'Minister' is gender free. If you say 'I'm off to see the Minister' there is no gender assignation.

If we put 'ess' that means that 'Minister' is a male Public Servant, and 'Ministeress' is a female Public Servant. That's EXACTLY what we DON'T want to do. We don't say 'Doctoress' or 'Writeress' or 'Chemistess' or 'Dentistess'...either.


I work with IT Systems Engineeresses and Project Manageresses every day. My boss is a CEOess.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ― Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Romany
Posted: Saturday, March 18, 2017 5:03:07 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 12,164
Neurons: 36,969
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

Prog -

Bit of a co-inky-dink: tho' my own Curator is male, I work with Curatoresses and Academicesses every day!
TheParser
Posted: Saturday, March 18, 2017 9:59:57 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 4,293
Neurons: 20,138
Drag0nspeaker wrote:



If a newly-appointed Minister doesn't know what the hell he's doing and is about to destroy the work of years, yes, the long-term workers in the department will be obstructive, slow, and generally a block.




Thanks for that sentence.

It nicely adds to better understanding the Deep State.
Hope123
Posted: Saturday, March 18, 2017 12:54:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 6,211
Neurons: 36,961
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
TheParser wrote:
Drag0nspeaker wrote:



If a newly-appointed Minister doesn't know what the hell he's doing and is about to destroy the work of years, yes, the long-term workers in the department will be obstructive, slow, and generally a block.




Thanks for that sentence.

It nicely adds to better understanding the Deep State.


Applause Applause Applause

I'm Dancing as Fast as I Can.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.