Who Exactly Is Controlled Opposition?

AngryFiver

AngryFiver

New member
Nov 14, 2014
182
1
0
I've heard this term pop up now and again on here. Usually it's when someone brings up Alex Jones or one of those guys.

People seem so sure about the fact that some of these people aren't who they seem to be. Yet, I can't believe that there are tell-tale signs that a person leading a movement is being controlled by the establishment unless maybe they get really popular, really fast. And even then, you can't be sure.

Plus, how can you tell the COs from the disingenuous people who are just trying to capitalize on making money from that audience?

And finally, what are each of the purposes of planting such a CO person in a group? Is it merely to direct anger into a forum that will never take action against the establishment? Or is there more to it than that?
 


AngryFiver said:
And finally, what are each of the purposes of planting such a CO person in a group? Is it merely to direct anger into a forum that will never take action against the establishment? Or is there more to it than that?
Click to expand...

Yes, I think that's the primary function, channeling dissent through a manageable conduit that leads to a limited hangout where sufficient naughtiness is revealed to quell the dissent before it turns into activism, but not enough to put the bigger game at risk of exposure. In that sense it's a self-defining term.

Activism is resource and labor intensive to redirect or stifle, and there's always a small chance that it will actually gain organization, leadership, program, and strategy, thereby becoming a problem for TPTB. Political and media figures who control opposition, whether wittingly or not, serve to keep the groundswell from cresting into a wave.

Controlled opposition also has a tendency of reinforcing the 'my team your team' mentality of discourse, which helps focus peoples' energy on their differences rather than their common ground.

There's often a cointelpro style subterfuge element as well where dissent is misled with disinformation rather than satisfied with a limited exposure of real information. This serves to discredit the dissent once the disinformation is later intentionally brought to light and its adherents are stuck holding the bag. This was very prevalent in the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Regarding who's who and what's what, the best things you can do are a. follow the money and b. develop a palette for bullshit. The truth usually sorts itself out somewhere in the middle. Think of it like heuristics.

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."
-Siddhartha Gautama
 
MSTeacher said:
Controlled opposition also has a tendency of reinforcing the 'my team your team' mentality of discourse, which helps focus peoples' energy on their differences rather than their common ground.
Click to expand...

This is probably the most insidious consequence of Controlled Opposition leadership.

"Oh, you guys are making headway through rational discourse and calculated, effective action? Here, let's insert a fucking troll into the mix to get people emotional and polarize shit. Tribalism FTW!"

For this reason, I think it's absolutely crucial for effective social movements & activism to remain covert. Subtly influence shit behind the scenes, but never be seen. Don't let them know your next move. Don't let them know what your tribe is exactly, or how they can isolate it. Don't use an obvious figurehead who could potentially be subject to slander and misrepresentation.

Instead:

  • Create or fund entertainment that subtly promotes your message (comedy shows, MUSIC, documentaries, etc..).
  • Fund charismatic intellectuals, scholars,etc... who are able to insert themselves into mainstream academia and subtly influence young minds without ever being directly associated with your movement.
  • Create social media personalities that attract large followings by appealing to popular social issues, trends, etc... and then have them gradually pivot over a long period of time toward your message.
  • Fund shaming campaigns targeted at influential opponents using quotable #hashtags, funny memes, etc. Expose hypocrisy (this can be done on a massive scale, somewhat anonymously).

I can think of a million ways to avoid having your movement targeted, marginalized, and then sabotaged.

Socialists, Feminists, and the Extreme Left in general has mastered this shit.

If libertarians and other fringe-ish groups want to keep up, they'll have to become hip to hardcore memetic engineering.

(but again, what the fuck do I know...)
 
Anderson Cooper for example?
looks like the CIA references have been stripped from his Wikipedia page, and the source page has been removed as well. Imagine that.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwMCIe2AGW8[/ame]
sorry about the kookie video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back