National security and double government

What Hacker News says

1. pnfSep 2022
   I could say there's no point in arguing with you for the exact same reasons. I see you really don't want to understand my argument and would rather blithely dismiss strawmen. That's your prerogative. For anyone else who reads this, I'll continue clarifying why I think you're argument is naive and, frankly, simplistic. You seem not to have a clear understanding of American politics. Maybe you don't live here or, if you do you don't pay much attention to deep politics. That's forgivable. Most people don't have the time, heart, or stomach for it. I assume you're talking about the former President pushing the claim? That is hardly the most powerful position in America. Do you think Joe Biden is the most powerful person in America? LoL. Read Glennon's book National Security and Double Government, or Sheldon Wolin's Democracy Incorporated for a primer.

   You clearly don't grok ruling class ideology and discourse policing. Please don't mislead other people with these tired arguments about conspiracy theories. Although, there is plenty of evidence of actual conspiracy at the top of the FDA and NIH if you want to nitpick. You might also want to investigate the modus operandi and principle funding structures of the WTO and WHO. But you would probably argue there were no conspiracies in Imperial Britain because they're just not possible. Your lack of historical knowledge blinds you to possibility.

   But I'm not even talking about technical "conspiracy" so called. I'm talking about ideological control structures for the ruling class and those within it. Your statements are a prime example of someone who cannot see outside your ideology. You don't even know that you don't know. That's the essential feature of ideological compliance. There absolutely are conspiracies to suppress information, that's called censorship. Wait, don't tell me. You're a fan of that, too. But only to suppress disinformation and protect the feebleminded masses from their own stupidity, right? But not you! You've got enough grey matter to handle it and come to the "right" conclusions. We all know the "right" opinions and we all want to be on the "right side of history", don't we? That's right. We don't need to be told that certain ideas are junk disinformation while other, approved ideas, are justified true belief. There's a good lad, off you go.

   Btw, the lab leak hypothesis was originally making a splash in the blogosphere in January 2020 before the narrative could get ahead of it. Then the political arms of the government science institutions and the pathetically complicit media leaped to the rescue by savaging the people who would dare suggest such a thing. Google "lab leak Wuhan" with a date filter if you want to relive those heady days. It's especially funny that you would make such a claim since that's exactly the sort of thing members in good standing of the establishment are expected to believe. There's really no point in arguing with someone who's mind has been broken by propaganda. I'm sorry for your loss.

   Show morethread
2. black6Feb 2021
   It's the difference between the "legacy" government (your traditionally elected public officials), and the "efficiency" government of bureaucracy. The legislature in the US has offloaded the power to make law to a multitude of bureaucratic agencies through the use of administrative law, as distinct from legislative law. Through the acts that establish these agencies, they are granted the power to create and enforce these administrative laws, which often leave the law-breaker with little recourse other than capitulation. The book National Security and Double Government by Michael Glennon is a fantastic resource for those interested in learning more.
   Show morethread
3. randomname2Feb 2017
   A fantastic read on the so called 'Deep state' is "National Security and Double Government" [1] by Michael J. Glennon in the Harvard Law School National Security Journal.

   Abstract:

   "National security policy in the United States has remained largely constant from the Bush Administration to the Obama Administration. This continuity can be explained by the “double government” theory of 19th-century scholar of the English Constitution Walter Bagehot. As applied to the United States, Bagehot’s theory suggests that U.S. national security policy is defined by the network of executive officials who manage the departments and agencies responsible for protecting U.S. national security and who, responding to structural incentives embedded in the U.S. political system, operate largely removed from public view and from constitutional constraints. The public believes that the constitutionally-established institutions control national security policy, but that view is mistaken.

   Judicial review is negligible; congressional oversight is dysfunctional; and presidential control is nominal. Absent a more informed and engaged electorate, little possibility exists for restoring accountability in the formulation and execution of national security policy."

   [1] http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Fin...

   Show morethread
4. schoenOct 2016
   I keep being impressed by Michael J. Glennon's "National Security and Double Government" (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2376272 ; subsequently also published as a book), which gives a fairly disturbing analysis of the "Madisonian" (or "dignified") institutions vs. the "Trumanite" (or "efficient") institutions in the government and how they relate to one another.
   thread