The Old Left was mostly focused on the economy – Marxism was mostly an economic theory. Thus its analysis was based on an economic category of Class; and its tools were economic things like nationalization and redistribution of wealth. The most favoured group was The Proletariat, which was in practice essentially the native male working class of manual labourers, especially as represented by Trades Unions.A description of the media and the progressive left that most on the Alt-Right are familiar with. He explains further:
But the New Left is in practice almost indifferent to the economy; and instead focuses on a rainbow of identity politics, ‘Human Rights’, ‘the environment’, anti-racism, feminism and (most of all) promoting the sexual revolution.
Consequently, the New Left has ‘switched sides’, and turned-against the native class of male manual labourers; and now strongly favours women, other ethnicities, the unemployed and economically inactive, and newly arrived immigrants.
The qualitative transition from Old to New Left demonstrates that there is no stable, long-term positive ideology to the Mass Media – and even the most fundamental values and principles may at some point be discarded or reversed.
And although relativistic, the Mass Media ideology is not tolerant. Whatever is being asserted now is absolute, and opposition is not considered reasonable.
It should therefore be emphasized that despite its fanatically-opinionated campaigns in favour of this, that or the other; relativism is indeed, over time, a profoundly negative ideology –indeed relativism sooner-or-later undermines any positive agenda which may emerge – even its own ideas such as the dictatorship of the proletariat which at one time seemed so terribly important to such a lot of people in the Mass Media.The MSM's goal is the destruction of order, even an order they help bring about. A good recent example is gays being pushed out of the Democrat party in favor of Muslims. Less than 2 years ago, the Progressives were celebrating the SCOTUS decision on gay marriage and spiking the football on the faces of Christian bakers and Christian TV personalities (getting a couple of brothers fired from a home improvement show, trying to get Duck Dynasty taken off the air). Now they prefer people who throw gays off roofs, or stone them, or worse.
In sum, the Mass Media is an agent of Permanent Revolution. And the Mass Media dominates modernity. Consequently our society is in a permanent state of revolution.
Permanent revolution means that the Mass Media has no positive goal or aim – there is no long-term plan to structure society in some permanently-sustainable way; indeed whatever is was or may in future be achieved, exists only to be dismantled and replaced when expedient.
But is Progressivism driving the media, or vice versa? Charlton says the MSM is Progressivism:
When people ask whether the Mass Media has a Leftist bias; the only rational response is to suggest that they un-ask the question: because that question contains false assumptions, implies a false framework.Here's the bit relevant to Michael Flynn, Russia hacking the election, Donald Trump is Hitler, violent protests at Berkeley, memory holing Omar Mateen and more:
Properly understood the Mass Media is Leftist bias, it is the core of Leftism, and has been since the mid-1960s at least, and is ever-more-so.
The standard model by which people try to understand media bias is a government which tells the media what to say and vets what it says in all minute particulars: something like Stalin and The Party dictating what got written, and what was not written, in Pravda.
That obviously isn’t what happens in the modern world – it would of course be impossible, such is the utterly vast volume of material being generated; and stupid people suppose this means that the media and government are independent the one of the other.
The Mass Media is not biased to Leftism, it is Leftism; so of course, Leftism must come from within the media: the bias is generated by the Mass Media.
Nobody is immune – everybody in public life who wants to stay in public life is afraid of the Mass Media.The CIA spies on an American citizen and releases the information to the public. The media runs with it because it fits their Narrative of Russian "hacking." When this is done by an individual (Linda Tripp) or insufficiently Leftist regime (Bush the Younger), the story is the spying and violation of the law. When the target of the spying is insufficiently Leftist, the spying is played down and the information played up. When a low level town clerk (the very bottom rung of American government positions) doesn't follow the law (Kim Davis), a national hate-fest is launched by the MSM. When high-level state and local officials announce they will not follow federal immigration law, they are regaled as heroes.
(Well, everybody within the system of worldly modernity, anyway; but this now has an extensive reach. The state of deferential terror towards the Mass Media notably includes the heads of the major Western ostensibly-Christian churches, who very obviously fear to depart from the media Leftist agenda, and live in continual trepidation about having a target painted on them by the Mass Media. This has eliminated traditional Christianity – that is, real Christianity – from the leadership of all the major denominations.)
The Mass Media choose and label the targets for exemplary punishment, and various groups (judges, tax officials, police, officials, astroturf mobs, real mobs... it does not much matter which) will enforce punishments of one sort or another – from harassment via investigations, up to vandalism, violence, prison and murder; and the media gives the whole process a positive interpretation.
That which happens outside this and/ or against the agenda of the Mass Media loop is ignored, mentioned then flushed down the memory hole, reframed, vilified, distorted, lied about, subjected to invented slurs...
Oh! the possibilities are endless!
Consider how the media portrays the astro-turf protests at the town halls of Republican Congressmen. All but the most redpilled will be fooled by these displays, convinced by the media that there is great opposition to President Trump.
How to fight the MSM? Leftism cannot be co-opted by the Right, but anything that damages the MSM will lead to more reaction:
The Mass Media is the enemy of reaction, and cannot – as a whole – be subverted or exploited for reactionary purposes.If you turn off the TV, you become more reactionary. If you use social media to block the MSM signal and create a right-wing echo chamber, you become more reactionary. If you create Black Twitter, you eventually get Hotep. If you created Alt-Right Twitter, you get oven memes and Pepes. If you launch Breitbart, or substitute the Daily Mail for CNN, even the conservakin become more reactionary. The more the Internet fractures "The Narrative" into many smaller Narratives, the result is increased reaction. As long as they are not from within "The Narrative," not MSM, they will eventually tend towards reaction.
While the Mass Media is growing, the forces of ‘reaction’ can sometimes win a battle on a micro-issue, but overall and over-time will lose the war.
Conversely, anything which significantly damages the reach or grip of the Mass Media net damages Leftism – even if restrictions go against freedom, democracy, balance; even if directed against reaction; all things which tend to limit the Mass Media will ultimately tend towards reaction...
To this point the MSM sounds like a virus, but it is really a cancer. Since Permanent Revolution has no goal, the only thing the MSM can do is grow.
The Mass Media is a social system like no other; and the difference accounts for its intrinsic evil: that is to say its intrinsic tendency towards destruction of Good (destruction of truth, beauty and virtue).You can kill a tumor by starving it's food supply. The MSM feeds on brains. Progressivism is your brain on MSM.
The Mass Media is a social system of communications – indeed, all systems (as systems) can be regarded as being made of communications: communications between processing units. These units are what process the information in the communications – and for the Mass Media, the main processing units are humans minds – although some processing is nowadays done by computers.
But the other social systems have a basic, core, extrinsic and unifying social function that is clearly useful: the police and military are for maintaining the distinctness and cohesion of society by use of intra-social and inter-societal coercive force; the legal system is about arbitrating disputes by formal mechanisms, the health services are about alleviating suffering, promoting health and increasing life expectancy; the educational system about transmission of knowledge and so on.
Whether these systems actually do what they purport to do, is another matter. But all the social systems have a relatively clear and valuable and well understood social aim.
However, the Mass Media does not have a specific social function; and therefore its default function is merely that of all systems (and living things) namely to survive, grow, reproduce... to expand itself. That is, to expand its own system of communications; because it seems that the Mass Media does not have any extrinsic goal, nor any unifying useful function (since ‘amplification’ is not an intrinsic function, not an end – merely a means to the end of other social systems).
Therefore, the Mass Media succeeds by growing its own system of communications – and fails when this growth fails to happen, as when expansion reverses into contraction, shrinkage, reduction of the volume of Mass Media communications.