Social Science 173

My readers will recall that I seek my first-stage democratic rights, contrary to everything I did prior to 2006 with a Jacobin and anonymous strategy. One of the reasons one knows there is a failure here is that the particular problem of the Mideast requires credibility with people who would not want to see I$raelis extort individual Palestinians into PLO leadership. We would not want to see Amerikans blackmail individual Koreans to become leaders of the DPRK. That would cause problems and simply would not be accepted. Likewise, no one that I would deal with successfully would want to know that I was extorted into office on the back of a racist lynching. Hence, the international proletariat needs to know about the kind of courses I took at Harvard University, before I graduated in 1984.

The “New York Times” has already shown me that it knows of the contents of a course I took, including a paper I wrote that was somewhat off key for the course in talking about “structural violence,” in an epidemiological sense, without calling it that. My Quaker section leader disagreed with me, because she saw the structural violence approach as justifying violent revolution. Once one realized the horror of the status quo, one would become a revolutionary she feared.

There were two things that separated me from the story-telling class, one was a proclivity toward epidemiology, probability and sociology rather than individualist versions of history writing. The other was that I accepted one Harvard professor’s speech to undergraduates criticizing the Aesopian class as hiding racism.

Social Science 173 at Harvard had a history of being taught by someone from the William James building.
Even at the time I participated in some psychological experiments as a research subject in that building. Psychology research with live subjects continues to this day.

What is more disturbing is what Harvard euphemistically called “classified research.” In some of my courses, the CIA came to lecture in the open. What some students may not have realized is that many more professors and researchers had intelligence connections. This includes alleged pacifists.

It’s not just that the CIA could come to you and try to recruit you while you were hoping to do objective research work that might have to criticize the government and its policies. It’s not just that Harvard has a “Government Department” and not a political science department. That “Gov.” department came up with “forced-draft urbanization” to handle Vietnam, the bomb-the-countryside strategy.

Many have figured out that that might be a kind of conflict-of-interest at Harvard. Also imagine selling tuition costs to parents and telling them–“and your child may end up used by Aesopian elitists in a mission s/he did not ask for.” It’s that the story-tellers could pick you for a mission via Aesopian means, without getting your permission. For the short run there is no solution, because elites are good at hiding.

Of course, a key Harvard actor is a Zionist. He had experience in peace mediation and has admitted AFTER my claims of a third party infiltration gambit and in response to a question about 1989 mediation that “the
trust in the third party [is] a very important feature.”

Looking at the situation I am in now, some readers may wonder why the conspirators did not pick the most left-wing Democrat available. Why pick a communist who disagreed with the conspirators on so many things?

On occasion I ask myself, “why didn’t they pick Jamin Raskin?” He was a Democrat with Washington connections. Why have I been paired with Obama for this drama is a follow-up question.

People with connections in Washington probably don’t need the kind of political capital that the infiltration gambit creates. Without the conspirators telling me, one may surmise that they knew the diplomatic card they were manufacturing was for the Mideast. Social Science 173 had a history of being taught by someone involved in Carter’s Mideast peace process, Camp David. People catching up with the conspiracy rightly see Zbigniew Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter all over the process. I was being monitored by Carter before the whole fireworks started in 2005-6.

By 1984, the conspirators did not know there would be an Oslo and that the PLO would lose its dominance with the rise of Hamas. The conspirators planned ahead, but they could not know everything 20 or 25 years in advance.

However, the problem is that the Mideast peace process is now one of repeated failure over decades of time. It does not seem to get off on the right foot.

I don’t know if I met Obama in Harvard Square. I can’t recall, but I met an anti-apartheid organizer from Columbia who went and got me some signatures for my petitions. That I am sure.

Also at this time, the CIA asked me in a roundabout way what I knew about CIA penetration of the RCP, including “Revolution Books.” I did not answer.

I don’t think Bad Company played the role that some might think; although, Bad Company certainly knows the relevant actors well. Bad Company and my graduate school advisor chided me for not going into the Aesopian mode of the ole’ boys’ network. I had been convinced that the people we need to mobilize for progress do not speak that way–and I had been convinced of that by a Harvard professor, no less, irony of ironies.

The confusion between me and the RCP at the time may have contributed to the choices made and stuck with in the early 1980s. Of course, this was partly my fault, because we had not written decisively enough on how the RCP was a labor aristocracy organization. A self-described emissary of the Senate Intelligence Committee saw me selling a copy of the RCP’s newspaper. That probably did not help.

In any case, a failed third party infiltration gambit like this one has much in common with a joint counter-terrorist operation. The left-wing of parasitism needs to get over appearances. The Republicans and secret services knew. Bush could have acted when he got rid of Rumsfeld. He did not. All that is left in the value of this is the struggle against racism. That in turn is related to setting up an independent proletarian pole apart from the Democrats, a task infinitely harder than the social material we have accumulated is capable of so far. The Zionist Herbert Kelman looks at it in terms of diplomatic mediation, but what I see is a supposed leftist movement working in synch with the imperialists and unable to tell.


One Response to “Social Science 173”

  1. Sydney Morning Herald « Mimdefense's Weblog Says:

    […] one of “conspiracy theory.” When a white man says it, it’s published material in a Harvard course. That’s exactly the kind of solipsistic world my subjectivist critics live in: whatever is […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: