5 ms·
> I hope he gets the mental help he needs to get better. It does sound weird, but on what basis can you or I claim to be better informed about that situation t
by ColanR 7y ago
> I hope he gets the mental help he needs to get better.
It does sound weird, but on what basis can you or I claim to be better informed about that situation than he is?
- rmilejczz 7y agoI’m confused by this comment, he can still be better informed than you or I but he’s declaring war on the “deep state” which seems like a fair basis to question his current grasp on reality, no? Forgive me if I misunderstood your comment Edit: is this comment offensive or something? Edit2: yes I get what a deep state “technically” is but this language is still implying a desire to “go to war” with an ill conceived entity. Who is the leader of the deep state? How do you go to war with it? This, to me, sounds like delusion. Edit3: the deep state circle jerk is real on HN apparently. I’m deeply sorry if my wrongspeak upset you, deeply deeply sorry.
- robdachshund 7y agoSo anyone that questions the government is mentally ill?
- staticautomatic 7y agoIt only sounds crazy if you don't believe the "deep state" exists. It does, it's just not exactly what Trump claims it is.
- debaserab2 7y ago> It does Every definition of the "deep state" that I've heard is usually based on a vague conspiracy theory or is an obvious truth that draws conclusions about the intentions of state actors without providing any evidence. Can you prove me wrong?
- staticautomatic 7y agoCan I prove that "every definition [you've] heard is not usually based on a vague conspiracy theory or is not an obvious truth that draws conclusions about the intentions of state actors without providing any evidence." No.
- debaserab2 7y agoOk. What is the deep state to you?
- staticautomatic 7y agoI would define it as something like this: The deep state is a set of individuals who use the powers granted to them by the government in order to further their own power interests and/or the power interests of extra-governmental entities regardless of whether the government and its constituents share in or benefit from those interests.
- saghm 7y agoCouldn't you argue that this could fit plenty of elected politicians? This doesn't seem to capture any part of what people seem to mean by the term "deep"
- debaserab2 7y agoYeah, I don't know anyone who uses the term "deep state" unironically that doesn't also have strong opinions about what that actually means.
- staticautomatic 7y agoSure. If you think that's an argument against the definition, then perhaps you could elaborate. Also, what do you think people seem to mean by the term "deep" that isn't captured?
- caseysoftware 7y agoThe distinction between an elected politician and a "deep state" figure in this regard would be their identity. You can probably name your Senators, maybe your House Member, and probably your local Mayor. You may have even voted for/against them. What about the Deputy Undersecretary of Whatever who is in charge of that topic near and dear to your heart? You didn't elect them. You can't even name them. In fact, you probably don't even know that job and person exist. I was in the Department of Justice and worked for a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in an agency you've never heard of just down the street from DOJ HQ. There were many lifers (worked there pushing 20 years) who I saw and heard say "Eh, I don't like the AG so I don't follow that policy." Fundamentally, it's no different than the CEO of a major company saying "we're going to do X" and various middle managers saying "Nah, that's a bad idea. I'm going to ignore it."
- rmilejczz 7y agoRight, I get that “technically” there is a deep state it’s not some strange esoteric knowledge. That really doesn’t make it any more sane to plan a war against a poorly defined adversary, this is a hall mark of delusion. I don’t see why my comment warranted downvotes
- airstrike 7y ago> I don’t see why my comment warranted downvotes It doesn't, really. I think this audience probably has a high representation of people who regard the "deep state" as a real entity that we should fight against and take issue on a personal level with your well-founded claim that the guy is a bit cuckoo
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- bsder 7y agoPeople who believe in the "deep state" but aren't cranks or self-serving propagandists call it what it is: "the bureaucracy" or "the civil service". And, oddly, it turns out to be one of the best inventions of modern government as it keeps things running in an orderly fashion in the face of leadership changes.
- exolymph 7y agoThe deep state is just the permanent bureaucracy that sticks around as presidents come and go. Those people run a lot of shit, and they have a lot of influence. Whether Byrne is being rational about this group is a whole separate question, but the "deep state" is a real thing. (And yes, the concept attracts a lot of conspiracy theories. However, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true, so we can't discount all of them without a merits-based examination of each hypothesis.)
- rmilejczz 7y agoAs I’ve said to others, yes I understand the “well technically” explanation of deep state but I’d posit that you’re still not particularly mentally fit if you’re declaring war on such a poorly conceived adversary. How do you go to war with a deep state? What do you do? It sounds like pure delusion
- perl4ever 7y agoSomething that people who believe they are sane don't generally understand is that manifest psychosis/mania/paranoia cannot be refuted by proof (assuming it exists) that what you are talking about is accurate in some sense. It's like if you are drunk, and you successfully drive your car through an obstacle course. You're still drunk!
- davidw 7y ago> The deep state is just the permanent bureaucracy that sticks around as presidents come and go. It's also far from a monolithic group of people with a similar point of view.
- derefr 7y agoYou could say the workers of such a permanent bureaucracy are at least united in the belief in the benefits of there being such a permanent bureaucracy; and more specifically, in the benefits of "non-partisan" bureaucracy, bureaucracy that isn't a catspaw of the party in power. (As opposed to a political spoils system, where each new administration comes with its own Civil Service.) And, because of that implicit endorsement of non-partisanship as "how the job gets done", these bureaucrats tend to also be considered technocrats: people who evaluate policy mostly on how the ROI works out for "the people" or "the state", rather than in how it figures into any particular political narrative, or into their own "courtly favour" with the administration. The label of "technocrat" then tends to put the workers of this bureaucracy into natural opposition—political-rhetoric-wise—with populist politicians, who as a rule evaluate policy by how it "plays" with the man-on-the-street (who has no knowledge of statecraft), and who tend to ignore what a policy will (or won't) actually be likely to accomplish. This opposition carries whether any given bureaucrat has any actual underlying opposition to the current populist sentiment or not. So there's at least one other thing these bureaucrats will tend to agree on: to the degree that there is, in a political "era", a populist fervour in the country, bureaucrats will be unilaterally hated by the man on the street, due to the rhetorical manipulations of populist politicians.
- debaserab2 7y agoI'm not really sure why you're being downvoted. This guy is a quack. You can just skim the quotes and I'm not sure how exactly you end up with a different viewpoint. Here he is threatening to "vaporize" the SEC if they clean up the fraudulent mess he created: > Now, after 15 years of being scofflaws, the shorts are crying because they are getting sucked into a black hole they created themselves. If you call “Bazoomba!” for them now, I am going to use this website to vaporize you with information I give the public. I am 100% confident that at least one of you knows to what I am referring.
- paul7986 7y agoHis story is so strange yet look at his success is he really crazy, all that is staged or its real? Overall peculiar and fascinating.