3 ms·
My favorite portrayal was in James Ellroy's "Underworld USA" trilogy. Of course establishment sources like The New Yoker would have us believe that state insti
by aww_dang 4y ago
My favorite portrayal was in James Ellroy's "Underworld USA" trilogy.
Of course establishment sources like The New Yoker would have us believe that state institutions are now non-partisan and trustworthy. Some would even suggest that mere suspicion of these institutions is a thought crime.
From my side, the historical record is more illustrative of the human condition. Names of individuals and bureaus may change, but the underlying incentives for corruption and abuse of power remain.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- woodruffw 4y ago> Of course establishment sources like The New Yoker would have us believe that state institutions are now non-partisan and trustworthy. The New Yorker is somewhat famous for its sober, balanced tone. Even so, it's impossible to read this article and come away thinking that the writer considers the FBI trustworthy.
- aww_dang 4y agohttps://www.newyorker.com/contributors/margaret-talbot https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/margaret-talbot https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/02/01/can-joe-biden-restore-americas-belief-that-government-is-good-for-people https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/02/01/can-joe-biden-... >Can Joe Biden Restore America’s Belief That Government Is Good for People? Despite the gravity of the challenges ahead, President Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris are setting out with some distinct advantages. Sure, specifically the FBI is criticized in a narrower partisan context. The larger picture of institutional authority is celebrated by the author. Take your pick of the stories from these search results. Show me where they critique the FBI's current political slant. Compare this coverage to stories celebrating institutional authority during the red scare or civil rights era. Please note that what we now call overreach wasn't overreach in the eyes of proponents or the complicit media voices. My thesis stands. The New Yorker has no problem with institutional authority where it suits their partisan biases. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22FBI%22+right+wing+extremism+site%3Anewyorker.com https://www.google.com/search?q=%22FBI%22+right+wing+extremi... >The Growing Threat of American Political Violencehttps://www.newyorker.com https://www.newyorker.com › News › 2020 Election Oct 15, 2020 — The F.B.I. case agent assigned to the shooting was Tom O'Connor, a specialist in investigating violent extremist groups, from the Aryan ... >Two January 6th Defendants and the Consolidation of Right ...https://www.newyorker.com https://www.newyorker.com › News › 2020 Election Jun 6, 2022 — A few days later, the F.B.I. arrested Reffitt in an early-morning raid. At Reffitt's trial in March, Jackson testified against his father and ... >Biden's Vital but Fraught Battle Against Domestic Terrorismhttps://www.newyorker.com https://www.newyorker.com › News › Joe Biden Jan 25, 2021 — He warned of “a rise of political extremism, white supremacy, ... Previous F.B.I. campaigns to counter domestic threats have resulted, ...
- woodruffw 4y agoI don't know what you think you've demonstrated here: I can't find a single reference to the FBI in that second article you've linked. I also don't buy the premise: the existence of any individual action by the FBI doesn't indicate a shift in their partisan tendencies. The original article goes to great pains to demonstrate this, e.g. with Hoover's begrudging support for civil rights violation prosecutions. In other words, you're overextending yourself. Nobody has claimed that the New Yorker isn't okay with institutional authority (what would that even mean?). The only claim is that they haven't demonstrated any particular inconsistency regarding the FBI.