4 ms·
Whatever you think about elite politicians and the super-rich, they’re not the “deep state”. The whole idea of the deep state is that it’s part of the state, i
by adjejmxbdjdn 5mo ago
Whatever you think about elite politicians and the super-rich, they’re not the “deep state”.
The whole idea of the deep state is that it’s part of the state, ie government, so not private citizens, and they’re “deep” ie hidden below the layers of government. Thats the exact opposite of politicians and the ultra rich.
- Avicebron 5mo agoLol I'm pretty sure the "deep state" just means, "manipulating the levers of power from a place without accountablity/oversight" which covers both these shadowy hidden layers of govt you describe and the shadowy wealthy elites funding and lobbying for whatever. It can be both.
- ambicapter 5mo agoSure, anything can mean whatever you want if you redefine anything to suit your whims at the time.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- js8 5mo agoI agree with parent, that's not how right-wing propaganda portrays the deep state. It's a strawman, of unaccountable government bureacrats. It excludes billionaires and dark money in politics (the real problem), they put themselves on the good side. (Remember DOGE?)
- andriy_koval 5mo agoterm predates that right-wing propaganda
- layer8 5mo agoNevertheless the parent is correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state#United_States
- andriy_koval 5mo agoYour link refers to lots of different contexts,cherry picking one of them which you failed to cite to win your nit-picking argument is not productive, because it is just not agreeable. Also, your link specifically starts with: ""a hybrid association of government elements and parts of top-level industry and finance that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process." which exactly how this was defined by your opponent.