The “Control of Misinformation” and the Deterioration of the Integral State

I was finally provided a link to appeal YouTube’s decision to ban my podcast “Twitter and the Deep State.” Soon after submitting my appeal, YouTube got back to me this this:

So they will not restore my content. One must ask, then, was the FBI also meeting weekly with YouTube to prep its team for censoring stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop? Because that’s what my podcast was about. And YouTube has censored it.

The actions of YouTube and other social media platforms are rationalized with the phrase “the control of misinformation,” something with which the Executive Branch and the network of corporations it represents have become obsessed. This phrase is the label for an Orwellian-named strategy to suppress information that contradicts the preferred narrative and undermines mass opinion engineered by the corporate state in support of that narrative. This is the way totalitarian states operate.

I suspect that YouTube also does not want you to know that the FBI colluded with former employee James Baker, a lawyer who had been with Twitter since 2020 until owner Elon Musk fired him over the Hunter Biden laptop coverup, to carry out the objectives of the administration state. Baker served as general council for the FBI from 2014-2018, working alongside Peter Strzok and Lisa Page (I encourage readers to look into doings of these two). Baker has also served as an analyst for CNN.

Baker was a key figure in the FBI’s probe into the allegation that Trump was a Russian asset during the 2016 presidential election. In other words, Baker has been exposed as a deep state actor who worked inside Twitter to arrange for FBI visits to Twitter headquarters to prep Twitter’s “legal, policy, and trust team” to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story. Musk is now indicating that, before leaving, Baker may have gone through the Twitter files to cover up his own role in Hunter Biden laptop affair.

It is almost certainly guaranteed that if I did a podcast on Baker and his role in the coverup and uploaded it to YouTube, the company would remove my content again and I would receive that strike they’re warning me about. This is a dilemma for me: since I use YouTube to host my lectures for my online courses, I cannot risk losing that resource. So I will now be uploading my political content to Rumble in the future: The FAR Podcast.

More revelations are sure to come out concerning the Hunter Biden laptop story, but we know now without any doubt that the administrative state and the national security apparatus work with legacy and social media to label information critical of progressivism and corporate power “misinformation.”

This fact is profound. To posit a separation between the public and the private spheres, between the political and civil societies of American life, is today untenable. The interlinkages between the administrative state and the corporate structure of late capitalism constitute the webbing of the corporate state. The corporate state, if we suppose at the moment is some form of an integral state, only means that we stand on the brink of an open totalitarian situation. For, if the hegemony engineered by the administrative state-corporate power nexus break down, then the only choice for the ruling class is to shift to open totalitarian rule.

As I have said before, following Sheldon Wolin’s thesis, as it stands now, we already live in a situation of inverted totalitarianism (and of course managed democracy). But it could be worse. We could see the end of the alternative networks of information sharing that I have been compelled to utilize.

The reader must grasp the direness of the situation. The liberal arrangements upon which the American republic was founded have been abrogated. The republic as a liberal-democratic constitution-based system is increasingly a fiction. The effect of all this is the end of democracy and personal liberty.

We see the end of liberal democracy not only in the cabal to engineer elections and with the administrative state weaponized in COINTELPRO fashion against conservative groups and other dissidents, but in the case of, for example, pharmaceutical interests, targeting for discrediting those scientists and doctors whose findings potentially hurt corporate profits. The integral state is desperate to shore up the hegemony it constructed decades ago to avoid the totalitarian shift they know risks provoking a popular uprising against the corporate state.

This reality has been made concrete to me. My own reporting on the FBI-Twitter machinations around Hunter Biden’s laptop have been censored by YouTube and they are threatening me with cancellation. In the past, both YouTube and Facebook have censored my podcasts on the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s a pattern that tells me what I never needed a smoking gun to confirm: that powerful interests are suppressing information disruptive to corporate state hegemony.

I’m just a small fry (in part because my accounts have been throttled for years). If corporations micromanage the political expressions of their other customers in the same way (and they do), then it is obvious that the suppression of my work and marginalization of my person is an organized function of the apparatus. How much longer will those who claim to love liberty deny the existence of that apparatus?

Published by

Andrew Austin

Andrew Austin is on the faculty of Democracy and Justice Studies and Sociology at the University of Wisconsin—Green Bay. He has published numerous articles, essays, and reviews in books, encyclopedia, journals, and newspapers.

One thought on “The “Control of Misinformation” and the Deterioration of the Integral State”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.