Thomas W. Braden, the former supervisor of cultural activities at the CIA, explained the power of the Agency’s cultural assault in a frank insider’s account published in 1967: “I remember the enormous joy I got when the Boston Symphony Orchestra [which was supported by the CIA] won more acclaim for the U.S. in Paris than John Foster Dulles or Dwight D. Eisenhower could have bought with a hundred speeches.” This was by no means a small or liminal operation. In fact, as Wilford has aptly argued, the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), which was headquartered in Paris and later discovered to be a CIA front organization during the cultural Cold War, was among the most important patrons in world history, supporting an incredible range of artistic and intellectual activities. It had offices in 35 countries, published dozens of prestige magazines, was involved in the book industry, organized high-profile international conferences and art exhibits, coordinated performances and concerts, and contributed ample funding to various cultural awards and fellowships, as well as to front organizations like the Farfield Foundation.
I mean it literally fuckin is, what is this amateur hour? Do I need to pull certain episodes of Trueanon up before this shit reboots in your heads
So what I'm getting from your quote here, is the CIA pumped a whole lot of money into all sorts of cultural spheres to fight a "cultural Cold War", which somehow makes everyone receiving any of that money (most likely without them knowing it was CIA money) a CIA, did I get that right?
No you did not get that right, I have repeatedly said I don't think Derrida or most of the French philosophers were conscious of it, but that doesn't mean there isn't a filter created by the CIA intervention in academia, and the people who get thru that filter are people who say and teach ideas compatible with the status quo, ideas which not surprisedly tend to be highly critical of Marxism and revolutionary politics
Well, "academia in general is highly critical of Marxism and revolutionary politics because of CIA intervention creating an environment where that flourished" is a statement that is both more insightful and less needlessly hostile towards a specific philosopher, so why didn't you just say that from the start? And how is Derrida of all people somehow the example you chose to pick for this, I don't get it. Like, if you don't wanna read him, just don't read him, what are these "DAE this one thinker is entirely dismissable without reading" posts cropping up here every so often
I mean it literally fuckin is, what is this amateur hour? Do I need to pull certain episodes of Trueanon up before this shit reboots in your heads
So what I'm getting from your quote here, is the CIA pumped a whole lot of money into all sorts of cultural spheres to fight a "cultural Cold War", which somehow makes everyone receiving any of that money (most likely without them knowing it was CIA money) a CIA, did I get that right?
No you did not get that right, I have repeatedly said I don't think Derrida or most of the French philosophers were conscious of it, but that doesn't mean there isn't a filter created by the CIA intervention in academia, and the people who get thru that filter are people who say and teach ideas compatible with the status quo, ideas which not surprisedly tend to be highly critical of Marxism and revolutionary politics
Well, "academia in general is highly critical of Marxism and revolutionary politics because of CIA intervention creating an environment where that flourished" is a statement that is both more insightful and less needlessly hostile towards a specific philosopher, so why didn't you just say that from the start? And how is Derrida of all people somehow the example you chose to pick for this, I don't get it. Like, if you don't wanna read him, just don't read him, what are these "DAE this one thinker is entirely dismissable without reading" posts cropping up here every so often