World-renowned academic and leftist intellectual giant, MIT professor Noam Chomsky, has historically been hostile to establishment power and privilege – literally writing the book about how consent is manufactured using media to support an elite-driven policy agenda.

Thus, Chomsky’s words should be taken extremely seriously when he recently referred to news stories being pushed in the mass corporate media, about Trump-Russia “collusion,” as little more than “a joke.” In fact, he says that this neo-McCarthyist/anti-Russia propaganda degrades one of the positive aspects of the Trump administration – a drive to reduce hostility with rival nuclear power Russia.

Over the years, Chomsky has refined what he calls, the ‘propaganda model’ of the corporate mass media. He posits that not only does the media systematically suppress and distort, but when they do present facts, the context obscures the actual meaning. In essence, the mass media uses brainwashing to keep people subservient to large corporate interests.

“The media serve, and propagandize on behalf of, the powerful societal interests that control and finance them. The representatives of these interests have important agendas and principles that they want to advance, and they are well positioned to shape and constrain media policy.” –Chomsky

During a panel discussion with Chomsky on Democracy Now, one of the panelists referenced Chomsky’s commentary on the Trump/Russia collusion being “a joke,” and asked him,

“Could you give us your view on what’s happening and why there’s so much emphasis on this particular issue?”

Chomsky, the author of more than 100 books, including “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media,” in which he breaks down how U.S. corporate media has been weaponized as a means of controlling public opinion by propagandizing the American people, didn’t mince his words, noting:

“It’s a pretty remarkable fact that — first of all, it is a joke. Half the world is cracking up in laughter. The United States doesn’t just interfere in elections. It overthrows governments it doesn’t like, institutes military dictatorships.”

“Simply in the case of Russia alone—it’s the least of it—the U.S. government, under Clinton, intervened quite blatantly and openly, then tried to conceal it, to get their man Yeltsin in, in all sorts of ways,” said Chomsky. “So, this, as I say, it’s considered—it’s turning the United States, again, into a laughingstock in the world.”

“So why are the Democrats focusing on this?” he said. “In fact, why are they focusing so much attention on the one element of Trump’s programs which is fairly reasonable, the one ray of light in this gloom: trying to reduce tensions with Russia? That’s—the tensions on the Russian border are extremely serious. They could escalate to a major terminal war. Efforts to try to reduce them should be welcomed.”

“Just a couple of days ago,” said Chomsky, “the former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Jack Matlock, came out and said he just can’t believe that so much attention is being paid to apparent efforts by the incoming administration to establish connections with Russia.” He said, ‘Sure, that’s just what they ought to be doing.'”

Continuing, Chomsky said, “So, you know, yeah, maybe the Russians tried to interfere in the election. That’s not a major issue. Maybe the people in the Trump campaign were talking to the Russians. Well, okay, not a major point, certainly less than is being done constantly.”

“And it is a kind of a paradox,” he said, “that the one issue that seems to inflame the Democratic opposition is the one thing that has some justification and reasonable aspects to it.”

One need to look no further than the Washington Post to understand how U.S. media frequently serve as an errand boy for U.S. corporate, military and imperial interests. Unsurprisingly, Jeff Bezos, owner of WaPo, is deeply connected to U.S. intelligence/security services, as the holder of a $600 million dollar CIA contract.

As the Nation reported at the time:

“[Jeff Bezos] recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a ‘private cloud’ for the CIA to use for its data needs.”

Although these connections aren’t enough to prove nefarious collaboration outright, these anomalous relationships seriously call into question the validity of a newspaper that claims to be a paper of national repute.

Moreover, history reveals actual collusion between the CIA and numerous news outlets, including the Washington Post, under a covert program, called Operation Mockingbird, to influence public perceptions by infiltrating newsrooms across America.

In 1977, a former Post journalist, Carl Bernstein, exposed the CIA’s clandestine efforts to infiltrate and subvert the news media, often with the knowledge and assistance of top management at these journalistic outlets. In total, Bernstein reported, over 400 journalists were reportedly involved:

“Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go-betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without portfolio for their country…In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.”

Make no mistake that the U.S. mainstream corporate media has been weaponized as a means of controlling public opinion, by propagandizing the American people into believing a false reality, or propaganda model, which serves the plutocratic oligarchy. According to Chomsky, Russiagate is the fake news you have been warned about!

DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.

DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.

If you'd like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.

Jay Syrmopoulos is a geopolitical analyst, freethinker, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at the University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs and holds a BA in International Relations. Jay's writing has been featured on both mainstream and independent media - and has been viewed tens of millions of times. You can follow him on Twitter @SirMetropolis and on Facebook at SirMetropolis.


  1. The U.S. dropped about 1/3 more explosive on Cambodia than it dropped on Japan during WWII, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and you think the harsh conditions there were the fault of the Khmer Rouge. When you have any interest in humanity or reality, get back to me.

    • Please show me anything that I have ever said that would indicate any denial of the U.S. governments role in what has happened in Cambodia.
      The U.S. government was complicit with their support for the Khmer Rouge regime as it was seen as a counter to what was perceived as the Soviet satellite state of Vietnam.

      You seem to want to down play all that the Khmer Rouge has been responsible for. They don’t call it year zero for nothing.
      Perhaps you might want to come to Cambodia some time where I actually live, and take a look at what the infamous S21 torture prison (one of many) or the killing fields look like.
      One of the things that the Khmer Rouge would do is drink red wine that had been fermented with the body organs of those that had already been tortured to death because they thought that doing so would give them the courage to torture more effectively. How’s that for some reality?
      The effects of the Khmer Rouge are sadly still with us today in many ways both economically and politically, and are still very much an every day devastation.

      • I do not play down the ugliness of the Khmer Rouge.

        The vast and ugly US bombing of Cambodia likely had a huge role in spawning and powering the Khmer Rouge.

        You harsely criticize Noam Chomsky, and those who appreciate him–polemicist! Agenda! Fan-Boy! Reflexive comment! Spineless! Blah blah blah.

        Mr. Chomsky takes pains to point out, to any intelligent and thoughtful reader or listener, our sins as a country. It is those we are in the best position to change for the better.

        Who you are a Brother to certainly is not clear.

        • Look, all I do is point out that we should not see Noam Chomsky as an objective journalist but as the polemicist that he is and……let the piss fits begin! I was not harshly criticising anyone, but I know the truth when told can make some feel harshly criticised.
          This is all indicative of a people who have been indoctrinated without the capability of being objective. I certainly never called anyone “spineless”. Stop lying about me.

          Objectivity as a method can be difficult.
          I don’t see the sins of any one country as being responsible for any of our problems in the world today. At least someone like Max Weber would have known that.This is why I find it so funny when people speak of Noam Chomsky as today’s Max Weber.

          Noam Chomsky was using C.I.A. statistics to downplay the Khmer Rouge genocide. He never acknowledged the true extent of the casualties and suffering until his documentary Manufacturing Consent in 1993.
          His denial and refusal to even discuss his denial is not the image that many have bought into for Noam Chomsky.
          When they see this sort of thing discussed they therefore feel the need to express some type of denial about it all in this way.
          I understand….

          • No, what you do is throw spitballs at a font.

            “I don’t see the sins of any one country as being responsible for any of our problems in the world today.”–what an idiotic thing to say!

            Not that any one country is exclusively responsible for the problems in the world.

            But just ignore the black actions of the U.S. government. Brilliant! No wonder you hate Chomsky–he spoils your blind, self-righteous opinion–which is the fruit of ignorance and propaganda.

          • Point out the objective apparent….and let the pissy fits begin!

            “No wonder you hate Chomsky”…

            I would rather not hate anybody, including you.
            You speak of hate, but you are the one expressing yourself in such an emotionally angry and hateful manner.
            Yes, I know…the truth hurts, but you don’t have to embarrass yourself by making it so obvious!

            I wish you the very spiritual best.

          • You may not hate him, but you dis him deeply and unendingly and say absurd stuff like, “I don’t see the sins of any one country as being responsible for any of our problems in the world today.” So I guess when the US brutally kills some 4 million SE Asians, that caused no problems.

          • “So I guess when the US brutally kills some 4 million SE Asians, that caused no problems.”
            Of course I never said any such a thing to indicate anything of the sort.
            You’re talking about something that has nothing to do with my original comment at all.
            I have clarified that time and time again, but yourself and others wish to ignore what you can’t contest.
            So…. you would rather talk about something else while making such a statement…..
            I understand.
            Thank you for sharing that.

          • “So I guess when the US brutally kills some 4 million SE Asians, that caused no problems.”

            “I quoted your statement accurately, so be more careful in your statements–Bro.”

            Where have I said anything of the sort? How do you get from what I actually DID say to ANYTHING like THIS?
            Once again though, NONE of this has ANYTHING to do with my original comment.
            Of course, I’m not surprised….

          • The one and only statement of yours I ever quoted–and I did that accurately–was “I don’t see the sins of any one country as being responsible for any of our problems in the world today.” That was a very weak comment. I said “”So I guess when the US brutally kills some 4 million SE Asians, that caused no problems” to point that out to you.

          • If you believe that was a weak comment you could have just said so and perhaps why, instead of equating my statement with yours as if my statement meant anything of the interpretation in quotation marks that you gave it.

            Have a great day!

          • Why, thank you for sharing that!
            Perhaps someday I’ll be as objective and coherently well informed as you!
            You’re SO well studied on the subject, I’m sure you would never assume that someone else isn’t simply because you choose not to like what they have to say!

            Have you ever thought of writing a book on this topic? I am sure we could all gain greatly from your incredible expertise!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here