How the Media Walked us into Autocracy (w/ Ralph Nader) | The Chris Hedges Report
They’re abusing them for the profits they want to make from advertising, which of course begins to replace journalists and editors who want to do the right thing with journalists and editors who got their finger to the wind and are worried about the money before reporting the truth in an equitable fashion. It even gets worse. The Times created Trump. They kept giving him more and more publicity. They created JD Vance. Whoever heard of JD Vance? They kept writing about his book.
By Chris Hedges / The Chris Hedges Report, 9 Mar 25
This interview is also available on podcast platforms and Rumble.
The American corporate coup d’état is almost complete as the first weeks of the Trump administration exemplify. If there has been one person who saw this coming, and has taken courageous action over the years to prevent it, it would be Ralph Nader. The former presidential candidate, consumer advocate and corporate critic joins host Chris Hedges on this episode of The Chris Hedges Report to chronicle his life’s work battling the corporate takeover of the country and how Americans can still fight back today despite the growing repression from the White House.
“The sign of a decaying democracy is that when the forces of plutocracy, oligarchy, multinational corporations increase their power, in all sectors of our society, the resistance gets weaker,” Nader tells Hedges.
Nader asks people to look around them and witness the decay through the ordinary parts of their lives. “If you just look at the countervailing forces that hold up a society—civilized norms, due process of law and democratic traditions—they’re all either AWOL [absent without official leave] or collapsing,” he said. Civic groups are outnumbered by corporate lobbyists, the media barely pays attention to any grassroots organizing and the protests that do occur, such as the encampments at universities, are brutally suppressed.
It’s not an impossible task, Nader says, recalling the precedent of organizing in the U.S. He says the fundamental basics are supported by a majority of people regardless of their political labels.
Chris Hedges
The New York Times published a lead column on January 18th, 2025, titled, “Are We Sleepwalking Into Autocracy?” The columnist’s answer is yes, unless, and I quote, “defenders of democracy have to stay united, focusing on ensuring that checks and balances remain intact and that crucial democratic watchdog institutions elude capture.” What is absent from the Times article is the complicity of the media, and especially the New York Times, in shutting down coverage of the fight by unions, grassroots movements, whistleblowers, and civic organizations, often led by the consumer advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, to placate their advertisers. This decision, made by newspapers such as the New York Times four decades ago, essentially erased these popular initiatives from public consciousness.
This erasure—done to placate wealthy corporations and oligarchs and boost revenue—bolstered the power of corporations and the government to dominate and shape public discourse and in the process saw them become ever more secretive and ever more autocratic. As Ralph Nader notes, the regular reporting about what activists were doing in the 1960s and 1970s made possible the consumer, environmental, labor, and freedom of information laws. Similar efforts now cannot gather momentum with media invisibility. Legislative hearings, prosecutions, and regulatory actions cannot get jump-started just by the people insistent on a just and democratic society. How often do you see op-eds from civic labor advocates, Ralph asks. How often do you read reviews of their books? How often do you see profiles of them?
How often have the groundbreaking studies by Public Citizen, Common Cause, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Veterans for Peace, Union of Concerned Scientists, etc. received coverage? This erasure stands in stark contrast to the coverage given over to those on the far right and corporations. Figures like Donald Trump, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Elon Musk get plenty of press. The media landscape is siloed. Media outlets, both the legacy media and the digital media, cater to well-defined demographics. But the power of the legacy media, should it decide to use its power, is to help set the agenda through its reporting. Most digital sites feed off of the reporting of the establishment media spinning it left or right. And what it does not cover often does not get covered. Legions of reporters, 500 full-time reporters cover the Congress, hundreds more sit at the feet of the titans of commerce and Wall Street, spit back to the public official communiques, and fawning interviews with the powerful, the famous, and the rich. Unless they are deployed outside the halls of Congress and the centers of power, what is left of our democracy, and not much of it is left, will wither and die.
Joining me to discuss our march towards tyranny, the complicity of institutions such as the media and the liberal class, including the Democratic Party, and what we must do to wrest back power is Ralph Nader, who has been fighting corporate power longer more effectively and with more integrity than any other American. Ralph, let’s go back to where we were because where we are now is a reaction to what you, you were at the epicenter of it, built. We can begin with your groundbreaking book, “Unsafe at Any Speed,” which should be taught in every journalism school. It is a masterful piece of investigative reporting. But let’s go back to what we had and then how they organized to take it away.

Ralph Nader
Yeah, thank you, Chris. It’s very well documented, the whole history of it. When I wrote the book, “Unsafe at Any Speed,” a reporter for Science Magazine picked it up and then the New York Times picked it up off of Science Magazine and it made page one. And so that was a good start.
Chris Hedges
Ralph, just want to interrupt for people who don’t know, these were cars made by GM that were not safe…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Chris Hedges
Let me just stop you because Ralph, let’s not bypass the fact that GM mounted a pretty intense and dirty campaign against you.
Ralph Nader
Yes, they hired a private detective with several former FBI people. That’s what happened to a lot of FBI agents when they retired, they go to work for these large corporations to follow me around the country, try to get dirt on me, to discredit my testimony before Congress. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………….. Ralph Nader
Yes, and at the same time the companies hired a firm called Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering and Lloyd Cutler would go and have meetings with editors of the New York Times and Post and saying, what are you guys doing giving this guy so much print? Don’t you know he’s bad for business? And the inference was that they were going to lose advertising if they didn’t shut us out. Once the Times started scaling down, then the Washington Post took note because they were of the same mindset and both of them were about to go public and sell stock on the stock exchange, which gave them even more vulnerability to suppression. And then that dried up more and more of the evening news. We used to get on the network news.
It’s almost impossible to get on the network evening news now. And the same with radio. At the same time, there emerged public radio and public broadcasting, and they were scared from the get-go that the companies would go after their funding on Capitol Hill and crimp their style. And so they covered us very little as well.
……………………………………………………….the cycle starts again against the whole set of new injustices. But all these forces I’ve just mentioned started shutting us down. We were saved for a short period by the Jimmy Carter administration. He appointed very good people to the regulatory agencies, the auto safety agency, the job safety agency, the EPA, and so on. But that was just a four-year reprieve and they were still counter-attacking. More lobbyists, more political action committees, more indignant calls to reporters and editors and publishers to shut us down. So, you know, that was their golden age, the mass media, what we call now the corporate media. And it’s completely changed now. And I say to reporters or editors, or publishers that I can manage to reach. It’s not easy. What are you ashamed of your golden age for? Look what you did for the country, just exercising your duty and professional responsibilities for newsworthiness. And now you don’t do it.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. we’re paying the price now in wars of empire, in the domination of corporate supremacists over everything.
They’re raising our children with that iPhone five, seven hours a day, undermining parental authority, separating these children from family, community, nature, harming their health with junk food and sedentary living, with very little kids playing outside anymore. There isn’t anything that corporate commercialism now has not invaded. They’ve commercialized the churches. They’ve commercialized the academic world. They’ve commercialized almost everything outside the marketplace they see as a profit center. So they want to corporatize the post office. They want to take over public drinking water departments and corporatize them. They want to corporatize the public school system. One way or another, they want to corporatize the public lands or take the public lands. And they’ve never been more aggressive, never been more successful. And the civic community, which used to be relied on to resist, can’t get any media. And we have tried. Last year, we made a major effort to turn Labor Day into a real workers day with events all over the country. We got the unions behind us……………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………….. . So basically when you shut out the civic community, Chris, you shut down democracy. And I placed the responsibility not just on the Democratic Party, but first and foremost on the mass media.
…………………………………………… the independent press is not such a hot shot either. The magazines like In These Times, Washington Monthly, Progressive Magazine, The Nation, they don’t cover civic community activities. They just pontificate. They do have some good articles, and they have their columnists, many of whom are getting very tired and repetitive. They don’t cover what Public Citizen, Common Cause, Pension Rights Center, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Union of Concerned Scientists, Veterans for Peace especially gets completely blacked out regardless of their demonstrations and non-violent civil disobedience all over the country against the military machine, the empire, the weaponization of the genocide in Gaza. They haven’t had a single article, they had to put out all kinds of great material people go to veteransforpeace.org and see for yourself.
These are veterans who’ve known wars and they can’t even get any coverage. And you can’t get any coverage of the lack of coverage. You can’t get the journalism publications to do any coverage of the censorship. So this is the ultimate censorship, the shutdown of the First Amendment. When the press, which is given a cachet in the First Amendment, there’s no other industry mentioned by name in the Constitution, are abusing their privileges for a mess of prodigies.
They’re abusing them for the profits they want to make from advertising, which of course begins to replace journalists and editors who want to do the right thing with journalists and editors who got their finger to the wind and are worried about the money before reporting the truth in an equitable fashion. It even gets worse. The Times created Trump. They kept giving him more and more publicity. They created JD Vance. Whoever heard of JD Vance? They kept writing about his book. They kept writing about his Senate race more than the opponent, Tim Ryan, and the US Senate race in Ohio………………………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Ralph Nader
In a broader sense, all it comes down to are two things. Trump will self-destruct because he knows no boundaries. So his greatest enemy is Trump. And you will see the unraveling of Trump in the succeeding weeks. I would not be surprised that if he continues his bull in the China shop, illegal, wild, flailing, affecting tens of millions of people in terms of their dire necessities of life in favor of his corporate supremacist, that he will be impeached and convicted in the U.S. Senate. His own party will turn against him because when they see the polls, which are already dropping since January 20th, by the way, when they see the polls and they realize it’s either them or Trump, they will always take their own political survival.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://scheerpost.com/2025/03/08/how-the-media-walked-us-into-autocracy-w-ralph-nader-the-chris-hedges-report/
Changing nuclear policy would make ‘SNP as bad as Tories’, MSP warns
By Xander Elliards Content Editor, 9th March
CHANGING the SNP’s policy on nuclear weapons would be a “panic measure” demonstrating the same lack of principles as the Tories or Labour, an MSP has warned.
Bill Kidd, who is also co-president of the
global group Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and
Disarmament, issued a warning to his party after its long-standing policy
on nuclear weapons came under fire on multiple fronts – including from
within.
As the fear of Russia rises in Europe, Labour have chosen nuclear
weapons as an issue on which to attack the SNP. Just this week, Prime
Minister Keir Starmer took aim at the party’s stance on nuclear weapons
in the Commons – followed by Labour MP Joani Reid and Scottish Secretary
Ian Murray doing the same two days later. Then, Ian Blackford, the SNP’s
former Westminster leader, joined the calls for the SNP to change tack on
nuclear weaponry – saying the party should support multilateral
disarmament instead of unilateral disarmament.
The question being asked is
simple: will the SNP stick with their support for the removal of nuclear
weapons from Scotland on day one of independence? Or, will they change tack
and say nukes can stay on the Clyde indefinitely (which, in practice, is
what waiting for multilateral disarmament means)?
For Kidd, who spoke to
the Sunday National from a UN summit on the Treaty on the Prohibition of
Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), the answer is clear. “There may be increasing
pressure from the UK, from the UK political parties – and in fact I
expect that there will be – but that is another example of why the SNP
should stand firmly as an anti-nuclear [party],” he said.
The National 9th March 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/24992541.changing-nuclear-policy-make-snp-bad-tories-msp-warns/
Does the Deep State really exist, and if so, is it being dismantled?
March 9, 2025, https://theaimn.net/does-the-deep-state-really-exist-and-if-so-is-it-being-dismantled/ .
What is the Deep State? Does it really exist?
These questions are hard to answer. I had heard the term Deep State over many years, and I connected it with all sorts of conspiracies – not just about U.S. politics and intelligence systems, but with wild ideas about satanism, reptilian shapeshifters, the antichrist, child-trafficking, blood harvesting – and all connected with extreme right-wing and pro- Trump propaganda. So I just dismissed and ignored them – there was no such thing as the Deep State !
It is not that simple.
Indeed, it is very complex.
If you start delving, the term Deep State takes you back to Turkey, over 100 years ago, where the concept of a “shadow government” a “secret state within the state” was a real thing. In more modern times the Deep State is defined as:
“The deep state conspiracy theory in the United States is an American political conspiracy theory that posits the existence of the deep state, a clandestine network of members of the federal government (especially within the FBI and CIA). The theory argues that there exist networks of collaborators within the leadership of the high-level financial and industrial entities, which exercise power alongside or within the elected United States government” – Wikipedia
So, OK it’s still just a theory – a conspiracy theory pushed by Donald Trump’s supporters in order to discredit USA’s Biden Democrat administration? And various extreme religious and other wacky groups tacked the more sinister stuff onto it.
The trouble is, as with many problems, there is some truth in it. Over the decades since World War 2, successive U.S. Presidents have turned to secret discussions with unelected officials from the CIA in particular, but also from other agencies and business circles, relying on their advice to make decisions. The decisions were then pretty much rubber-stamped by a complacent and oblivious Congress.
The following (annoying advertisement-afflicted) video from early 2024, is unmistakably a propaganda piece for the Trump campaign. But it does contain some telling information. Even from its first example, we see that J.F. Kennedy, in the Cuban missile crisis, went not to his advisors, but to a social group of very secret members of the CIA to decide what to do. The development of the very powerful, very secretive CIA, in partnership with military leaders, rocket scientists from Germany, media and business leaders, produced an information network on which Presidents relied for decision-making. The CIA’s spying powers that were appropriate in war against the enemy are now directed also against the American public, even in peacetime. Huge well-funded resources went to secret activities that included misinformation and disinformation against civil rights and peace activists. Congress accepts these secret programmes in the name of security.
That video – however pro-Trump it might be, does not mention satanism, etc. If you separate that wacky stuff from the Deep State story – it is all remarkably convincing. To an American public, fed up with the secrecy, the endless expensive pointless wars – Vietnam, Iraq Afghanistan …, Donald Trump’s promise of change, and of dismantling the Deep State sounded attractive.
And hey – presto ! Trump is doing it! He’s sacking those unelected officials, thousands and thousands of them. He’s purging law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and plans to cut 70 percent of staff from various government agencies — freezing of billions of dollars in funding,
Ain’t that great!
Actually, no.
We might welcome the disruption of a Deep State system based on militarism, with the USA forever fomenting trouble overseas, and spending unknown $squillions on military gimmickry. A phrase springs to mind – “Throwing the baby out with the bath-water” . That’s a very corny metaphor. But what is really happening is this:
Trump’s aim is nothing to do with the “Deep State” . Trump’s goal and methodology was set out, detailed in Project 2025, the Center for Renewing America and the America First Policy Institute. The goal is the destruction of democracy – removing or rendering useless the laws, regulations, protocols and rules that prevent autocratic power. No more compromise, limited power, checks and balances and accountability. He made a good start in getting control over the Supreme Court
And I don’t know if everybody noticed two salient points in Trump’s “defeat of the Deep State”
- the power and unaccountable funding of the Pentagon will continue.
- Trump’s getting rid of “unelected officials” – but apparently taking orders from unelected Elon Musk.
The end goal is the dictatorship of Donald Trump. It would be funny if it were not so deadly serious. The first step – the “Trump’s Birthday and Flag Day Holiday Establishment Act” gives a clue as to what will follow.

The President Trump phenomenon will end eventually, for sure in chaos. Western World leadership is in the hands of a powerful, but unhinged , dictator, who is taking the advice of another powerful unelected unhinged billionaire, Elon Musk.
The whole process is far too much to pay for the destruction of the Deep State. Yes, it is welcome that the secretive decision-making by unelected officials and business leaders – taking the USA into endless wars – has been stopped. But its replacement is a terrifying fascism.
And at the end of it all, after the chaos, what will emerge? If we’re lucky enough to avoid catastrophes of global heating, and war, will we again get a government of men that are happy to have decisions made by macho men in bureaucracy and industry, who are itching for war – another Deep State in the name of “security”?
Doug Ford: Rip up the GE-Hitachi US nuclear contract

Ontario Clean Air Alliance 6 Mar 25
Premier Ford says he will tear up Ontario’s expensive contract for Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite service in the wake of Donald Trump’s unhinged attacks on our economy. And thanks to Doug Ford, American wine and bourbon is gone from our liquor stores.
He has also ordered the Ontario Public Service to go through the province’s contracts “with a fine tooth comb” to find other U.S. contracts that can be axed. According to Premier Ford: “We won’t award contracts to people who enable and encourage economic attacks on our province and our country.”
That’s why it’s time for the Ford Government to tell Ontario Power Generation to rip up its contract with GE-Hitachi for 4 new nuclear reactors at Darlington, east of Oshawa. These expensive and first-of-their-kind proposed new U.S. reactors would come with a lot of energy security and financial risks, including the need to import enriched uranium from the U.S.
As Bob Walker, National Director of the Canadian Nuclear Workers’ Council told the Globe and Mail: “Developing a dependence on another country for our nuclear fuel has always been a concern and recent events have proven those concerns are justified.”
A much lower cost and more secure way to keep our lights on is to invest in Made-in-Canada wind and solar energy plus storage.
It is time for Doug Ford to lift his political moratorium on Great Lakes offshore wind power and work with Premier Legault to expand our east-west electricity grid. As a first step the Ontario-Quebec electricity interconnection capability at Ottawa should be increased by 2,000 megawatts.
Please tell Premier Ford that to Protect Ontario we need to invest in Made-in-Canada wind and solar energy and storage, and work with Quebec to expand our east-west electricity grid.
UK Government slaps down Ian Murray over UN nuclear weapons summit.
By Xander Elliards
IAN Murray has seen his efforts to lobby the Labour leadership over nuclear weaponry slapped down – with the UK dismissing any engagement with a global summit on the weapons out of hand.
The Scottish Secretary is one of a handful of Labour MPs to have signed a pledge to work towards worldwide nuclear disarmament, which was drawn up by the International
Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) and also backed by almost all
SNP parliamentarians.
The National 4th March 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/24981383.uk-government-slaps-ian-murray-un-nuclear-weapons-summit/
Nuclear energy has no role in Scotland’s green future

Scottish Greens 4th March 2025, https://greens.scot/news/nuclear-energy-has-no-role-in-scotland-s-green-future
Nuclear energy is costly and toxic and will do nothing to cut bills.
New nuclear power would cost Scottish households while diverting funding and resources from real climate action, says Scottish Green Co-leader Patrick Harvie.
Speaking ahead of a Scottish Government debate on Scotland’s renewable future, Mr Harvie warned that Labour’s focus on nuclear power would risk increasing household bills and would be a gift to a toxic industry that is not offering the solutions we need.
The UK Labour government has proposed building new nuclear power plants across the UK touting so-called ‘small modular reactors’, despite one never having been built and the long-running record of the nuclear power industry running over schedule and budget.
The first nuclear power plant to be built in the UK for over 30 years, at Hinkley Point, is nearing £28 billion over budget and despite the construction phase beginning in 2016, it will likely not generate any electricity until at least 2029 but possibly 2031.
Mr Harvie said:
“This cold war era obsession with nuclear power shows just how out of touch Labour are with the real crisis we face. It is costly, takes years to go online and will leave a long and toxic legacy for future generations.
“New nuclear power would cost billions of pounds at a time when Labour are telling the public that there is no money to tackle poverty or keep pensioners warm. These new reactors would do nothing to reduce the bills that Labour promised to cut during the election.
“Hinkley Point is the perfect example of everything wrong with nuclear power. Its construction has been a disaster for the environment, requiring masses more concrete and steel than initially thought and it is now running significantly over budget and behind schedule. Does Keir Starmer really think the people want more of this?
“It is a distraction from doing the real work that is so important in terms of investing in clean, green renewable energy that will make a big difference for people and planet.
“Keir Starmer seems to have been sold up the river by his friends in the nuclear power industry who promise modular reactors, which have never been built to any kind of scale and don’t remove the major problem of highly toxic nuclear waste that will still scar our landscape for centuries to come.
“Scotland can have a positive and prosperous green future, but nuclear energy has no part in it. We have the resources for a renewables revolution but we need all governments to commit to it rather than taking a big backwards step with nuclear.”
Nuclear Policy in Scotland

The following motion was passed in the Scottish Parliament on 4th March:
That the Parliament rejects the creation of new nuclear power plants in
Scotland and the risk that they bring;
believes that Scotland’s future is as a renewables powerhouse;
further believes that the expansion ofrenewables should have a positive impact on household energy bills;
notes the challenges and dangers of producing and managing hazardous radioactive
nuclear waste products, and the potentially catastrophic consequences of
the failure of a nuclear power plant;
recognises that the development and operation of renewable power generation is faster, cheaper and safer than that of nuclear power, and welcomes that renewables would deliver higher employment than nuclear power for the development and production of
equivalent levels of generated power.
A Labour motion, proposed by Energy Spokesperson, Sarah Boyack was defeated….
Scottish Parliament 4th March 2025,
https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/votes-and-motions/S6M-16657
Keir Starmer’s plan for UK growth – the Ukraine war

The Labour government’s increase in military spending and its extraordinary new agreement with Ukraine are platforms for the UK arms industry, which Labour sees as key to economic growth in Britain.
MARK CURTIS, 26 February 2025, https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-plan-for-uk-growth-the-ukraine-war/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=Image&utm_campaign=ICYMI&utm_content=Image
- UK military spending and aid to Ukraine are effectively providing a public subsidy to British arms firms.
- One major MoD contractor is currently being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office for suspected bribery and corruption
Wars can be useful to governments, and the horrendous conflict in Ukraine is so proving.
In his announcement of increases in UK military spending, Keir Starmer strongly referenced Ukraine and the threat from Russia and said the new “investment” will “create a secure and stable environment in which businesses can thrive, supporting the Government’s number one mission to deliver economic growth”.
He added: “The increased spending will sustain our globally competitive industry, supporting highly skilled jobs and apprenticeships across the whole of the UK.”
Starmer sees the increase in funds to the military as part of Labour’s Plan for Change, its overarching economic growth strategy for Britain.
A few weeks ago, foreign secretary David Lammy echoed his prime minister in comments to an audience of arms firms about the extraordinary 100 year partnership between the UK and Ukraine. He said the new accord, which was signed in January, is “a platform for the UK defence industry” to extend military equipment to Ukraine.
Lammy added: “The UK’s defence industry is key to our growth and security by creating jobs, driving forward innovation and collaborating internationally”.
Britain’s supply of billions worth of military equipment to Ukraine is openly seen by the government as both boosting the fortunes of UK arms firms and promoting Labour’s whole economic growth strategy.
Giant UK arms firms like BAE Systems, Babcock and Thales UK will all likely benefit from increased military spending. They are already benefiting from new procurement contracts from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) as the UK gifts its current stocks of military equipment to Ukraine.
Much of UK military aid to Ukraine – which amounts to £4.5bn this year – is really a subsidy to these arms firms.
Keir Starmer tells SNP to reverse nuclear weapons opposition

NOW is the time to reaffirm the UK Government’s commitment to nuclear
weaponry, the Prime Minister has said – on the day that international
efforts to promote a global ban on the technology step up.
Speaking in the Commons on Monday, Keir Starmer took issue with the SNP’s opposition to
nuclear weapons – apparently in response to comments from First Minister
John Swinney last week. The SNP leader suggested that a focus on nuclear
weapons was an “inhibitor” to combating current military challenges due
to the “resources they command” – and called for the funding
allocated for renewing Trident should instead be invested in
“conventional weaponry”.
The National 3rd March 2025 https://www.thenational.scot/news/24978206.keir-starmer-tells-snp-reverse-nuclear-weapons-opposition/
Keir Starmer faces backbench rebellion over ‘shortsighted’ cuts to aid budget
Keir Starmer is facing a backbench revolt by Labour MPs this week as anger
mounts over the government’s decision to cut the international
development budget by almost half in order to pay for an increase in
defence spending.
The Labour chair of the all-party select committee on
international development, Sarah Champion, who has already called on the
government to rethink the decision, has secured a debate in the Commons on
Wednesday at which dozens of Labour backbenchers are considering
intervening to express their dismay. One of those who may speak out,
according to colleagues, is Anneliese Dodds, who resigned as international
development minister on Friday.
Guardian 2nd March 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/mar/02/keir-starmer-faces-backbench-rebellion-over-shortsighted-cuts-to-aid-budget
Conservatives’ push to identify ‘suitable sites’ for nuclear reactors in Telford and Wrekin is defeated.
A Conservative move to get Telford and
Wrekin’s local plan to ‘identify suitable sites’ for small nuclear
reactors was defeated as the borough’s all important development
blueprint moved to the next stage.
Shropshire Star 3rd March 2025 https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2025/03/03/conservatives-push-to-identify-suitable-sites-for-nuclear-reactors-in-telford-and-wrekin-is-defeated/
Zelensky needs to go …been risking nuclear war far too long

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 2 Mar 25
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky is a spectacularly failed leader. He’s failed on every indicator of good governance.
He failed the largely Russian cultured Ukrainians in the Donbas who overwhelmingly voted him for president in 2019. He promised he’d end the war on them by their own government after the 2014 coup toppled elected pro Russian President Victor Yanukovych. Once in office Zelensky caved to the ultra-nationalists who wielded the real power in Kyiv. The war on the Donbas separatist movement escalated under Zelensky. He massed 60,000 elite troops on the Donbas border to complete destruction of the separatist movement. Guess what that provoked February 24, 2022?
He failed by continuing his predecessors’ desire to join NATO, knowing full well Ukraine in NATO crossed a red line Russia viewed as an existential security threat. That made the February 22, 2022 Russian invasion even more inevitable.
Two months into the war he failed to conclude a peace treaty with Russia in April, 2022 that was about to be signed. He allowed US and UK war hawks bully him into rejecting the settlement which would have cost Ukraine nary a square mile of territory. He swallowed whole their delusion he could win the war with US weapons but not US cannon fodder Now he’s lost about 45,000 square miles for caving to his US/UK masters of war..
Worst of all, Zelensky failed the most important responsibility of any leader: do nothing that could risk nuclear annihilation. He’s spent the entire 3 years of war asking, begging, demanding the US give him the weaponry to attack deep inside Russia. He appears oblivious how easily such attacks could trigger nuclear war between the US and Russ
Astoundingly, when an errant Ukrainian missile killed a couple of Poles in Poland, Zelensky claimed that represented a Russian attack on NATO requiring an immediate NATO military response. Hello WWIII. That alone made Zelensky unfit to serve another day as Ukraine leader.
With the US proxy war on Russia lost and Ukraine in ruins, Zelensky’s failed days in power are dwindling. His exit cannot come soon enough.
Techno-Fascism Comes to America

American techno-fascism is no longer a philosophical abstraction for Silicon Valley to tinker with, in the vein of intermittent fasting or therapeutic ketamine doses. It is a policy program whose constitutional limits are being tested right now as DOGE, staffed with inexperienced engineers linked to Musk’s own companies, rampages through the federal government.
Silicon Valley is premised on the idea that its founders and engineers know better than anyone else: they can do better at disseminating information, at designing an office, at developing satellites and advancing space travel. By the same logic, they must be able to govern better than politicians and federal employees.
The historic parallels that help explain Elon Musk’s rampage on the federal government.
New Yorker By Kyle Chayka, February 26, 2025
When a phalanx of the top Silicon Valley executives—Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Google’s Sundar Pichai—aligned behind President Trump during the Inauguration in January, many observers saw an allegiance based on corporate interests. The ultra-wealthy C.E.O.s were turning out to support a fellow-magnate, hoping perhaps for an era of deregulation, tax breaks, and anti-“woke” cultural shifts. The historian Janis Mimura saw something more ominous: a new, proactive union of industry and governmental power, wherein the state would drive aggressive industrial policy at the expense of liberal norms. In the second Trump Administration, a class of Silicon Valley leaders was insinuating itself into politics in a way that recalled one of Mimura’s primary subjects of study: the élite bureaucrats who seized political power and drove Japan into the Second World War. “These are experts with a technological mind-set and background, often engineers, who now have a special role in the government,” Mimura told me. The result is what, in her book “Planning for Empire” (2011), she labelled “techno-fascism”: authoritarianism driven by technocrats. Technology “is considered the driving force” of such a regime, Mimura said. “There’s a sort of technicization of all aspects of government and society.”
In the nineteen-thirties, Japan colonized Manchuria, in northeastern China, and the region became a test ground for techno-fascism. Nobusuke Kishi, a Japanese commerce-ministry bureaucrat, was appointed to head the industrial program in Manchuria, in 1936, and, with the collaboration of a new crop of the Japanese conglomerates known as zaibatsu, he instituted a policy of forced industrial development based on the exploitation of the local population. When Kishi returned to national politics in Japan, in 1939, along with a clique of other Japanese technocrats who had worked in Manchuria, he pursued similar strategies of state-dictated industrialization, at the expense of private interests and labor rights. This fascistic regime would not be structured the same way as Mussolini’s or Hitler’s, with power concentrated in the hands of a single charismatic leader, although Kishi had travelled to Germany in the nineteen-twenties, as the Nazi movement expanded, and drew inspiration from German industrialization for his Manchurian project. Instead, Mimura said, Japan “kind of slid into fascism” as bureaucrats exercised their authority behind the scenes, under the aegis of the Japanese emperor. As she explained, techno-fascist officials “acquire power by creating these supra-ministerial organs and agencies, subgroups within the bureaucracy that are unaccountable.” Today, Elon Musk’s DOGE is the Trumpian equivalent.
American corporations of the twentieth century flirted with a merging of state and industrial power. The entrepreneur Henry Ford promoted a system of industrial organization that came to be known as “Fordism,” whereby the state would intervene in the economy to guarantee mass production and consumption. In the nineteen-thirties, I.B.M. did business with the Nazi government through a German subsidiary, lending its technology to projects like the 1933 census, which helped identify Jews in the country. As a recent feature in the Guardian by Becca Lewis laid out, Silicon Valley itself has exhibited right-wing tendencies for decades, embracing misogynist and hierarchical attitudes about achievement. The journalist Michael S. Malone was issuing warnings about emerging “technofascism” way back in the late nineties, when he warned about “IQ bigotry” in the tech industry and the willingness of people to push forward digital revolution while “tossing out the weak and wounded along the way.” But our current moment marks a new conjunction of Internet entrepreneurs and day-to-day government operations.
American techno-fascism is no longer a philosophical abstraction for Silicon Valley to tinker with, in the vein of intermittent fasting or therapeutic ketamine doses. It is a policy program whose constitutional limits are being tested right now as DOGE, staffed with inexperienced engineers linked to Musk’s own companies, rampages through the federal government.
Musk has slashed the ranks of federal employees, shut down agencies whose authority challenges his own, and leveraged artificial intelligence to decide where to cut, promising a government executed by chatbots such as Grok, from Musk’s own A.I. company. DOGE has gained access to Americans’ private data and developed tools to e-mail the entire federal government at once, a digital megaphone that Musk recently used to demand that employees send in a list of their weekly accomplishments. As Mimura put it, “You try to apply technical concepts and rationality to human beings and human society, and then you’re getting into something almost totalitarian.”
The techno-fascist opportunism goes beyond Musk; one can sense other tech entrepreneurs and investors slavering to exploit the alliance between Trumpism and Silicon Valley capitalism, building infrastructure on a national scale. Sam Altman, the C.E.O. of OpenAI, has arranged his own deals with Trump’s government, including Stargate, a heavily hyped data-center project worth a potential five hundred billion dollars. Apple recently announced its own five-hundred-billion-dollar investment campaign in the U.S. over the next four years, including a plan to begin building A.I. servers in Texas.
However nebulous, these extravagant plans signal a spirit of collaboration. On Truth Social, Trump posted approvingly that Apple’s plans demonstrated “FAITH IN WHAT WE ARE DOING.”
Erin McElroy, a geographer at the University of Washington who studies Silicon Valley, has used the term “siliconization” to describe the way that places such as San Francisco or Cluj-Napoca, Romania, to which many western tech companies have outsourced I.T. services, have been remade in the image and ideology of Silicon Valley.
According to McElroy, the first signs of Washington’s current siliconization can be traced back, in part, to the Administration of Barack Obama, who embraced social-media platforms such as Facebook as a vector of government communication. For a time, digital platforms seemed to support democratic government as a kind of communal megaphone; but now, a decade later, technology seems to be supplanting the established authority of the government. “There is a crisis of the state,” McElroy said, and Silicon Valley may be “trying to corrode state power” in order to more quickly replace it.
Silicon Valley is premised on the idea that its founders and engineers know better than anyone else: they can do better at disseminating information, at designing an office, at developing satellites and advancing space travel. By the same logic, they must be able to govern better than politicians and federal employees. Voguish concepts in Silicon Valley such as seasteading and “network states” feature independent, self-contained societies running on tech principles. Efforts to create such entities have either failed or remained confined to the realm of brand-building, as in the startup Praxis, a hypothetical plan for a new tech-driven city on the Mediterranean.
Under the new Trump White House, though, the U.S. government is being offered up as a guinea pig, McElroy said. “Now that we’ve got Musk running the state, I don’t know if they need their little offshore bubbles as much as they thought they did before.”
Such visions of a technologized society represent a break from the Make America Great Again populism that drove the first Trump Administration. MAGA reactionaries such as Steve Bannon tend to be skeptical of technological progress; ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.newyorker.com/culture/infinite-scroll/techno-fascism-comes-to-america-elon-musk?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Science_030125&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5be9d23d24c17c6adf3bf435&cndid=30183386&hasha=432fc0d0ad6543e820e2dfcd39f76c35&hashb=e1c24f6a6459c7d1d625eb2ea55d9dfbbb4633bf&hashc=ac5a1f5526e7292c73f49dfa8fb6d5d0cb87d8773cec3b9b03d38a4ce482d7c8&esrc=subscribe-page&mbid=CRMNYR012019&utm_term=TNY_Science_Tech
The Guardian view on PM’s gamble: exploiting crisis to remake Labour was a step too far for an ally

Guardian 28th Feb 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/feb/28/the-guardian-view-on-pms-gamble-exploiting-crisis-to-remake-labour-was-a-step-too-far-for-an-ally
The exit of a soft-left intellectual politician from government highlights a growing unease about the reordering of the party’s priorities.
The resignation of Anneliese Dodds, the international development minister, from Labour’s cabinet may not have been entirely unexpected. Sir Keir Starmer’s decision to cut the aid budget to “pay” for increased defence spending was wrong. Making the world’s poorest foot the bill for Britain’s security is reckless and self-defeating. Slashing aid fuels instability – it won’t buy safety. From her perch in government Ms Dodds, who was Sir Keir’s first shadow chancellor, knew this better than most.
The former cabinet minister’s letter is right to warn that the cuts will mean the UK withdrawing from many developing countries and having a diminished role in global institutions like the World Bank, the G7 and climate negotiations. She pointedly argued Britain will find it “impossible” to deliver on its commitment to maintain development spending in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine with the shrunken budget. Sir Keir rebuffed this charge, but Ms Dodds is right to say his move is being seen as following the Trumpian lead in cutting USAid – a framing that implies the UK is losing its independent foreign policy direction.
Like many others, including this column, she understood that in an increasingly volatile world, defence spending must rise. But rather than a collective discussion on whether the government’s fiscal rules and tax policies remain fit for purpose, the prime minister chose to gut aid budgets to fund defence spending with little debate, as if stability abroad weren’t essential to security at home. Such high-handed treatment left Ms Dodds, a soft-left intellectual politician, with no choice but to resign.
Her departure had been in the air since Sir Keir made his announcement – but she held off until he returned from Washington. Sir Keir now owns the decision, and its consequences will define his leadership. That he was shaped by events rather than shaping them will not be lost on his MPs.
Clive Lewis, a leftwing Labour MP and former soldier, has called for a wealth tax to fund defence. This is a sensible idea that merits wider discussion, as does relaxing borrowing rules – a debate already under way in Europe. The party’s right wing wants to frame Sir Keir’s move as more than fiscal, briefing that Sir Keir has made a deliberate break from the party’s pro-aid stance. It is reported that the Treasury didn’t push this – it was the prime minister’s personal call. Ms Dodds’ rise and fall mirrors his hardening leadership style.
Sir Keir is seizing this crisis to remake his party. His government has embraced militarisation, welfare cuts, climate backtracking and nationalist asylum policies. The political rationale is to ward off attacks from the extreme right and particularly Reform, which has seen its support rise. Why amplify rightwing narratives instead of challenging them? If this is just tactical positioning, fine. If not, he risks losing Labour’s soul – a perilous path as concerns over the lack of good jobs, equality, child poverty and pensioner support are likely to keep growing. Labour voters may turn away if “hard-headed” geopolitics trumps fairness. The reaction from MPs and the electorate will determine whether this gamble pays off – or exposes rifts within Labour’s coalition.
‘The climate crisis is the biggest security threat of them all’: Anneliese Dodds quits government over aid budget cuts

Michael Holder, 28 February 2025
Anneliese Dodds has today quit the Cabinet over plans to raid the
international aid budget to boost defence spending, warning in her
resignation letter the decision risks damaging the UK’s interests and
undermining efforts to tackle a climate crisis that “is the biggest
security threat of them all”.
Dodds, who resigned as Minister of State for
both International Development and Women and Equalities, said while she
fully supported the government’s decision to increase defence spending, she
disagreed that the UK overseas development budget should “absorb the entire
burden”.
Business Green 28th Feb 2025,
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4410216/climate-crisis-biggest-security-threat-anneliese-dodds-quits-government-aid-budget-cuts
-
Archives
- July 2026 (294)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS



