A very interesting piece, and one which describes a great deal of what actually goes on in government, or indeed businesses or any long-term collective exercise - thanks to your lifetime of experience.
It has appeared to me that there is more than one perception of the current usage of the phrase. The one you are addressing is certainly out there, and is not one to which I would subscribe. But my allowance for the existence of something I would call the deep state is more historical. You describe it in your piece here, which is the fact that governments (both elected and bureaucratic) have a great deal more "information" to sift through than the general public, and will make decisions based on things that they won't necessarily want to talk about, probably much of which relates to not wanting to open another can of worms. But while "thinking Gaddafi was about to fall, and wanting to claim credit" might possibly be an explanation for Clinton cackling about it in an interview, it still shows up an intent to benefit that is not talked about openly or subject to "democratic" scrutiny - a state deeper and less visible than the one we normally see. The invasion of Iraq was a catastrophic decision, presumably made for potential benefit, but with a pretty elaborate set of lies and false narratives to bolster it. Maybe all made up on the run, but seems more likely it was some invisible person's bright idea that wasn't talked about opening. That, to me, is the deep state - the origin of decisions that are recognized to have purposes most decent people wouldn't agree to, so they're given a gloss of false narrative. It sounds superficial, except that the consequences are so ghastly for so many. I don't think it hurts to recognize that power is most often wielded by people out of the public eye, and the more chaotic things are, the more opportunity for those individual interests to be pursued. Given that government tends to collect a particular type of person, and those with a taste for the uses of power will try hardest to get there, it's not unreasonable to think that there is a degree of private pushing of public agendas.
This is not the conspiratorial "Deep State" you are contending with in your piece, but I just wanted to put in a word for a not unreasonable suspicion that a hell of a lot goes on under the radar, with intentional help, even if this is not coherently long-term or generational.
I never cease to be grateful for the thoughtfulness of your pieces, and the thoughts they provoke!
Interesting article. However you seem to put aside the Italian (and west european) experience with Gladio and other stay behind networks.
I think that OlavTunander's article "Democratic State vs Deep State: Approaching the Dual State of the West" gives sufficient evidence of the existence of parallel structures within the Western democracies.
This has of course nothing to do with naratives re conspiracies.
There is a deep state, that looks for a continuation of policies. US's deep state is to:
1. Expand the gamut of private capital around the world and remove any constraints on it, by hook or by crook (CIA is the brainchild of former Wall Street lawyers). Colonel Smithers could tell you a thing or two about the influence of finance on government actions. From all the writings on this substack, it is obvious Aurelien has not worked in the Treasury belly of the beast.
The ideological fight against USSR and now China is ultimately the fight between oligarchy and its ability to control a polity and a population intimately, so that there is no other alternative, and other forms of organization that do not allow such amount of power to be accessible to a minority, to the detriment of the rest and of the society at large and the security of the state.
2. Entrench US hegemony and maintain the existence of the other, so the flow of funds continues. I am thinking of the 1960 incident with the U2 spying plane that was downed by the soviets, on the eve of a rapprochment meeting between the US and USSR. CIA made sure that identifications of pilot etc were available so that there was no doubt on the perpetrator. Made the US president look like a poor schmuck. Or the "deep state" sabotaging Trump's order to exit Syria.
As for European countries, they are on autopilot, with the programing done by the US. If they disobey, they pay. Look at Hungary, how the noose is being tightened:
"Moody’s Ratings lowered the outlook of Hungary’s debt to negative from stable, citing weaker governance that risks losing grants and low-cost loans from the European Union. The agency affirmed Hungary’s rating at Baa2, the second-lowest investment-grade level and on par with Mexico and Colombia. The locked money from the EU may lower economic growth and worsen debt metrics, Moody’s said in a statement. “If Hungary’s institutions are not able or willing to meet the remaining conditions set by the EU for the release of its funds, Hungary may ultimately lose out on a substantial amount of grants and low-cost loans,” analysts including Heiko Peters and Dietmar Hornung wrote in the Friday statement. “Like its peers in Central and Eastern Europe, Hungary has in the past received significant EU funds which have boosted GDP growth and supported fiscal and debt metrics.” Hungary’s currency has lost almost 7% against the euro so far this year, reaching a two-year low on Thursday as the weakness of the domestic economy and the unfavorable global sentiment made investors focus on the country’s financial vulnerabilities. In October, S&P Global Ratings pointed to risks that the “2026 elections could complicate the government’s ability to reduce the large budgetary deficit.” It affirmed Hungary’s rating at the lowest investment grade, BBB-. Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s governing party is facing a strong political challenger leading up to the 2026 parliamentary elections".
If the overall structures are not affected, doesn't matter to TPTB if clowns are in certain positions. Otherwise, the bricks start falling down on the source of disturbance/resistence.
Another pet peeve I have with Aurelien's postings is that while we are regaled with exquisit minutia on how bureaucracy and governments work, he never addresses theorganizing principles, the ideological foundations of polities and how that affect the directions governments take.
OK, like I said I'm travelling this week, but I have been able this evening to edit the post settings and switch comments by anyone back on. I have no idea what went wrong, but I will double-check next time.
Now we can go back to talking about deep state. I take it to be the power behind the throne... the bureaucracy, the "captains of industry", the banksters, and other high placed people who wield a lot of public power but are unelected and there is no way to hold them responsible. It's not that they are covert (though sometimes their actions are), but that they are illegible (James C. Scott).
i'm sorry to say that, for reasons that escape me, but must be linked to incompetence on my part, comments on this post have been accidentally limited to paid subscribers . I have no idea how that happened, but it will not recur. And of course these essays will always remain free.
"The Deep State can be anything you want it to be according to context."
"There is a "difference between aspirations and plans."
"Deep State hypotheses can never be falsified..."
The beginnings of a more falsifiable hypothesis on the origins of the modern Deep State:
In 2005, a top secret memo written by George Kennan on July 30, 1948 was declassified. The memo was entitled "The inauguration of organized political warfare." It states in part:
"Having assumed greater international responsibilities than ever before in our history and having been engaged by the full might of the Kremlin's political warfare, we cannot afford to leave unmobilized our resources for covert political warfare. It is with all of the foregoing in mind that the policy planning staff [of the State Department] began some three months ago a consideration of specific projects in the field of covert operations, where they should be fitted into the structure of this government, and how the Department of State should exercise direction and coordination."
Yeah, in 1948 USSR was just looking to lick its soooo many wounds and rebuilt a thoroughy destroyed country. The east European countries were spoken for already at Yalta, and USSR agreed to let Finland and Austria be as long as they stayed neutral.
Good old Georgie was lying through his teeth: "having been engaged by the full might of the Kremlin's political warfare". Russia is a very reactive state, this description is absolutely out of character. Likely only later in life Old Georgie realized the errors of his way, which comes from the very agressive character of American polity. Georgie was just projecting there and put one of the first bricks in building the cold war.
US foreign policy is strongly influenced by unelected entities such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the US State Dept, and CIA. These, in turn, reflect priorities and viewpoints that would not survive democratic processes, and that can be influenced by special interests that have no concern for what benefits the US population. The term "deep state" applies.
You do not understand American politics. While there is dissension domestically, and later very much kerfuffle about 'identity' issues, American foreign policy since WWII has been consistent in maintaining and advancing global dominance militarily, politically, and economically. The ones who rule don't really care about domestic issues as long as their rents, interest, and power are not affected by politics. Peter Dale Scott and Aaron Good have written about the US Deep State in regard to their theory of the 'tripartite state', composed of the surface elected government and its bureaucracies, the security state including both military and intelligence, and the oligarchs of finance, industry, and crime. The Deep State includes members of all three levels.
A working example is Allen Dulles, first head of the CIA. Dulles worked as a Wall Street banker before joining the government, and he did their bidding. When errant President Kennedy moved to end the Cold War, this was so unacceptable to the Deep State that they assassinated him. In general, the Deep State keeps empire running and is ruthless in doing so.
I really enjoy your writing - so much so that I forwarded one of your articles to Mike of "Coffee and a Mike" podcast and he subsequently had you on although by his line of questioning didn't seem to me he really understood what your writing was about.
I am quite puzzled by this article though. It seems entirely possible to me that people with immense wealth and power use it to get certain things done. I've even seen a video of Klaus Schwab of the WEF say that they penetrate cabinets of western leaders and many current and former leaders were part of the WEF Young Global Leaders program. It sure seems to me they have a great deal of influence and it's uncanny how just about every western leader is in lockstep on global policy and the ones who aren't are demonized (Trump and Bolsonaro to name a couple). Look what is happening in Romania - do you think that's organic? How about Georgia - no outside influence involved? In Germany they are trying to ban the Aft party (I actually could see this move being organic as dumb and futile as it is). Money - and a lot of it - is required for some of these moves.
"The Creature from Jekyll Island" is a book I read many years ago and seems very well researched with all the footnotes there were. Maybe try reading that.
Once the Supreme Court in the US made their decision on Citizens United it allowed for Democracy to be bought and paid for. Powerful people don't pay money for campaign promises. They pay money to get results on things that aren't discussed much on the campaign trail.
What are your thoughts on this video showing how things get done politically in Britain? Sure seems to me like things are done a lot differently than we're lead to believe and this is not the first time I've seen this explained.
On the delightfully names "WikiSpooks" site, we see the origin of the phrase: Susurluk.
Four people were in a car crash in a remote mountainous region: a gangster, his beauty queen girlfriend, a top cop, and an MP. All but the MP died.
It brought up the immediate question: "why were these 4 people in one car?". (All that's missing is a famous imam.)
The beauty queen died from the crash, somebody snapped the necks of the mobster and the top cop to make sure they were dead, and "the MP was rescued by his guards".
A very interesting piece, and one which describes a great deal of what actually goes on in government, or indeed businesses or any long-term collective exercise - thanks to your lifetime of experience.
It has appeared to me that there is more than one perception of the current usage of the phrase. The one you are addressing is certainly out there, and is not one to which I would subscribe. But my allowance for the existence of something I would call the deep state is more historical. You describe it in your piece here, which is the fact that governments (both elected and bureaucratic) have a great deal more "information" to sift through than the general public, and will make decisions based on things that they won't necessarily want to talk about, probably much of which relates to not wanting to open another can of worms. But while "thinking Gaddafi was about to fall, and wanting to claim credit" might possibly be an explanation for Clinton cackling about it in an interview, it still shows up an intent to benefit that is not talked about openly or subject to "democratic" scrutiny - a state deeper and less visible than the one we normally see. The invasion of Iraq was a catastrophic decision, presumably made for potential benefit, but with a pretty elaborate set of lies and false narratives to bolster it. Maybe all made up on the run, but seems more likely it was some invisible person's bright idea that wasn't talked about opening. That, to me, is the deep state - the origin of decisions that are recognized to have purposes most decent people wouldn't agree to, so they're given a gloss of false narrative. It sounds superficial, except that the consequences are so ghastly for so many. I don't think it hurts to recognize that power is most often wielded by people out of the public eye, and the more chaotic things are, the more opportunity for those individual interests to be pursued. Given that government tends to collect a particular type of person, and those with a taste for the uses of power will try hardest to get there, it's not unreasonable to think that there is a degree of private pushing of public agendas.
This is not the conspiratorial "Deep State" you are contending with in your piece, but I just wanted to put in a word for a not unreasonable suspicion that a hell of a lot goes on under the radar, with intentional help, even if this is not coherently long-term or generational.
I never cease to be grateful for the thoughtfulness of your pieces, and the thoughts they provoke!
Interesting article. However you seem to put aside the Italian (and west european) experience with Gladio and other stay behind networks.
I think that OlavTunander's article "Democratic State vs Deep State: Approaching the Dual State of the West" gives sufficient evidence of the existence of parallel structures within the Western democracies.
This has of course nothing to do with naratives re conspiracies.
There is a deep state, that looks for a continuation of policies. US's deep state is to:
1. Expand the gamut of private capital around the world and remove any constraints on it, by hook or by crook (CIA is the brainchild of former Wall Street lawyers). Colonel Smithers could tell you a thing or two about the influence of finance on government actions. From all the writings on this substack, it is obvious Aurelien has not worked in the Treasury belly of the beast.
The ideological fight against USSR and now China is ultimately the fight between oligarchy and its ability to control a polity and a population intimately, so that there is no other alternative, and other forms of organization that do not allow such amount of power to be accessible to a minority, to the detriment of the rest and of the society at large and the security of the state.
2. Entrench US hegemony and maintain the existence of the other, so the flow of funds continues. I am thinking of the 1960 incident with the U2 spying plane that was downed by the soviets, on the eve of a rapprochment meeting between the US and USSR. CIA made sure that identifications of pilot etc were available so that there was no doubt on the perpetrator. Made the US president look like a poor schmuck. Or the "deep state" sabotaging Trump's order to exit Syria.
As for European countries, they are on autopilot, with the programing done by the US. If they disobey, they pay. Look at Hungary, how the noose is being tightened:
"Moody’s Ratings lowered the outlook of Hungary’s debt to negative from stable, citing weaker governance that risks losing grants and low-cost loans from the European Union. The agency affirmed Hungary’s rating at Baa2, the second-lowest investment-grade level and on par with Mexico and Colombia. The locked money from the EU may lower economic growth and worsen debt metrics, Moody’s said in a statement. “If Hungary’s institutions are not able or willing to meet the remaining conditions set by the EU for the release of its funds, Hungary may ultimately lose out on a substantial amount of grants and low-cost loans,” analysts including Heiko Peters and Dietmar Hornung wrote in the Friday statement. “Like its peers in Central and Eastern Europe, Hungary has in the past received significant EU funds which have boosted GDP growth and supported fiscal and debt metrics.” Hungary’s currency has lost almost 7% against the euro so far this year, reaching a two-year low on Thursday as the weakness of the domestic economy and the unfavorable global sentiment made investors focus on the country’s financial vulnerabilities. In October, S&P Global Ratings pointed to risks that the “2026 elections could complicate the government’s ability to reduce the large budgetary deficit.” It affirmed Hungary’s rating at the lowest investment grade, BBB-. Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s governing party is facing a strong political challenger leading up to the 2026 parliamentary elections".
If the overall structures are not affected, doesn't matter to TPTB if clowns are in certain positions. Otherwise, the bricks start falling down on the source of disturbance/resistence.
Another pet peeve I have with Aurelien's postings is that while we are regaled with exquisit minutia on how bureaucracy and governments work, he never addresses theorganizing principles, the ideological foundations of polities and how that affect the directions governments take.
Perhaps of interest.
Mike Lofgren is a former congressional staff member who served
on both the House and Senate budget committees. His book
about Congress, The Party is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy,
Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted,
was published in paperback in 2013. His book The Deep
State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow
Government, was published in January 2016.
The Tsar is good: it's his advisors who are responsible for the oppression of the people.
OK, like I said I'm travelling this week, but I have been able this evening to edit the post settings and switch comments by anyone back on. I have no idea what went wrong, but I will double-check next time.
Works now. Thank you!
Now we can go back to talking about deep state. I take it to be the power behind the throne... the bureaucracy, the "captains of industry", the banksters, and other high placed people who wield a lot of public power but are unelected and there is no way to hold them responsible. It's not that they are covert (though sometimes their actions are), but that they are illegible (James C. Scott).
i'm sorry to say that, for reasons that escape me, but must be linked to incompetence on my part, comments on this post have been accidentally limited to paid subscribers . I have no idea how that happened, but it will not recur. And of course these essays will always remain free.
"The Deep State can be anything you want it to be according to context."
"There is a "difference between aspirations and plans."
"Deep State hypotheses can never be falsified..."
The beginnings of a more falsifiable hypothesis on the origins of the modern Deep State:
In 2005, a top secret memo written by George Kennan on July 30, 1948 was declassified. The memo was entitled "The inauguration of organized political warfare." It states in part:
"Having assumed greater international responsibilities than ever before in our history and having been engaged by the full might of the Kremlin's political warfare, we cannot afford to leave unmobilized our resources for covert political warfare. It is with all of the foregoing in mind that the policy planning staff [of the State Department] began some three months ago a consideration of specific projects in the field of covert operations, where they should be fitted into the structure of this government, and how the Department of State should exercise direction and coordination."
Yeah, in 1948 USSR was just looking to lick its soooo many wounds and rebuilt a thoroughy destroyed country. The east European countries were spoken for already at Yalta, and USSR agreed to let Finland and Austria be as long as they stayed neutral.
Good old Georgie was lying through his teeth: "having been engaged by the full might of the Kremlin's political warfare". Russia is a very reactive state, this description is absolutely out of character. Likely only later in life Old Georgie realized the errors of his way, which comes from the very agressive character of American polity. Georgie was just projecting there and put one of the first bricks in building the cold war.
US foreign policy is strongly influenced by unelected entities such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the US State Dept, and CIA. These, in turn, reflect priorities and viewpoints that would not survive democratic processes, and that can be influenced by special interests that have no concern for what benefits the US population. The term "deep state" applies.
You do not understand American politics. While there is dissension domestically, and later very much kerfuffle about 'identity' issues, American foreign policy since WWII has been consistent in maintaining and advancing global dominance militarily, politically, and economically. The ones who rule don't really care about domestic issues as long as their rents, interest, and power are not affected by politics. Peter Dale Scott and Aaron Good have written about the US Deep State in regard to their theory of the 'tripartite state', composed of the surface elected government and its bureaucracies, the security state including both military and intelligence, and the oligarchs of finance, industry, and crime. The Deep State includes members of all three levels.
A working example is Allen Dulles, first head of the CIA. Dulles worked as a Wall Street banker before joining the government, and he did their bidding. When errant President Kennedy moved to end the Cold War, this was so unacceptable to the Deep State that they assassinated him. In general, the Deep State keeps empire running and is ruthless in doing so.
I really enjoy your writing - so much so that I forwarded one of your articles to Mike of "Coffee and a Mike" podcast and he subsequently had you on although by his line of questioning didn't seem to me he really understood what your writing was about.
I am quite puzzled by this article though. It seems entirely possible to me that people with immense wealth and power use it to get certain things done. I've even seen a video of Klaus Schwab of the WEF say that they penetrate cabinets of western leaders and many current and former leaders were part of the WEF Young Global Leaders program. It sure seems to me they have a great deal of influence and it's uncanny how just about every western leader is in lockstep on global policy and the ones who aren't are demonized (Trump and Bolsonaro to name a couple). Look what is happening in Romania - do you think that's organic? How about Georgia - no outside influence involved? In Germany they are trying to ban the Aft party (I actually could see this move being organic as dumb and futile as it is). Money - and a lot of it - is required for some of these moves.
"The Creature from Jekyll Island" is a book I read many years ago and seems very well researched with all the footnotes there were. Maybe try reading that.
Once the Supreme Court in the US made their decision on Citizens United it allowed for Democracy to be bought and paid for. Powerful people don't pay money for campaign promises. They pay money to get results on things that aren't discussed much on the campaign trail.
What are your thoughts on this video showing how things get done politically in Britain? Sure seems to me like things are done a lot differently than we're lead to believe and this is not the first time I've seen this explained.
https://substack.com/@starknakedbrief/note/c-79564266?r=n7d0e
Institute of Statecraft and Integrity Initiative spring to mind
On the delightfully names "WikiSpooks" site, we see the origin of the phrase: Susurluk.
Four people were in a car crash in a remote mountainous region: a gangster, his beauty queen girlfriend, a top cop, and an MP. All but the MP died.
It brought up the immediate question: "why were these 4 people in one car?". (All that's missing is a famous imam.)
The beauty queen died from the crash, somebody snapped the necks of the mobster and the top cop to make sure they were dead, and "the MP was rescued by his guards".
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Susurluk_car_crash
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susurluk_scandal
This was insane, of course, and the phrase "deep state" hit the media because of this scandal.