From: harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (Harel Barzilai)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
Subject: RE-FRAMING DISSENT AS CRIMINAL SUBVERSION (part 1)
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: 27 Jul 92 05:50:30 GMT
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB

Topic 45        Repression & Paradigm Shift Frame       4 responses 
cberlet Public Eye Network      10:01 am  Jul 25, 1992 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

RE-FRAMING DISSENT AS CRIMINAL SUBVERSION: 

PARADIGM SHIFT AND POLITICAL REPRESSION 

A version of this article first appeared in 
Covert Action Information Bulletin. 

==================================================== 
Footnotes are available in the printed version 
appearing in Covert Action Information Bulletin, 
Summer 1992 (Number 41). Send $6.00 to 
Covert Action, 1500 Mass. Ave., N.W., #732 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
==================================================== 

by Chip Berlet  

The following reply files contain the  
text of the article. 


Conf?  


Topic 45        Repression & Paradigm Shift Frame       Response  1 of  4 
cberlet 
Public Eye Network      10:02 am  Jul 25, 1992 



RE-FRAMING DISSENT AS CRIMINAL SUBVERSION: 

PARADIGM SHIFT AND POLITICAL REPRESSION 

by Chip Berlet  

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  - 
"What is secret is often squalid as well. In the  
dark, men were able to act contrary to the values  
they proclaimed in public. Paying service to  
democratic ends, they made league with scoundrels  
whose interest is anything but the survival of  
democracy...today's New Right ideologues believe  
in the omnipotence of the goal and the  
irrelevance of the deed. So their tactics are  
those of the enemy they hate and fear, and they  
award America's franchises to con men, hustlers,  
terrorists, racketeers, murderers and other  
sleazy characters who for a fee sign up for the  
crusade." --Bill Moyers. <1>  
-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  - 


When our national security interests are  
perceived as threatened, secrecy becomes sacred,  
and the ends justify the means. Since the end 
of World War II, the techniques of  
political repression recur, banal and  
predictive, like the musical theme that  
signals stalking in a grade-B thriller. Those 
organizations and individuals targetted for  
repression are portrayed as enemies of democracy; 
those investigating and attacking then assume 
the mantle of democracy's guardians <2>.  

Because of the covert nature of campaigns and the 
enormous difference in resources between government 
agencies and dissident/reform movements, it is often 
impossible to document or prove the existence of an 
organized campaign of political repression in its  
earlier stages. In case after case, however, later 
investigation has revealed illegal government 
surveillance, harassment and public opinon  
manipulation, as well as media complicity. 

Therefore, when classic patterns of political  
repression emerge, a political or social  
movement would be wise to consider tactics and  
strategies to protect its members from the  
negative effects of political repression--political, 
emotional, and physical. members can be provided with 
simple, common sense techniques to prevent fears  
(and actual incidents) of surveillance and  
infiltration from paralyzing or disrupting the  
group and diverting it from its goals. 


PARADIGM SHIFT 

One of the earliest and most overlooked warning signs  
that a campaign of political repression is underway is  
"paradigm shift." Paradigm shift, in this usage,  
means a major negative change in the way the  
public perceives the political movement that is  
ultimately victimized. Paradigm shift frequently  
is associated with episodes of political  
repression, and frequently precedes more overt  
signs of attack such as assaults, break-ins and  
surveillance. Political repression telegraphs  
its punches. 

For many years the major threat to "the American  
way of life" was popularly believed to be  
communism, then generalized leftist  
revolutionism, and now a vaguely-defined domestic  
terrorism. Targetted individuals are seen as not  
only engaged in criminality, but also attacking  
core cultural and political  

values which, if abandoned, would destroy America  
as we know it, and which therefore represent a  
threat to national security. This concept of  
America under attack frequently is filtered  
through a paranoid worldview that represents what  
social scientists call a "subversion myth."  

The perceptual shift from dissent to criminality  
first goes public with unsubstantiated  
allegations and conclusions in the newspapers,  
newsletters and magazines of the reactionary and  
paranoid political right. These right-wing media  
attempts to re-frame the public's perception of  
the dissident group. The concept of the  
"frame-up" has been popularized in pulp crime  
novels and <film noir>, but few people stop to  
consider what it means when, with wide-eyed  
innocence, the person being dragged to jail  
proclaims, "I've been framed." The term "frame"  
is condensed from the original jargon, "to hang a  
frame" on someone, which means to select for an  
observer a perspective from which certain  
conclusions about a person, group or event seem  
readily apparent, logical, and even inescapable. 

Eventually, right-wing re-framing of dissidents  
as subversives or criminals spills over into more  
mainstream media. A growing segment of the public  
begins to see the targeted political movement as  
fundamentally at odds with mainstream society.  
This antagonism is portrayed as irreconcilable.  
The dissidents are seen as non-rational,  
unstable, alien, and capable of odious crimes  
because of their zealous mindset. Lists of  
potential crimes are discussed, and finally  
actual crimes are blamed on the political  
movement. Ideas that were once merely  
marginalized are thus criminalized. Popular  
opposition to government and private attacks on  
the dissenting group is partially neutralized. In  
some cases the re-framing is so successful that  
there is widespread popular sentiment supporting  
the attacks. When this process of re-framing is  
successful, paradigm shift has occurred. 

Often, derogatory information passes back and  
forth between government agencies and private  
right wing groups through informal back-door  
channels, and the actual source becomes obscure.  
Lawsuits and declassified documents have revealed  
that sometimes it is the investigative agency  
that leaks information to the right-wing press,  
and in other cases investigative agencies  
rationalize investigations by citing charges  
appearing in the right-wing press. The  
relationship benefits both sides. The agency is  
able to test public sentiment and prepare the  
ground for its assault, while the right-wing  
press furthers its political agenda and at the  
same time appears to be generating hard  
investigative journalism.