• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

University poll finds most Americans fear the “Deep State”

Woberts

The Perfumed Seneschal
Lol. 803 people used as a sample for 325.7 million people. Personally, I'm not that worried about a deep state.
 
Lol. 803 people used as a sample for 325.7 million people. Personally, I'm not that worried about a deep state.

That's not a particularly small sample size.

Theoretically gets you around a 4% margin of error at 95% confidence (in reality, polling methodologies always underestimate MoE, but that's another story).
 

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is the question that the poll asked, and the responses:

The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March 2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%​

For everyone here who would answer "definitely exists" or "probably exists," I ask you to give an example or examples of "national policy" that you believe "unelected government and military officials . . . secretly manipulate".
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is the question that the poll asked, and the responses:

The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March 2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%​

For everyone here who would answer "definitely exists" or "probably exists," I ask you to give an example or examples of "national policy" that you believe "unelected government and military officials . . . secretly manipulate".
So you are asking for evidence of things being done in secret? You know what in secret means, right?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
So you are asking for evidence of things being done in secret? You know what in secret means, right?
One popular "deep state" conspiracy theory is that the Military
Industrial Complex drives foreign policy & military adventurism.
(Although they point to the MIC, I've yet to hear anyone name
the companies or individuals who are members.)
 

bubbleguppy

Serial Forum Observer
I want to know where they pulled their sample from and how they went about getting their sample. I'm not a fan of institutions not including this information when they give survey results.

Edit: Okay I finally found it, but I still believe they needed to make it more obvious.
 

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
So you are asking for evidence of things being done in secret?
If you were to read my post, you would see that I didn't ask for "evidence of things being done in secret"; I asked for "examples of 'national policy' that you believe 'unelected government and military officials . . . secretly manipulate'"

My thought was that there would be a number of examples of such, or of something close to qualifying as such, that we all agree to. The decisions of federal courts obviously can be seen as "manipulat[ing] . . . national policy," though it isn't done in secret. Federal agencies operate according to lots of rules and regulations, the construction of which is not necessarily very transparent or by people we can identify. As another sort of example, at the moment I'm not quite sure what statements under other Andrew McCabe lacked candor about, for which he was quickly fired just hours before he was retire, moreover, fired upon the recommendation of the AG who has definitely lacked candor under oath about his meetings with Russians during Trump's campaign.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Monmouth University in a poll found that most Americans, of both political parties, believe that “Deep State” exists and works against the public.

Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’ | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

I think a lot of it may be rooted in shifts in culture, both in government and politics, around the time of the Cold War. There was more intense government secrecy, along with escalating paranoid obsessive rhetoric about all the supposed "threats" facing America, both around the world and within America itself. Revelations about McCarthyism and J. Edgar Hoover's antics helped to feed these attitudes, along with concerns over what the CIA might have been involved in.

Then there was the JFK Assassination, which became a popular topic for conspiracy theorists since the Warren Report was viewed as incredibly implausible. Since the public believed the government was lying, it led to the idea that they must be hiding something from the public (which they were, since so many files and pieces of evidence were marked "classified" and inaccessible to the general public).

Up until that point, our own government was the biggest purveyor of conspiracy theories and paranoid perceptions about the outside world and the American public itself. Naturally, some of this started to rub off on the body politic and it would soon become a noticeable part of our political culture.

The Vietnam War started escalating and the public wanted answers, but the government's answers were not satisfactory. Perceptions of the Civil Rights Movement also came into play, as it was revealed that there were government operations to try to thwart Civil Rights, particularly focusing on surveillance on Martin Luther King. There are still those who believe that MLK's Assassination was a government plot. COINTELPRO became known to the public.

Then there was Watergate, which also fed into public perceptions about government conspiracies. Concurrently, the public was becoming more aware of the existence of the Mafia and organized crime. By the 1970s, it would seem that public cynicism about the government and belief in conspiracy theories might have been at their peak. Most of the public believed that the JFK Assassination was a conspiracy (echoed by a 1978 Congressional Report on it). The notion that UFOs exist and being actively covered up by the government was also quite prevalent and widely believed.

Then there were government denials that the public did not really believe, such as the denials about Agent Orange and the effects it had on those who served in Vietnam. Another typical example might be the government's denial that we had anything to do with the 1973 coup in Chile, but it would later come out that we did have a role in that event. The public also started hearing more about private organizations like the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations and other such unelected bodies where the top leaders and movers-and-shakers in society would meet and hold conferences, yet the public was not allowed to know what they talked about.

So, a long track record of lies, denials, intense state secrecy, coupled with scads of delusional propaganda about "enemies" of America both from within and without - all of this had a role in shaping public attitudes and perceptions regarding the government and the existence of the Deep State. Ultimately, the government and ruling class were the ones primarily responsible for creating the political culture which led to such attitudes.

Personally, I have no real stake in any conspiracy theories, although from the standpoint of realpolitik, anything that makes government look bad or undermines the public's faith in government is ultimately a good thing. I believe that if enough public support pushed for it, the government may eventually end their culture of secrecy and become more transparent. I believe that's for the greater good, even if the conspiracy theories turn out to be false.

For similar reasons, I find myself extremely mistrustful of those who seemingly go out of their way to defend the government and attempt to "debunk" these conspiracy theories. Why would they care so much about the government's reputation?

I think about this every time I see a heated discussion about JFK or 9/11. I'm somewhat agnostic about government conspiracies regarding these events. Maybe they happened, maybe they didn't, but there are those out there who have ostensibly made it their life's work to try to convince people that the government is clean, while denigrating conspiracy theorists as "nutjobs" and "loons." But their zeal and emotionalism is what gives them away, since they seem so angry at conspiracy theorists for daring to question the government's reputation. I'll admit that this has always been a mystery to me, since I see no rational justification for such passionate attitudes in defense of our government (unless they either work for government or a paid shill).

On a JFK board I used to frequent, I would encounter these types and directly challenge them: "What's your deal here? Why do you care so much about defending the government?" Even if they truly believed that JFK conspiracy theories were a pack of lies and that Oliver Stone was a "nutjob," why do they care so much? What is their motivation? None of them ever really wanted to give any kind of plausible answer.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
.....I find myself extremely mistrustful of those who seemingly go out of their way to defend the government and attempt to "debunk" these conspiracy theories.
Debunking conspiracy theories needn't be defense of government.
(Indeed, one is acknowledging that government does wrong.)
This is worth doing because people get distracted by loopy theories,
which blame an unseen boogeyman, & they fail to see more useful
explanations for observed events & patterns.
It strikes me that this is to avoid responsibility for one's own actions,
eg, voting for a politician with a record of doing what one opposes.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
This is the question that the poll asked, and the responses:

The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March 2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%​

For everyone here who would answer "definitely exists" or "probably exists," I ask you to give an example or examples of "national policy" that you believe "unelected government and military officials . . . secretly manipulate".
The definition of deep state from right wing media are people saying things against the president. Its ironic that they would call people deep state actors for leaking information about Trump praising Russia as they protect a President praising dictator type policies and sympathizing with Russia and China ideologies. I also heard Ryan and McConnell joined the deep state for disagreeing with Trump. Then there are tweets from Trump himself shifting blame of Russian collusion to Obama and Hillary as deep state actors. Trump literally feeds the deep state conspiracy theories and encourages it while simultaneously trying to stop and delegitimize any sort of investigation into the matter.
 

suncowiam

Well-Known Member
Monmouth University in a poll found that most Americans, of both political parties, believe that “Deep State” exists and works against the public.

Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’ | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

What does this have to do with anything of consequence?

Go start a poll and ask people if they believe in God. Go ask in universities and then go ask in churches. Tell me what you find...

And then what do those results suggest about God?

It's another Facebook scam to influence doubt and belief.
 

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is the question that the poll asked, and the responses:

The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist?

March 2018

Definitely exists 27%

Probably exists 47%

Probably does not exist 16%

Definitely does not exist 5%

(VOL) Don’t know 5%​

For everyone here who would answer "definitely exists" or "probably exists," I ask you to give an example or examples of "national policy" that you believe "unelected government and military officials . . . secretly manipulate".
Well, I asked this question 3 hours ago, and no one has provided a single example yet.

I wonder if it took the people answering the poll question this long to decide whether or not the "Deep State" exists?
 

Nous

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I believe that if enough public support pushed for it, the government may eventually end their culture of secrecy and become more transparent.
Can you provide some sinister examples of this "culture of secrecy"? What is it that the government needs to become more transparent about?

For similar reasons, I find myself extremely mistrustful of those who seemingly go out of their way to defend the government and attempt to "debunk" these conspiracy theories. Why would they care so much about the government's reputation?

I think about this every time I see a heated discussion about JFK or 9/11. I'm somewhat agnostic about government conspiracies regarding these events. Maybe they happened, maybe they didn't, but there are those out there who have ostensibly made it their life's work to try to convince people that the government is clean, while denigrating conspiracy theorists as "nutjobs" and "loons." But their zeal and emotionalism is what gives them away, since they seem so angry at conspiracy theorists for daring to question the government's reputation. I'll admit that this has always been a mystery to me, since I see no rational justification for such passionate attitudes in defense of our government (unless they either work for government or a paid shill).

On a JFK board I used to frequent, I would encounter these types and directly challenge them: "What's your deal here? Why do you care so much about defending the government?" Even if they truly believed that JFK conspiracy theories were a pack of lies and that Oliver Stone was a "nutjob," why do they care so much? What is their motivation? None of them ever really wanted to give any kind of plausible answer.
Good points; good questions. The same phenomena confound me as well. Some positions on issues that are matters of our national conversation take on a religious nature. They become dogma. I really don't know why.

Since you brought up JFK, one interesting fact is that early surveys showed that most Americans disbelieved that Oswald was a lone gunman. I believe subsequent surveys have shown that this skepticism has gradually tended to wane, although there is still at least a substantial portion (perhaps still a majority) of Americans who doubt the official story.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
Proof propaganda works. Repeat "deep state" multiple times a day, 365 days a year and people will come to believe it. And most likely vote on it.

The only 'deep state' I'm familiar with is the republican corporate establishment. You know, the same people the cultservatives hate in their own party. These people are so dumb they don't realize if you want to drain the swamp, you have to stop electing swampsters.
 
Top