“deep state” is insanely vague. Does it mean the part of the government that has lots of secrets it fights tooth and nail to make sure is never revealed and even potentially engages in illegal acts? Or does it mean bureaucracy?

From what I’ve heard most people complaining about the “deep state” they always seem to express their complaint about the bounds of normal bureaucracy and less about secret/covert/illegal activities.

prior to appx 2016, it meant the intelligence apparatus and the constellation of orgs and ngo's around it; after that it meant the unelected permanent bureaucracy that persists across administrations

One thing I would add to the accurate description that responded to you, is that it is by its very nature very amorphous and evasive. It’s not really all that unique or special, it is the same entropy that the tech community is far more aware of than the government/politics community is. The reason for that difference is that there is immediate benefit that comes from the deconstruction and corruption of structure in government/politics, which is generally not only not the case in tech but the opposite is true.

There are no benefits or advantages I can think of that come from sloppiness and deconstruction. In politics/government there are not only immediate but ever growing benefits from corruption and reconstruction of the processes and structures that come to the people at the top and the apparatchiks/aristocracy/bureaucracy they bring along as bolster and shielding.

People call it different things, but what is clearly emerging in all western societies simultaneously is not at all what the ruling class claims, but rather the authoritarian default that the American Revolution in particular has been a thorn in the eye of for a few centuries now. It is why these duplicitous forces have been attacking and undermining the Constitution of the USA for so long, because it is the only document/philosophy in history that has determined the limits the people place on government rather than government determining the limits on the people.

In many ways, the US Constitution was the only real revolution in human history, one that turns the power dynamic on its head. That is being destroyed right now and I guarantee when (if?) that dam breaks, it will be far worse for the rest of humanity than America. The world takes for granted that everything we enjoy is a function of the US Constitution that is being destroyed right now.

It may all end super well for the elevated privileged classes in this community in particular, but at best it will end horribly for most everyone else. Another possibility is that it all goes sideways as things are wont to and many here end up a head shorter.

> because it is the only document/philosophy in history that has determined the limits the people place on government rather than government determining the limits on the people

Really? The only document in history?

What would you like to call it? That's the only logical response to that complaint. The deep state has a meaning. It's a useful meaning. And the term is used based on that meaning by many political scientist and historians.

The deep state is simply unelected governmental authority. And it's specifically useful because of the mainstream tendency to inaccurately attribute more power to elected authority than it really has.

And this inaccuracy often has to do with industrial bias, as the deep state is beholden to industry before any public good. The CIA, for example, was established very specifically to support US industry and support global economic ambitions.

Those people are not elected and collectively have a great deal more power than most of those we elect. So we have a name for that.

You can choose another name if you wish. But we already have one we use.

I've heard it first hand from a former head of a national agency of another country, say "the C... became a monster" due to the concentration of power it had/has.

It's the entrenched bureaucracy of all flavors.

It's not me that is fixated on the name, it is the article that goes out of its way to assign responsibility "specifically" to the CIA - it's right in the title and in the first paragraph!

And this produce what is objectively an historical howler right at the start. As the other commenter said, maybe it's just sloppy editing. But seems pretty click baity to me.

> And this produce what is objectively an historical howler right at the start.

What howler? You quote it ascribing actions to the Guatemalan dictatorship in the 1930s which is accurate. Then you claim the piece says the CIA was active in the 1930s, which it does not say anywhere.

I've posted an excerpt from the start of the article at the start of this thread, you could check it.

As it is written, it clearly seems to give the responsibility of the delay in publication to the CIA.

The most charitable interpretation is "poor editing".

> It’s why they like “classifying” to keep their evil deeds covered and hidden behind an vail of authority.

I found classified docs pretty boring. Most of them remained classified because the information presented had limited distribution, which could identify sources. I never worked at the CIA though, so maybe you're right, the entire CIA is just a Ton Clancy novel.

They declassify the boring ones.

Not making a judgment on the JFK assassination, but I'm sure that one would be interesting and still has not been fully declassified.

one very odd thing is that they brought Allen Dulles in to investigate after he had been fired by JFK, and ended up running a decent portion of the investigation out of his home.

Maybe people have a hard time with the “deep state” because every claim is so unfalsifiable. It’s the new “wake up sheeple”.

Presumably 1000s of executive appointments and senior civil servants across generations of administrations all collectively conspire on odd Tuesdays and think exactly alike like all complex organizations do.

Reductionism provides all truth, the world is black and white.