BRATTLEBORO — As we have learned, the 2016 election was hacked by foreign sources, most probably Russia, according to U.S. intelligence sources and President Obama.
The domestic reaction among the mass media, politicians, and the public have been justifiably explosive, as this represents a legitimate threat to our already compromised democratic processes.
Yes, there is a real sense of violation here but perhaps some historical perspective would be helpful - a perspective that has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media.
Since the formation of the Central Intelligence Agency in 1947, the U.S. has engaged in both overt and covert operations to influence, change, or destroy other governments. Regime change by any means necessary has been the prevailing modus operandi.
In 1975, congressional investigations from the Church and Pike committees reported on the CIA's reprehensible history. Numerous more-recent accounts by academics and former agents have identified 50 attempts from 1949 to 2012 to overthrow governments by military coups, covert operations, assassinations, or support for terrorists. Thirty-five of these assaults were successful.
U.S. leaders - of course, employing the usual canards - justify such actions as matters of vital “national security” and therefore permissible.
One should ask: in whose national interest has this regime change been undertaken - the people's, or that of the 1 percent who actually realize the economic and power benefits of overseas adventures?
Can we not speculate that whoever hacked our elections manufactured the same self-serving justification?