Trump is a Soviet spy

There are posts circulating on the Internet claiming that Donald Trump is a Russian agent, recruited by Soviet intelligence in the 1980s, who was given the code name Krasnov and who continues to work to promote Russian interests. The Soviets are said to have seduced the businessman by offering him lucrative real estate deals in the USSR and including him in their most select circles until they convinced him to join their ranks. A photo from 1987 showing a forty-year-old Trump in Leningrad, together with his then wife, bears witness to this.

This truth, supposedly revealed by a former KGB officer, has as little likelihood of being true as the hundreds of hoaxes that are spread daily to favour the interests of the extreme right. But it made me laugh. And think.

They manage to burn images into our heads, create enemies, invent solutions. And us?

Had the story been released by the other side of post-truth , it would probably be circulating on the internet at breakneck speed and with the power of a chainsaw. Instead, despite being worthy of the plot of a great spy movie and offering a plausible explanation to the question “what is happening to us in the West”, Krasnov’s story has not taken off.

In recent days, when the far right is displaying a level of inhibicion and brazenness that we cannot remember, there has been a proliferation of debates between journalists and politicians about how to act in the face of the advance of populist leaders.

Read also Technocast Gemma Ribas Maspoch

Their speeches manage to occupy our attention with huge amounts of money, algorithms, armies of bots, big marketing campaigns and a complete lack of scruples. In contrast, our nebula of news and defensive actions, lack of organization and an increasingly palpable inclination to avoid the news so as not to get depressed. They manage to burn images in our heads, create enemies, invent solutions. And us?

There are those who say that we should not respond with the same weapons, those who advise us to stand up to them with all our resources, those who recommend not talking about them so much because we are giving them too much focus, those who believe that we should focus on dismantling their lies and exposing them, those who proclaim that a powerful, clear and alternative narrative is urgently needed, those who suggest that we should once again make human rights and the basic principles of democracy our banner. Should we play well even if we lose? Does anything go to win? A bit of everything, in the right measure? Who should/can organize all this?

As you can imagine, I don't have the answer. But here is the headline so it will appear in Google searches.