Talk:Atlantik-Brücke

Const

Currently this is lacking a |const. Good work, Terje, on adding these important groups. Any ideas on a suitable name for these incubator/hatchery/selection groups? -- Robin (talk) 17:10, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The Germans, who have plenty of them, call these groups for transatlantic influence networks or just transatlantic networks. But it can be hard to generalize to other countries. The Australian American Leadership Dialogue does the same as the transatlantic networks, except it is over the Pacific.

Tafelronde is obviously a Dutch version or part of the Milner Group; and the really influential French Le Siecle is more of a local deep state network. The equally important Boer Broederbond is also local, and somewhat in opposition to the Anglo-speaking Milner Group networks in South Africa.

Maybe local deep state network, national deep state network or something similar would work? But that doesn't cover the often international (US) dimension...

Terje (talk) 05:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)---

Well, deep state faction is a potential source of independent influence (e.g. Milner Group) which the young leaders groups don't seem to be -- they are more of a conduit. All of these distinctions are somewhat fluid, but where a different character is discernible, some language to clarify that is good. Possibly an umbrella term, such as deep state group might help. (c.f. deep state operative) - it would at least provide a const for groups with an unclassified or unknown function. -- Robin (talk) 19:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I'll sleep on it a few more nights, but deep state group in general,deep state recruitment network for the young ones, and transatlantic influence network for the groups essentially being US tools, would work.

Terje (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2021 (UTC)---

So are you willing to confirm, that we going with DSF now, Terje? Not that I'll switch so many constitutes and next week we've added another 3. thanks in advance. --Jun (talk) 02:28, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

--Jun (talk) 02:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC) And would you be willing to provide a few short examples of mandatary hallmarks in your view for the several networks constitutes? As it seems as I've read it, a lot of networks could fall under those terms? --Jun (talk) 02:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I suggest young leaders as a separate, relatively small category as deep state recruitment network.

I would prefer deep state group, as it is broader and simpler than deep state faction, which sounds more powerful. A separate category for the ones that were created as US influence networks might be handy, but can wait. What you mean by "hallmarks"?

Terje (talk) 05:17, 13 June 2021 (UTC)---

By hallmarks I meant if we would keep DSF and DSG both; what are the differences between the term? What are the key definitions that differ between the Deep State faction and Deep state group? As I see it a deep state faction would be a smaller group within a deep state group that operates with a somewhat different goal, method and member base than the core deep state groups of their country/region, EG: The Integrity Initiative of the UK/DS. Currently a deep state group is simply defined as, undemocratic networks that conspire to seize and maintain (hidden) power. Just to confirm, do you agree on these hallmarks? --Jun (talk) 19:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)