> not sure how you could conclude this given the abundance of evidence regarding the activities and influence of people like the Koch Brothers, Rupert Murdoch, Peter Thiel, the fossil fuel industry in terms of the global warming discourse, the general corporate and wealthy forces shaping Republican/Democrat policy over the last ~50 years

Because for each of these there are a hundred other monied interests, and they're all in covert or open conflict with each other.

> Look at what's happening to CBS and will soon happen to CNN due to the Paramount merger and the Ellisons/Bari Weiss for example

Yes, that's one group overtly taking over a platform. The fact that they're behaving differently after Weiss should give pause to the hypothesis that this is all already co-ordinated from the shadows.

> what part of history have disorganized masses shown themselves to be powerful against "the intentional propaganda efforts made by the most powerful actors in society spanning decades" that I'm referring to?

Every regime fighting survivial deploys all means available to it in its fight. That includes the media. Disorganised groups have overturned concentratios of power far more pronounced than what we have in the U.S. (We have high inequality. But our elite is still usefully fractured.)

> channeling that anger towards scapegoats like immigrants or jews etc is an old and effective playbook and I don't see why we wouldn't call that distraction

Here I agree. But there are also powerful immigrant-born Americans and Jewish Americans who obviously don't want to be part of that, and who have influence over money, power and media.

Everyone is trying to consolidate power. But that's an exclusionary imperative. Hence, political competition.