123

Some Call It Conspiracy Theory – Part 1

Iain Davis

There are certain assumptions that are applied to anyone labelled a “conspiracy theorist”—and all of them are fallacies. Indeed, the term “conspiracy theory” is nothing more than a propaganda construct designed to silence debate and censor opinion on a range of subjects.

Most particularly, it is used as a pejorative to marginalise and discredit whoever challenge the pronouncements and edicts of the State and of the Establishment—that is, the public and private entities that control the State and that profit from the State.

Those of us who have legitimate criticisms of government and its institutions and representatives, who are therefore labelled “conspiracy theorists,” face a dilemma. We can embrace the term and attempt to redefine it or we can reject it outright. Either way, it is evident that the people who weaponise the “conspiracy theory” label will continue to use it as long as it serves their propaganda purposes.

One of the most insidious aspects of the “conspiracy theory” fabrication is that the falsehoods associated with the term have been successfully seeded into the public’s consciousness. Often, propagandists need do no more than slap this label on the targeted opinion and the audience will immediately dismiss that viewpoint as a “lunatic conspiracy theory.”

Sadly, this knee-jerk reaction is usually made absent any consideration or even familiarity with the evidence presented by that so-called “lunatic conspiracy theorist.”

This was the reason why “conspiracy theorist” label was created. The State and its propagandists do not want the public to even be aware of inconvenient evidence, let alone to examine it. The challenging evidence is buried under the “wild conspiracy theory” label, thereby signalling to the unsuspecting public that they should automatically reject all of the offered facts and evidence.

There are a number of components that collectively form the conspiracy theory canard. Let’s break them down:

  • First, we have a group of people who supposedly can be identified as conspiracy theorists.
  • Second, we have the allegation that all conspiracy theorists share an underlying psychological weakness.
  • Third, conspiracy theory is said to threaten democracy by undermining “trust” in democratic institutions.
  • Fourth, conspiracy theorists are purportedly prone to extremism and potential radicalisation.
  • Fifth, conspiracy theory is accused of not being evidence-based.

According to the legacy media, there’s a link between so-called “conspiracy theory” and the “far right” and “white supremacists.” Guardian columnist George Monbiot, for example, wrote that:

[…] conspiracism is fascism’s fuel. Almost all successful conspiracy theories originate with or land with the far right.

Apparently, this is a common belief held by people who imagine that “conspiracy theory” exists in the form they have been told it exists. It is also a bold claim from an alleged journalist. There is no evidence to support Monbiot’s assertion.

Numerous studies have tried to identify the common traits of conspiracy theorists. These studies tend to initially identify their subject cohort simply through opinion surveys. If, for example, someone doesn’t accept the official accounts of 9/11 or the Kennedy assassination, the researchers label them “conspiracy theorists.”

Probably the largest demographic study of these alleged “conspiracy theorists” was undertaken by political scientists Joseph Uscinski and Joseph Parent for their 2014 book American Conspiracy Theories. They found that “conspiracy theorists” could not be categorised demographically.

Ethnicity, gender, educational attainment, employment and economic status and even political beliefs were not indicative. The only firm trait they could isolate was that conspiracy theorists, so-called, tended to be slightly older than the population average—suggesting, perhaps, that scepticism of State narratives increases with life experiences.

Professor Chris French made this observation, as reported by the BBC in 2019:

When you actually look at the demographic data, belief in conspiracies cuts across social class, it cuts across gender and it cuts across age. Equally, whether you’re on the left or the right, you’re just as likely to see plots against you.

This is not to deny that a minority of conspiracy theories are promoted by people on the far right of the political spectrum. Nor that some on the far left don’t advocate other similar theories. A few “conspiracy theories” can be considered “racist” and/or “antisemitic.” But there is no evidence to support the allegation that “conspiracy theorists,” when compared to the general population, are any more or less likely to hold extreme political beliefs or promote extremist narratives.

George Monbiot is certainly not alone in his views, but his published opinion—namely, that conspiracy theories “originate with or land with the far right”—is complete nonsense. So let’s discard his claim right now as ignorant claptrap.

Monbiot’s allusion to “conspiracism” relates to the alleged psychological problems that supposedly lead people to become “conspiracy theorists.” The “conspiracism” theory is a product of the worst kind of junk science. It is primarily based upon the notoriously flaky discipline of experimental psychology.

One of the seminal papers informing the theory of “conspiracism” is Dead and Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories (Wood, Douglas & Sutton, 2012).

The researchers asked their “conspiracy theorist” subjects to rate the plausibility of various alleged conspiracy theories. They used a Likert-scale, where 1 is strongly disagree, 4 is neutral, and 7 is strongly agree. Some of the “theories” the subjects were asked to consider were contradictory.

For example, they asked the subjects to rate the plausibility of the notions that Princess Diana was murdered and that she faked her own death. Using this methodology, the researchers concluded:

While it has been known for some time that belief in one conspiracy theory appears to be associated with belief in others, only now do we know that this can even apply to conspiracy theories that are mutually contradictory.

But the researchers did not ask their subjects to exclude mutually contradictory theories—only to rate the plausibility of each individually. Thus, there was nothing in their reported findings to support the conclusion they unscientifically reached.

Subsequent research has highlighted how ludicrous their falsely named “scientific conclusion” was. Yet, despite being roundly disproved, the erroneous assertion that conspiracy theorists believe contradictory theories simultaneously is repeated ad nauseam by the legacy media, politicians and academics alike. It forms just one of the groundless truisms spouted by those who spread the “conspiracism” myth.

One of, if not the, most influential scholar in the field of conspiracy research is the political scientist Joseph Uscinski. Like many other of his peers, he has tried to differentiate between evidence-based knowledge of real or “concrete” conspiracies, such as Iran-Contra or Watergate, and what scientific researchers allege to be the psychologically flawed and evidence-free views held by so-called “conspiracists.”

Uscinski cites the work of Professor Neil Levy as definitive. In Radically Socialized Knowledge and Conspiracy Theories, Levy stated:

The typical explanation of an event or process which attracts the label “conspiracy theory” is an explanation that conflicts with the account advanced by the relevant epistemic authorities. […] A conspiracy theory that conflicts with the official story, where the official story is the explanation offered by the (relevant) epistemic authorities, is prima facie unwarranted. […] It is because the relevant epistemic authorities — the distributed network of knowledge claim gatherers and testers that includes engineers and politics professors, security experts and journalists — have no doubts over the validity of the explanation that we accept it.

Simply put, the scientific definition of “conspiracy theory” is an opinion that conflicts with the official narrative as reported by the “epistemic authorities.” If you question what you are told by the State or by its “official” representatives or by the legacy media, you are a “conspiracy theorist” and, therefore, according to “the Science™,” mentally deranged.

All related “scientific research” on conspiracism and claimed conspiracy theory starts from the assumption that to question the State, the Establishment or the designated “epistemic authorities” is delusional. As hard as this fact may be for many to accept, the effective working definition of “conspiracy theory” in the scientific literature is “an opinion that questions power.”

Clearly, this definition is political, not scientific. The supposed underlying psychology of “conspiracism,” which allegedly induces people to engage in “conspiratorial thinking,” is an assumption stemming from the academic’s political bias in favour of the State and its institutions. It has absolutely no scientific validity.

In his 1949 essay Citizenship and Social Class, sociologist TH Marshall examined and defined democratic ideals. He described them as a functioning system of rights. These rights include the right to freedom of thought and expression, including speech, peaceful protest, freedom of religion and belief, equality of justice, equal opportunity under the law, and so on.

Most of us who live in what we call representative democracies are familiar with these concepts. “Rights” and “freedoms” are often touted by our political leaders, academia and the legacy media as the cornerstones of our polity and culture. The entire purpose of representative democracy, it is alleged, is to empower “we the people” to hold decision-makers to account. “Questioning power” is a foundational democratic ideal.

If we accept the working scientific definition of “conspiracy theory,” then its inherent questioning of power and overt challenge to authority embodies perhaps the most important democratic principle of all and forms the bedrock of representative democracy. It is not unreasonable to aver that representative democracy cannot possibly exist without “conspiracy theory”—again, as it is defined in the scientific literature. As we can see, the claim that “conspiracy theory” threatens democratic institutions is without merit.

Representative democracy is not founded on public trust in the State, in its agents or in its representatives. On the contrary, representative democracy is built upon the right of the people to question the State, its agents and its representatives.

Autocracies and dictatorships demand public “trust.” Democracies do not. In a representative democracy, “trust” must first be earned and, through their actions, State institutions must constantly maintain whatever trust the public originally chose to invest in them. Wherever and whenever that “trust” is no longer warranted, the people who live in a democracy are free to question, and ultimately dissolve, State institutions they don’t trust.

Trust is not a democratic principle. Questioning power is.

Consider that, according to State institutions like the United Nations (UN),

Conspiracy theories cause real harm to people, to their health, and also to their physical safety. They amplify and legitimize misconceptions [. . .] and reinforce stereotypes which can fuel violence and violent extremist ideologies.

This is a wholly misleading statement. It is disinformation.

The most violent act imaginable, and the most extreme ideology of all, is war and the all-out commitment to it. Full-scale war is possible only when a State declares it. International war is solely within the purview of one entity: the State. Wars are frequently justified by the State using lies and deception. Furthermore, the ideology of war is unwaveringly promoted by the legacy media on behalf of the State.

To be clear: the UN alleges that when ordinary men and women from across all sectors of society—representing all races, economic classes and political views—exercise their democratic right to question power, they are expressing opinions that “fuel violence and violent extremist ideologies.”

For such an extraordinary, apparently anti-democratic allegation to be considered even remotely plausible, it must be based upon irreproachable evidence. Yet, as we shall see, the UN’s claim is not based on any evidence at all.

In 2016, UN Special Rapporteur Ben Emmerson issued a report to the UN advising its member states on potential policies to counter extremism and terrorism. In his report, Emmerson noted the lack of a clear, agreed-upon definition of “extremism.” He reported that different UN member states defined “extremism” based upon their own political objectives and national interests. There was no single, cogent explanation of the “radicalisation” process. As he put it:

[M]any programmes directed at radicalisation [are] based on a simplistic understanding of the process as a fixed trajectory to violent extremism with identifiable markers along the way. [. . .] There is no authoritative statistical data on the pathways towards individual radicalisation.

A year later, in 2017, the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) delivered its report, “Countering Domestic Extremism.” The NAS suggested that domestic “violence and violent extremist ideologies” were the result of a complex interplay between a wide gamut of sociopolitical and economic factors, individual characteristics and life experiences.

The following year, in July 2018, the NAS view was reinforced by a team of researchers from Deakin University in a peer-reviewed article, “The 3 P’s of Radicalisation.” The Deakin scholars collated and reviewed all the available literature they could find on the process of radicalisation that potentially leads to violent extremism. They identified three main drivers: push, pull, and personal factors.

Push factors are the structural factors that propel people towards resentment, such as State repression, relative deprivation, poverty, and injustice. Pull factors are factors that make extremism seem attractive, like ideology, group identity and belonging, group incentives, and so on. Personal factors are individual character traits that make a person more or less susceptible to push or pull. These include psychological disorders, personality traits, traumatic life experiences, and so on.

Presently, the UN maintains that its report, Journey To Extremism in Africa, is “the most extensive study yet on what drives people to violent extremism.”

In keeping with all previous research, the Africa report concluded that radicalisation occurs through an intricate combination of influences and life experiences.

Specifically, the report noted:

We know the drivers and enablers of violent extremism are multiple, complex and context specific, while having religious, ideological, political, economic and historical dimensions. They defy easy analysis, and understanding of the phenomenon remains incomplete.

In its report called “Prevention of Violent Extremism“—published in June 2023—the UN noted that “deaths from terrorist activity have fallen considerably worldwide in recent years.” Yet, in its promotional literature for the same report, the UN claimed that the “rise of violent extremism profoundly threatens human security.”

How can the UN have it both ways? How can it be that a “rise of violent extremism” correlates with a considerable reduction in terrorist activity and associated deaths? This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

And remember that in the Africa report, which the UN currently calls its “most extensive study yet,” the UN acknowledged that the causes of radicalisation “are multiple, complex and context specific” and “defy easy analysis.”

This thoroughly refutes the manifest ease with which the UN proclaims, without cause, that so-called conspiracy theories “fuel violence and violent extremist ideologies.” This begs the question: what on Earth does the UN think “violent extremism” is, if not terrorism?

The bottom line is that, by its own admission, the UN has absolutely no evidence to support any of its “conspiracy theory” assertions. Rather, the UN is simply making up its entire “conspiracism” thesis from whole cloth.

In reality, so-called “conspiracy theorists” are overwhelmingly ordinary people with legitimate opinions that span a wide range of issues. Their opinions do not lead them to adopt extremist ideologies or to commit violent acts. There is no evidence at all to support this widely promulgated contention.

Nor are alleged “conspiracy theorists” a unique group of malcontents with psychological problems. The only defining characteristic these people possess is that they exercise their right to question power.

They do not seek to undermine democracy but, rather, exercise the rights and freedoms that democracy is supposedly based upon. It is this behaviour that the State deems unacceptable and that leads the State and its “epistemic authorities,” including the legacy media, to label them “conspiracy theorists.”

This observation in no way implies that the conspiracy theorists are always right. Conspiracy theories can be bigoted. They can be ridiculous. They may lack supporting evidence. They may cause offence. And they are sometimes just plain wrong. In other words they are just like any other opinion. But, equally, there is nothing inherently inaccurate or dangerous about every opinion labelled “conspiracy theory.”

There is only one way to ascertain if an alleged conspiracy theory is valid or not: examine the evidence. Unfortunately, the conspiracy theory label was created specifically to discourage people from looking at the evidence.

There are countless examples of the conspiracy theory or theorist label being used to hide evidence, obscure facts and deny legitimate concerns. In Part 2, we will look at a few of these examples and explore the wider geopolitical context in which the conspiracy theory label is deployed.

I extend my gratitude to my editor, who has provided invaluable contributions to my articles since October 2021 (but who, for personal reasons, prefers to remain anonymous).
You can read more of Iain’s work at his blog IainDavis.com (Formerly InThisTogether) or on UK Column or follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his SubStack. His new book Pseudopandemic, is now available, in both in kindle and paperback, from Amazon and other sellers. Or you can claim a free copy by subscribing to his newsletter.

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Categories: latest, The "New Normal"
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

123 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
les online
les online
Oct 11, 2023 11:03 AM

Early in a conflict an atrocity committed by The Enemy is selected and given considerable publicity…It is elevated to be the moral yardstick against which your side’s atrocities are judged, and, by comparison, your side’s atrocities always pale …
Thereafter The Enemy’s atrocity is the central referent of your side’s propaganda…
Their atrocity justifies any your side subsequently commits…

John Manning
John Manning
Oct 13, 2023 8:00 PM

The term conspiracy theory is more harmful than an actual conspiracy. The reason being that it provides people with an excuse to stop thinking. This is the state in which the majority of people seem to be most comfortable.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 13, 2023 10:02 PM
Reply to  John Manning

Nicely put, and perhaps key point of all these psyops.

Just as the murder of the Kennedys was not about them but about all their supporters and sympathizers and the widespread PTSD that it induced, often disabling intellect and memory, key long-term goals and features of MKUltra.

[Bobby’s widow Ethel Kennedy still doesn’t get that Sirhan is (almost) completely innocent. She doesn’t have a clue about that 55 years late, as very easily noticeable in her letter to Gavin Newsom asking him to deny Sirhan parole.

If we could just get her to finally revisit the trauma, now so stone cold as facts, and stonier cold as an unsolved case, however forever lively in the heart, I bet she would see the light and support Junior!

He and his brother Steven are the only two siblings strong enough to have faced it, and also all of RFK Jr’s long experience in litigating so many of the same perps.

But the opposition is tightly knit among the cabals, too. That’s another feature in the mind jobs.

As it was for the dissenting angels of yore!

Not to equivocate? No need either for punches or the pulling of them.

£4£&$4$+my2¢™~~`

“Devil with devil damned firm concord holds.”

~ Milton, Paradise Lost

Franko
Franko
Oct 12, 2023 11:25 AM

Family

On matters conspiracy or not.

What’s the verdict on roundup?

Safe or not safe.

Balkydj
Balkydj
Oct 13, 2023 7:50 AM
Reply to  Franko

Better: ask Bayer . . .

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 13, 2023 8:50 AM
Reply to  Franko

Carcinogenic. Didn’t RFK win a huge judgement against it in court? I know they used it around here at senior communities, and all over, and so many elderly people got ill from it. (Fun Fact: my mum’s photo made the front page of the L.A. Times in ’97, showing her at the gates of Landmark, a huge senior development in Huntington Beach, with the ol’ gal leading the sizeable pack of elder dissidents, pointing her index at some miscreant facing off against them in a testy fit of corporatic contradiction.)

Franko
Franko
Oct 15, 2023 3:43 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

During a recent workout, the ball went into thick scrub. My bend it like Beckham moment abruptly ended.

Got the ball out and in the process, inhaled a stinging floral odor like cheap perfume – the kind Mrs. Franko would effortlessly pickup a mile away like a truffle bloodhound – hang on to the discovery – later to brought up conveniently during steak night – when I’m always in good spirits.
Love her.

Back to earth, I later found out the odor was indeed roundup.

It appears our shared spaces are laden with roundup even in food.
Unsure what to make of it all – like bearing witness to healthy chain smokers.
Genetics luck?

Evokes a memory of Cesária on stage, puffing away – audience captivated.

Good over evil.

Ian
Ian
Oct 11, 2023 11:13 PM

What makes you not a ‘conspiracy theorist’? I’m surrounded by people who are seemingly intelligent but buy the main line. And mock anybody who questions it. They have no comprehension of how modern propaganda works and is infused in all media. Once you say, look, they have an agenda, or a narrative, you are a paranoid nut case. In Australia we are having a referendum to alter the Constitution. The yes side say it’s just a small change to give aboriginals a ‘voice’. The no side are saying the implications of the change are not clear. But if you think ‘no’ then you are a paranoid racist white supremist. Emotions are high! Yes = Good. No = Bad. Simple. Sort of helps if you are at all undecided.

Who D. Who
Who D. Who
Oct 11, 2023 3:13 PM

Excellent essay. What should be added is that you can be certain that those driving these “UN” studies are most certainly the usual suspects: the “opinion makers” of the US, the UK, and the EU, and that if they were driven instead by the leaders of, say, Arab or African or Asian countries, the approaches and conclusions of such studies would be entirely different.

Ort
Ort
Oct 11, 2023 8:39 PM
Reply to  Who D. Who

Yes, the UN houses the Western Hegemony’s Hall of Mirrors.

Welcome to the funhouse! 🤡

T.S.
T.S.
Oct 12, 2023 6:02 PM
Reply to  Ort

Then why does everything that the UN bloviates these days sound like the cheap chicom crap that emanates from the CCP mouthpieces ?

Phillip Michaels
Phillip Michaels
Oct 11, 2023 3:12 PM

Identifying Mockingbirds

Mockingbirds (definition) – Professional disrupters in a public forum.  (N.B. Named for CIA’s Operation Mockingbird exposed in the ’70s by the Church committee. It was an operation that co-opted American Media to meet the agency’s propaganda objectives.) Commenters–either in the employ or in the draft–of an organized effort to oppose alternative explanations in public forums of important events in our history.  Note the characteristics below are drawn in part from instructions given for attacking 9/11 truthers in public forums published in a January 2013 Scientific American article. 

Mockingbird strategies:

* Never acknowledge your opponent’s facts.
* Emphasize your facts (i.e. shouting, all caps, etc.).
* Anonymously claim expertise, if needed.
* Speak with emotional disdain and distaste for your opponent.
* Attempt to draw your opponent into an unproductive emotional argument.
* Draw a connection between your opponent and other highly odious groups.
* Attack the opponent personally rather than deal with the facts.
* Warn third-party listeners about the danger of your opponent’s worldview.
* Warn listeners that your opponent’s ideas are just myths.
* Frame your opponent’s arguments as being one situation or another with both of them being something highly objectionable.
* Create an intrinsically-weak argument representing your opponent’s ideas so that they can be easily knocked down.
* Use similar, but weaker words to describe a critical part of your opponent’s arguments.
* Use exaggeration of your opponent’s arguments in order to draw them into an argument that is less than useful in presenting their point.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 11:54 PM

All sounds far too familiar Phillip.

Edwige
Edwige
Oct 11, 2023 2:57 PM

“Owning nothing and being happy is a baseless conspiracy theory”;;;;
https://dumptheguardian.com/cities/2023/oct/11/culdesac-car-free-neighborhood-tempe-arizona

The name ‘Culdesac’ is a nice touch of morbid mockery.

Remember every C40 city (and there are a lot more than 40 of them) has signed up to abolish car ownership by 2030.

Straight Talk
Straight Talk
Oct 11, 2023 12:48 PM

The obvious reason “conspiracy theories” swirl about is because actual documented conspiracies abound!

Why the President of the Club of Rome tried to stop the approval of my dissertationA brief history of the club, their vision of a technocratic dictatorship, and tight connections to the elites of the world
The dot-connectors, aka critical thinkers, can spot the Hegelian Dialectic in action, the waves of manipulation of the masses to steer desired outcomes, such as this:

Create a migrant crisis to justify putting up walls. Make life so horrible that people want to leave the country and decide that they don’t want borders anymore.

“In a libertarian society, there is no commons or public space. There are property lines, not borders. When it comes to real property and physical movement across such real property, there are owners, guests, licensees, business invitees, and trespassers — not legal and illegal immigrants.”
~ Jeff Deist, president of the Mises Institute

So, end nation-states, borders, constitutional rights, environmental protections, citizenship itself. They want a world of Big Owners and Others…. who will own nothing.

This Is Not Just About the Border…

Bryan
Bryan
Oct 11, 2023 11:29 AM

Once upon a time in psychohistoricity, the Human rejected life-affirmation, life-coherence and living naturally and sensibly, preferring instead to invent one’s own nature. Everybody could and can see everything is moving, perpetually subject to change, generation and corruption (the Heraclitian “flux” or “logos of fire”). “That can’t be right or good or true” they exclaimed, there must be something that determines the apparency of flux and mutability and so the Eleatic One was born, generated from the pure and sublime imagination of those who did not want to understand nature as naturr. “We cannot be the One” they said, so they made another One, in the spit and the image of the Eleatic One and called it “human nature” as the imaginary ‘true’ copy of the imaginary original of all subsequent collective imaginability-only.

Thereafter: “man is a rational animal” seeking causes in imaginability in order to justify and legitimate the reductive-mechanical ideology grounded in the Imaginary One, the suprasensory Unmanifest Absolute Imaginability as the original, ordinal and insuperable Supreme Identity; whichever is concretised in the statement-generating logos as the “Principle of Sufficient Reason” – whichever is the rational-causal, hierarchical and deterministic image of nature as the “Rational Order of Things” [ROOT, ROT.]

Thereafter: the political-intellectual struggle is for private access to the supreme imaginary as a symbolic source of authority; via one’s own private introspection about the moral nature of the rational-causal image of nature. Of whichever the Eleatic One is The Idea of which all speechsound (name and verb) is abstracted and arbitrary symbol associated by agressed imposed agreement; of whichever all written grammaticalisation is also aggressed arbitrary associationism of letter and sound-activity as an imitation of an imitation of an imaginary named entity outside reality causing shit to happen in a supernatural and supramundane but deterministic way of which we can have causal “nomothetic” knowledge of the formalised universalised ‘essential nature’ abstracted from the natural phaenomena; whichever is absolutised absurdism as the episteme of all belief, all speech, and all action-guided none-sense.

The ultimate conspiracy theorist’s guide to conspiracy theory: everything in the last two millennia is a confabulated conspiracy theory grounded in the imaginary and formalised by symbolic means. The entirety of ontology is completely made-up as aggressed make-believe of a symbolic naturalisation hierarchy that causes the world to be determined in a particular way, all of which is reductive-mechanical ratiocentric ideology imposed on the world by extremised and radicalised violence as a mimesis of a mimesis of nothingness apart from imaginability-only. So why continue to copy the thanatological ratiocentric determinist ideology?

Reductive-mechanistic conspiracy theory seems to be a heartbroken eulogy for the truth that never was, not a serious or restorative inquiry into the actual nature of nature, before the made-up confabulating and obfuscating phantasia began. The Rational Essential Human in toto is a categorical rejection of life-affirmation that is proved to be life-negation. Reductive ratiocentric conspiracy theory – as an initiated insight into the secret nature of causes – also presents as an “imperialism nostalgia” as a mournful lamentation of the perceived loss of privacy, economic privileged right to consume “freedoms and liberties”; as previously afforded by the aggressed imposition of the rational-causal authoritarianism by order and control of the supreme imaginary.

Fuhrer, sorry, furthermore, there seems to be a rational-causal ‘democratic’ palingenesia or “imperial prostalgia” for a regenerative return to recent levels of economic imperialism as restoration of the right to consume other people’s “freedoms and liberties” said no conspiracy theorist ever…. Because they really want is to mend their broken bleeding liberal heart’s with someone else’s blood.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 12:03 PM
Reply to  Bryan

Wha?

underground poet
underground poet
Oct 11, 2023 12:35 PM
Reply to  Johnny

its called gobble d gook.

George Mc
George Mc
Oct 11, 2023 12:42 PM
Reply to  Johnny

“Postmaterialist textual theory and social realism…..
The essay you have just seen is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator. To generate another essay, follow this link.

If you liked this particular essay and would like to return to it, follow this link for a bookmarkable page.”

https://www.elsewhere.org/journal/pomo/

If you follow that link, you’ll get a different essay. This site seems to generate them based on an algorithm that churns out syntactically correct but meaningless prose. If you happen to favour any one in particular, I’d do a copy/paste right away because you may never see it again.

Howard
Howard
Oct 11, 2023 3:57 PM
Reply to  George Mc

Are you sure that’s what those particular comments are? I ask this because there is a definite theme running through all the particular comments offered by this one person?

Can a random algorithm be that consistent?

Bryan
Bryan
Oct 11, 2023 5:55 PM
Reply to  Howard

🙂Thanks!

Bryan
Bryan
Oct 11, 2023 5:39 PM
Reply to  George Mc

The charge of randomly generated text could easily be applied to all rational ontological theory as ‘first philosophy’; as violent imposition of abstract and arbitrary symbolatry. You can easily reference Parmenides and the Eleatic ideology of Being (always with a capital); and you could follow the genealogy to present.

To my great misfortune, I actually began to study logic and ontology over 40 years ago when ‘analytic philosophy’ was still at its peak. It is that which made me give up philosophy, and subsequently all branches of rational or logico-analytical inquiry. It is all shite and only survives as totalitarian mindfuckery.

The “Rational Image Of Thought” [RIOT] has survived as an eclectic and syncretic form of psychiatric mindcontrol for over two millennia. First, impress on the defenceless neotonic perception the ideology of the psyche, and then let the psyche do the controlling as autoeconomic self-preservation. Thereby, idealism that there is an immobilised permanent ‘nature’ behind phaenomenal reality is more or less universalised; despite the fact that it is completely false economic control. In logic, if your premisses are false, everything that follows is false. Everything in psychology is false. Everything in economics is false. There is no external control: EFQ (ex falso quodlibet).

The premisses, principles, predicament, categories, truth-logic and so on all follow from the absolute existence of an imaginary entity and its psychic possession of the body as animae immortalis (the original AI). Ergo: everything that follows is in contradiction of life-itself. This is the logical principle of explosion and because of the inhabited misperception of reality, things really are about to explode.

It ain’t ChatGPT, it’s actual “really-real” reality to which ecological holism is the only remedy: QED!

Bryan
Bryan
Oct 11, 2023 5:46 PM
Reply to  Bryan

*neotonic is a random word generated by my keyboard. I meant neonatal or neoteny — the extended infancy of lifelong remediation of the intellect by rational-causal imposition.

George Mc
George Mc
Oct 11, 2023 8:22 PM
Reply to  Bryan

Oh no I think you went too far there!

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 11:59 PM
Reply to  Bryan

Verbosity = 10
Clarity = 0

George Mc
George Mc
Oct 11, 2023 8:21 PM
Reply to  Bryan

Well exactly!

Bryan
Bryan
Oct 12, 2023 9:54 AM
Reply to  George Mc

Johnny and George Mc

Agreed: the holistic ecological worldview is unintelligible to the reductive-mechanistic worldview — but which one is correct and veridical to the actual world?

The reductive-mechanistic or rational-causal worldview is destroying the real world right now. Human knowledge of the world is destructive of the actual world. Human rational participation in nature is fatally incompatible with nature. Ergo: the Human has a completely and fatally flawed idea on nature…. and it all goes back to the Imaginary One.

Why keep on with the fatally flawed reductive-mechanical ideology of hierarchised control said no conspiracy theorist ever.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 12, 2023 10:38 AM
Reply to  Bryan

Humans ARE Nature.
That knowledge has been buried under ignorance.
Human BEINGS, on the other hand, are Awareness.
That too, has been buried.

Balkydj
Balkydj
Oct 13, 2023 9:54 AM
Reply to  Bryan

Oh no nono Bryan, 😂 I think you’ve definitely gone too far beyond the pale limits of George’s Rainbow comprehension… I Trans-gress.

A veritable verbosity of sardonic nature is highly entertaining. But, don’t tell George or Johnny, ffs, this spoils my high noon delight, having promised publicly to never address George ever again, as long as he shuts the fuk’ up about his utterly Distractionary Fixation on Trans-national Trans-gender issues: best leave sleeping dogs lie, misrepresented & remaining ill informed, on how inebriated by the exuberance of your own verbosity, you actually are… not. 😉
George & complexity is truly a no go Zone !
And, his accusation was Scientifically inept !
You’d be better off discussing with a Muppet… !

Now: about Geo-engineering … are you still in-filtrating
Extinction Rebellion ? Because, never in the field of human conflict has so many barrels of oil been produced by so few, for so many…
In one day. Now, that’s what I call ‘Peak Oil Pollution’ of the
Mind & Planetary corporate controlled mechanisms !
Truly a Corporate Sovereign Coup d’etat &
Put-schhh… let the children play.
Peak Oil production hits record high.
A Sovereign Putsch over conspiracy theory.
Let us vote ❎ issues, not Theory,
& Fuk Hierarchy & vested interests.
If only Richard Branson could have branded
Virgin Olive Oil 🛢 he could have employed
Popeye & George & sold spinach… ✌
In a depression 😂 as natural & wholesome,
Food for thought. I fly, with my lil’ eye…
Something beginning with ‘C’ see ?
C.F.C.s Corporate Fascist Conspirators.
Balky

Invisible Man
Invisible Man
Oct 13, 2023 5:14 PM
Reply to  George Mc

Bryan’s post is just standard issue Nietzschism — Nietzsche blamed, with some real justification, Socrates and Plato for sending Western thought into an excessively rationalistic direction, for making a fetish out of the rational and ostensibly “scientific” component in human thinking, as well as a fixation on Being over Becoming, stasis over flux. (Although Socrates and Plato both had a strongly mystical component to their thought as well.)

However, one of Nietzsche’s great virtues is the exceptional clarity, precision, and lucidity of his prose. Sadly, Bryan prefers to translate Nietzschean ideas into postmodern obfuscation and obscurity of expression instead of stating his perspectives clearly.

les online
les online
Oct 11, 2023 7:57 AM

“Climatosis” – What is it ? Did it escape from a Chinese Lab ? Is it contagious ? And, importantly, is it curable ?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/10/10/a-review-of-missys-twitch-and-the-scourge-of-climatosis/
With a cameo appearance by little Miss “How Dare You !” Greta…(1.41)…

niko
niko
Oct 11, 2023 7:41 AM

Some call it conspiracy, but it’s just bizzness as usual (don’t take it personally). The rule of law, from smallest city hall to grand central of globocap, is the product of backroom deals cut by class interests calling the shots. Every institutional context in which we live is governed by some board of directors of sorts making decisions for subordinates in chains of command on a need-to-know basis next to nothing at all, compartmentalizing cogs in machinery of profit and power for purposes of exploitation above our pay grade. Even Ma and Pa are running the corner store employing proles just doing their jobs, informed consent be damned.

This law of rule is hidden in plain sight by all the noble lies we’re told before we have a chance to think and beyond, from earliest age conditioning us to deny until we die common sense of social relations ranked according to the few over the many. How else but in the land of the free are open secrets, like all the elites getting together at their summits to plan the fate of human resources and all life, going to pass for normalcy right in front of us? How else is organized crime made respectable?  

That there’s controversy to conspiracy as a concept, apart from the endless content where the devil is in the details, simply shows how gaslit we can be. Conspiracy realism is rooted in realization of rule, and how its inevitable cancer of power over others, now covering the planet like a plague, must be countered by more egalitarian conditions. We’ve got a lot to unlearn. 

les online
les online
Oct 11, 2023 7:16 AM

Someone has offered:
“Stop calling them Conspiracy Theories
call them
Spoiler Alerts.”

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 11, 2023 3:27 AM

“Some Call it Conspiracy Theory”

Because, in that crowd, “None Dare Call it Treason”

[Because they would be answerable to their conscience? Then.]

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 1:37 AM

Psychopaths en masse:

We have abolished all rules of warfare. Our soldiers will not be held responsible for anything. There will be no military courts, — Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 11, 2023 3:29 AM
Reply to  Johnny

Sounds maybe more like Tojo and his cry of “Total War”

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 3:48 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

Once a General, always a General.
And, as someone once said:
‘GENERALS DIE IN BED’

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 5:16 AM
Reply to  Johnny

That ‘someone’ was Charles Yale Harrison:

https://quillandquire.com/review/generals-die-in-bed/

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 1:01 AM

Apparently, ‘conspiracy stuff’ is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.

Gore Vidal

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 11, 2023 3:30 AM
Reply to  Johnny

That’s cool. Leave it to Gore.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 9:17 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

He didn’t suffer fools or fakes.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 12, 2023 6:16 AM
Reply to  Johnny

As in his bon not, “the laughing gas of the New York Times.”.

Or on WBAI 2004, “Voting that is pretty much rigged from the getgo.”

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 13, 2023 9:03 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

“bon mot” spell-check is treacherous with M’s and N’s and never the twain shall meet, especially thru my bifocals.

George Mc
George Mc
Oct 11, 2023 12:46 PM
Reply to  Johnny

“TV-watchers have no doubt noted so often that they are no longer aware of how often the interchangeable TV hosts handle anyone who tries to explain why something happened. “Are you suggesting that there was a conspiracy?” A twinkle starts in a pair of bright contact lenses. No matter what the answer, there is a wriggling of the body, followed by a tiny snort and a significant glance into the camera to show that the guest has just been delivered to the studio by flying saucer. This is one way for the public never to understand what actual conspirators—whether in the F.B.I. or on the Supreme Court or toiling for Big Tobacco—are up to. It is also a sure way of keeping information from the public. The function, alas, of Corporate Media.”

Gore Vidal

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2001/09/mcveigh200109

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 12, 2023 12:02 AM
Reply to  George Mc

That quote should be carved into the sky George.
Thanks.

les online
les online
Oct 11, 2023 12:31 AM

On: ‘The false morality surrounding “our” debt.’
‘As is well known, the debt incurred by risk taking, highly speculative private financial companies was unloaded onto the public. Our bailouts of the banks were nothing less than making good on the debt while at the same time the moralistic charge was defected quickly from them and refocused on welfare recipients, the unemployed, the elderly, and the ill. who pay for the private debt through the diminishment of their benefits, pensions, et cetera. Attention was turned away from the 1%.’
‘Debt is today’s Original Sin – generations now are born into debt.’

All That’s Solid Melts Into Air:
https://arcade.stanford.edu/content/all-solid-melts-air-again

Trigger Warning for Sensitives: contains some observations by Marx…

Guilt, and dis-trust – major aspects of Capitalism’s emotional economy…

mgeo
mgeo
Oct 11, 2023 9:09 AM
Reply to  les online

Less benefits is only one half of the totalitarianism. The other half is the ratcheting of privatisation, “liberalisation” and default secrecy.

RKae
RKae
Oct 11, 2023 12:21 AM

“Conspiracy” means “two or more people are planning something and not telling you.”

It’s astounding that the establishment got people to believe that it’s insane to think that planning and lying are ever occurring.

Also: Notice how Trump was “COLLUDING” with Russia. The legacy media had to avoid the word “conspiracy” but they still had to convey the meaning.

Tommskyy
Tommskyy
Oct 11, 2023 8:43 AM
Reply to  RKae

Except Trump wasn’t colluding or conspiring with Russia at all. That was made up by those protecting Hillary Clinton and her corruption.

Veri Tas
Veri Tas
Oct 10, 2023 11:02 PM

From your article:

Subsequent research has highlighted how ludicrous their falsely named ‘scientific conclusion’ was.” 

Said Charles Darwin back in the days: “How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of service.”

And that’s how The Science arrives at false conclusions (including his own)!

Paul Dawson
Paul Dawson
Oct 10, 2023 10:48 PM

“The Open Conspiracy; What are we to do with our lives?” H.G.Wells, Originally published in 1928.
To make a short story shorter, HG Wells opined that humans were embracing stupidity against reality.

RKae
RKae
Oct 11, 2023 12:23 AM
Reply to  Paul Dawson

HG Wells was a scumbag and a plagiarist. He was also such a devoted fan of technology and state control that if he were alive today he’d be sitting at the WEF.

Tommskyy
Tommskyy
Oct 11, 2023 8:45 AM
Reply to  Paul Dawson

HG Wells, and many of his contemporaries, was a paid propagandist for the state.

Onthemoney
Onthemoney
Oct 10, 2023 10:36 PM

The state is otherwise termed the people. The entities who label people conspiracy theorists are criminals. Either they know what they are up to or they are dupes under then influence of full on pschopaths. In anycase they are criminals. Such a constuct seeks to defend any and all conspirators aka criminals. The courts are filled with charges of conspiracy. Conspiracy to commit x, y or z. To ridicule any and all allegations of conspiracy is the depths of conspiracy. The mind of the psychopath. Those that participate are the flying monkeys. Meredith Miller did this video on flying monkeys. To deal with a smear campaign basically she says to go no contact. The flying monkeys could just as easily turn on someone else so are a serious threat to have in any organisation. If you see some drop them like a hot potato.

mgeo
mgeo
Oct 11, 2023 9:19 AM
Reply to  Onthemoney

This totalitarianism will continue until all laws against criticism – justified or not, including defamation, slander or libel – are scrapped.

Paul Prichard
Paul Prichard
Oct 10, 2023 9:25 PM

Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2023-10-09. 100% effective then 99% 98% etc. Legacy media couldn’t publish anti-jab. Pfizer knew 80% miscarriage rate (blog, gab, tweet).

Anarchos
Anarchos
Oct 10, 2023 8:21 PM

Err, no. Conspiracy theories do not merely question authority and mainstream narratives but positively state that hidden groups other than the visible authorities actually control our world and are responsible for mass crimes against humanity and mass deception so as to feed their insatiable lust for power and control…

Sorry but this article is off the mark.

Iain Davis
Iain Davis
Oct 11, 2023 3:43 PM
Reply to  Anarchos

I think you are referring to the popular perception of “conspiracy theory.”

According to the Science, “conspiracy theory” is defined as an explanation of an event “that conflicts with the official story, where the official story is the explanation offered by the (relevant) epistemic authorities.”

Questioning power in other words.

Hugh O’Neill
Hugh O’Neill
Oct 10, 2023 8:13 PM

Otago University’s Professor Charles Pigden has written some excellent papers on this topic in which he makes clear the absurdity of not believing in conspiracies. I explain to people is that judges, lawyers, juries and police indulge each day in theorising about conspiracies: Humans conspire all the time, whether it be for a surprise birthday party or robbing a bank – presumably to pay for a birthday present….

Hugh O'Neill
Hugh O'Neill
Oct 10, 2023 9:54 PM
Reply to  Hugh O’Neill

https://philarchive.org/archive/PIGCTA-2 Here is the link to the Pigden paper. N.B. Otago University is now funded largely by Bill Gates, so all such papers will be memory holed…but only if you are a conspiracy theorist….

Penelope
Penelope
Oct 10, 2023 7:45 PM

NEW CONSPIRACY INFO

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/10/10/turbo-tumors-linked-to-covid-jabs.aspx
Very valuable Highwire video interview w text. Wm Makis, cancer researcher/ oncologist
(All Mercola articles include complete text & sources)
Start @ 8:50 if you’re already familiar w turbo cancer occurrence.

THIRD SHOT ALTERS IMMUNE STATUS TO STOP FIGHTING SPIKE
@17:00

TREATMENT CURING 85-90% OF CANCER STOPPED BY CANADIAN GOVT
@19:50
Do you think they’re usurping it to give only to TPTB??

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Oct 11, 2023 12:25 AM
Reply to  Penelope

As a rule of thumb presented alarm figures must be above 0,1% to be worth precious intelligent time.
0,1% of a group will have deviations or vulnerabilities not fitted to foreign intake.
Were these 0,1% people disposed to cancer before intake? We dont know.

I have a friend of mine who destroyed his stomach for life by drinking a glass of milk in Egypt, simply because his immune system was too weak to take the foreign milk bacteria.

I have frequently liquid stomach when I travel overseas but by coconut milk or clean yogurt its gone in 1-2 days.

So some people are more vulnerable than others. Therefore its an individual responsibility what you expose your body to, as only you can know your own condition.

Tommskyy
Tommskyy
Oct 11, 2023 8:58 AM
Reply to  Penelope

This interview with Prof. Angus Dalgleish, of St George’s London, explains how the vaccines are compromising the immune systems of cancer patients and allowing cancers to reappear. His research using IMM-101 to reinvigorate T-cells is relevant to anyone over 55.

https://youtu.be/PnJ5T1Enwq4?si=rnf6UL3Wn3GYdbaI

Joe Smith
Joe Smith
Oct 10, 2023 7:29 PM

Actually, a friend of mine finds “conspiracy theorist” to be a useful term. Whenever he says something scandalous, like covid is a hoax or something, and they’re looking at him with horror, like some vermin that needs eradicating, like they should be getting out the garlic and crucifixes and silver bullets, he just says, “You know me. Never heard a conspiracy I didn’t like.” Then people relax. Oh, he’s just our friendly neighborhood conspiracy nut. Every neighborhood’s got one. Nothing to worry about.

les online
les online
Oct 10, 2023 10:39 PM
Reply to  Joe Smith

You might be on to something !
Like, asking them “Have you heard the latest Conspiracy Theory ? ” Then telling them about how, for example, “Pfizer documents record over 1800 ‘side effects’ can be caused by their jab”…They might listen, and it might expose them to data that might, just might, start to loosen their Resistances…
Not saying it will, but overcome their Resistances to The Facts ” By Any Means Necessary “(BAMN) – to borrow the motto of The Rulers of The Universe…
Dont be a CT zealot ! During Therapy tackling resistances head-on strengthens resistances (the analysand digs in) – so subterfuge** is required…

** ‘subterfuge’ is not a Dirty Word
(The Dictionary is not Big Brother, though Humpty Dumpty might insist it’s The Authority on The Meanings of Words !)

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 12:36 AM
Reply to  les online

Reverse psychology Les.
Worth trying, just for the laughs.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 11, 2023 12:41 AM
Reply to  Johnny

comment image

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Oct 12, 2023 4:35 AM
Reply to  Joe Smith

We are trying to wake up the sheeple arent we? Reverse psychology makes that impossible, it only confirms the artificial invented roles.

sandy
sandy
Oct 10, 2023 6:38 PM

On the face of it, the entire “conspiracy theory” meme, is a farcical misuse of language. A “theory” would be a proposed diagnosis of what had happened in the past that had no clear cause defined. Multiple theories would be possible and can exist simultaneously. Until, publicly, in 1963, when the CIA attached the word “conspiracy” to “theories”, they found as a threat to their knowledge hegemony over public events. The word ‘conspiracy” deflated enemy “theories” into a loony straitjacket.

The assassination of JFK can be seen as the date marker where the existing capitalist state apparatus, including the rich, soft coup’d any US dissent from it’s world police empire objective. Ruling their empire, requires violent events, like the 4 assassinations, wars and coups abroad, poverty, inequality and divisiveness at home. and to achieve this requires the US public to see and know all of it, while having completely ridiculous ideas planted in the heads about the causes. Like the single rifle “theory”. Like “unknown” Arab terrorists or “aluminum tubes” and countless other “theories” that are actually the real conspiracy theories cooked up in the manufacturing consent labs of the CIA, FBI, NSA, the Council on Foreign Relations and God knows whatever 1%er think tanks spin reality.

On another level, the word “conspiracy” is used constantly by the ruling elite to define the acts of “revolutionaries”, dissidents or activists (“extremists”) on behalf of theories like: communism, racial equality, civil rights, anti-poverty, anti-war, sovereignty, environment, indigenous rights, anarchism, anti-fascism, constitutional rights, libertarianism, animal rights, pollution, nukes and nuclear war, etc. Any point of view, theory, that the existing system sees as a threat to their hegemony, is a “conspiracy” and prosecuted as such in laws that try and convict “extremists” of all kinds, in courts. Like of course J6 was a REAL “conspiracy”, but let’s not go there. In 2008, Minneapolis police, preemptively arrested several organizers of RNC protests, claiming they were “conspiring” to commit a crime. Here, free speech, assembly and redress are “conspiracies” against the State, punishable as violent criminals. The ultimate in “conspiracy theories” is manufactured by the State.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 11, 2023 3:38 AM
Reply to  sandy

“…like the 4 assassinations…”

5. Count ’em: the case is made rather airtight in “The Martyrdom of Thomas Merton” that he rounded out that dreary year as the 5th, the 3rd of 1968 alone.

For those who know of him, he was as significant internationally, as a voice for peace, as the others.

mgeo
mgeo
Oct 11, 2023 9:44 AM
Reply to  sandy

Usually, cops “detain” you (lock you up) for a while to impress upon you not to tangle with the PTB. They do this even if they have no hope of sending you for prosecution. During processing at the police sttion, they do take the precaution of checking whether you are linked to anyone important or likely to sue them.

The truly sceptical should be calling a “conspiracy theory” a hypothesis or conjecture.

rangeofillusions
rangeofillusions
Oct 10, 2023 6:35 PM

I thought this was relevant about the different types of Conspiracy theorists posted by dyslexicdave.
dont shoot the messenger.

Your not a conspiracy theorist if you watch Gb bullsh%ttv or daily shill, with ben shillco and co.
Your deluded if you think madak news made a error and let cia carson talk internet idiot fashionable,
Your not a conspiracy theorist if you think a GCHQ/naval intelligence outfit that has a T^ory Mp on there show is alternate-mainstream news,.
85% are not conspiracy theorist as your trump is secretly fighting on your behalf when he is doing the op[psite.
Imagine calling your self conspiracy theorist when you read the news as it is literal. Rather than what it is trying to say.
Full moon 77 33 11 khan 2333 dead yet most having a clue and read the news as it is.
Your not a conspiracy theorist if you still knock one out to the trannies in hollywood who you think are womens.
How many times. with the …
Hold on tight as some whilsleblower is telling you how bad big pahma is and this is not conspiracy theory this is called getting shilled. Tell us something we dont no but instead your being feed next weeks msm news a week early.
They can call them looney or yeadon, baloney and you still wouldnt get the hint.
They can have no vak win and your still thinks it a win.
They laugh at you and you still do not get it.

Your not a conspiracy theorist your a Msm viewers under the new internet alt media banner.
Comical department of the military-industrial complex runs your networks.

dyslexia dave 

AntiSoof
AntiSoof
Oct 10, 2023 5:45 PM

Conspiracy theorists remind me of Socrates who also thought about the state and tried to get his students to think independently and especially to unmask the sophists. Well, he experienced what it meant to go against the ‘order’. He had to take the poison cup. Could Plato also be seen as a conspiracy theorist? Or Jezus? And so many others?

Apart from that, I think it’s unhealthy to think too much. It just makes you tired and you can’t do much anyway. Seen in this light, it might be better to be a ‘little’ stupid or (very) wise.

wardropper
wardropper
Oct 10, 2023 10:39 PM
Reply to  AntiSoof

For me, it all depends on what one means by, ‘unhealthy’ in the context of thinking.

Socrates and his rarified kind may well have spent too much time thinking for their own purely physical good, but most of mankind are a very, very long way from overworking their minds at that level.

Having that in mind, I would say we should all be spending a heck of a lot more time in the activity of thinking.
A good start would be even to know what ‘thinking’ actually is.
Just watching ideas flit in and out of one’s head isn’t thinking at all.

Even if we put it on the level of brushing our teeth every day, it is something we can all do for a short while regularly, although a little guidance might be a sensible thing to look for to begin with.
So much of our environment is geared to hurry and stress, while thinking – which is perhaps in some ways similar to meditation – can’t really be done unless we can find a calm space in which to do it.

Howard
Howard
Oct 11, 2023 2:57 AM
Reply to  wardropper

One of the “benefits” of making it so difficult to tell what is real from what is fake is that it makes it difficult to actually think about anything.

The best most can do is consider aspects of something or another. But with reality becoming more and more elusive, it’s all but impossible to get to the bottom of anything.

Take the Hamas/Israeli crisis: all mental processes must go toward discerning whether it’s a real skirmish or something staged. So it’s impossible to place it in a wider context. If it’s real, it means this; if it’s staged, it means that.

Thinking in a world given to deliberate obfuscation becomes almost a waste of energy. Most would rather watch a football game.

judith
judith
Oct 12, 2023 12:58 PM
Reply to  Howard

Yes, and many if not most people do not want to “go there”.
As someone close to me says, “It’s just all too much.”.
And it is.

Crusader Rabbit
Crusader Rabbit
Oct 10, 2023 5:22 PM

The term conspiracy theory was coined by the CIA to try to persuade a very doubtful American public that the Warren Commission’s conclusion was correct. What else needs to be said? Sure, every group has nutty fringe elements, conspiracy theorists are no different. But look how many conspiracy theories are eventually revealed to be conspiracy facts!

Now we just have to figure out why Israel actually expects us to believe that it had no prior knowledge of the assault by Hamas.

Anarchos
Anarchos
Oct 10, 2023 8:25 PM

Stop repeating this- the CIA did not coin the term.

Albert Anderson
Albert Anderson
Oct 11, 2023 12:36 AM
Reply to  Anarchos

And?

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Oct 11, 2023 1:32 AM
Reply to  Anarchos

So far this is the best bet. I note you dont have an answer but only a negate.

Crusader Rabbit
Crusader Rabbit
Oct 11, 2023 3:16 PM
Reply to  Anarchos

I did some research and you are correct! Thank you for the correction. I think however that it is reasonable to say that the phrase took on a whole new life after the JFK assassination. And, although CIA personnel may or may not have fired any of the shots that killed JFK, the CIA was certainly involved behind the scenes.

Ort
Ort
Oct 11, 2023 8:31 PM

You meant to say “promoted”, or perhaps “revived”.

It wasn’t exactly an egregious error. 👍

judith
judith
Oct 12, 2023 12:59 PM
Reply to  Anarchos

Well, I’ve see the document that supports this.
Unless the document was faked.
What is your take on it? Who coined the term, if anyone?

les online
les online
Oct 10, 2023 11:18 PM

Maybe the Palestinians are experts in Disinformation Tactics…
Mis-direction: Lots of communications chatter about mass troubles in West Bank…Israel stations 33 battalions in West Bank, drawing forces away from Gaza open air prison…
Within the mis-direction communications Hamas plans it’s jailbreak…
The Soviet Union’s Uncle Joe Stalin – America’s Ally during World War Two – is said to have coined the word “dis-information’ for the Soviets practice of concealing their real intention inside other activities…US intelligence agencies used the term, early 1980s, believing the Soviet’s “perestroika” and “glasnost” were a smokescreen concealing some nasty surprise the Soviets intended…
The Pentagon employed the same tactic during its preparations for the Gulf Wars…”The Pentagon Leaked Like A Sieve” – the Pentagon fed numerous leaks to the corporate propaganda media that led people to believe it intended a land invasion… Behind that deceit it hid the build-up for intention to use its airforce to bomb the Iraqis back to the Stone Age (As Israel is doing in Gaza)…

el Gallinazo
el Gallinazo
Oct 10, 2023 4:43 PM

The UK’s greatest “conspiracy theorist” lays out who the power behind the Israel-Hamas war really is. Every false flag needs a patsy, and the patsy in this case is the Israeli and Palestinian people. Icke proves that the Rothschild Luciferian cabal, started the “country” of Israel in 1947 and essentially owns it, holds the Jewish people in utter contempt by pointing to its record with the scamdemic and bioweapon vaccine. The death and disability of the fake vaccines among its Jewish population (exclusively Pfizer) rival that of any other country on the planet.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/4R7laUciyxPE/?list=subscriptions

The only side worth taking in this conflict is the people of Israel and Palestine against the global Luciferian cult.

IMO, this false flag is designed to kick off an attack by the USA and Israel against Iran. Israel cannot hope to succeed in this attack without the US military doing the heavy lifting. However, to mobilize the braindead majority in the USA in a bloodthirsty rage against Iran, we will need a really major FF on USA soil, killing (at least) thousands, and IMO this may come as early as this month. Iran probably has the capability to sink the aircraft carrier now stationed off the coast of Gaza which would be the primary nexus of the USA attack, even if they do not have the hypersonic missiles of Russia and China. Carriers have now become floating coffins to sophisticated missile attacks.

The Iranians certainly can shut down all crude oil transit in the Persian gulf as well as its entrance into the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. This should bring the price of crude to $200 a barrel or potentially even higher. I live in SW Mexico. I own an old SUV super gas guzzler. I have also owned motorcycles most of my adult life, but now in my late 70s, my deteriorating sense of balance has made that suicidal. To compensate for the soon to explode retail price of gasoline, I bought a 200cc Mexican manufactured (Italika) quad and put pavement tires on it. While it does not quite give the fuel economy of a 200cc (2 wheeled) motorcycle, it comes pretty close. The quality is not as good as most manufactured in Asia, but its lower price and resistance to a supply chain parts disruption in the coming chaos compensates. Picking up a gasoline sipping vehicle may be something to be considered.

alice hesselrode
alice hesselrode
Oct 10, 2023 8:08 PM
Reply to  el Gallinazo

I have not yet looked at bitchute article but I think you are spot on. From another person who escaped to Mexico Oaxaca.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Oct 10, 2023 4:38 PM

Is this part of an Academic University symposium?
So much babbling to explain a simple newspeak word. Not one word about what to do against name calling or label smearing.  😏 

Howard
Howard
Oct 10, 2023 3:44 PM

The law is the Corporate Transparency Act that passed Congress in 2021. The intent of the legislation was to help detect and report suspicious activity related to money laundering and terrorist finance, to facilitate tracking money that has been sourced through criminal or terrorist activity to safeguard the national security and the financial system of the U.S. This law is being enforced under the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN). This law applies to corporations that have less than $5 million in assets, fewer than 20 employees and don’t otherwise meet broad exemptions like banks, credit unions, investment companies, venture capital, securities exchange or clearing agency, insurance companies, public utilities, accounting firms, tax-exempt organizations as qualified and determined with status by the IRS, i.e. 501c4 organizations, large operating companies, and inactive entities. 

The consensus by community association lawyers is community associations incorporated at the state level will be impacted by this new law and will have a responsibility to file information with FINCEN through the Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting requirements. The Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting program is slated to be implemented with filings beginning January 1, 2024. The current filing deadline for existing corporations is January 1, 2025. The filing is not yet open. 

At a minimum, here is what is going to need to be reported by the community association to the FINCEN federal agency on an annual basis. 

Businessname.

Legal name of board members, birthdate, home address, an identifying number from a driver’s license, state ID, or passport.

Individual with substantial control. The same information (name, birthdate, home address, identifying number) of person (s) who exercise substantial control over financial reporting for the community association corporation. It is unclear whether a community manager and/or management company qualify as an individual with substantial control. This is yet to be confirmed. CAI will continue to evaluate this and provide guidance accordingly.

Changes, corrections, additions to the filing must occur within 30 days of when you become aware of the change (i.e., board member moves, is replaced, etc.).

Of great concern, is noncompliance of filing could result in civil penalties of $500 per day and criminal penalties of up to $10,000 and up to 24 months in prison.

CAI has taken the position that we do not believe the Anti-Money Laundering Act and Corporate Transparency Act are intended to apply to community associations. Accordingly, we are taking the following measures: 

Request community associations be exempt from the Act and the subsequent Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting requirements.

Request delay of the implementation of the Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting requirements by supporting HR4035/S2623.

Urge confidentiality of the individual corporate filings of the Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting through rulemaking process.

We need your help to urge Members of Congress to support exempting community associations, delaying implementation, and limiting access to the corporate filings. 

 

This may seem peculiar to present in this forum; but the highlighted part says much which is directly related to the gist of the article. The US law in question exempts the very businesses which are most likely to deal in money laundering, etc. But I’m sure they would call it a “conspiracy theory” to come right out and say so.

(Note: Apparently the highlighting feature doesn’t work with quoted material – sorry.)

mgeo
mgeo
Oct 11, 2023 9:53 AM
Reply to  Howard

Some hallowed phrases that are related: liberalisation and free market.

judith
judith
Oct 12, 2023 1:05 PM
Reply to  Howard

Corporate transparency. Now there’s an oxymoron if ever there was one.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 13, 2023 10:24 PM
Reply to  judith

Like “Central Intelligence”

(I have to think about that one, even if I thought it already. Like, 1967 for the starters.)

Big Al
Big Al
Oct 10, 2023 3:09 PM

I woke up this morning with a headache and I’m pretty sure it was because I was conspiracy theorizing last night. It is affecting my health, just like the United Nations warned (I wonder, was that all the countries or just some of them, it’s never really quite clear), so I’m thinking about going cold turkey. Or maybe Wild Turkey. Either way, I’m just going to have to stop thinking for myself before it gets really serious.

underground poet
underground poet
Oct 10, 2023 5:52 PM
Reply to  Big Al

Many southern black youth awoke to the same morning you just had Al, but not from hitting the bottle a little hard, but from an inheritance of their for fathers hard labor, yes, some things do get passed on when it comes to sperms and eggs.

Now the sad part of the dealeo is that since that very moment so many centuries ago, the northern politician has somehow created everyone an equal and since they do not suffer, they insist the southern black youth is also not suffering, but his lack of educational competition is derived from being lazy.

There are wars b/c people are not the same, and can’t even agree on what they arn’t.

arielazalexander
arielazalexander
Oct 10, 2023 10:17 PM
Reply to  Big Al

Love ya, Al, but I theorise that it already got serious,

Tom Larsen
Tom Larsen
Oct 10, 2023 3:09 PM

In Lance de Haven-Smith’s book “Conspiracy Theory in America” he defined conspiracy theories as “S.C.A.D” or “State Crimes Against Democracy.”

Excellent piece Iain! This is worth committing to memory!

Freecus
Freecus
Oct 10, 2023 2:36 PM

Thank you for your research Iain, always an interesting read and this time it makes me think of the following..
The concept of controlling a critical-mass of the world population, with the deceptive appearance of it occurring from the bottom-up, is the current trajectory of Web3.
Individual, and later group behavior, is actively “steered” using digital (dis)information “drops” rather like pheromone trails in what researcher Alison McDowell calls the “ant computer”, a form of digital stigmergy.
The push towards a Web3 “token economy” will facilitate this form of communication where the digital tokens, tied to digitalID, are not merely a form of script or currency, but signals intelligence (SIGINT) towards emergent behavior.

Paul Watson
Paul Watson
Oct 10, 2023 2:16 PM

Really good article.

mgeo
mgeo
Oct 10, 2023 12:35 PM

The entire purpose of representative democracy, it is alleged, is to empower “we the people” to hold decision-makers to account.
1. Free expression comes before holding anyone to account.
2. Representative democracy is not synonymous with democracy. In practice, it means buying reps or governments if you can afford it. Larry Romanoff has written a series of articles on this.

Let me try to simplify the link between conspiracy theory and extremism. Exploitation or suffering generates grievence, which may generate a conspiracy theory. If officialdom responds with denial (stonewalling, censorship or rejection) or violence (suppression or punishment), that may generate extremism. In practice, the extremist has to find a sympathetic foreign power to finance him. 

Edwige
Edwige
Oct 10, 2023 12:27 PM

“the erroneous assertion that conspiracy theorists believe contradictory theories simultaneously”.

I’ve been reading ‘The Shakespeare Claimants’, a Stratfordian book from the early 1960s by H.N. Gibson. This is exactly the line the author has been taking. Well, of course! Those who think Oxford, Derby or Marlowe wrote “Shakespeare” contradict each other in sone regards – they are arguing for different authors! It’s all designed to obfuscate the central problem that any of these is a more likely author of the works of “Shakespeare” than Shakspeare of Stratford – a man with no proven education, with no letters or dairies, who died unnoticed, who nobody in his home town apparently knew was a writer, who left that will mentioning nothing to do with authorship (not even a writing desk, let alone manuscripts), who could base plays on original sources in languages he couldn’t speak, who had a vocabulary three times that of Milton and could acquire prodigious learning across a range of fields (from the law to medicine to sports to falconry to foreign geography) and leave no trace of how he acquired it.

The more I look at the Shakespeare authorship the more I’m seeing a template for subsequent conspiracies:
1) Upholders of an official narrative simply ignoring their critics as much as possible.
2) A repeated refusal to face up to vested interests. What would it do for university Shakespeare departments if it turned out they’d got the author wrong for over a century? What would it do for the Stratford tourist industry?
3) When forced to acknowledge the critics, their views are grossly misrepresented. For example, doubts about Shakespeare’s authorship did not start in the 1840s as Strafordians repeatedly assert (no doubt to paint it as a cranky Victorian obsession like Spiritualism). Doubts were expressed at the time. Disraeli has a character doubt Shakespeare in an 1837 novel.
4) Anti-Stratofrdianism is pinned to Delia Bacon who it’s then loudly proclaimed ended up in an asylum. QED anti-Strafordians are mad! Funnily enough all the arguments about patriarchiy and its oppression of inconvenient women don’t apply to Delia Bacon!
5) Appeals to authority – oh yes, every expert has declared Shakespeare of Stratford the true author! Don’t worry about Walt Whitman, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry James, Charles Dickens, Sigmund Freud, Leslie Howard, Orson Welles, three Supreme Court Justices and Mark Rylance among other “experts” who’ve all expressed strong doubts about the authorship. I only just found out that Poet Laureate Ted Hughes seems to have concluded that Marlowe was the author. BTW it also transpires that Hughes and Plath used a ouija board and Hughes seemed to become possessed by Pan – not exactly part of the narrative about Plath’s fate that one often hears. In her case, it was patriarchy!
6) We then get “official conspiracy theories” that argue there was a conspiracy but one that retains Shakespeare as the authoe. Phillips and Keatman ‘The Shakespeare Conspiracy’ argues he was posing as a dull provincial petit bourgeois to mask his work as an intelligence agent. Not only did Shakspeare write all those plays and poems (in a remarkably short time if one believes the official chronology – I don’t) but he was James Bond too! It’s a transparent attempt to purloin part of Marlowe’s narrative – where there is actual evidence of intelligence work – and apply it to the official legend to liven it up.
7) When all else fails, anti-Stratfordians are accused of anti-semitism. At least two recent Stratfordian books have done this, improbable as it may seem to those who’ve not looked into this.

Joe Smith
Joe Smith
Oct 10, 2023 7:45 PM
Reply to  Edwige

The only real way to test authorship is word-count studies. Word-count studies compare the writing styles of the different claimants. In this word-count study, Shakespeare wins, and de Vere, at least, definitely loses.

Was Oxford Shakespeare? A Computer-aided Analysis (shakespeareauthorship.com)

les online
les online
Oct 11, 2023 12:16 AM
Reply to  Joe Smith

There is no “only real way”, and, computers regurgitate what’s fed into them , and according to their programming…It has been claimed Pythagoris was not one person but is a composite of many persons …

Strange Loop
Strange Loop
Oct 11, 2023 5:38 PM
Reply to  Edwige
Joe Smith
Joe Smith
Oct 11, 2023 7:23 PM
Reply to  Strange Loop

Actually read my link and then refute it. Or is this just a test of who can post a link. Gosh that’s hard.

Strange Loop
Strange Loop
Oct 11, 2023 9:56 PM
Reply to  Joe Smith

Can’t be that hard – you did it 🙂
And I did read it, thank you.

I just thought the link I shared was an example of proper scholarship and worthy of a wider audience, can’t please everyone it seems.

Meanwhile here’s a link to a refutation of your link & more besides….

https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/wp-content/uploads/Oxfordian2009_SW_Claremont.pdf

peter mcloughlin
peter mcloughlin
Oct 10, 2023 12:14 PM

It is dangerous to “silence debate”. Facing up to the truth is something us humans are not good at. We keep ignoring the warnings of history. And as we move closer to war (WW III currently) the deeper we sink into the mire of self-delusion. History comes down to a simple syllogism: every empire eventually faces the conflict it is trying to avoid – but doesn’t see it; everyone wants to avoid nuclear Armageddon; therefore, that is the fate that awaits. Unless rulers can grasp this logic the human race is doomed. There is hostility: I have been banned from Twitter (X) and a number of other sites for trying to highlight the issues I raise in my free e-book. That is why I am asking anyone who might agree with me to share the below link where they can – thank you.
https://patternofhistory.wordpress.com/

Paul Lockwood
Paul Lockwood
Oct 10, 2023 11:52 AM

Leo

The interesting point here is that to be labelled as a ‘conspiracy theorist’ you don’t have to propose a theory at all – you just have to question the official explanation. This was brought home to me when, in response to an article in The Guardian about the Skripal poisonings in Salisbury, I posted that the official explanation contained so many implausibilities that it couldn’t be true. I referred people to an article, that had just been published, by Craig Murray, where he listed ten very cogent points which effectively demolished the official explanation. Neither myself nor Craig Murray offered any theory as to what actually happened, as neither he nor I actually know, but within 5 minutes of me posting the comment, a reply was posted saying ‘But Craig Murray is a loony conspiracy theorist’, and within another few minutes about 8 people agreed with that comment (although more people agreed with mine, I have to say).

Interestingly, more recently The Guardian published an article (apparently without irony) on the subject of ‘how to spot a conspiracy theorist’. The article explained that when a conspiracy theorist is challenged about their beliefs, they offer no rational defence of their position but instead indulge in ad hominem attacks on the person who challenges them. No further comment required.

Isaac Ellerman
Isaac Ellerman
Oct 10, 2023 11:03 AM

While I do have my doubts about Miles Mathis (especially since he suddenly seems to support the lab-leak theory), I do agree with him that not only the official narrative is controlled, but the most popular alternative versions of those stories are controlled as well, by the same ruling families, who like to hide behind a certain religious minority.

Questioning the crimes and power and influence of these families can get you the anti semite label very fast. Before it gets me cancelled, lets give full disclosure; I recently found out my own ancestry is from (crypto) Jewish lines. I am not proud of that fact, but I also don’t see it as something negative. I am anti Zionist as long I can remember and I will stay that way.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Oct 10, 2023 10:58 AM

Fragile

There needs to be something that is absolute proof the establishment can be malign. Something you can see with your own eyes. Something that cannot be explained away. The penetration of the South Tower by “UA 175” in the Hezarkhani and other videos did it for me. It doesn’t how many experts say and egg can pass through a bank safe. I know it can’t happen. Likewise with the late fragile “UA 175”. It couldn’t do what was shown in the videos. Therefore the media lied. Therefore they and the establishment can be malign. Therefore everything they claim must be examined, especially when they are in an obvious feeding frenzy. If that makes me a conspiracy theorist, so be it. I have seen the light and will be sceptical.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Oct 10, 2023 10:59 AM

…It doesn’t matter…

Paul
Paul
Oct 10, 2023 10:54 AM

I like to keep things simple.
Most conspiracy theories are true. People calling others conspiracy theorists in a pejorative sense, are dumb, dull or are themselves conspiring to deceive.

jtkong
jtkong
Oct 10, 2023 10:24 AM

Perhaps the best course would be to adopt the term conspiracy, but with a slight twist. Instead of conspiracy theory, how about “conspiracy science”? 

The legal definition of conspiracy is:
“when people work together by agreement to commit an illegal act. A conspiracy may exist when the parties use legal means to accomplish an illegal result, or to use illegal means to achieve something that in itself is lawful.”

The definition of science is:
“science is defined as the “systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.”

Therefore the term “conspiracy science” would be defined as:
The systematic and evidentiary based study of the structure and behavior of people working in concert for illicit purposes.

This needs some fine tuning, but I think the term “conspiracy science” would reduce semantic variance, as well as counter the conspiracy of propaganda engineered to hash the term. As Goebbels stated, if you don’t have the language to express an idea, you can’t think it – which of course is their goal.

mgeo
mgeo
Oct 10, 2023 12:39 PM
Reply to  jtkong

Covid is the premier example of monstrous conspiracy science on a global scale.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 10, 2023 9:54 AM

We need an epithet for the conspiracy doubters:

GOVSUCKERS
GOVZEALOTS
GOVLOVERS
CORPARASITES
CORPUSTULES
DDs (Duped and Deceived)
NQAs (No Questions Asked)
(Insert yours here)

.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 10, 2023 10:25 AM
Reply to  Johnny

NQAs (No Questions Asked).
FAIRY TALERS.
FLAG FOLLOWERS.
PUPPETTES.

Brianborou
Brianborou
Oct 10, 2023 9:26 AM

Those who push the “ conspiracy “ narrative from the highest levels !

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” John 8:44

Roger Lewis
Roger Lewis
Oct 10, 2023 9:25 AM

#SCADS State Crimes Against Democracy Prof Lance De Haven
Lance Dehaven who coined the term SCAD explains it thus

”I coined the term “State Crimes Against Democracy” in a peer-reviewed article published by Administrative Theory and Praxis, the journal of the Public Administration Theory Network. SCADs are defined as “concerted actions or inactions by government insiders intended to manipulate democratic processes and undermine popular sovereignty.” Until recently, scholarly research on political criminality has given little attention to antidemocratic conspiracies in high office, focusing instead on graft, bribery, embezzlement, and other forms of government corruption where the aim is personal enrichment rather than social control, partisan advantage, or political power. However, SCADs are far more dangerous to democracy than these other, more mundane forms of political criminality because of their potential to subvert political institutions and entire governments or branches of government.”

http://dehaven-smith.com/faq/default.html
https://youtu.be/A42m7zABR3o?feature=shared

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Oct 10, 2023 8:59 AM

The term ‘conspiracy theory’ has two parts to it:

  1. It is a THEORY – in other words, it is being suggested that no evidence exists to disprove or confirm the theory.
  2. It involves a CONSPIRACY – which involves multiple actors agreeing to act in a certain way that the establishment don’t like.

So let’s start with the second – apart from a lone gunperson shooting a single individual, it’s very very rare that you could do much at all without teaming up with others.

If you wanted to organise a bombing, after all, you would need:

  1. Access to explosives.
  2. The ability to transport those explosives to the relevant region of the world.
  3. The ability to store such explosives secretly, local to the target site.
  4. The ability to plant the explosives and set up an activation mechanism.
  5. The need for intelligence as to what the authorities knew about your actions, if any.
  6. The need to check up on your co-conspirators to ensure they were not Establishment stooges.
  7. The money to carry all this out.

So you probably need an arms dealer, transportation experts, quite likely an undercover operative at a port, a safe house owned or rented by someone, stooges inside the intelligence services, access to surveillance technology and a fundraiser.

And that’s just to blow up one building.

IF you wanted to organise an invasion of Israel, I can’t see even Jesus Christ managing that on his own…..

So almost everything of global significance will be a conspiracy…..

As for theories, it’s very important for corrupt establishments to deny facts and one way to do that is to downgrade arguments invoking facts to unconfirmed opinion. The more theories rather than open and shut cases that exist, the better, as far as the Establishment is concerned.

So anyone wanting to confront the Establishment should do two things:

  1. Have all your evidentiary ducks in a row, so you are not theorising, you are prosecuting a case in court.
  2. Laugh uproariously when some numpty politician/media prostitute suggests that you could overthrow Joe Biden as a lone revolutionary.
Clutching at straws
Clutching at straws
Oct 10, 2023 10:50 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

Sorry Rhys, I have to take issue with your second part.

The actors I’m concerned about ARE the establishment.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Oct 13, 2023 10:30 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

For my mind, the big hole in the armor of the people who first coined that at CIA in 1967, in Cord Meyer’s wing at Langley, who forwarded it to the (almost) Mephistophelean(ish) DCI Richard Helms, is that by definition almost no one is fronting these as theories, but simply as hypotheses. The very existence of the phrase as a meme throughout cultures now shows their hand as frantically, or ubiquitously, rigging the card deck, or the roulette wheel.

I felt it from day one as an obvious canard . You could feel it coming from late ’63, and I was only disappointed in that it fulfilled all too handily my very low expectations for our “government”.

Most people prefer hypnotism, as subjects. They can’t face the psyop eye to eye without going under, fast. Denial seems like the only remedy for encroaching insanity, but any of that is already too slippery a slope.

Thus enter Uncle Skam to Amerikans: “you are getting sleepy.”

At a certain point “sieg heil” doesn’t even need to be rehearsed, as was the case it appeared in 30s Germany. Sleepwalking and talking doesn’t need to be rehearsed.

Johnny
Johnny
Oct 10, 2023 8:57 AM

An excellent piece Iain.

‘The only defining characteristic these people (conspiracy theorists) possess is that they exercise their right to question power.‘

And everyone else either submits, believes, or takes the money and shuts up.

Sunface Jack
Sunface Jack
Oct 10, 2023 8:37 AM

Thank you Iain. An excellent explanation.