I have had it with conspiracy theories

[shoddysolutions]

The first recorded sighting of 'conspiraloon' on the boards is predictably on a 9/11 thread, here. The editor does indeed appear to be the originator of this particular piece of newspeak.

There is however always the possibility that the editor could always have quietly removed the original thread and claimed all the glory for himself ...

 

[fela fan]

Anyway, we're stuck with conspiracy theories. They'll never go away so long as we have politics.

No politics, no conspiracies, no conspiracy theories.

The links are inescapable.

 

[sponge]

Anyway, we're stuck with conspiracy theories. They'll never go away so long as we have politics.

No politics, no conspiracies, no conspiracy theories.

The links are inescapable.

Please give examples. Seems like a sweeping statement to me. Was the fight for suffrage based on a conspiracy? Socialism? Human rights? The UN? The prevention of war? Reduction of poverty? Having a job?

 

[fela fan]

Please give examples. Seems like a sweeping statement to me.

Anyone with power means someone else with a deficit. With a clash between those with power, those who want more, those without, then you will get people conspiring. Always had them, throughout history.

The context surrounding all this is politics. Those with power have always conspired on how to keep it, those without conspire to get it.

 

[sponge]

Anyone with power means someone else with a deficit. With a clash between those with power, those who want more, those without, then you will get people conspiring. Always had them, throughout history.

The context surrounding all this is politics. Those with power have always conspired on how to keep it, those without conspire to get it.

So feudalism was a conspiracy? If it was a conspiracy, they didn't do much to cover it up. Just the opium of the people helped the public not to see that 2+2=4, instead it equaled 46 plus God.

I presume that conspiracies cover secret "illegal" acts, beyond the visible actions of the state.

 

[fela fan]

So feudalism was a conspiracy? If it was a conspiracy, they didn't do much to cover it up. Just the opium of the people helped the public not to see that 2+2=4, instead it equaled 46 plus God.

I presume that conspiracies cover secret "illegal" acts.

sorry, probably me mate, but i just cannot see what you're talking about here.

But, conspiring is, yes, about planning illegal actions.

 

[sponge]

sorry, probably me mate, but i just cannot see what you're talking about here.

But, conspiring is, yes, about planning illegal actions.

Have you heard of Marx

You know, economics and stuff, like, people controlling the means of production, without the need for secret handshakes and the need for sleeping with corpses?

 

[kyser_soze]

All power politics that involves few/many relations where the few have the power will be a conspiracy as far as FF is concerned sponge.

I think the mess the planet is in is direct evidence of there not being a global cabal sitting in a room somewhere...I mean FFS if you were running a conspiracy you'd make a better bloody job of it than this...

 

[sponge]

All power politics that involves few/many relations where the few have the power will be a conspiracy as far as FF is concerned sponge.

I think the mess the planet is in is direct evidence of there not being a global cabal sitting in a room somewhere...I mean FFS if you were running a conspiracy you'd make a better bloody job of it than this...

But you cannot seriously suggest that it is a conspiracy that Murdoch has a lot of power? He aint doing anything illegal .... he just owns a lot of media

If that is a conspiracy, then anything is.

 

[fela fan]

I mean FFS if you were running a conspiracy you'd make a better bloody job of it than this...

Not really, that assumes that humans are capable of perfection, which as we know, they're not.

Sometimes those that do conspiring have little in the way of grey matter. I don't see why you put a premium on only intelligent people being capable of conspiracies.

 

[fela fan]

Have you heard of Marx

You know, economics and stuff, like, people controlling the means of production, without the need for secret handshakes and the need for sleeping with corpses?

Yeah but that was written for a different time, not in the global world where news and information and views can travel all around the world in seconds.

You can only get away with these power trips (illegal actions) in a democracy with the turning of a blind eye by the people en masse.

 

[kyser_soze]

'Those that do the conspiring'

So these hypothetical rulers of the world aren't that smart...right...

Conspiracies led by the dim tend to be uncovered. In order to create and manage a conspiracy of the magnitude and pervasiveness required to guide entire societies you'd need more than just a few smarts just to keep track of the subtext imagery involved in soap operas globally, let alone maniulation and management of the world financial markets, oil industry...

 

[R.I.C.O.]

...

Conspiracy theories only act to hold back human evolution - instead of pro-actively questioning the structures of power and society, they fill people's heads with crap about lizards, explosions and cults. Nice going, lads....

 

[sponge]

Conspiracy theories only act to hold back human evolution - instead of pro-actively questioning the structures of power and society, they fill people's heads with crap about lizards, explosions and cults. Nice going, lads....

But to be fair, I don't see political philosophers or sociologists falling over themselves to explain the social world. It would be good though eh? Instead, they rather talk about whether we have a post-industrial society, or a post-modern society, a late-post-premodern-structuralist-state-capitalist society with postmodern informational networks for the global village of modern post-industrial post-feminist-ideological society, that is greedy.

Conspiracy theories at least provide explanations.

 

[R.I.C.O.]

But to be fair, I don't see political philosophers or sociologists falling over themselves to explain the social world. It would be good though eh?

Conspiracy theories at least provide explanations.

Explantions for what though? Conspiracy theories only muddy the waters - and some are pretty ludicrous, to be fair. Like the one about lizards. And missiles hitting the WTC.

 

[sponge]

Explantions for what though? Conspiracy theories only muddy the waters - and some are pretty ludicrous, to be fair. Like the one about lizards. And missiles hitting the WTC.

What I am saying is that people like to know what the F**K is going on in the world.

If sociologists just talk about the debates of post-pre-structural post-capitalist whatevers, and the media don't even talk about corporations, where do people go ?

 

[R.I.C.O.]

What I am saying is that people like to know what the F**K is going on in the world.

If sociologists just talk about the debates of post-pre-structural post-capitalist whatevers, and the media don't even talk about corporations, where do people go ?

So is the wrong information better than no information at all?

 

[sponge]

So is the wrong information better than no information at all?

Phew. You misunderstand me.

I am not defending the conspiracy theories involving the lizards, Jews and the Illuminati. What I am saying is that people, like in life in general who have a brain, want to know what is going on in the world, how it operates, etc.

If political philosophy and sociology disappears up its own bottom, where do people go? The BBC? Murdoch TV? Most people can see through this. Conspiracy theories offer a remedy.

I don't like the remedy. I would rather people got together and looked at the structures of power, looking at possible solutions in a rational manner.

But it appears not in this world

I think modern life is so splintered, it is almost impossible to do so. And the academics are obviously too busy shagging each other to do any real work.

 

[R.I.C.O.]

Phew. You misunderstand me.

I am not defending the conspiracy theories involving the lizards, Jews and the Illuminati. What I am saying is that people, like in life in general who have a brain, want to know what is going on in the world, how it operates, etc.

If political philosophy and sociology disappears up its own bottom, where do people go? The BBC? Murdoch TV? Most people can see through this. Conspiracy theories offer a remedy.

I don't like the remedy. I would rather people got together and looked at the structures of power, looking at possible solutions in a rational manner.

But it appears not in this world

Ah, I see. Sorry pal, I did misunderstand you! I know exactly where you are coming from - how do academics expect people to engage with discussing "moral relativism", "deep ecology" and "postmodernism", when they are so darn inaccessable? Why not follow some loony myth concocted by (9 times out of 10) a very clever salesperson flogging their book that can give instant (if wacky) truths that rally against a group?

 

[kyser_soze]

It is of course possible that even with hugely adjusted language and terminology that the structure of society is in fact too complex for many people to even copnceptualise as a system, let alone understand how it interrelates and works?

 

[sponge]

It is of course possible that even with hugely adjusted language and terminology that the structure of society is in fact too complex for many people to even copnceptualise as a system, let alone understand how it interrelates and works?

Well, the only thing that I can judge the idea against is when clever people get involved with real issues. I can think of .... Marx, Chomsky, Erich Fromm, the very elegant Wilhelm Reich, Popper even, blowing people's minds with simple, but brilliant thoughts.

I have heard that Chomsky on Talk Radio in America goes down like a f**king storm, because he is clever and talks about real issues, and people dig it. Chomsky goes through very detailed stuff .... and people understand it easily. More!!!

 

[kyser_soze]

When it comes down to it, partly through socialisation, partly because it's simply too abstract, people don't give a flying fuck unless it's something that concerns them AND AFFECTS THEM DETRIMENTALLY in their immediate experience.

And of course, Chomsky would turn round and give a list of very well construcrted cause-and-effect argumnents about how things DO relate to people's immediate experience of life...and they'd switch off halfway through.

None of the people you've listed are known for quick'n'dirty analysis of society - have you read Capital? 'Most people can see through this.' - I don't know where you get this idea from, because most can't, or won't.

One of the problems of postmodernism is that unlike it's predecessor which attempted to categorise the world in neat little packages and systems it at least accepts that the inter-relationships between economics, culture and society DON'T stick to neat little cause and effect paths, and that's why it's so obscure. The same thing goes for moral relativism - there are no absolute morals and while one can argue there are 'better' morals and modes of behaviour at an empirical level because they lead directly to 'better' results, they are still subjectively better results.

The reason people believe in conspiracy theories are the same reasons people believe in God - the real world and subjective truth that goes with it is either too complex or too unpleasant for them to face - or even too simple. Look at the Diana stuff - all the guff that's spouted about that and when it comes down to it, if she'd been wearing a seatbelt like her bodyguard she'd still be alive. Same thing goes for capitalism generally - lots of people know the deal but either choose to deny it or just shrug their shoulders and get on with living.

Most of the herd don't care - they've got enough problems of their own to worry about then having to deal with incredibly complex theoretical propositions, cause and effect patterns and the million and one other things that influence how society runs.

I have heard that Chomsky on Talk Radio in America goes down like a f**king storm, because he is clever and talks about real issues, and people dig it. Chomsky goes through very detailed stuff .... and people understand it easily. More!!!

And what are the listening figures for that show? Out of a population of how many millions? How does Chomsky compare to the right wing talk radio hosts in terms of listeners?

 

[sponge]

Most of the herd don't care - they've got enough problems of their own to worry about then having to deal with incredibly complex theoretical propositions, cause and effect patterns and the million and one other things that influence how society runs.

But if problems of society don't relate to people, then there isn't a problem

If we are talking about global issues, I agree that preaching to the rich does not do much. But I think people need to take responsibility for what they are actually responsible for.

If capitalism is bad for 3 people in a country, then there cannot be a civil argument against it.

It depends what you think the problem is. Chomsky's solution is just so dangerous - that is why his solutions are just never discussed.

No, I don't think Marx sat down with anyone with a copy of capital. He did real stuff too. And don't forget that the bloke who started the Labour Party couldn't even read at 16. He made quite a jump ....

 

[kyser_soze]

But if problems of society don't relate to people, then there isn't a problem

If we are talking about global issues, I agree that preaching to the rich does not do much. But I think people need to take responsibility for what they are actually responsible for.

If capitalism is bad for 3 people in a country, then there cannot be a civil argument against it.

Above you talk about 'I would rather people got together and looked at the structures of power, looking at possible solutions in a rational manner.'...well the basic work of analysing how the power relationships of capitalism has already been done - it doesn't take a genius to pick up a Marx easy reader to grasp that it's basically a huge ass-fuck at all levels except the top (and even among the ruling class there's pretty brutal social competition).

Every time you go to the store and buy something, there is more likely than not a hugely complex chain of distribution, purchasing, marketing, and finally producing that has happened to be there, and within that chain are problems which affect 1000s if not millions of people - being a consumer in a capitalist society links you to people around the world - hell, even using electricity to run your PC or petrol to drive your car implicates you in a system that is so castly unequal that fucks most of the planet over to give you the lifestyle you lead - you really want to face up to that and accept your part in it?

We live in a globalised consumer society where the social and environmental impact left by pretty much everyone living in the West is paid for by someone poorer than you - the distinction between global and local isn't fixed, it's a fluid, dynamic relationship as is the link between you and capital - on a global level it works to your advantage - on a local level it may not depending on how well you fight to keep your place safe in society.

And in reply to your first line - many of thethe 'everyday' problems are caused by the social system - poor and live on a council estate? The problems you suffer from are most likely to be health and crime related, both of which are directly linked to your status in society. Rich and just been mugged, or had you r car broken into? Same story - your success means that someone else has had to 'fail' and that has led to someone ultimately making the moral choice to commit a criminal act.

 

[Jazzz]

Christ there is some utter wank on this thread.

We are all conspiracy theorists.

Or what was Watergate exactly? The Tuskeegee syphilis experiment? The sinking of the Maine? The Reichstag Fire? Our Porton Down sarin experiments? The USG's cocaine dealings with the contras in Nicaragua?

Do posters on this thread really think that Bush/Blair launched war in Iraq because we were worried about his weapons capabilities? Or did they conspire to mislead public opinion to launch a phoney war for which the oil ecomony had a lot to do with?

The point is such conspiracies can and do exist, and we are all conspiracy theorists; apart from a very few blissfully ignorant who believe that the CIA's $multi-million covert operations budget is spent on basket-weaving.

What separates us is not whether they do or not, because we all know there are such conspiracies, but which ones it is our personal belief are true, and which are not. We label the people that believe the ones we don't 'conspiracy theorists', and think we are all so terribly clever, instead of small and quite possibly closed minded.

 

[Loki]

The difference is DrJazzz, most of us don't believe everything we read on tin foil nutters' sites authored by the likes of Joe Vialls.

 

[Jazzz]

You prove the point perfectly.

 

[Loki]

I'm not the one posting up bonkers nonsense from the likes of Joe Vialls and taking it as gospel. That would be you DrJ.

I'm glad I "proved" my point.

 

[Jazzz]

Well you certainly proved mine, unfortunately it seems quite beyond you

 

[Bob_the_lost]

The Tuskeegee syphilis experiment?

Odd, have you looked at the other side of the tuskagee story? Did a bit of background reading a while back on it as it infringed a topic i was studying. Most of the criticism is unfounded/wrong.

(It wasn't an experiment either, it was a study )