Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Political Conspiracy Theory

Recently, I responded to a post. I don't think you actually need the text of the original to make sense of this but in my comment back, I said:

Those that cannot create seemed doomed to destroy. I guess we need both creators and destroyers but the destroyers need to destroy the right stuff, and that's always the problem, isn't it?

I feel another thinkpost coming on, but I will say this. You are right. When you position money as the most important element, when getting the most wealth becomes the focus, everything else becomes secondary and by secondary I mean irrelevant.

And that's the soulless, vacuum of suck that we are rushing towards.

But the comment back really required more than just a passing response which is why I waited until the weekend and why I brought it back to my journal to do that proper thinkpost. So, here is the response, and my reaction to it.

The comment back about my reaction above was as follows:

I am saying that all parties are part of one conspiring group who are intentionally playing out pre-planned theatrics, fleecing and controlling the entire population of the country.

I´m saying that money is one tool they use to hoard all the power.

I´m saying that all the democrats and republicans, including Barack Obama, are very much one group of conspirators who are only pretending to be at odds so that the citizens of the country continue to be fooled into thinking they have any choice at all, and so that they will be distracted from all the horrendous shit that the Demopublicans---AKA The People Who Own The Country--are getting away with.

I´m saying there are in fact numerous distractions set in place for just this purpose ... the whole racism against Obama being one of them (or at least the fueling of it), the so-called "birthers" phenomenon being another one (or at least the fueling of it), just to name a few ... This is all premeditated and purely intentional. In fact the entire society is built to create and perpetuate such distraction.

I´m saying that the average citizen is just as responsible as the people pulling the scam, for buying into it. Each person has a responsibility for themself, however, tangentially the average person has a weak and poor character.

I´m saying a lot of things here.

You just worked on Obama´s "campaign."

And we agree, how, Dean?

There's a lot to try to go through there. And, I really didn't think I would be getting a response like this one, since that wasn't necessarily the direction the original post seemed to be going. But I wanted to give this a proper examination to try to analyze these elements and see if it, in whole or in part, rings true.

Let's start with a basic concept. In order for a conspiracy to work, it would rely on at least several people to make it work. And, the bigger the conspiracy, the more people you would need to control both the nature of and the information about it.

Having said that, I do not believe that all parties involved in government are one conspiring group.

Now, I understand that if we pulled out a board game, like Monopoly, we could play the game together and be at odds with each other as we each tried to win. So, if that's the analogy, that's a bit different from believing that we would be playing this game in order to work together to distract someone else from their lives or to take from that other person.

So, no. That concept doesn't work for me. I don't see any evidence that this is what's happening.

Now, if you want to make a case that all of politics is just a game and that there are similarities regarding *some* elements of what these representatives want for their constituents, I would agree with that. But that's very different from the statement being made above.

Also, the concept of "pre-planned theatrics" is a difficult one. And really I won't spend a lot of time on that point, but based on how humans act and react, and the various level of reaction, it would be impossible to know exactly how things can, would or could go if there were some Svengali pulling the strings. Such a master plan would require a better grip on the emotional side of things or at least know where the range of emotions would take any particular player in this game, and that would change from minute to minute and from event to event.

Briefly, we have had people who insist that 9/11 was a US government action, designed to open a gateway for us to go into the Middle East and start a war, just as an example. But that really couldn't be the case, at least not unless the facts of the event as we know them were completely fabricated.

But if THAT were the case, that everything we think we know about the attacks were untrue, there would be a fairly large number of people who would know that info, or a portion of that info. Just based on how news gets leaked, especially about something that is both of international interest, like an attack on US soil, AND would require the kind of cover-up needed to plug every potential hole in the system that would allow us to discover the "truth," well, you can imagine how difficult and more importantly how expensive that would be. And that would be just one of a series of events, any of which could unravel to expose this conspiracy.

You might offer the thought that there was some sort of skeleton crew team that is just taking the actions and reactions of we humans as we go and making new decisions on the fly, based on what happened. Again, that is a different concept from what is being suggested here.

Money is a tool. That I totally agree with, and we all should agree with, because money is an exchange: it is what the job you do pays you for your time, skills and effort. Of course, money itself is power, because money allows you the ability to do things. But what do you do with that money?

Economics is a pretty big landscape and can take us in a lot of different directions. It's pretty unwieldy to try and cover it, because there's very little about it that's clear and concise! And really economics "experts" don't always seem to know or understand how it works, so there's that.

To be able to manipulate the economics of just one country would be Herculean, to say the least, but this sort of level would be on a global scale to be effective, and that model just doesn't work.

I guess it's easy to think that all politicians are alike and that President Obama is just another one. But based on everything I know about the man, his childhood, his education, his interests, his family, his attitude and his work, that's a complete disservice to who he is and what he has accomplished.

Not to mention the fact that he is attempting to succeed against the people who do not favor his politics and the people who do not favor his skin tone. In many, but not all cases, these are the same people, with differing agendas. I would also say that the "birthers" phenomenon is just a façade for the racism that seems to be coming out of everywhere now, as a reaction to knowing another 4 years of a man of color in the White House is about to happen. It's pretty horrific, this reaction to it all.

I guess the biggest question would be how would a conspiracy like this even work? Who would profit from it? You always need to ask who the big winner is for something like this. And there has to be an answer or there couldn't be a plot. Somebody we could potentially name would be the biggest gainer, and we should at least have, if not the name of this person, a general sense of who it might be, or the companies owned that are sharing in the profits and the elements involved in all of it.

So, I will now offer up my theory. It's not that involved. It's brief. It's sorta straightforward and it does have a bit of conspiracy to it.

1. People are self-interested and certain ones will put their interests ahead of everything.
2. People can put together plans when like-minded people find each other (like in Congress or on LiveJournal).
3. Unless you're paying attention, you may not notice manipulation, but in government there are people constantly paying attention: the various forms of the media.
4. The greediest will spill the beans on a plan if they can get more by telling than by not.

And that's the fail safe. If you're going to try something as crooked as manipulating the American public (and in the process, the world), using a whole bunch of people with clearly differing agendas, someone will be the weak link. And if there's a better chance for any one of them to tell their story and do better from it than by staying silent and marching to someone else's tune, that house of cards falls faster than the speed of gravity.

Is our political system flawed? Of course it is. Can there be tampering and manipulation? Yes. But is this a part of a larger, overriding plot? I don't see any evidence to support that, but more importantly, I don't see any method to attempt it even if someone wanted to try.


( 4 comments — Leave a comment )
Nov. 19th, 2012 10:00 pm (UTC)
About the best advice I could ever give you or anyone is to step back and see the big picture. You are oversimplifying everything or almost everything here.

Picture the cream or butter rising to the top of the milk. Now, picture the smart and greedy rising to the top of the pile, of the structure of the people. It is not just the governing bodies, it is also the owners and people in power in the large corporations, and it is the people at the top in the media. Together they form a triad that keeps the whole system going. It is not that there is corruption in the system, it is that corruption IS the system.

As for your two major arguments against what I´m saying as expressed above.

Number one, the media is NOT going to poke the holes to let the air out of this massive system of corruption, because the media is itself a part of the system. In fact, it is a CRUCIAL part which helps to make the whole thing possible. Yes, it would be next to impossible to predict and control the reactions and thoughts of so many people WITHOUT a ubiquitous brainwashing system which is the media as we know it today. It is a major tool which is used, in its many forms, to perpetuate the system as we know it.

Number two, people with MORAL agendas DO sometimes spill the beans, but thanks to the super mind-shaping abilities of the media (which siphons most of its power from the sheep-like nature of the average human), they are usually at least not listened to. *Ahem, the evidence which DOES exist about the true nature of 9/11, but which you seem to be ignoring.* Some of these people, moreover, are SILENCED. There are people, if you want to do your research--on both the small and large scales--who have been finally willing to talk about how their lives and those of their families were threatened. And when you reach TOO large of a scale--we´re talking about people with a lot of power politically, leaders of countries and such--when THOSE people try to do the right thing, they DIE. Again, if you want to do your research, you can trace your way back through a whole lot of very convenient plane crashes, and the like.

As for the people with IMMORAL agendas, generally speaking it would benefit none of the immoral, powerful people at the top to spill any of those beans. Because those people, generally speaking, maintain their power and secondarily their wealth, ONLY so long as the system as we know it is maintained. And to blow the whistle on one secret in this system, unless done properly, is to poke holes in and weaken the system as a WHOLE. We are talking about, again, the very system which allows them to maintain "who they are" and everything they have. If they can direct this whistle blowing at only a select group of people, without the danger of exposing a little bit too much light the facade of the system as a whole, I think they do it. But this is rarely done because it´s hard to do.

Continued below
Nov. 19th, 2012 10:07 pm (UTC)
The other major piece in making all this work is putting a good face on your monster. The people who own the country do a very careful job in gauging what it will take to keep the populace from getting too worked up, from really revolting, and they serve up JUST THAT on a silver platter. Now, don´t think these people don´t have some time, effort and money to willingly put behind what it will take to maintain their positions. Obama is exactly this face, nothing less and nothing more. After 8 years of George W. Bush, there was a sector of people who were very angry and who needed to be "appeased." Obama was special ordered just for them: the way he is able to present things, the content of what he is saying, the landmark he represents in terms of making history as the first black president--all of this is very pleasing to and was aimed directly at this sector of people.

To close, it is next to impossible to play comment ping-pong when you´re dealing with a topic of this breadth and depth. It would be nice if the distance between us were not preclusive to us getting some sushi and sake, because this all really necessitates an in-person DISCUSSION.

But I would ask you why you still have not watched this film (and its two sequels)? I think this is something like the third time I have recommended it to you and expressed interest in hearing your thoughts on it, and I haven´t yet received so much as a reply from you. After watching it I think you will better understand where I´m coming from. So if you are a person who wants to see the truth, as opposed to a person who just wants to believe what they WANT to be true, then pull up your boot straps and click on the link.

And then when you are a little bit clearer on where I´m coming from, maybe we can find a way to sort out and continue with this massive heap of a conversation on the internet.

Edited at 2012-11-19 10:18 pm (UTC)
Nov. 20th, 2012 04:31 am (UTC)
You seem to believe that the people who "own the country" are controlling everything. I am waiting for you to demonstrate how they can do this. How did they make Obama the candidate? You're basically saying there is no free will, that every choice we make is pre-determined to the benefit of these people, whomever they are, at the top.

Personally, I think it's kind of easy to suggest that we are being controlled by powerful people. And really, that's religion. There is a God. God will raise up certain people and smack down others. This is just another sort of religious belief, in the "People That Own the Country."

I mean, I don't want to belittle what you're saying here too much. Maybe there is something to it. But you have to be less vague about it. Even the 9/11 conspiracy theorists were more specific about what they thought happened than this!

But again, I say you have to be a lot more clear and a lot less vague about what you're saying if you want anyone to even give this a second look. And you need some examples of what's going on to back it all up. Without some facts we all can examine, the theory remains exactly that.
Nov. 20th, 2012 04:16 am (UTC)
I really don't think I can speak to you about this. We really can't have a "discussion" because you have your mind firmly made up about things. But I'll give it one more go and if it doesn't work, we're going to have to agree to disagree.

First, you are the one oversimplifying everything. To suggest that there is some organized group that is controlling everything we see and hear sounds like we have to call Keanu to rescue us. But, okay, let's work with this.

The "smart and greedy" are not necessarily the same people. And there must be smart people with morals, otherwise how smart are they, really?

The media TODAY is a lot more broad, and a lot more narrow than the seven entertainment conglomerates. Now, anyone who has a website, a phone cam, and the desire to uncover the truth can become a reporter, load those videos up and show the world what's really going on, hashtag that on twitter and suddenly everyone knows.

So, no. Maybe the "mainstream" media is able to block facts that their corporate HQ do not want out there, but there are plenty of documentarians, independent producers, watchdogs and whistleblowers who can and do get into the muck of it.

When you say stuff like "super mind-shaping abilities of the media," it really comes off as half-baked. Please show some proof of what you are talking about. Cite some examples of how the media is shaping minds intentionally, and what they're doing to achieve it.

It's not up to me to do the research of YOUR theory! It's up to YOU to make these statements and have the facts to back them up. Otherwise the conspiracy doesn't ring true. It just sounds like so much AM Talk Radio overnight jargon.

Continued on your other comment.
( 4 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

November 2017


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by chasethestars