See other Editorial Articles
Title: A Conspiracy of Really Smart and Really Evil Demons
Source:
Me
URL Source: http://Me
Published: Mar 12, 2006
Author: Bob Wallace
Post Date: 2006-03-12 09:26:45 by YertleTurtle
Keywords: Conspiracy, Really, Really
Views: 174
Comments: 31
While I have no doubt there exist miniscule conspiracies that involve two or three guys dumping Jimmy Hoffa in a swamp, I also have no doubt there do not exist unbelievably, indeed impossibly complex conspiracies that involve two passengers planes being remote-controlled into skyscrapers (which have remote-controlled explosives in them) while a missile hits the Pentagon and another missile hits another plane. Yet, these kinds of conspiracies have been around since, oh, the day human race showed up. I'm sure the conspiracy stories thousands of years ago were doozies, just as they are today: "See that tribe over there? Their witch-doctor sent a tornado right through teepees last night. Let's go rub all of them out." The best conspiracy story I encountered recently is the one in which Joe Kennedy (the father) okayed the hit on both his sons, John and Bobby. Before that, it was the one about how the Titanic and its sister ship, the Olympic, were switched so the Olympic would go to the bottom and the owners get the insurance money. Why do people believe such wackiness? Such conspiracies are clearly nonsense, ones that have zero proof and are almost completely divorced from reality, yet many people still suspect they are true. Some are convinced they're true, and end up spending 40 years trying to prove there were three shooters triangulating on Kennedy. And 40 years from now, there will be people with 30 books and several boxes of papers, fanatically convinced there was a satellite or a helicopter that took over those two planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center (I wonder how many of them will ever find out that idea was the plot of the first episode of The Lone Gumen, the spin-off of the X-Files, which came out several months before 9-11?). All these conspiracy stories look different on the outside, but there is a core story all have in common: there exist incredibly brilliant and purely evil people who are responsible for most of the problems in the world. They go by many names: the Illuminati, the Masons, British bankers, or, if you want to believe David Icke, blood-drinking, shape-shifting reptilian space aliens (I might have fallen for that one except when he claimed Kris Kristofferson was one). But underneath all of these stories, there remains that one core story. I remember an anthropology class in college, where the instructor told us in some primitive tribes the members don't believe anyone dies of disease or accident -- there are witches who've cast spells on them. Those witches, of course, have to be ferreted out and killed. Talk about everyone being paranoid. I know such an idea sounds preposterous to us, but it's still an example of that core story: brilliant and evil people are the ones who did it! It's no different than Europeans or Americans who thought witches existed, ones who hexed people. A lot of them ended up burned at the stake. Since more than one "witch" was immolated (there were thousands), obviously the people during that time thought they were dealing with a conspiracy. That same belief in witches and witchcraft exists today, only those "witches" have advanced technology instead of magic, and fly airplanes instead of brooms. But it's still the same core belief: it was done by those evil, brilliant people. Heartless, cruel people, motivated solely by the lust for money and power. Usually, they want to conquer the world, like that little big-headed mouse, Brain, of Pinky and the Brain. The people who believe in these impossible conspiracies will be loath to admit they're the same kind of people who, several hundred years ago, believed witches really existed and cast spells on people. But they are, whether they can admit it or not. They believe in a conspiracy of corporeal demons. They're also examples of that curious, indeed almost unconscious belief, that evil is smarter and more powerful than good. No one believes in a conspiracy of good people attempting to do good things to the world. It's always evil people, and they're never dumb. They're not even smart. They're Mad Scientist brilliant. Why are they no Totally Sane Scientists involved in a conspiracy to put the world right? They're always mad, brilliant and evil people doing terrible things. Nobody would believe in a conspiracy of Really Nice, Really Smart Guys Doing Good Things. But they'll believe in some guy with wild hair going "BWHAHAHA!!" It doesn't say much about people, that they believe such things, not when in the past it led to innocents having firewood ignited at their feet while they're strapped to a pole. Religion has it right: people are asleep, hypnotized. That sleep-walking can lead at time to some truly depraved behavior. The first guy I met who truly believed in conspiracies was a religious nutcase who thought that he, and only he, understood what the Bible meant. He was convinced the Catholic church was the anti-Christ and the Whore of Babylon, and since he had discovered the truth about the church, he told people the Pope had sent assassins to rub him out. He was totally rational in his own way, but completely deluded. He was also, not surprisingly, "writing a book," one he has been working on for about 25 years. In his mind everything was very simple: there were bad people who were responsible for most of the problems in the world, and then there were the good people (which basically meant him and anybody who agreed with him) who had turned the tables and discovered the plot. He was the ultimate conspiracy buff, who, if he ever gained political power over people, would probably go completely grandiose and paranoid and therefore would really be insane. It was from my deluded aquaintance that I realized that the fixed belief in these massive, complex conspiracies is a kind of narcissistic mental illness: there are brilliant and evil people who are responsible for most of the badness in the world, and I, in my intellectual superiority to them, have grandiosely figured them out. Even if I don't have any proof. But what about people who aren't as nearly as crazy as my crazy friend? The same applies to them as it does to him, only in lesser degree: there are brillant and evil people responsible for our problems...only they're not sending godly gunsels to rub me out. The paranoia is far less. And thank goodness for that. On that lesser scale, I'd say the more powerless people feel, the more horrible things that happen, the more they are prone to belief in conspiracies. "Conspiracies and urban legends offer meaning and purposefulness in a capricious, kaleidoscopic maddeningly ambiguous, and cruel world. They empower their otherwise helpless and terrified believers," writes Dr. Sam Vaknin. People believe in conspiracy theories because of a deep-seated need to make sense of major events in terms of major causes. They want to impose order and pattern on a sometimes chaotic world. Vaknin's comment about the sometimes capricious and cruel world means the archetype of the horror story is relevant: evil invaded by good; order attacked by chaos. A belief in major, impossible conspiracies is the belief in Godzilla-sized monsters attacking the order of society, and our lives. Since some people see these conspiracies everywhere, they become paranoid. They exaggerate the threat; they give people evil qualities that they cannot possess, only demons and monsters. Hence, the belief in astonishing brilliant and astonishingly evil conspirators. Since people believe in monsters, they seek a hero to save them. Usually this requires giving the "hero" qualities of goodness, intelligence and bravery he doesn't possess. His "goodness" and "intelligence" and "nobility" is exaggerated almost as much as conspirators' evilness. Perhaps in children's fairy tales heroes and monsters can be like this, but not in real life. Sometimes, the "hero" can be utterly incompetent, or even a catastrophe, as in the case of Hitler. Let's sum it up: the belief in impossibly complex conspiracies is the belief in monsters, in witches, in demons. It's the belief in a grandiose hero to save us. It's the belief that goodness is always under attack by evil, even if it's not. It's the belief in exaggeration and therefore paranoia. It's the belief that, underneath all the complex conspiracies, those involved can be defined in simple good-or-evil terms. The belief in conspiracies does do good whatsoever in dealing with the real problems in the world. It diverts people's attention into blaming that which is blameless and trying to prove that which cannot be proved. Were I a dictator, I would be consistently churning out propaganda, diverting attention from me toward innocent people. Nothing like an innocent scapegoat to cover the guilty's butt. Vincent Bugliosi, the author of Helter Skelter, referring to the Kennedy assassination, said the belief in these kind of impossible conspiracies is "poison." He's right; that's exactly what it is. Poison, that can obsess and ruin people's lives.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: YertleTurtle (#0)
Made me think of BAC and his WMD rants. And how the 'librul' press', under the control Clinon, is keeping the truth from the American people. LOL!
Huh?
You need to go post this to BAC over on LP.
A very well done essay, IMO. The URL says "me" - did you write it? Are you "Bob Wallace?" These are inherently incompatible. Brilliance is essentially to comprehend reality for what it is at all degrees - nearly pure seeking of truth in some discipline, often accompanied by some creative goal. Whereas evil is essentially deception and distortion of truth, often accompanied by some destructive goal. Evil is incredibly self-consuming leaving little left over to focus on a larger task while brilliance is incredibly time consuming (idiot savants excepted) leaving little left-over to maintain a web of lies. I've personally known some brilliant people. They don't have it in them to be evil. I've only known a couple marginally criminal people (I don't believe I've ever personally, directly known someone I would charaterize as "evil") and they're rather dull, they couldn't hold a candle to the brilliant ones. A conspirator who is both astonishingly brilliant and astonishingly evil is exceedingly rare, maybe even non-existant as they are diametrically opposed characteristics, and a conspiracy that depends on multiple such conspirators is even less likely. This is the point I've made occasionally that the 911 conspirators aren't smart enough to have pulled it off as the conspiracy is, to date, presumed. While I don't think one need believe in a grandioise hero (a whistle blower? an investigative journalist, a special prosecutor?) regardless, the conspiracy theories do get impossibly complex. That Larry Silvestein manipulated the bidding to take over the WTC, beating out three competitors in time to rig explosives in his own buildings to destroy them before the insurance policies were finalized so as get not enough insurance money to cover losses and rebuild them, and covered it up by having al-Qaida hatch a plot that the Mossad/FBI/CIA/NSA knew about but did nothing to prevent and further arranged for planes to be substituted and a coordinated missle strike against the Pentagon which the DoD is covering up. Yeah. As if. Does the government's version make sense? Not entirely, no. Does the conspiracy make sense? Not entirely, no. Why doesn't the American public demand the truth? From whom shall they demand it? Who is believable? When a bit of the government's version is shown to be incomplete we expect the government to 'fess up. But when some aspect of a conspiracy theory is shown to be improbable, does it get an honest re- evalutation? No. It just takes on a greater life of it own and the absence of proof becomes proof of conspiracy, the starker the absence, the more clever and powerful the conspirators. The government's refusal to release evidence and address the pointed inconsistencies in their own versions does feed the conspiracies. I believe that is deliberate. That the conspiracy theories thus engendered serves to make the government look more reasonable. The fomenting of the conspiracy takes the focus off the government's incompetence, impotence, or indifference. Mundane but more likely explanations. Oddly, one often finds these very same people discount biblical miracles yet believe in conspiratorial miracles. And there are demonized, evil people. But they are neither brilliant nor subtle. Actually, good is always under attack by evil, that is true. But in seeking to turn attention away from what is good to what is evil, any old lie will do. There is only one truth, but many lies. Only one good, but many evils. Just as some government minions will lie pathologically, so will some conspiracy theorists. Making up (or implying the existance of) details to reinforce a pet conspiracy theory in which the theorist is heavily invested comes as quick and naturally as the governments lies that anything is amiss. Everybody has an agenda. The trick, IMO, is to methodically, meticulously dissect and peel away each lie (from any/every version of events, no matter government or other) to uncover the remaining truth.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
These are inherently incompatible. Yes, I'm Bob. I thought that was known by pretty much everyone here. I know they're inherently incompatible. Few people can seem to figure that out, though. The way I see it, the belief in these unbelievably complex conspiracies make about as much sense as believing Brain or Simon Bar Sinister are real people instead of cartoon characters. As for the rest of what you wrote, yes, I pretty much agree with it. As for everyone else, no snide comments, please. I post these article to get legitimate comments such as Starwind's.
"I aim to misbehave" -- Mal Reynolds, Firefly
Things are going well in Iraq and victory for "democracy" is right around the next corner. No civil war in sight. Just ask ANY member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. All those things blowing up over there . . . well that's just some dead-enders and foreign AQ who hate our freedom and want to kill us and our children in our beds or on the way to church. Richard W.
Would all the outright lies and fabrications leading up to the Iraq war and all the events since then qualify as a "complex conspiracy" or is Syria really hiding Saddam's WMD? Obviously, the easiest way to discredit any truth that may be found in a real conspiracy, is to exaggerate it, or bring forth enough derivatives, to the point where it is ridiculous. The WTC couldn't have come down without a conspiracy. The perps we're exactly working independent of each other. Richard W.
I agree it was a conspiracy, but in cases like that the perpetrators come clean and claim it. I mean those "secret, hidden conspiracies" that always seem to involve hundreds or thousands of people and sometimes go on for hundreds of years,or are so unbelievably complex I don't see how anyone can believe it. The perps would truly have to be astonishingly smart and astonishingly evil to pull them off.
"I aim to misbehave" -- Mal Reynolds, Firefly
I would imagine that there are some conspiracies that go undiscovered or undetected. Others just hit an official/unofficial wall. Others get ridiculously exaggerated. I have personally never believed in the lone gunman in Dallas, but I seriously doubt that you will ever find any acceptable evidence to prove other than the official version of those events. Two top Kennedy brothers get bullets and we say, "Damn, that's bad luck". Richard W.
Excellent essay Yertle, thanks. The problem with conspiracies is that often
they run together with propaganda which is used to achieve a goal. As an
example is there any doubt that FDR, in his desire to engage America in war,
used Walter Winchell as his personal gossip columnist to spread anti Japanese
disinformation? History is also clear that the attack on Pearl Harbor was no
sneak attack. We were well aware of Japan’s intent. Is this FDR, Winchell,
Pearl Harbor attack connection a conspiracy? I think so. We can go on to
JFK’s assassination, but I’m curious to see your take on this first.
bingo! con•spir•a•cy ken-"spir-e-se noun pl con•spir•a•cies [ME conspiracie, fr. L conspirare] (14c)
I agree. FDR set up Pearl Harbor, possibly to
prevent Russia from having to fight a two-front war against Japan and Germany.
"I aim to misbehave" -- Mal Reynolds, Firefly
Good piece. People believe in conspiracy theories because of a deep-seated need to make sense of major events in terms of major causes. They want to impose order and pattern on a sometimes chaotic world. Yaweh/Jehovah/Allah is a conspiracy of one. Well, unless you're Catholic.
It's not too complex, but... It is the same state of the US population that made the lies possible that leaves the lies unpunished. To put it another way, conspirators aren't exogenous.
The author is exhibiting the elementary defense mechanism known as cognitive dissonance. It is more comfortable to be a State-worhipping sheep than to think independently. IOW, this article is:
#2. To: YertleTurtle (#0)
#3. To: FormerLurker (#0)
#4. To: YertleTurtle, Tauzero, Arete, Phaedrus, Axenolith, Zipporah, christine, robin, Neil McIver (#0)
Hence, the belief in astonishing brilliant and astonishingly evil conspirators.
Let's sum it up: the belief in impossibly complex conspiracies is the belief in monsters, in witches, in demons. It's the belief in a grandiose hero to save us.
The belief in conspiracies does do [no?] good whatsoever in dealing with the real problems in the world. It diverts people's attention into blaming that which is blameless and trying to prove that which cannot be proved. Were I a dictator, I would be consistently churning out propaganda, diverting attention from me toward innocent people. Nothing like an innocent scapegoat to cover the guilty's butt.
Let's sum it up: the belief in impossibly complex conspiracies is the belief in monsters, in witches, in demons. It's the belief in a grandiose hero to save us.
It's the belief that goodness is always under attack by evil, even if it's not. It's the belief in exaggeration and therefore paranoia. It's the belief that, underneath all the complex conspiracies, those involved can be defined in simple good-or-evil terms.
#5. To: Starwind (#4)
Hence, the belief in astonishing brilliant and astonishingly evil conspirators.
#6. To: YertleTurtle (#0)
#7. To: YertleTurtle (#5)
The way I see it, the belief in these unbelievably complex conspiracies
#8. To: Arete (#7)
The WTC couldn't have come down without a conspiracy. The perps we're exactly working independent of each other.
#9. To: YertleTurtle (#8)
#10. To: YertleTurtle (#0)
#11. To: Arete (#7)
The WTC couldn't have come down without a conspiracy. The perps we're exactly working independent of each other.
1 : the act of conspiring togethe
2 a : an agreement among conspirators
b : a group of conspirators syn see plot
#12. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
As an example is there any doubt that FDR, in his desire to
engage America in war, used Walter Winchell as his personal gossip columnist
to spread anti Japanese disinformation? History is also clear that the attack
on Pearl Harbor was no sneak attack. We were well aware of Japan’s intent. Is
this FDR, Winchell, Pearl Harbor attack connection a conspiracy? I think so.
#13. To: YertleTurtle (#0)
We used to dine out every day on caviar and steak flambé ; but now it's Chinese take-away... washed down with home-brewed beer.
#14. To: Arete (#7)
Would all the outright lies and fabrications leading up to the Iraq war and all the events since then qualify as a "complex conspiracy" or is Syria really hiding Saddam's WMD?
We used to dine out every day on caviar and steak flambé ; but now it's Chinese take-away... washed down with home-brewed beer.
#15. To: YertleTurtle, all (#0)
#16. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
The Rush Limbaugh of his day?
Walter Winchell as his personal gossip columnist
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
#17. To: mehitable (#16)
Excellent analogy, me.
The Rush Limbaugh of his day?
#18. To: IndieTX (#15)
A statist is what the stupid call the smart. By the way, you're not welcome at this site.
It is more comfortable to be a State-worhipping sheep than to think independently.
"I aim to misbehave" -- Mal Reynolds, Firefly
#19. To: YertleTurtle, Brer', christine, fred mertz, all (#18)
Indeed. The nazi speaks at anyone who disagrees with him, eh? Who appointed you spokeman for the rest of the posters here asshole. Why don't you go fuck yourself brownshirt.
By the way, you're not welcome at this site.
#20. To: YertleTurtle, Brer', fred mertz (#18)
Oh yes. Congratulations. You're the first one on the BOZO list brownshirt. So why don't you enlighten the rest of us why I am not welcome retard?? By the way, you're not welcome at this site.
#21. To: YertleTurtle, robin.christine, brer', fred mertz (#18)
I'm still waiting brownshirt. Only you are allowed to speak it seems. The opinions of others don't count. That makes you a brownshirt. So elaborate. Why am I not welcome in your worthless opinion?
By the way, you're not welcome at this site.
#22. To: YertleTurtle, brian s (#18)
I'm still waiting Jim Robinson. Let's here your reasoning fascist.
By the way, you're not welcome at this site.
#23. To: Starwind (#4)
That Larry Silvestein manipulated the bidding to take over the WTC, beating out three competitors in time to rig explosives in his own buildings to destroy them before the insurance policies were finalized so as get not enough insurance money to cover losses and rebuild them, and covered it up by having al-Qaida hatch a plot that the Mossad/FBI/CIA/NSA knew about but did nothing to prevent and further arranged for planes to be substituted and a coordinated missle strike against the Pentagon which the DoD is covering up. Yeah. As if. Ok, I'm jumping in late, but I can't resist. At this point and time, I don't know what to believe. But I know what I don't believe in, specifically, I don't believe in the omnipotent power of coincidence. I find it highly unlikely that 19 people pull off the highjacking of four airplanes, something that took a great deal of time to plan, and it's all just a "lucky" coincidence that they execute their plan on the same day that NORAD is conducting a drill called Operation Vigilant Guardian. And the scenario of that drill?: the hijacking of multiple airplanes in the Northeastern United States. Too blasted many coincidences. And my take on it...? He's my conspiracy theory: Some people in one of the federal alphabet soup agencies/departments had been known about what the hijackers were planning. At some point during the planning of the attack, someone went to the hijackers or people working with them and said something to the effect of "Hey, we know what you guys want to do. Here is the date, time and to do it." What would motivate someone to do that? Or maybe it's as "simple" as AQ having a well-placed mole. I honestly don't know. The one thing that I do know is that we're not being told anything close to the entire truth. And it does seem a little odd that the country suffers the first attack on US mainland soil in over a century and no one gets fired.
While I don't think one need believe in a grandioise hero (a whistle blower? an investigative journalist, a special prosecutor?) regardless, the conspiracy theories do get impossibly complex.
Nothing says "poor workmanship" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
#24. To: orangedog (#23)
I would generally agree. I'm not sure what is real, fake, planned, coincidence, accidental. I only know (from my other life) to scrutinize everything; trusting only what can be independently verified and pursue the falsehoods like a roadmap back to the perpetrators. I don't believe the WTC fell because of burning jet fuel. It looks like controlled demolition, but I don't yet see how explosives could have been planted reliably, perfectly, painstakingly (over a long time judging by 'controlled demolition' documentaries I've seen) without someone noticing. I don't believe a 757 crashed into the Pentagon, mainly because of the absence of debris, the absence of a radar track for most of flight 77's flight time until just prior to its arrival the pentagon, and its manuevering entirely unlike a 757 under control of a inexperienced trainee. But I don't have any theories about why 911 was done or who did it. I can easily believe the government is covering up their own incompetance. But to expand on that to the government knowing in advance and allowing the attack and/or facilitating it to some degree, begins to involve (it seems) too many people and too much coordination - that's where (for me) the complexity of a conspiracy that large becomes improbable. And yet, whomever planted the WTC charges seemed to care about loss of property (and perhaps life) by taking pains to 'control the demolition'. Likewise, manuevering to strike the Pentagon in a less occupied portion again seems like an effort to minimize losses. Who would care about such 'niceties'? And then there is the 'full government investigation' that manages to exactly avoid the important and controversial questions of evidence (like the fall of WTC 7, how were the cell phone calls made, why did Flt 77 drop off radar until the last few miles) resolving nothing - incompetance carefully honed and crafted to further obscure the facts. So I continue to 'sift the evidence' to see what falls out.
At this point and time, I don't know what to believe. But I know what I don't believe in, specifically, I don't believe in the omnipotent power of coincidence.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
#25. To: All (#0)
ping
"Benjamin Franklin was shown the new American constitution, and he said, 'I don't like it, but I will vote for it because we need something right now. But this constitution in time will fail, as all such efforts do. And it will fail because of the corruption of the people, in a general sense.' And that is what it has come to now, exactly as Franklin predicted." -- Gore Vidal
#26. To: All (#25)
ping
"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities also has the power to make you commit atrocities." — Voltaire (1694-1778)
#27. To: YertleTurtle (#26)
Have you heard about the Reichstag Fire? Or the fabricated invasion of Germany by Poland?
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers
#28. To: All (#0)
ping I thoroughly enjoy tweaking irrational and hysterical people.
“When I am the weaker, I ask you for my freedom, because that is your principle; but when I am the stronger, I take away your freedom, because that is my principle.”-Louis Veuillot
#29. To: YertleTurtle (#28)
As do I, herbie!
I thoroughly enjoy tweaking irrational and hysterical people.
"A functioning police state needs no police." - William S Burroughs
#30. To: YertleTurtle (#28)
It hurts. Bad.
I thoroughly enjoy tweaking irrational and hysterical people.
#31. To: All (#0)
St. Ausgustine on the State: "It was a criminal band that achieved legitimacy not by renouncing aggression, but rather by attaining impunity."
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest