Is conspiracy theory a substitute for political involvement?

I like a good conspiracy theory and I love the films of Oliver Stone but I see them as entertainment rather than revelations of hidden truths. Oh I try to keep an open mind any theory should be allowed it’s day, even the one about the moon been made of cheese or the earth being created in six days. We have to learn to sift through information and make up our minds so every conspiracy theory needs to be checked against what is known and what can be known. And by the way my favourite Oliver Stone movie is Salvador not JFK.

However there are those types of conspiracy theory that seem to be pushing the futility of political involvement, by claiming that political involvement is futile, that whatever you do someone or something will always be pulling the strings.

If you are left wing you are the pawn of a secret long-term communist plots and if you have right wing views you are playing into the hands of a secret cabal of international bankers, and these puppet master are always out of reach one step ahead.

So what is the point and what can be done, well the answer for the hardened conspiracy nut seems to be nothing, whatever you do you remain a cog in the conspiracy.

So I would ask what conspiracy theory does for politics does it enhance it or stifle it?

 

I completely agree!

I like a conspiracy as much as anyone else (and there are some that are true) but using them as your ENTIRE political base is futile in the end. You have to beleive in something, and too much conspiracy makes you beleive in nothing and no one. One feels there is no reason to even TRY to change things, as "they" will always stop you.

sigh

 

What does Oliver Stone have to do with government conspiracies?

What about declassified government documents, insider testimonial/whistleblowers, mainstream news reports, and quotes from banking and government elites like David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezenski and Henry Kissinger, calling for a one-world government?

Almost all the wars and bloodletting we see going on in the world right now are a direct part of this, and if you are choosing to not dig deep and ask the real questions, it is YOU that is contributing to the problem.

Obviously if I didn't care about what was going on in the world, I wouldn't be so passionate about it. I am trying to wake people up to events like September 11th. So much of what has been going on in the world since that day is a direct result of those attacks.

People will either immediately discredit whatever I say as "conspiracy theory," or they will be open-minded enough to actually look into the things I talk about and come to their own educated and informed conclusion. Some are already aware, and see what's going on. I am not asking people to blindly accept whatever I say as fact, because for all they know I could be completely full of shit.

I don't think I am, though.

I am out in support of people's civil liberties and the preservation of the Constitution. I have never heard you once do this, Balbus. I have written articles against the Patriot Act and HR 418. What have you done, other than criticise people?

I have looked at major historical events, and I have determined that not everything we have been told is what it truly is; from the attack on Pearl Harbor to the assassination of JFK, to the Gulf of Tonkin to the Oklahoma City bombing, to the second, and final, attack on the World Trade Center, and Pentagon in 2001.

I have researched all of this in depth. Have you?

I don't think anyone is promoting that. I certainly don't feel that political involvement is futile. Very much the contrary, actually. However, first and foremost, I believe in waking people up. You cannot expect to see change on a large scale unless you help to wake people up to things they have been blind to for all this time.

Well, the world bankers (and all of the global-elite for that matter) are essentially communists, since they hate competition and they hate the underclass having money. Communism allocates people's money to the government and the banks so they can have full control over the people.

The left wing and the right wing are controlled by the same people -- at least the people within the federal government, anyway.

Again, to become informed and wake people up.

Have you read the Patriot Act? Have you read the Northwoods documents? Have you looked into the events of 9/11? Have you studied the banking system? Have you read about secret societies like Bohemian Grove and Skull & Bones?

Until then, like Bob Dylan said, don't criticise what you can't understand.

It depends on how credible the conspiracy is, and how much evidence there is to support it.

Obviously something like "10 foot aliens control the government" would be pure rubbish. But what about looking at some of the major events in history that are shrouded in mystery, be it JFK or OKC, or 9/11? Then look at what is going on at the moment and who stands to gain from it all.

Here is a piece of advice: THINK!

 

**

So -

So most (or all) the banks of the world are run by communists?

The ‘global-elite’ are all or a majority are also communists?

That the true tenets of communism is hatred of the proletariat and the promotion of capitalistic monopolies?

That all political parties, whatever their stated beliefs and goals are just fronts for the communist banks and wealthy elite?

Presumably then this conspiracy has been going on some time, was Karl Marx either in on the project or was he in someway led to his ideas and encouraged in writing them at the instigation of this ‘group’?

So for over a hundred years (at least) this group have kept to a unity of purpose?

This of course would have meant the recruitment of others to the cause as the nature of the ‘global-elite’ changed or have they had such control over technological and financial developments that they have places their own candidates into positions of wealth? And presumably this would have gone on globally even in such areas as the Soviet Union?

**

So your contention is that most of the major events in at least the last hundred years fit in this the above hypothesis?

Are you also making the claim that there is direct links to it and events such as –

Pearl Habour 1941

Vietnam – 1948-75

JFK’s assasination 1963

The Oklahoma bombing 1995

9/11 – 2001

 

Conspiracy theories are just intellectually lazy ways of explaining world events and circumstances.

Why is the economy bad/good/average? It's easier to say "The illuminati did it" than to actually try to understand all of the factors that go into the economy.

Why did X win an election instead of Y? It must've been fixed by the New World Order, because learning all of the factors in each election would be too time-consuming.

And my personal favorite: What caused the tsunami? It must've been a "tsunami bomb" created by the American military, because actually learning about geology might make one's head hurt.

In reality, conspiracies tend to be much more limited in scope, tend to be executed poorly, and tend to be obvious in retrospect.

 

Well, the world bankers are more along the line of socialists. Everyone knows that the Rockefellers and Rothschilds are socialist banking families. They use liberalism and socialism to further their agenda through the various institutions they own. I was merely alluding to the notion that there is nothing more the elite would want than a New World Order, which would be a communist New World Order, as all power would be transferred from the people and placed into the hands of the government. You cannot fully have control over the masses until you rid them of their wealth and power.

Again, I never said the banks were communist. I merely said the international bankers would prefer communism to capitalism, as do all dictators and power hungry people, who feel the need to rule other people's lives and exert control.

A capitalist society, as flawed as it may be, is really one of the only things keeping us free from total government control.

But yes, the Democratic and Republican parties (not all parties) are both owned and controlled by the same corporate interests. This is hardly news to many people that haven't been living under a rock.

Libertarians and Constitutionalists are really the only ones who pose a threat to this elite system, since they're pretty much opposed to everything they stand for. Libertarians want to nationalize the banking system, which of course the elite are completely opposed to. They are also pro-sovereignty and pro-2nd amendement, which the New World Order also opposes.

Most socialists support the abolishment of the second amendment and the erosion of sovereignty, which plays right into the banking NWO plan for world government.

Most so-called conservatives support the Bush agenda, which is more socialist and communist than it is conservative.

So, both sides are playing into this, and both sides make up the majority of people who vote, since most people are on either one side or the other side, when both sides are exactly the same, with the exception of some empty rhetoric and certain policies.

JFK wanted to nationalize the "federal" currency (which isn't federal at all) and abolish the privately-owned Federal Reserve. Many believe this is why he was assassinated.

The New World Order conspiracy has been going on for along time. A hundred years, if not longer.

Karl Marx, Lenin and Trotsky were essentially dysfunctional losers who were employed by the Illuminist bankers to hoodwink the masses. Lenin, for example, had been a unsuccessful lawyer who had only six cases in which he defended shoplifters. He lost them all. A week later he gave up the law to become a highly paid revolutionary. Lenin declared: "Peace means quite simply the domination of Communism over the entire world." His reign of terror caused nine million deaths but you never see him compared to Hitler.

Yes. Their unity of purpose is based on wealth, power, and in many cases, blood, since the ruling banking families are all inter-related at the very top of the pyramid structure.

It's very complex, confusing, and very hard for many people to grasp without immediately shrugging off as nonsense, as I once did. So if you think I am crazy for saying all this, that's fine. We are all entitled to our own views.

Well, if you learn to follow the money and see where it leads, it all leads to one place; the banking elite.

The elite do have control over all the major institutions, since there are people working for these elites in every major institution within and without the government -- which the elites ultimately own -- and they're paid large sums of money to do what they are told and play along.

For instance, a lot of these media moguls, like Ruppert Murdoch, are merely grossly paid frontmen, and whatever these news networks air is dictated by elite-fronted groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, and the David Rockefeller-fronted Trilateral Commission, which are all working in tandem with these lower level puppets found within the media, educational system, federal government, religious institutions, etc..



Let's take this quote from David Rockefeller for instance:

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the NY Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." -- David Rockefeller, speaking at the Bilderberger conference in June 1991 in Baden-Baden, Germany:

**

In many historical incidents; yes, absolutely. It's called the problem-reaction-solution scenario. It's where a problem is intentionally created by the government, which causes the people to react, proclaiming that "something must be done," in which the government then puts forth it's own pre-planned solution. It's nothing more psycholoigcal manipulation.

Just look at 9/11 for instance. We are attacked by who the US government says is al Qaeda, which created massive response in the American people, which lead to the Patriot Act and the high-tech police state that has ensued. People would not have allowed for this hadn't we been attacked, nor the wars which followed. Look who most stands to gain. Certainly not the terrorists.

Yes, I believe that the official stories given for these events are not completely truthful ones, as do many people that have sufficiently studied these events.

Even the History Channel alluded in a special from a couple years ago that FDR had forewarning of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Instead of alerting the men, like any human being would have done, he saw to it that the attacks went through by dismantling the code breaking machines and diverting naval ships in the Pacific so the Japanese could not be shot down.

Of course this attack was used as the pretext to enter the war (as 9/11 was the pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq), which the globalists benefited greatly from and gave rise to the globalist entity known as the United Nations.

 

Not only did FDR let pearl harbor happen, he also purposely left 7,000 americans in japan to be tortured, raped, and killed for war propaganda usage, while navy ships were leaving japan almost completely empty.

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

How is this so? It takes more effort to think outside the box of concensus reality and question things than it does to simply digest everything as it is presented. To me, the people who are "intellectually lazy" are those who shun anything that opposes concensus reality, without doing their own research into it first. They just assume based on a know-it-all mentality.

Well, there are two ways to look at the economy. Most people are aware of how the economy works in a general sense, but few are mindful of who controls the banking system.

I mean, how many Americans know the Federal Reserve is a private institution, and not a part of the federal government? Not many.

Many people are too caught up in the system to see beyond it.

Have you even looked at the evidence from the past two elections, which shows that they were indeed rigged?

How do you explain the 90,000+ votes that turned up in Ohio in this past election?

I've never heard that one. I have heard that the US government indeed has the technology to create a tsunami, but the last tsunami was clearly the result of an earthquake... not a "tsunami bomb."

Thanks for your opinion.

 

from Pressed Rat: "which would be a communist New World Order, as all power would be transferred from the people and placed into the hands of the government."

I'd argue that this New World Empire would not be a communist one, but a fascist one. I mean, it would have communist elements of course, but overall, I wouldn't classify our could-be lives of indentured slavery as "communist", I'd call it fascist totalitarianism, which is presicely what the global bankers and "free traders" want.

This isn't a conspiracy theory. It's documented and evident to those who are paying attention, such as the world-renowned "anti-globalization" movement.

 

THANK YOU.

 

**
Rat

The question raised in this thread – Is conspiracy theory a substitute for political involvement?

You claim that you are very committed to political involvement, and that your chosen political philosophy is libertarian so I presume your political party of choice would be the Libertarian Party?

The thing is that the stated policies of the libertarian party and libertarian ideas would very much enhance the power of the banks and wealthy elite’s that you seem to be urging people to curtail.

If I understand you correctly you want to make sure that these bankers and wealthy elite’s are unable to dominate the government or people?

Libertarians want very few or no taxes or regulations on banks or the wealthy, little or no state welfare, education or training systems, and the repeal of all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and the abolition of employment laws.

In other words they wish to weaken a government’s (or any public body’s) ability to have any effective control over such things as banks or wealthy corporations and individuals.

It is therefore more likely that these banks or wealthy corporations and individuals would have a hell of a lot more ability to the dominate the government or people?

 

Can we please move this to the Paranoid forum where it belongs?

Conspiracy theory IS for the intellectually lazy, for whom "doing research" means memorizing the contents of Rense. Reading through Rat's posts is evidence enough. What caused the Russian revolution? Conspiracy. WW2? Conspiracy. 9/11? Conspiracy. The US elections? Conspiracies. How does the media work? Conspiracy. How does the banking system work? Conspiracy. Wow, that sounds A LOT harder than having to learn history or economics, yeah no taking the easy route for Rat! Of course it isn't and dumber or more intellectually lazy than the drivel that passes for anti-globalisation ideology.

To crystallise the insanity of this theory of universal conspiracy, look at this quote:

Right, so bankers are communists and their bitter enemy is libertarians who want to nationalise banking. Could any statement be any more ludicrous and self contradicting? How can one even begin to respond to such nonsese?

It is simply a mantra to say that "global bankers" want communism. Or else those evil privatisers want fascism! Yes no matter how inherently contradictory those stories are, the conspiracy theorists and anti- globalisation activists apparently agree that that one of these two inherently contradictory things is happening and only the and their small, elite group of intellectual peers are aware of it. So maybe the theory isn't all that important, what matters is concluding that you are part of a small intellectually superior group, standing apart from the idiotic "masses.

 

Seems pretty Synonymous to me!

 

Well, then if you find it to all be so ludicrous, why do you insist on trolling the forums and berating anyone who thinks differently than you? If we're all a bunch of idiots and you're the smart one, wouldn't it be wise for you to just simply ignore us instead of criticising everyone, while having no evidence of your own to refute anything?

All I have ever heard you do is lunge insults at people. You never have anything to contribute, other than criticism. Why don't you take the time you spend trolling these forums and do something actually worthwhile, like yank your crank?

No, I said the bankers are socialists, but they a want communist or socialist-like dictatorship to enslve the masses and exercise full control.

Right. Only you know the answers, PB. Only you are entitled to your opinion.

Actually, I don't even know where you stand politcally because all I have ever heard you do is mock people you don't agree with. I've never heard you discuss anything with any civility.

I assume you're either a neocon, since you see seem to be an apologist to all the murderous zionists and neocons, or you're just a mainstream liberal yuppie with a small dick.

But I am just ASSuming.

 

**

The question was – Is conspiracy theory a substitute for political involvement?

So what political involvement are you committed to?

You claim that the major political parties are controlled by forces that negate what they stand for. You claim to be an independent of libertarian leanings but not a member of the Libertarian Party, would you encourage people to vote for the Libertarian Party or another?

Do yo believe that the ‘secret conspirators’ could control any political party or movement? If so what political action besides voting are you calling for?

You claim to be trying to open peoples eyes but to what end?

Are you calling for revolution, the overthrow of the present system by presumably violent action? If so how?

I mean if you cannot trust any official or even unofficial political party or movement, what is the political involvement you claim to be so committed to?

**

I warn you that libertarian policies are likely to enhance the wealth and power of the banks and wealthy elite’s that you seem to be urging people to curtail

You tell me they already have all the wealth and power in the world

You then tell me that “the only thing the elite could ever want is money (ie: power) to be taken away from the people and handed over to them”

Which is it? And if you think that they want to take away peoples money why would you support libertarian policies that would do just that?

**

You claim that the conspirators control “all the wealth and power”.

That they have control over the money supply and presumably all other financial systems.

They also have a firm grip on the political sphere by ruling all the branches of the US government and any political party they need.

You claim that their goal is to bring about a fascistic world government.

Why?

What is their motivation?

**

 

Balbus, their motivation is power for the sake of self-congradulations, obviously. To prove that they are indeed the "fittest", in Darwin's terminology. It's not much, is it. Yet that's what they are striving toward.

Pressed Rat, what Balbus is doing is exercizing HIS control issue by diverting our attention away from discussing ideas and strategies toward constantly debating with him. He's seeking our attention by using methods of disagreeing with EVERY point we could ever make just to make himself feel superior in some way. Or maybe he's an agent of some kind being paid for it (we'll probably never know) but either way, we should begin looking toward using our "ignore" option with people like Balbus. And most assuredly, he'd accuse us of...well, something, for refusing to bow down to his level (by paying attention to him) and probably call US fascists and hypocrits, etc. These are the tactics of ALL rightwing thinkers, whether they have power or not. Of course the ones with power are more insidious (and thus, effective), but there is a common thread among them. Our best course of action is to begin ignoring them on these types of forums, because where is all this debate going anyway? Deep down, they know that we make the most accurate deductions about world affairs, but there is no way that they'd ever voluntarily surrender their case (non-case) no matter how many times they are beat down with correct analysis, which in effect continues the never-ending cycle of useless argument, which they intentionally use to divert our energies away from strategizing, for example, about things like fomenting Counter-Culture.

 

Yo, Revo! Pressed Rat, not Balbus, is the "right-winger" in this discussion. His views line up well with those of the John Birch Society and the militia movement.

 

To those who might be reading the global government thread ...


you see that the "debate rages on..."

 

I am not committed to any political movement. I don't consider myself a right-winger or left-winger, or a conservative or liberal. I am simply pro-liberty, anti-tyranny. I simply try to wake people up by exposing them to what is going on. I never claimed to be some kind of revolutionary, and I don't really have any real solutions for what to do -- nor does anybody else. If people had solutions, we would have likely seen a change by now.

However, I think the more people are alert to what is going on in the world, the better off they will be. More and more people are waking up everyday, and this is good. But I am not sure if this will save us in the end.

I would encourage people to vote for whatever party they choose, hoping they're informed on the issues and not programmed by everything the mainstream (corporate) media tells them.

Sure, they could have control over anything they wanted to. But the only political parties that really matter to them (in this country) are the Democrat and Republican parties, as these are the parties in which they operate. Most dumbed-down Americans haven't even heard of the Libertarian Party -- let alone any other third-party -- so it wouldn't be of any benefit to them to take control over these third parties, since they rarely ever receive more than 1% of the vote anyway.

And once again, my only goal is to wake people up to some of the things I have learned over the past couple years. I am not calling for a revolution or an overthrow of the government, because I think it's naive that something like that would be possible until there is a mass-awakening. I am hoping this mass-awakening will occur sooner than later, but I have my doubts.

Sorry, but I don't believe in violence. There is already enough violence and death in the world. Before you can have a revolution (whatever that might entail), you first need to have a public that is informed. When most of America are sheep and only subscribe to the rhetoric of Corporate Party A and Corporate Party B, you cannot have a revolution because a revolution takes numbers.

I am not part of any movement, and my political involvement lies in informing people who are open-minded and want to listen.

Now let me turn the tables and ask you what political movement or involvement YOU are committed to...

???

**

Again, you selectively ignore the fact that the banks are the ones producing this money to begin with. They already have all the money they could ever want. What they want is power (not money). And to gain this power, it must be taken away from the people in the form of economic wealth (this would be achieved through an economic collapse). When people have all the wealth stolen from them, they must then rely on the government and its handlers for their survival.

This is correct.

Right. And the money being handed over to them wouldn't be to make them richer, it would simply rob the people of their wealth (hence their power), so the people would become helpless and dependent on the same system that is hell-bent on enslaving them. It's called totalitarianism. To bring about fascism or totalitarianism, you must first bankrupt the economy and make everybody helpless and dependent.

Libertarians are advocates of people having control over their own money, not the state controlling their money, as with socialism.

**

Because, these people are ruthless, power-hungry sloths, and they basically want to rule the world. That is their motivation. They are social darwinists.

Then again, I don't have the answers to everything, either, and I am not going to pretend that I do. I can only go based on what I know.

And these people I am referring to are not only working through the US, but all the countries across the globe.

Didn't you read any of those quotes I provided?