Now there is going to be some debate about some of these. Obviously she puts 'The Election Was Stolen' in the "dangerous to yourself and others" category, which indeed it may be -- dangerous, that is, to yourself and others. It may nevertheless be true. I'm sure she doesn't believe it is at all true, but I think that some versions of that theory are not only plausible but likely. We've discussed that at length here: it definitely appears that the election was conducted illegally and unconstitutionally, and in ways that disabled fraud protections. Every audit or hearing in every affected state has found numbers of probably or definitely fraudulent votes well outside the margin of victory, and a Time magazine article has interviewed those who hired 'armies' of partisan poll workers to count votes.
So I'd say that one is no higher than blue, at least in some forms. The forms being put forward by some people who allege secret servers in Italy or wherever may well be much less well-grounded.
In her top category, I would dispute that the use of the phrase "Cultural Marxism" is necessarily anti-Semitic, and definitely not a conspiracy theory. Most people who use the phrase probably don't actually know who the Frankfurt school members are, or that they were Jews. More, they're not objecting to anything essentially Jewish about the school: they're objecting to the Marxism, which is formally material atheism.
And it's not a conspiracy theory that these people existed and published works expressing thoughts and ideas that could be fairly characterized as a sort of Marxism applied to cultural issues. You can go read the books at the library. Objecting to a set of published ideas is not a conspiracy theory, and it's not anti-Semitic if your objection is to the ideas and not the people (who aren't all that Jewish anyway if they're Marxists, which involves a denial of the God of Israel).
Broadly, though, I think she's not too far off. Tim Pool points out that she had to drop "Bill Gates is Microchipping People' because that one turns out to be true; sadly, instead of moving it to the green sector she left it off the list. It's an interesting and useful idea, trying to sort these in terms of which ones are really true, plausibly true, or wildly untrue. What do you think about all this? Are there any you'd move up, or down, on the chart?
UPDATE: On reflection, I think there are several top level items that are in no way essentially anti-Jewish; a few of them are barely or not conspiracy theories. There’s definitely a push by trans activists, who clearly do have an agenda; you can object to the ideas they’re advancing without ever having a thought about Jews enter your mind. They’re not even obviously related topics, since Judaism has a traditional sexual law very similar to Catholicism and not all that different from Islam. So this topline category may need examination.
24 comments:
What does it mean that 'George Soros' in listed in the top level of conspiracy-ness? Does it mean the belief that Soros exists, or that he doesn't exist? Clearly not...it surely refers to the belief that Soros drives a lot of bad things. Given his funding of certain prosecutors, and the almost-surely-related crime wave, that statement would seem to fall in the level of 'grounded in reality'.
Yeah, that’s another example from that level of a dubious claim. You’re free to oppose Soros’ ideas of actions even though he may be of Jewish descent; and he is definitely involved in American politics to a great degree.
As I glanced over this list and had some instant objections I asked myself two questions
1. If I belonged to one of these and knew it to be partly true, what sort of colorful graphic would I devise to make people think it was ridiculous to believe in that conspiracy?
2. If I had left-of-center beliefs, what sort of colorful graphic would I devise to discredit my opponents? Where would I place the ideas I wanted to protect on this list?
Notice which are near the center of each band and in the clearest print.
I'm not sure why anyone would doubt that bureaucracies tend to become self-serving and resistant to control by their nominal superiors.
The ordering says something about Abbie Richards.
Why is "Iran Contra" under "We have questions"? About the only remaining question about that is if Reagan was directly involved. I wonder if this is a Millennial confusing those operations with the belief that Reagan and GHWB conspired with the Iranians to hold the embassy hostages until after the 1980 election. (Believing Republicans win elections only with the assistance of foreign influence has a long history among Democrats.)
Why is believing Ted Cruz is the Zodiac Killer "harmless" (Steve Scalise and Rand Paul would like to comment) but thinking the moon landing was faked is "dangerous to yourself and others"?
And WTF are some of these? "Denver International Airport"? "US is a Corporation"? "Ancient Giant Trees"?? Noticing the existence of redwoods is "dangerous to yourself and others"?
Also interesting to note what doesn't make the list anymore. FDR and Pearl Harbor. Nothing about pesticides and GMOs. No mention of Communist infiltration of the US government.
A lot of people have begun using "modifer Marxis-" as shorthand for any system of thought that expands Marx's interpretation of economic interaction as a conflict between an oppressor class and an oppressed class into other areas of human interaction.
Nothing about the Koch brothers, unless I missed it.
I don't even know what a lot of these are, but how the top level would all be antisemitic is a mystery. Is Bill Gates Jewish? Are the Reptilian Overlords Jewish? Was George Floyd Jewish? Etc.
Right next to "Antifa did Jan 6" should be "Jan 6 was an insurrection".
Maybe "Southern Strategy" should be in yellow.
I think it would be very interesting to create our own Chart of Conspiracies for comparison.
"I'm not sure why anyone would doubt that bureaucracies tend to become self-serving and resistant to control by their nominal superiors."
The BBC's TV comedy *Yes, Minister* could be a textbook. Standard academic economic theory also addresses what is referred to as the "Principal-Agent Problem" and Western Civilization carries forward Eastern-Biblical stories about the differing goals and behaviors of OWNERS and STEWARDS.
The whole problem is rhetorical. The storied resistance of "The Deep State" to elected leadership is known to be a problem, but the story that members of such an unaccountable group of powerful denizens of government abuse their power to run child sex trafficking rings under pizza parlors is, hmmm, not as widely accepted. In a sense, "The Deep State" is rhetorically similar to "Let's Go, Brandon!" It's a way to say an innocuous thing that is understood by insiders to mean something more powerful.
I think it would be very interesting to create our own Chart of Conspiracies for comparison.
I was kind of hoping you guys would feel like doing that.
All conspiracy theories are true, and cancel each other out.
Instead of a Chart of Conspiracies, if we're to be properly tribalized it must be titled 'The Truth Chart' and the triangle must be inverted; then it will start with the "Detached from Reality" perceptual lunacies of current popular culture at the bottom - race hoaxes, Gender of the Month, Triggering, so forth - and move upward toward the pointed end of Grounded in Reality. If you want to make heads explode, be sure to include something about Trump near the top.
I really don't understand the need to graft antisemitism onto US politics. Equating "Bankers" with "Jews" is a European thing. In the U.S., "Bankers" means the people who run the banks( often WASP Ivy-Leaguers).
It's also a mistake when R's call the D's antisemitic for bashing Israel. It's not because Israel is Jewish, but because it's Western.
That's a good point in general too. Half the complaints I see about "anti-Semitism" don't even have anything to do with Jews. Half of the other half don't even have to do with observant Jews who are trying to keep the Law.
Where is the ymarsakar level?
They never disclosed the private banksters running the fed reserve. Btw not federal nor a reserve.
Cnn cuomo and child abuse rings says different.
That chart can makr pekple insane. Not recommended.
Haha i know what those are. You can look up the ytube channel norbzworld and search forests. Or ancient tartaria.
I know of pretty much all of them that are true or based on data.
The us as an incorporated regency that disabled the us constitution is quite popular amongsr the q and sidney powell flynn crowd.
As folks told me here, soros is just exercising his free speech and ymar is baking a cake teying tonsuppress soros.
I am gonna do a lot more than that all ye old humans.
J Melcher said...
The storied resistance of "The Deep State" to elected leadership is known to be a problem, but the story that members of such an unaccountable group of powerful denizens of government abuse their power to run child sex trafficking rings under pizza parlors is, hmmm, not as widely accepted.
Ok but stuff like this keeps cropping up with surprising regularity among our elite classes.
And we had the recent post here about the CIA ignoring similar activities among their contractors and employees.
Sexual activity with minors does seem to be among the last remaining things that could plausibly be used for blackmail material. Most other sexual and lifestyle practices don't get much more than a shoulder shrug anymore. So running a child sex ring from a pizza parlor might be a fantasy but the idea that powerful people looking to manipulate others might be baiting traps is not out of the range of possibility.
"What do you think about all this? Are there any you'd move up, or down, on the chart?"
Haha.
There is only 1 true xonspiracy group level.
The ymar level.
As for the chart, it is an interestinf eye full but not ra s single eye accurate. A good try for old humans. At least we dont get the same old comments talking about people being crazy and in need of avi s lunacy institutionsz for being out of realitt. Eealitt aint as solid as people think. But maybe in the future people will say it is crazy again.
Red vs blue. Action vs reaction. Cloward piven. Crisis solution.
A great documentary summrizing the fall of the qabal. Website is out of the dark or out of darkness.
Narr: "All conspiracy theories are true, and cancel each other out."
I like it.
Grim: "I was kind of hoping you guys would feel like doing that."
Well, I guess we should decide our categories of conspiracies first, maybe. She has 4 ways of locating things on the chart.
1. The overall "Grounded in Reality" -> "Detached from Reality" axis
2. The bubbles on the right of the chart
3. The demarcation line labels
4. Color
Also, there's no need to keep the triangle shape. It seems the shape should conform to the contents, so we can just use a rectangle for now. If the contents later indicate a triangle, oval, etc., are appropriate, that can be applied then.
Thoughts, anyone?
Post a Comment