BEYOND THE BLOG

I've moved to anthonynorth.com

  • Introduction

    I've now moved to a new website and blog. Click 'Anthony North', below.
  • Stats:

    • 711,467 hits
  • Meta

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Calendar

    February 2008
    M T W T F S S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    2526272829  

US AND THEM

Posted by anthonynorth on February 6, 2008

people-21.jpg You could argue that any rational person will decide that conspiracy theories are bunkum. Whilst the US government and other organisations have indulged repeatedly in conspiracies – Bay of Pigs and Watergate come to mind – it is unrealistic to think that a large organisation could get away with even credible ones, never mind the alien and satanic conspiracies. Basically, big organisations leak like a sieve. So why do we believe so much in conspiracies?

US CONSTITUTION

Maybe because SOME conspiracies are more real than we realise. Take, for instance, the US Constitution.
In the mid-1800s, the ultra-individualist Lysander Spooner argued that the American Constitution was dead, and deservedly so. His argument was simple. A document that guaranteed freedom and happiness could not hold people together under a federal government.
Spooner was not believed. But in the mid-20th century, a whole group of conspiriologists began to argue this was, indeed, the case. Their argument rested on the belief that, on 9 March 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt’s declaration of national emergency was never nullified. Just the slightest whiff of a ‘clear and present danger’ allows the US President to automatically suspend rights to anyone he wishes.
Further, bit by bit, dictatorial powers have been passed to the President, to the point that he can now do anything he pleases. He can seize property, send troops to battle, restrict travel and tap all forms of communication without any other authority, allowing presidents to strut the world stage like Roman emperors.

OM

With such a reality – a reality becoming starkly clear following US government powers following 9/11 – it is easy to feel that the US Constitution isn’t worth the paper it is written on.
This feeling of conspiratorial powers is given equal credence by one of the most seemingly ridiculous conspiracy theories ever put forward – that of ‘OM’.
Based around the persistent belief in the East that the universe was created out of Chaos by the sound of ‘Om’, the word has become the most popular mantra. But it has crept into western conspiriology as OM, an acronym for Operation Mindf***.’
The most virulent of supernatural conspiracies, whenever something weird happens, it is OM behind it. Eventually, we began to understand the process with Surrealism and Postmodernism, intellectual pursuits that make the world chaotic and ridiculous. In the modern world, it is often impossible to distinguish what is OM and what is not, so absurd has much of the world become.
The conspiracy of OM undoubtedly came out of Discordianism, thought by some to be the first true religion, based on the worship of the goddess of Chaos. It offers true reality of religion as a joke.
The founder of Forteana, Charles Fort, that irrepressible collector of weird tales and happenings, put the strangeness of the world down to a being known as the Cosmic Joker, and such events generally require a degree of passivity, due to our non-understanding.
This passivity is the purpose of the force to mess with our minds. Indeed, Dlscordians cope with this stupidity with mantras such as: ‘We Discordians must stick apart.’
This is the beauty of postmodernism, an idea and way of life with no purpose, no meaning, no identity. And within this swirl of negativity and seemingly over-powering forces, we all become conspiriologists of sorts.
And even more important to the conspiriologist’s trade is the simple fact that, in less media invasive days, conspiracies DID occur. Consider, for instance, the conspiratorial history of Britain.

DEMOCRACY

Modern, democratic government can find its roots way back in early Anglo-Saxon Britain. In order to rule, a king had to have a council usually made up of local leaders and bishops to discuss issues and assist him in ruling.
As the centuries rolled on, this became known as the Witan, meaning ‘moot’, or meeting. Dealing with such things as land grants, defence and taxation policy, the Witan soon discovered that it could prize authority from a king by refusing to collect taxes. This form of justifiable blackmail is conspiracy.
One king who often abused his power was King John. In order to bring him into line, a conspiracy was hatched by some barons. This conspiracy led to the signing of the Magna Carta on 15 June 1215, guaranteeing a council of 25 barons to watch the monarch, and guaranteeing human rights that form the basis of a free society. Lauded as a great moment in history, the Magna Carta was nonetheless the product of conspiracy.

THE TUDORS

By the time of Henry VIII, Europe had settled down to centuries long turmoil where the power of Catholic Rome was under threat as Protestantism allowed the first stirring of national government.
Under the excuse of divorcing his first wife, Henry severed links with Rome, creating the Church of England, and formulating a national government in England free of Catholic interference. In other words, he was the leading player in a huge conspiracy that reversed for ever the centre of power in England.
By the reign of his daughter, Elizabeth I, the battle was to seize England back for the Catholics. With the English defeat of the Catholic Scots, their Queen, Mary, Queen of Scots, threw herself on the mercy of Elizabeth, who had her confined. However, this did not stop Mary attempting to conspire against Elizabeth through the now famous Babington Plot and others, leading to her execution.

THE STUARTS

With no Tudor heir, Mary’s son took the throne following Elizabeth for the Stuarts, with, of course, their Catholic leanings. However, James I was obviously not Catholic enough for the Gunpowder Plotters.
Led by Robert Catesby, they hatched a plot to blow up king and Parliament during the State Opening of 5 November 1605. The barrels were discovered in the cellars below the House of Lords before the gunpowder could be ignited, and today 5 November is celebrated as a famous conspiracy with bonfire, fireworks and burning the effigy of the conspirator, Guy Fawkes.
Charles I WAS more Catholic in his leanings, and constantly conspired to subvert the Protestant integrity of England. To counter this conspiracy, Oliver Cromwell and other Parliamentarians conspired against HIM, resulting in the English Civil War and eventual beheading of the king.
This immense period of conspiracy and counter-conspiracy eventually led to the Barebones Parliament at the beginning of a brief flirtation with Republicanism. Throughout this Parliament, its members conspired to erode English freedoms by imposing a dictatorial Puritan ethic upon the population. Eventually, Cromwell conspired against his own Parliament and assumed dictatorial control himself.

END GAME

By 1660 the Stuart dynasty had been restored, providing a rich source of conspiracy as Parliamentarians conspired to retain their power, and the monarch conspired to take it away.
And, yes, return the country to Catholicism.
In particular, at one stage James II had a newborn baby placed in his chamber, declaring it the rightful heir. This obvious attempt at conspiracy to guarantee a Catholic line of succession led to a number of Parliamentarians writing to the Dutch Stadholder, William of Orange (husband of James’s Protestant daughter, Mary) offering him the throne of England.
Wllllam wasn’t particularly interested in the throne, but he DID require the English army in order to guarantee victory in his latest war. And thus, through conspiracy built upon conspiracy, did the Glorious Revolution of 1688 come about, guaranteeing human rights through the Bill of Rights, and, with William and Mary on the throne, instituting the modern democratic form of government we know today.

CONSPIRACY

We can see from the above that conspiracy is endemic to democracy, and did, infact, lead to modern western freedoms. So where does this leave the conspiracy theorist? Does it give credence to his imaginings?
Sadly, not at all. Conspiracy DOES occur. All governments do, in one form or another, conspire against their electorate. But this is nothing special, and certainly nothing sensational. Indeed, we don’t even call it conspiracy any more. Rather, it is called, simply, politics.
But it is a fact of life that, being endemic to the society we class as free, we will continue to have conspiracy theorists to tell us it is far worse than this. The politicians actually like them – they divert us from looking at what is really going on.
Indeed, if conspiracy theorists didn’t exist, governments would have to invent them.

(c) Anthony North, February 2008

Click It’s Under Control for more conspiracy posts

16 Responses to “US AND THEM”

  1. Brian said

    Here, here. Mr. Prime Minister, can you deny these allegations brought forth by the Honorable Anthony North?

    No, I cannot. It is politics as usual, those that have the gold, make the rules.

  2. anthonynorth said

    Hi Brian,
    ‘Order! Order!’ as Mr Speaker says.

    It always amazes me how the MPs of my country have the nerve to call themselves ‘Honourable’.
    Okay, some are. Looking through history I think I’ve just got onto the fingers of my other hand 🙂

  3. TiamatsVision said

    Great post but really Tony, just because you’re not paranoid, it doesn’t mean they’re not plotting against you ;).
    Since “nothing is true and everything is permitted”, the prevalence of conspiracy theories is not all that surprising, and as you state, necessary(i.e. politics). You also make an excellent point in that some major events were born out of conspiracy. I think it’s an innate part of the human psyche to try and make logical sense out of what we see as random or chaotic events. In our effort to do so, we look at all angles and attempt to look “outside the box”. If one looks hard enough, they can “find” a possible “conspiracy” in just about everything.
    And yes, this is post is part of a plot to get you to respond to it. 😉

  4. anthonynorth said

    Hi TiamatsVision,
    I may be going paranoid – outside forces work against me – I know I shouldn’t – I try to fight it – but …
    … but …
    I respond 🙂

  5. foo said

    Conspiracies happen all the time. One needs to approach a question with an open mind.
    Generalizations can be helpful, but they will cloud the weak mind, Anthony. I usually appreciate your writing, but tell me, how can an argument in the 1880s be founded on a fact that occurred in the 1930s? Or, are we over-generalizing to reach a pre-determined conclusion?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/equatorialguinea/story/0,,2253951,00.html

  6. anthonynorth said

    Hi Foo,
    I think this is the first time we’ve spoke and I appreciate your words on my writing. The case you link to is clearly reported in a newspaper, which is, I think, the point. It IS in the public eye, whether the public decide to notice or not.
    Conspiracy theorists tend to be more sensational, their ‘evidence’ more ethereal. And this distracts the public from what is really going on – politics. As for that politics, you will usually find Big Biz behind it today. And it isn’t funny.
    Can I suggest you cast your eye across these short posts by me:

    https://beyondtheblog.wordpress.com/category/super-capitalism

    If I seem to be sceptical about conspiracy theories, it is because I think they are counter-productive, and useful to certain ‘powers’ in the world today. And speaking about ‘powers’, I’m not talking about sensationalist conspiracies, but simple politics and thirst for power and control.
    Let’s concentrate on what is really important.

  7. Seriously, why is it that in the last five decades no one seems upset that the U.S. goes to war without a declaration of war? I mean, come on, the Constitution had become nothing more than something useful in rhetoric but ignored in practice.

  8. anthonynorth said

    Hi TT,
    You raise a valid point. I wouldn’t say no one is upset by it – once upon a time there used to be riots; now people are just in an apolitical coma.
    It’s a difficult issue. I’d argue an executive should have the right to go to war, as we need decisiveness in matters of security – as much in my own UK as the US. But it should be ratified as soon as possible by the legislature – and arguably only allowed if the state is under extreme risk of invasion.
    Notice, I use the word, ‘invasion’, as opposed to ‘clear and present danger’. For instance, I think the decision to dismantle Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan was valid. Iraq no. But whilst there may have been a ‘clear and present danger’, the legislature had time to give the executive the authority to do it.
    That phrase ‘clear and present danger’ actually scares the hell out of me. There’s nothing more frightening than ambiguity. But again, this is politics, not conspiracy.

  9. By no one, I meant no one in the mainstream of political power. The Republicans only complain about it when the Democrats are in power, the Democrats only complain when the Republicans are in power. Neither party has a problem with going to war without declaring war, they just don’t want the other party doing it. It is quite sad really.

  10. anthonynorth said

    Good morning TT,
    Ah, I’m with you now. To me, the main reason for this problem is what people think is the death of ideology. In reality, it is nothing of the sort. Rather, it is the total success of ideology – the imposition of a super-capitalist ethic grounded in materialism, individualism and consumerism. In the model, materialism means the only reward is a product, whilst individualism gives you the right to demand the product.
    Because this ideology does not have apparent ‘political’ elements, one side effect is the need for a ‘politics of fear’. Any society needs a social glue, and if politics won’t do it, an all-pervading threat will – a modern version of the Devil after your soul.
    But the main consequence of this ideology is that politicians are no longer people with a cause, but managers, simply tweaking the system to make it easier for Big Biz.
    For added control, Big Biz loves political parties, as the politicians do their own policing. And this is the point – it is no longer acceptable for politicians to go against this party line.
    Hence, fear breeds social cohesion, but also war, and the politicians, being just managers, go along with it because its the only way to manage society in the way they think they must.
    I don’t know about the US, but in the UK I offer a remedy here:

    ABOLISH POLITICAL PARTIES

  11. rodeo97 said

    I do not believe that a hundred year old controlled master plan is being devised by a close nit group of people which indulge in rituals. I do beleive, however, that very rich and powerful people are able to influence major changes in the world in coordination with each other. The most wealthy and powerful people on this planet did not get there by pure luck and the sweat of their brow. They are very intellegent and capable of organizational and leadership roles that the average person is not capable of. Think of the small town in which the mayor, the sherrif, and the local business people are in cahoots. The local business owner who generates most of the jobs and money can influence the mayor to put a certain law into effect and the sherif will enforce that law. Now think of a MULTINATIONAL corporation. What kind of influence do they have? Do they even belong to a particular country exactly? They don’t have to break the law or be corrupt because they make the laws. Coorporations are not evil or anything like that, but they fall under a different set of laws than an individual citizen of a particular country. The truth is that this globilizatin thing is very real. I believe that the change this new world order is in the process of bringing is scary because all change is scary. However, I do not see any evidence that it a planned take over of the world. Honestly, It seems like it has a mind of its own. The economy, power politics. Humans are just the tool for some self realizing force. The future is never certain and it scares man just like the knowledge that some day all men will die.

  12. rodeo97 said

    I also agree about the constitution. It has become a very nice gallery piece. Very sad:(

  13. anthonynorth said

    Hi Rodeo97,
    You share many of my concerns here. Might I suggest you see my Super Capitalism category, accessed through right sidebar.
    I’ve a number of short posts on this subject there.

  14. suzy said

    testing

  15. Suzy said

    When conspiracy theories are disregarded,it’s usually because of the inability and therefore something is blocking more than one possible explanation of reality. And the one explanation that is accepted is the one coming through news media.

    Wasn’t it later determined by the supreme court that the government’s action of monitoring and recording all communications was unconstitutional? I agree with your statement, unfortunately, that the constitution may not be worth the paper it is written on. Who is going to make right the destructions of the constitution? Who is going to police the ‘whight haus’? Who is going to challenge the ‘authorities’ who do what seems like the thing to do at the time? No one. Because, unfortunatley, ‘city hall’ can’t be fought. When you’ve got power, albeit temporarily, you can and do use it.

    I suppose that being able to see a conspiracy theory is like being able to see a ghost. Only certain persons have the gift, if you want to call it that.

    Did aliens ever crash in Roswell? Was 9-11 an inside job? My 2 cents is that it never felt right from that day. and for those buildings to collapse they way they did. It’s practically been proven there was dynamite in there. The fall made that evident. Also those clips are never shown. Probably because the clips would prove this was no ordinary collapse. Who other than an americian could come with the symbolism of the date meanings and the eleven looking like the 2 buildings. And there was an election scheduled to take place that day. That may have been one of the reasons, if not the reason. Now I don’t really want to think this about old betsys soil, but i’m no dummy either. Give us a little credit, will ya (talking to t h e m).

    Nobody better knock on my door after reading this post. But let me say this, we are all entitled to our opinion. I respect yours.

  16. Suzy said

    On a totally unrelated subject, I’m asking this question here because I can’t post anywhere else. Does anyone else find this site extremely slow? Must be some third party recording every keystroke only to play it back at strategic times throughout our lives. aaaagggghhhh!!!!!!!! No seriously, though, why is this site so slow?

Leave a comment