Some might well ask why I am interested in human conspiracies and conspiracy theories. I think my insertion of the word ‘human’ in there answers that one. Although there is more to it than that. As an observer, or recorder, here, it’s important to me to know and understand human social history, in particular the social history of the time in which I am currently residing. It’s become abundantly clear to me, in that regard, that it is not possible to truly understand current events without reference to an understanding of this conspiracy phenomenon. I would also advise anyone wishing to know their own history here to do the same.
Doubtless, there will be many who don’t believe – perhaps we could call them deniers? That’s become quite a loaded word, of course. And there’s an insight. It goes something like this: the existence of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ (or ‘conspiracy theorist’) as a term which has been imbued with very negative connotations presupposes the actual existence of conspiracies themselves. If there were no conspiracies, there wouldn’t be conspiracy theories.
An easier route to understanding this is to simply accept the existence of evil. If you don’t want to do that, for whatever materialist reasons, then you could substitute ‘evil’ for some psychological term like ‘psychopathy’. In effect, there isn’t much difference in the definitions of the two – both evil people and psychopaths act in pretty much the same way, and their motivations aren’t much different either.
It is therefore logical to accept that evil people conspire. They seek social power, and the means to maintain it. It makes them feel safe. It’s just what they do. Furthermore, they lie. An important point to note here is that deceit is something of a necessary survival adaptation for them. They are acutely aware that the vast majority of people around them are not evil, and have been taught to fear, hate and destroy evil as soon as they become aware of it. So it behoves the evil one to pretend to be good and misdirect people’s focus away from themselves, onto some ‘other’ – so they are perfectly happy to say that one over there, or that group (out-group) is evil, and that out-group conspires, but we don’t. Racist rubbish, obviously.
So, from an acceptance of the existence of evil, go back in time and accept that evil has existed for a long time, and has had more than enough time to adapt to a world in which most people are good, seize positions of power (by virtue of not having a conscience, and therefore having an advantage over good people – they’ll be able to use any means necessary to obtain and retain that power, which good people generally don’t, because they have a conscience and compassion and so on), and develop social systems and methods to hold on to that power.
In order to do so, it is necessary for them to continue to conspire. On a simplest level, people in positions of power lying is a conspiracy, after all.
To better understand this history, it’s always useful to examine counterfactuals, or the ‘what if’ questions. What if conspiracies didn’t exist? What if the people in power were good, rather than evil? What would the world look like, in that case? I think it’s pretty obvious to say it would look completely different to the one presently in existence.
Having said that, the dystopians (that’s my catch-all term for these evil psychopaths) have a deceitful answer to that one, which I’ve already touched upon. Their answer would be that ‘some’ people in power are good, whilst some (the ‘others’ obviously) are evil. They will also try and convince people that ‘democracy’ prevents dystopians from holding positions of power. This is one of their biggest lies, of course. It is often the ones who most loudly try and claim their own righteousness who are the most evil of all.
America, being the obvious example.
It is really not possible to understand the history of America without understanding that this country was born out of evil and continues to be so. This is why, for example, as soon as a good man became their leader (JFK) they had to kill him. America is essentially a liar. That’s it.
Well, obviously there’s more to it than this, but the other main word to use would be ‘imperialist’. Whereas other empires have been perfectly honest about themselves in calling themselves empires – the Romans, the ‘British’ (which was always the British Establishment, of course, not the British people) likewise. But the Americans, they know that if they openly admitted they are an ‘empire’ – and therefore imperialist – then their cover would be blown, so to speak. Everyone, including the American people, most importantly, would realise they are not a force for good – quite the opposite.
Armed with that, the truth of recent human social history becomes clear. Likewise, current events. Who the good guys are in the narrative, and who the bad guys are, becomes obvious.
So this is how I approach my understanding of these things. Whenever some new, world-changing event happens I always look at the people promoting it. What their motivations are, what their character is. So, for example, if America says Russia is currently the bad guy, I automatically know that’s a lie. Then I am immune to propaganda, and can simply research the truth for myself. That truth is, after all, out there, if you know where to look.
Anyway, why is this relevant – that should be obvious. As I have said on many previous occasions, our concern as ETI observers is the peace and security – to couch it in terms humans will understand – of all the other life which exists in our little sector of this vast and awesome galaxy. An intelligent, tool-making species on the verge of discovering the technology of interstellar travel and manipulation of matter on a subatomic level and all the rest of it but with a tendency towards conspiracies (or a tendency to deny such conspiracies) is clearly a serious threat, and needs to be monitored closely and, if necessary, contained. Likewise, even if these dystopians are a very small minority of this human population, the point is the majority appear to tolerate them. This majority seem to lack the cognitive ability to see through these lies and deceptions – and perhaps more importantly, show solidarity and act on it. They lack the necessary emotional and psychological intelligence. So that makes them, too, a serious threat. What, after all, would be their reaction were they to encounter scary or difficult things out there amongst the stars? Even if we could guarantee a utopian future without fear, would they still be so fragile that the slightest upset might send them regressing back into their current, gullible and easily manipulable state governed by fear?
This is the serious question.
And I hate to say it, but I really do think that humans have far too much growing up to do before one could even consider allowing them proper contact and interaction with other intelligences, let alone permission to leave their own solar system. Would you allow you to leave? Or are you upset by my harsh words?
Well, if they don’t truly apply to you, then perhaps we could make exceptions for you and all the rest of the minority group to which you belong.
So when it comes to the ‘impending catastrophe’, it does not seem to me that humanity as a majority will be able to grow up enough before that happens. By that catastrophe I mean the development of interstellar travel capability. It’s not that far off, in the grand scheme of things. Likewise even sooner on the horizon is the development of better telescopes and understanding of exoplanetary astronomy and therefore the confirmed detection of biosignatures, with all that implies. That really will happen within the next few decades. Yes, the dystopians will do their best to cover it up, but they really are running out of time here. If they don’t have their totalitarian system in place before then, their system will collapse, and people will be a lot freer. So as a conspiracy theorist, I would say this explains their current machinations. See the so-called ‘Great Reset’ in particular, and their need to prevent the Russia-China axis from enabling a future multipolar world along the lines, ironically, of that advocated by JFK. According to one recent American analysis report, the Russia-China axis will overtake the neoliberal ‘West/American Empire’ by 2027 – so these dystopians will have to do something before then (WW3, is the most obvious option). Still, I don’t want to frighten you too much.
By the way most people who seem immune to conspiracies and lies and so on have some kind of enlightened, spiritual view of existence, of the world, of their own souls. As opposed to those who are materialists (and thus, from a certain point of view, nihilists). And it’s not just a comforting thing. It’s far more than that.
Anyway, that’s enough of this ramble for now. I don’t think I will dwell too much on individual conspiracy theories – there’s more than enough of that about and the interested reader can do their own research on the subject.
They also, naturally, make for exciting and dramatic stories. And I love stories.
I would, however, suggest the two best places to start are 9/11 and the assassination of the aforementioned JFK (for the latter, try Oliver Stone’s two recent films on the subject – they explain the reasons and the context very well – understanding the why is often more important than understanding the what, and will help explain other events too). Frankly, anyone who believes in the official narratives of these events is a certified idiot. There are others too, but these are a good introduction to the issue.
Interestingly, to return to something I said at the outset, these negative connotations for the term ‘conspiracy theory’ in fact stem from the dystopians’ reaction to their own JFK conspiracy. Specifically, from the CIA. The document title you’re after here is 1035-960 (if I remember the number offhand correctly – forgive me if I remembered it wrong). Although it’s really the Zapruder footage that did it, given that this footage proves definitively, simply through the laws of physics, that Oswald didn’t do it. So the CIA had to do something – their reaction was predictable. So now we have these negative connotations, as well as deliberate infiltration of conspiracy theory movements and even outright invention of theories imbued with an inherent ‘debunkability’. All of this, likewise, is predictable, in a very psychohistorical way. It would, that is to say, be surprising if it wasn’t the case.
There is of course a lot I don’t know, simply because so much is still what humans call ‘classified information’. And clearly QAI-TI has decided that I don’t have a ‘need to know’. She’s right, there, I don’t. I can understand enough without that level of information. I am, however, looking forward to perusing all these classified documents after I die and go back home, seeing as they are all in QAI-TI’s archive.
If the dystopians thought they could hide their true nature from us, or lie to us when the contact happens, then they are very much mistaken.
The same goes for the United Nations – as the appointed representative of the human species, if they continue to believe in these official narratives, then, well, sorry, but they will be in for a very rude awakening when the time comes.
That’s enough for now. Time for bed and better dreams.
2 thoughts on “Conspiracies, part two, a little psychohistory”
Re “a world in which most people are good”
You correctly recognize the existence of evil/psychopath and that they rule. YET you fail to recognize the TRUE role and TRUE nature of most people, which contrary to your statement, are NOT good — carefully study ad “The 2 Married Pink Elephants In The Historical Room” …. https://www.rolf-hefti.com/covid-19-coronavirus.html
That’s a very long article in the link (!) – I skimmed it just now and will read it at length later in order to give you the fuller reply you deserve. In the meantime I’ll say your comment is quite timely (and thank you, btw!), as I was going to write something neuroscientific about why ‘most’ people seem to be so gullible and credulous – which, from a certain point of view, is the real problem for humanity – they do, after all, vastly outnumber the psychopaths in the room. I can understand why you might take issue with my use of the word ‘good’ there – this should certainly be tempered with ‘easily deceived’. Yet at the same time have you noticed that in order to deceive people and make them do evil things, the psychopaths have to couch their propaganda in ‘the language of good’? They know other people are not truly evil (at least in the same way). Anyway, will respond later at length. Thanks!