Friday, 8 June 2012

Conspiracy theories

One of the tricks played on us over the past few decades has been the denigration of conspiracy theories whenever the establishment is involved. Conspiracy theories directed at the establishment have to be very carefully explained if they are to escape the tinfoil hat label. Wildly improbable conspiracy theories skew the debate.

Yet it would be outstandingly naive to assume that the establishment is not essentially conspiratorial, routinely conspiring against our interests. It has always been this way - it goes with the logic of politics and government bureaucracy.

All professions are conspiracies against the laity
George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950) - The Doctor's Dilemma, act 1

Of course they are – that’s the point. It isn’t just about professional standards, comforting though that idea may be. Shaw was right and we should not forget that politics and bureaucracy are professions. They conspire against us, the laity as well as their professional competitors - it’s a key aspect of what they do.

noun, plural con·spir·a·cies.
1. The act of conspiring.
2.An evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3.A combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4.Law. An agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5.Any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

Quite clearly definition 1,3 and 5 apply to politics and government. How could it be otherwise? A great deal of covert government discussion, both formal and informal, can be and should be defined quite correctly as conspiracy. So why the gullibility in dismissing conspiracy theories? Why the embarrassment when we are continually presented with the plainest evidence of widespread conspiracy at both national and international level?

  • Climate change alarmism.
  • UK politics and the three major political parties.
  • The EU and its long-term agenda.
  • The UN and its global agenda.

 How obvious does it have to be?

All groups with mutual political interests conspire against those who are not of their group. As the world becomes more interconnected, conspiracies deepen and opportunities for conspiracy widen. Mutual interests expand and become more rewarding for those on the inside. Networking, both overt and covert becomes essential to global players. It becomes lucrative too - professionally and financially.

This is how we work as human beings – a basic aspect of our psychology. Conspiracy is how we align our own interests with those of our adopted group and aim to make the group stronger. It would be astonishing and even perverse if the elite managed to remain aloof from the pressures of their own power base.

Power is nurtured by conspiracy – it always was.


Anonymous said...

What irritates me is that no-one ever taps me up to be part of a nice, juicy conspiracy! I mean, if there's a nice 'earner' in it, I'd join in a flash.

A K Haart said...

David - given the right background I'm sure you would have been tapped!

Anonymous said...

All explained in Tim Slessor's book 'Lying in State'. Especially the techniques of SODEM - standard offensive/defensive/evasive measures - developed and used by Whitehall (it is alleged).

A highly developed craft it seems, there ought to be a degree course on it...

A K Haart said...

Roger - I can imagine the Whitehall culture being very well established.

Yvonne said...

You may want to listen to this BBC Radio 4 programme that touches on the subject in its usual way:

A K Haart said...

yvonne - thanks for the link. I'm listening too it now.