Carrying on from the first thread I aim to open your eyes to something a little bit more nuanced. Something not often spoken about by those
So without further ado, I feel it's my honor and duty to introduce to you what i simply refer to as the conspiracy of conspiracies.
In the last thread I wrote about how with a strong misleading narrative and compelling evidence to go with it, it can be possible for only a handful
of individuals to mislead entire governments and government departments of even the most liberal and progressive social democracies, to carry out
maleavolent conspiracies against its own citizens, without them neccessarily having any idea about what's truly going on.
And in this thread I want to analyse this phenomena in more detail. So to begin I'd like you to consider this semi rhetorical question.
Who are the conspirators?
The reason I ask this, is because i wanted to get you to start thinking about what kind of a character such individuals may possess, and what kind of
beliefs they might hold. The problem here though is that the narratives you assume based on outward appearances can often be at odds with hidden
realities and truth. Sometimes the most shady looking characters can be the most honest and reliable. Sometimes the most honest, well meaning looking
characters can be the most unreliable and corrupt. In short, not all conspirators look the same, have the same attitudes, or have the same beleifs.
But although I made it appear as though not all conspirators are alike, they do share some things in common. Primarily that they are aiming to deceive
you (the type we are concerned with in is thread series).
Now, here is where it gets interesting.
When a conspiracy is hatched that involves large scale deception, fraud, inception etc the motives are sometimes purely for greed, but sometimes they
are political or philosophical.
It's in those cases when the motive is political or philosophical (including religion) that the conspiracy of conspiracies occurs.
Let me pose another question.
What motivates someone to enact a conspiracy on the basis of political or philosophical beliefs?
The answer is not simply whatever the end goal of the conspiracy is, although that surely is the primary motivator, there are other societal factors
What it comes down to fundamentally is, the conspirator holds a view that he believes, rightly or wrongly, he would not be able to persuade his peers
in the general population to accept.
This may be for a variety of reasons. And before I reveal what the conspiracy of conspiracies is it is important to list what some of those reasons
are / may be so you can have a better understanding about the different ways in which this conspiracy unfolds.
The people are not of the same religion as the conspirator/s
The political establishment will never facilitate what the conspirator aims to bring about unless there is a revolution.
The philosophy of population is diametrically opposed to that of the conspirator.
The population is seen to be too uneducated to understand real reasons behind a particular course of action, so is not informed.
The population if informed would revolt because they disagree.
Now in every case you can see subtle differnces but striking similarities. The best example to explain the conspiracy of conspiracies is the example
of the population who's philosophy is diametrically opposed to that of the conspirator.
In two very important character flaws of the conspirator can be learned. Arrogance and cowardice. To explain, if a philosophical view is held and an
opposite view is held by another person that then leads to political disagreement, the civilised and humane thing to do would be to have a debate.
But the conspirator refuses. And by refusing to debate with people, the conspirator conspires to bring about both the end of civilization and humanity
as we know it. And i challenge anyone who disagrees with that to find me one example of something that makes civilization function that isnt based on
philosphy. I put it to you at civilizations are built and sustained by philosophy. And what separate humanity from the animals is our ability to
debate and reason, and settle disagreements with one another without resorting to violence and actions that harm society.
So this ladies and gentlemen is the conspiracy of conspiracies.
Reflect for a moment how many conspiracies there have been in recent decades that we know took place, have just taken place, or are currently taking
place. And consider that each time a conspiracy involves philosophical or political motives, the conspirators are not only conspiring to bring about
whatever political or philisophical or religious end results they desire, whether they know it or not, by engaging in such conspiracirs they are
simultaneously conspiring to bring about the end of civilisation and humanity as a whole.
edit on 8-10-2015 by nonjudgementalist because:
(no reason given)