Page 1 of 1 [ 8 posts ] 

codarac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 780
Location: UK

31 Jan 2009, 10:05 am

http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/economic/080498.html

Media Lies: ‘Conspiracy Theory’

(c) Copyright 1998: Graham Strachan

The standard media reaction to the suggestion that ‘economic rationalism’ and ‘free trade’ are false versions of the theories of Adam Smith and David Ricardo, deliberately contrived to bring about domination of markets by the economically strong and to further the process of ‘globalisation’, is to label the claimant a ‘conspiracy theorist’. According to the ‘politically correct’ view, ‘globalisation’ is supposed to be ‘just happening’, the result of spontaneous forces beyond the control of man, ‘market forces’, forces of inevitability, history or destiny. That’s why the media are claiming the MAI is ‘unstoppable’.

One might think that the suggestion that world events somehow take place spontaneously without people plotting and planning is so absurd as not to warrant serious discussion, but it appears that is the point now reached in this society thanks largely to the media campaign against 'conspiracy theories'.

When one boils down what a ‘conspiracy theory’ really is, it is any interpretation of world events or their causes which differs from the officially sanctioned view put out by the media. To suggest that the official view might be deliberately false to serve or protect the interests of the people who own the media, or the people who in turn own them, is itself branded a ‘conspiracy theory’. Obviously the whole ‘conspiracy theory’ business is a label to quash speculation that the official media version of the world may be false.

The claim that ‘conspiracies’ are the result of the paranoid imagination is recent. Previous generations were not so coy. Writing in his book ‘The Nation State and National Self-determination’ in 1969, for example, Professor Alfred Cobban referred to “systematic attempts [by Nazi Germany] to destroy the independent states of Europe by spreading internal dissention.” Such ‘systematic attempts’ implied conspiracy. Cobben quotes another witer from a previous century, Lecky who, in another book, ‘Democracy and Liberty’ (1896) had condemned “the use of national divisions for the [deliberate] destruction of existing political entities”. How else but by ‘conspiracy’?

Weakening neighbouring states to make them ripe for conquest by deliberately stirring up trouble within their borders is as old as mankind. It did not happen through the aspiring conqueror sitting on the toilet and thinking hard, it came about through conspiracy: a plan, meetings, and briefings, and the financing of people within the target country to stir up trouble. Leckey referred to it as “the object of all such men [tyrants] to see surrounding nations divided, weakened, and perhaps deprived of important strategical positions, through internal dissentions”.1 According to Professor Cobban, and he is hardly alone, Germany did precisely this in the years before 1939. Nobody accused these learned writers of being ‘conspiracy theorists’.

Techniques similar to the ‘conspiracy theory’ stunt were used by the media to protect the communist movement in the post-World War II years. The Communist Manifesto of 1848 is a conspiratorial document. The purpose of its authors, Marx and Engels, was to inspire the workingmen of all nations to unite and overthrow their capitalist oppressors and the state they controlled and replace them with a state in which the working class were the ruling class. An international organisation, the Communist International, was formed to coordinate the activities of the Communist movement world-wide. Lenin, in ‘What is to be Done’ (1902), urged communists to “go amongst all classes of the people as theoreticians, as propagandists, as agitators and as organisers”. One can hardly get more conspiratorial than that.

And that’s exactly what communists did, yet anybody who suggested as much was accused by the editors of the mass media of ‘kicking the communist can’, or ‘seeing reds under the bed’. There was ‘no communist plot’, according to Western media, even though all the communist literature confirmed that there was, and any worker on an Australian factory floor was well aware of it. Even when Mihail Gorbachev, with the arrival of ‘glasnost’ and ‘peristroika’, confirmed that Russia has been ‘exporting revolution’ and said it was time that it stopped, no apologies from the editors of mass media were forthcoming.

That the American CIA works around the clock to prop up or topple governments in other countries according to their usefulness or otherwise to American interests is well known. Yet despite evidence the CIA may have been involved in the toppling of Australia’s Whitlam government in 1995, to actually say so gets you labelled a ‘conspiracy theorist’. Things are what the media say they are, and anything else is ‘conspiracy theory’.

To suggest that human affairs have never been, or are not now the outcome of deliberate human connivings, some of them covert, is patent nonsense. Yet that, is what the editors and journalists of the major media are expecting the public to believe. That such stupidity could come out of the mouths of men and women professing to be objective reporters of human events and commentators on human affairs defies rational explanation. The evidence that there are hidden interests at work, and always have been, is so overwhelming that the persistence of media people in their irrational denial tends to confirm that there is conspiracy at work right now, and they are part of it.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

31 Jan 2009, 10:30 am

Wait. So, denying the existence of any given conspiracy is automatically evidence that one is involved in a conspiratorial cover-up? Not buying it.

The historical examples in that article are pretty poor, and don't lend any credence to the NWO-type nonsense that will be spouted. You have to give strong evidence of a specific conspiracy to be taken seriously, and honestly, you just haven't.
Image


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


history_of_psychiatry
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,105
Location: X

01 Feb 2009, 3:11 am

Ohh, right. It's those dirty minorities behind everything. :roll:


_________________
X


Dussel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: London (UK)

01 Feb 2009, 5:59 am

codarac wrote:
http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/economic/080498.html

Media Lies: ‘Conspiracy Theory’

(c) Copyright 1998: Graham Strachan

The standard media reaction to the suggestion that ‘economic rationalism’ and ‘free trade’ are false versions of the theories of Adam Smith and David Ricardo, deliberately contrived to bring about domination of markets by the economically strong and to further the process of ‘globalisation’, is to label the claimant a ‘conspiracy theorist’. According to the ‘politically correct’ view, ‘globalisation’ is supposed to be ‘just happening’, the result of spontaneous forces beyond the control of man, ‘market forces’, forces of inevitability, history or destiny. That’s why the media are claiming the MAI is ‘unstoppable’.


Globalisation happens since the 16th century and is mostly the result of better of communication and transport. Each new development of better means lead to an increase in the global integration. Starting with better Ships, capable of journeys to India and the West Indies in the 16th century, via the railway and the telegraph to toady means of transport.

Trying to stop this would would mean to turn around a 500 year old trend and to stop technical innovation.

codarac wrote:
Techniques similar to the ‘conspiracy theory’ stunt were used by the media to protect the communist movement in the post-World War II years. The Communist Manifesto of 1848 is a conspiratorial document. The purpose of its authors, Marx and Engels, was to inspire the workingmen of all nations to unite and overthrow their capitalist oppressors and the state they controlled and replace them with a state in which the working class were the ruling class.


A conspiracy needs to be secret. The Communist Manifesto of 1848 has been published. Marx and Engels really were not secret about their goals and ideas.

If you look into the situation of a worker anywhere in Europe at 1848 the analysis of Marx was not that wrong that they really did not benefit form the existing order and there situation was quite same anywhere in Europe. Therefore an international answer was the logic result of this international situation.

codarac wrote:
An international organisation, the Communist International, was formed to coordinate the activities of the Communist movement world-wide. Lenin, in ‘What is to be Done’ (1902), urged communists to “go amongst all classes of the people as theoreticians, as propagandists, as agitators and as organisers”. One can hardly get more conspiratorial than that.


You may take some time to analyse closer the enormous differences between the ideas of Marx and of Lenin. I would recommend Kautsky's book "Die Diktatur des Proletariats", 1918, in which Karl Kautsky provided a devastating critic on Lenin from Marxist viewpoint:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky ... /index.htm

codarac wrote:
To suggest that human affairs have never been, or are not now the outcome of deliberate human connivings, some of them covert, is patent nonsense.


It is therefore not patent nonsense, because for a social revolution you need a revolutionary situation. If the circumstance weren't in Russia as they were 1917 Lenin and Trozki would remain isolated emigrants in Austria or Switzerland. Whey there was no revolution e.g. in Sweden? Or Lenin even didn't thought about starting a revolution in Switzerland?

For a revolution to happen you must have a very significant part of the population who's situation is miserable that the risk of loosing everything (including live) is outweighed by the possible gains. Well fed citizens in reasonable circumstances do not start a revolution, some of those become leaders of revolution - but this is an other issue. The Lenins and Robespierres of this world are running around all the time, but without a revolutionary situation they will remain unknowns.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Feb 2009, 9:33 am

Orwell wrote:
Wait. So, denying the existence of any given conspiracy is automatically evidence that one is involved in a conspiratorial cover-up? Not buying it.

The historical examples in that article are pretty poor, and don't lend any credence to the NWO-type nonsense that will be spouted. You have to give strong evidence of a specific conspiracy to be taken seriously, and honestly, you just haven't.
Image


Correct! For Conspiracy Theorists lack of evidence is evidence. It just shows how clever the conspirators are in covering up their tracks. So evidence is evidence and no evidence is evidence.

ruveyn



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

01 Feb 2009, 9:40 am

Conspiracy theorists are behind all of this. They make these things up so we buy their ideology and they can control the world. Evil conspiracy theorists.


_________________
.


sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 69
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

01 Feb 2009, 4:23 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Conspiracy theorists are behind all of this. They make these things up so we buy their ideology and they can control the world. Evil conspiracy theorists.


Crop circles topic

All the wheat from those farms went in to making Paranoid Cocoa Puffs cereal.

There are aliens among us, and we know what they want. :twisted:


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

01 Feb 2009, 4:37 pm

codarac wrote:
Obviously the whole ‘conspiracy theory’ business is a label to quash speculation that the official media version of the world may be false.

well, I believe that could be true in some circumstances, the label has become popular to be used in a degorative way, and using that could become a fallacy itself, depending on the nature of a discussion and the circumstance. But yeah, popularizing such label seems to open the possibilities of being overused and wrongused.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?