| Blogs > notesfromunderground |
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
On October 29 2015 01:05 Djzapz wrote:To me, a conspiracy requires direct hands on planning by at least two people or entities that have some direct contacts. So if Janet Yellen is having secret meeting with Jamie Dimon and not telling us about them, does that count as a conspiracy? | ||
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
On October 29 2015 00:47 Falling wrote: My brother works in a pizza shop between two small cities and some of the regulars are conspiracy theory nutters so I hear a fair a bit from him about chem trails, vaxx conspiracies, etc, etc. I would say a common trait for those that fall for the crazy ones is they tend to personalize most bad things that come their way. One fellow is CONVINCED that the former premier of our province was out to grab HIS pay cheque. And not like generic tax increases for everyone, but that the premier is personally out for his money above and beyond the regular tax payer's money. But you see this fairly commonly- little allowance is made for undirected bad events or unintended consequences. Everything fits into the pattern of a deliberate, master plan. It's personal. There is also a tendency to reduce a wide array of interests to one secret and shadowy organization (a League of Shadows, if you will.) There must be one prime mover- somewhat akin to an evil pagan god, if you think about it. They also tend to have a real shot-gun approach to facts- an indepth knowledge of a certain peculiar set of facts, but nothing around it because they tend to cycle through their arguments in a rather rapid pace, making it difficult to pin down any one of piece of their menagerie of facts. This is makes it fairly difficult to discuss their theories because you can never stay on one topic long enough to get down to their ground level assumptions, but they WILL cycle back to that set of facts again- possibly multiple times in the same discussion. Alex Jones is very much like this, but my brother and I have had very similar experiences with the local conspiracy theorists. They also tend to have an unrealistic of view of human's capacity for secrecy (or rather the lack.) Franklin's "Three can keep a secret, if two are dead" never applies. They drastically underestimate (or else do not consider) just how many people would need to be in on the secret and how many people would need to be silenced. this is an interesting post, thank you! | ||
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
On October 29 2015 00:04 Doodsmack wrote: Chomsky's "political economy of the mass media" (forget if that's the exact title) is a good example of a conspiracy that assembles itself rather than achieves direct manipulation through deliberate coordination. Basically political power structures accomplish media complicity not through direct puppet stringing but through a system structure that forces the media to live off the government. The result is a lesser degree of control than could be achieved by puppet stringing or straight up state run media. And it may not even be a deliberate effort by those in power but rather an emergent feature caused by natural self-interest on the part of political power components of the "system". Chomsky actually is a pretty rigorous thinker about questions like this I think. I should read more of his work. just want to leave this here for anyone who hasn't seen it: | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On October 29 2015 13:38 notesfromunderground wrote: So if Janet Yellen is having secret meeting with Jamie Dimon and not telling us about them, does that count as a conspiracy? I'd say it depends on what's in the meeting. I did specify "planning" needs to take place. So you need collusion, planning, and a nefarious goal. Janet Yellen meeting with Jamie Dimon is perhaps unethical (?) but would they directly conspire to accomplish anything? I don't know. I guess the point I'm getting at is, are them minimum levels of planning, collusion and a minimum level of nefariousness before one can be called a conspirator or a co-conspirator? Or is it a conspiracy to tell your colleague "hey let's steal $5 each from the cash registry, place yourself in front of the camera" and our boss will never know. Because in this case you have a little bit of planning, a little bit of collusion and a "little bit" of theft. So is there a scale or does that count? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17267 Posts
here you go http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13989301/lenny-dykstra-claims-spent-500k-pis-blackmail-umps-better-calls LOL not too many guys experience a dramatic improvement in their mid thirties  | ||
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
| ||
|
Paljas
Germany6926 Posts
On October 30 2015 00:42 notesfromunderground wrote: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/bernies-conspiracy-theory-213307 Regardless whether or not this analysis of Sanders rheotirc is correct, this is acutally a nice example for the point I made earlier. "Billionaire class rigged the system" is not only ahistoric and oversimplified nonsense, but it's also an ineffecitve and poor critic of capitalism in general. What is stuff like this going to accomplish? It's trying to fix something which is not fixable. Billionaires don't have to rig the system. | ||
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
On October 29 2015 22:01 Djzapz wrote: Janet Yellen meeting with Jamie Dimon is perhaps unethical (?) but would they directly conspire to accomplish anything? You don't think Dimon telling Yellen how to run the Fed would be unethical or beneficial to him? | ||
|
Paljas
Germany6926 Posts
It rigs itself through a sort of self-assembly A thousand years of nonlinear rigging | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On October 30 2015 08:08 notesfromunderground wrote: You don't think Dimon telling Yellen how to run the Fed would be unethical or beneficial to him? Well sure but who's to say that's how it would go down? More likely, Yellen would tell Dimon to fuck right off. Who's to say they would even agree on anything? Odds are, Yellen meets with a bunch of important people that we'll never hear about and they give her council and all that. Also, despite her relative autonomy, Yellen would get kicked from the fed if the monetary policy didn't follow suit with the fiscal policy. So it would be a weak conspiracy because it wouldn't work. And I don't think the federal reserve is well suited to give an advantage to one specific business anyway, that'd more of a fiscal policy thing. That's why the lobbies are close to the legislature. As for the criticism of Sander's approach, I don't think he can speak to the US electorate without making these types of oversimplifications. The system is rigged, he says, referring to unfairness and the absence of equal opportunity (or anything resembling equal opportunity). I think "a thousand years of nonlinear rigging" is a nice way to put it, because instead of assuming that the unfair system is this way by design, it suggests that it's natural, and to an extent it is, but your objection comes from the fact that rigged systems are rigged by design and billionaires don't need to design anything to give them an advantage because they have billions of dollars (unless I misunderstood you). If that is your objection, I say I agree that billionaires do have a natural advantage, but they've also been working hard, putting institutions into place that ensure that their wealth will continue to grow, often at the detriment of others. That leads to murky waters... People will always seek to improve their situation - people with economic power are better suited to do it. They institutionalize things that advantage them in ways which regular folks cannot. Is it a conspiracy? Perhaps not, due to the disjointed way in which it takes place. Is it rigged? Regardless of the level of coordination in which the "rigging" took place, it's hard to argue against the fact that social mobility is not easy, with rampant nepotism and the advantages that come with starting off in life with a certain wealth... Anyway time to sleep. | ||
|
notesfromunderground
188 Posts
| ||
| ||
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Weekly #120
GgMaChine vs ReBellioNLIVE!
PiG Sty Festival
Group D
ByuN vs ShoWTimELIVE!
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
WardiTV Winter Champion…
Replay Cast
WardiTV Winter Champion…
The PondCast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
