Alex Jones - COINTELPRO? Fascist Tool?

[the_last_name_left]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

Thanks for the reply.

Lisa:Read up on all of that and then ask yourself if Alex Jones is a good guy or a bad guy.

well, i suppose I already have some ideas about it - but I am less interested in him so much as his 'function' perhaps? I am 'old school' leftie in that I see these things in terms of structural class war - I guess I view AJ as being a foil against genuine progressive change - as a bulwark to the existing class structure and capitalism, and all that jazz. So the personal psychology aspect isn't so important to me perhaps - neither does it matter much (to me) whether AJ is concious of what he does, or not: the consequences are the same. Tho anything which very clearly suggests he IS concious of his role, would certainly be worth knowing. He has not replied to any of my several emails questioning him and/or prisonplanet.inc

Incidentally, several times I have written them about a copyright issue over Orwell's 1984. Prisonplanet.inc has the entire 1984 manuscript available for download - but only in the members' area. I am against property rights in principle (property is theft) - and I certainly support 1984 having as many readers as possible. Orwell would have wanted that. But prisonplanet.inc believes in property rights - and they have 1984 ONLY in their members' area. So far as I know, the copyright still exists and is now held in trust following Sonia Orwell's death. She was given the responsibility of looking after Orwell's estate from his deathbed. I don't appreciate AJ making money out of Orwell - if there are copyright fees due - I'd rather they went to where they should - Orwell's estate, and NOT into AJ.corp. And if there aren't royalties outstanding, what the hell is 1984 doing in the members' area and not in the PUBLIC one? I think it is horribly disrespectful whichever way they cut it. Payup, or give it away........


SPELLBINDER seems a very good term.

The Political Ponerology book by Dr. Lobaczewski elaborates on "spellbinders" and is well worth reading.
This book is the KEY to understanding what is going on in the "9-11 Truth Movement" Cointelpro operation, of which Alex Jones is the self-proclaimed "grandfather".

Well, ok. :) I'm reserving judgement: I have read some in the few but long threads I have finished. It's interesting - but tbh it doesn't seem all that relevant to me. If I stick around, I'm sure I will come across it more, and maybe my view will change. But like I say - I am old leftie, and class war and all that adequately explains the world for me, largely. I had a rather brief interest in clinical psychology, so I'm not totally unfamiliar - but I am essentially ignorant of such things, and ponerology appears pretty sophisticated, so....[I'm also naturally very resistant to having new 'ologies' thrust upon me! Most often it is total quackery - I haven't had reason to think that of ponerology so far - although the name sounds a bit hokey imo :)] Also, my inclination is that much psychology ultimately reflects the class and ideology of the psychologist: issues over intelligence and race for instance. Yup - good old fashioned leftie stuff - that's me. But I am interested, so who knows.....?

L:Alex Jones is about as "christian" as George W. Bush.
He has strategically steered people away from truth while exploiting public fear and paranoia regarding stuff like the " police state" and "martial law" and events such as 9-11 for profit.
Alex Jones works tirelessly to control and manipulate people's minds.

I pretty much agree.

Sweejak and Cyberchrist are two individuals who are hooked up with psychopaths.

Well, again - I don't know. I have come across them before - and we've (really!) clashed over several things. I don't really know what to make of them - I simply put them down in the 'opposition ranks', simply as 'anti-socialists' / pro-capitalists. I strongly disagreed with them, over all sorts of things - but don't draw anything much more from it than that. I don't feel much need to : my view is that the underlying IDEAS are important - and that is what will hold sway with people - it doesn't matter (so much) about being able to pin individuals down as cointelpro or whatever, because if one looks at the ideas promoted, eventually they expose themselves, as it were. I don't mean to suggest that finding out that someone is compromised isn't worth knowing - only that I like to think if you concentrate on just the ideas, eventually rubbish ideas fall apart from a lack of internal logic and contradiction anyway? Ultimately that's more important to me than the individuals involved. Even tho this entire thread perhaps contradicts that, seeing as it is essentially about AJ. LOL. oh well.

Blah blah woof woof

On the wider, impersonal side, I see in prisonplanet and other "9/11" and "anti-war" places a lot (a lot!) of reflections of incipient fascism. Of course there is quite a bit of people posturing against fascism, but within the 9/11 and anti-war movements there seems too little understanding and appreciation of how deeply those movements have THEMSELVES begun to reflect fascism, and at best are simply unconciously providing platforms for the pernicious ideas and values underlying fascism. Conflating jewishness with capitalism, for example. Or the 'NWO' with 'jewishness'. Of communism being a 'jewish plot'. Of hitler 'saving europe' from jews. Of the Iraq war being 'jewish'. That multi-culturalism=NWO inspired clash of civilisations. even issues about black-box voting can be exploited by the far-right as simple means to undermine liberal democracy.

The far-right recognised this long, and imo has been energetically and gleefully subverting the 9/11 and anti war movements for a long time. The far-right benefits from such associations - because the anti-war argument is SO JUST. And because 9/11 is all about TRUTH. Piggy backing on these movements has gained a major platform for the wider views of the far right. But any "real" 9/11 or anti-war movement can have no place for things like racism, let alone fascism? In my world-view that's what the whole thing is about - all THAT is what I oppose - so it's distressing to see 'truth and anti-war movements' succumb. Inevitable I suppose, but that can never be reason to accept it?

anyway. apologies for long post. And thanks for the reply.

 

[the_last_name_left]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

Thanks for replies.

I'm kinda surprised - but in a way that reinforces my previous perception that such views are quite rare? Well, not for you people, obviously.....:) Maybe I don't get out enough? When I first posted this (elsewhere) - the first reply was "yawn." A restricted search on google for "alex jones fascist" etc turned up zero replies. even uiyiuyiuyui gets like 25.......seemed strange. Anyway I guess such views are becoming more prevalent?

On that score, apologies for any repetition, but thanks for your time.

And no suggestions of my having any psychosis? Not yet anyway. But I only posted for the free psycho-analysis...... ;)

 

[Mr. Premise]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

Welcome last name left.

I am a traditional leftie with a LOT of time for esoterica!

I would suggest keeping an open mind about hyperdimensional issues.

Have you wondered why the Powers that Be have no problems having a lot of Marxist academics around? And why they tolerate, and even encourage, the esoteric pursuits of so many?

But if you try to mix the two, it gets immediately, in a subtle way, supressed?

Could it be that the materialism of traditional Marxism makes it very useful for the Powers that Be?

Here's hoping you stick around for a while.

Hello. I'm new.

I came across this place to read some of the posts regarding Alex Jones.

I thought it would be interesting to give you my view - interesting for me, maybe -- maybe for you, too?

I wrote the following post just over a year ago - I'm interested in your opinions.........[btw - I'm much more interested in any views on the <i>content</i> rather than my very obvious stylistic limitations. :)]

I am pretty much traditional leftie, and don't have much time for esoterica. Even so, maybe my perspective might offer you something slightly different? I only post in one other place - and was persuaded to post here by the high level of criticism. I'm interested in subjecting my admittedly rambling view of AJ to some scrutiny - so I am just after some feedback...........hopefully it might elucidate something. maybe not? My view certainly seems to generate some hostility - maybe it will receive better hearing here? Maybe not - maybe I am too much of 'an old leftie'?

 

[the_last_name_left]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

DonaldJHunt:
Here's hoping you stick around for a while.

Thanks. And Hi too. :)

I am a traditional leftie with a LOT of time for esoterica!

An idealist materialist? What do you mean tho? I love krishnamurti - and buddhism seems fine - but most anything else and I seem to instinctively recoil. Inside myself, there are all sorts of things going on - and I think all society would benefit from getting better acquainted with such stuff. But once that inside stuff is turned outwards, and becomes words, and takes structure as idea, well, it just seems to disappear and it's castles in sand. it's imortant - but only inside, and up close. Just the 'meaning' conjured up as a necessity, or side-effect of the selfish gene in a little materialist monkey? I think a lot of what I would call esoterica arises because any 'thing' that became sentient in a world that can sustain life would consider all the possible ways they couldn't exist - and naturally enough would feel - "I'm special. Why?" etc.... Such a being IS special - ALL the IMPOSSIBLE beings can never be in the first place, let alone can they think "I am amongst the impossible - what a vast array of impossibilities there are - I am nothing special......."

I think I can dig abstractions - but esoterica? I don't know. It's 'special' knowledge? I guess I always imagine 'special' knowledge is hokey anyway, and it's what only other people have - i don't have any 'special' knowledge........so by definition I can't have it? :)

About the most 'esoteric' i get is wondering where values come from without 'god'. Is aethiesm doomed to succumb to nihilism? I don't think so at all, but I can struggle to justify that properly. I think it's from a natural/organic source - but that's pretty hazy? Ah well, I'm only a little monkey.......I think I've lost any sense I might have once had about being able to understand 'everything'. Or even wanting to. Being completely insignificant is quite a release i think - I don't know how the human-centric religious types can bear the responsibility. And I have to notice that they are the ones doing a great deal of the mess......... the religious can even believe in heaven and hell, and eternal judgement and all that, and STILL they do what they do. I don't believe in that eternal damnation or heaven stuff - and yet I have no desire to do what they do - and I don't do what they do (kill people for jesus/allah/santa, i mean)

I would suggest keeping an open mind about hyperdimensional issues.

About the 'pure physics' bit of it - then I'd like to think I do. I read michiu kaku stringtheory, and I try to keep abreast of what those seemingly very, very clever people tell me. :) I love cosmology and Theories of Everything - I love 'science' in the 'childish' sense - like an inquisitive monkey. But I am in no position to debate them - I don't know remotely enough - nor ever will. I have to rely on the 'scientific community', and my own relatively very simple logic and intuition to help me decide between competing ideas. But I'm no cosmologist - no physicist - nor mathematician. In all likelihood, I can only have a very superficial understanding. I have a fair degree of faith in empiricism and scientific method and all that, but I'm no scientist. I realise it isn't perfect, but it gets 'work' done ultimately, and is by far the best thing we have imo. I'm a sceptic - and rationalist - empirical - etc. I try to be, at least. Other things are important, but no other system of inquiry can come remotely as close imo. So i try to keep an open mind - but from what I've seen hyperdimensional stuff often steps over into wild fantasy - it's broad church perhaps? What do <you> mean by 'hyperdimensional'? Maybe what i'm thinking of is something else?

Have you wondered why the Powers that Be have no problems having a lot of Marxist academics around?

Well, apparently all those neocon straussians are former 'trostkyites' - that's what I keep reading anyway. I've never actually come across anything by any of them that I would think of as remotely trotskyite. I take it they must mean trotskyite as a tactic, rather than as a belief system? I don't really understand it - but I'm not maerican, so maybe I just missed their political metamorphosis? Still tho - I have never seen anything remotely 'left' from any of them. Would you have any links, because I'd be interested in how one can go from trotskyite to neocon. I don't know how they could do that - maybe I just haven't read enough strauss yet? lol Plus, likely I don't have the same notion of 'trotskyite' as american journalists. I don't think most of them know the damnedest thing about the left, let alone what made trotsky different from stalin, for instance.

So, tbh, I don't think there are any marxists around - academic or otherwise. I don't understand how any marxists would be prepared to hang around. Maybe that's just my personal prejudice of marxist=good therefore it is impossible for a marxist to hang out with bushco? deeper than that tho, I just don't understand. Am I missing something?

Could it be that the materialism of traditional Marxism makes it very useful for the Powers that Be?

I'm not sure I understand you. In what ways would it be useful? (other than providing some genuine insight, you mean?;))

I asked for a refund on my "brevity for beginners" course. They said "no"

 

[Mr. Premise]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

I was thinking that it could be useful to divert people from asking certain questions. For the materialists, keep them from asking certain questions, for the "spiritual" types, keep them occupied either with standard religions or new age stuff. I don't know, though, I was really asking questions.

Could it be that the materialism of traditional Marxism makes it very useful for the Powers that Be?

I'm not sure I understand you. In what ways would it be useful? (other than providing some genuine insight, you mean?;))

I asked for a refund on my "brevity for beginners" course. They said "no"

 

[OPINMYND81]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

Nice, Lefties of SOTT rejoice, we found a new home!

For the record I've been pretty much a VERY left-wing (not far, not extreme, but VERY ;) ) all my life. Even though I can't read a damn word of Marx or guys like him I just naturally thought like a Marxist, i.e. scientifically over analyze everything to death, knowing that rich people wanted to screw everyone else over. Read a lot of Chomsky, Zinn, Parenti, Blum then moved onto this kind of stuff while occasionally dabbling into the old Leftie bookshelf. I still read sites like wsws.org and others since they still give solid information with relevant analysis, even if they still seem to be a bit stuck in the dogma.

I'm sure there's plenty of people who visit this site who are on that side of the political spectrum since it's mostly Lefties who are able to FEEL and THINK (i.e. they have consciouses and some are able to SEE). Notwithstanding that the spectrum itself is rather limited and too simple, and the fact that socialism and communism have plenty of theoritical weaknesses and shortcomings which have been covered by this site. Thankfully, we aren't dogmatists or "true believers" here so we can talk about such things without worrying of upsetting said "true believers."

The whole materialism question is obviously very relevent to the work we do. And Marx and Marxism is probably one of the most wrongly caricatured people and scientific methods in history. He was actually quite into spirituality among other things. Sadly, even the most open minded of his admirers still seem to be caught up in the "Cult of Science" as am sure Laura has talked about repeatedly on this site.

Have you wondered why the Powers that Be have no problems having a lot of Marxist academics around?

Don't really see anything leading into that, aside from the materialist/cult of science angle. Most academics are eggheads who think too much, like Marxists, so it's natural that they would end up in Universities, however the idea that the universities are CRAWLING with them is a flat out lie...one that's spread not just by Alex Jones and his ilk (to promote his alleged anti-NWO effort), but by the even worse David Horowitz and his brand of nazi a-holes.

Well, apparently all those neocon straussians are former 'trostkyites' - that's what I keep reading anyway. I've never actually come across anything by any of them that I would think of as remotely trotskyite.

I find that question to be so damn amusing. The neocons are so loathed their passed along the ideological spectrum like a hot potato, especially by the right-wingers. The right-wingers, the same who call Hitler a socialist cuz of the National Socialism, can't deal with the fact that the neocons are foaming at the mouth rightwingers like themselves so they toss them in the left, as left wing "trotskyites" without actually providing a scintilla of valid evidence to back it up. Where would Right-wingers be without their patented immaturity and irresponsibility? It's even funnier when they try to drag in the "permanent revolution" cuz it's blatantly obvious they have NO idea what the permanent revolution actually is, otherwise they wouldn't be constantly citing it out of context.

Alex Jones is a fraud.
Plain and simple.

Well the Alex Jones issue has been beaten to death and I've already shared some of my opinion on that jacka$$, whom I never trusted since I started reading his "work" back before 911.

There is something I've come to realize about Alex Jones and in particular the term "marketplace of ideas" that I'll share on this thread. Basically they don't call it the "marketplace of ideas" for nothing. It's ideas and they all cost money, real money not in terms of rational validity. And it's all owned by the same giant "corporation." And like any good marketplace it's got something for everybody.

You see in any good western "democracy" where the literacy rate is high and people are "encouraged" (to a certain point) to get involved with the political process, their minds will be empty and will need ideas to fill them based on their pre-conceived values, biases, notions, etc. all the while reinforcing the system/status quo itself. And that's where the Marketplace of Ideas comes in. For the two major ideas, Liberalism and Conservatism, are bound to catch most of the people but there will still be a couple that fall out of the margins. And because of that they risk "buying from someone else" and straying from the system and controlled thought.

That's were people like Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, Pat Buchanan, David Horowitz, Rense, Justin Raimando from antiwar.com, etc. and...Alex Jones comes in.

That is they are certain popular individuals who serve as pied pipers to get the straying sheep back into the fold. They got someone for anyone. Get a conscious and a head on your shoulder and a heart full of idealism while seeing flaws in the system but want to only go so far? Go left of centre with Moore and Chomsky and co. Smart but don't really give a rats ass about others except people who think like you? Go Right of centre.

But what about those right wingers who grew up on the American ideology of Christianity, Capitalism and Anti-Communism? What if they buy into all the fake disinfo conspiracy stuff, get hooked, but then start to realize that America isn't what they grew up believing? How can they get over that cognitive dissonance, of WANTING to love America but knowing that America is screwing up itself and the world? Oh what to do!

Enter Stage Right -> Alex Jones.

For you see, according to Alex, it's not REALLY America's fault. It's still the evil Communists/Socialists/Liberals! The communists never went away, they merely changed into the NWO and infiltrated America all the way into the government. Heck even some of the Republicans are part of that evil Socialist conspiracy. So it's the NWO's fault that America has wavered from it's pure foundations, up until that evil commie FDR took office. Things like Slavery, Native American Genocide, the Founding Father's brutal suppresion of opposition, their admission that they were against democracy, the destructiveness of Capitalism...all this does not factor in for those people. In anycase, if they ever come up, it's all the NWO's fault. Liberals, Democrats, Clintons, ACLU, Jesse Jackson, the UN, the MSM, PBS, are all communist, sorry, "NWO fronts" (communism is soooo 50's) who are trying to destroy America. Heck, anybody to the left of Mussolini is trying to destroy America. Sounds rather convinient for the PTB that don't like to have to deal with a large population that is left of centre (relative to the PTB), no? What better way to set man against man, left against right, until there's no man at all?

So it's not really America that invades countries, impoverishes the world, or basically acts like The Beast from Revelation, it's really that big evil commie conspiracy known as the NWO. That way they can continue loving America, home of the brave, while conviniently pinning all its faults on the things they love to hate. All thanks to Alex Jones and his fellow travelers!

And as the_last_name_left aptly points out, it doesn't matter if their logic contradicts itself or is circulary or just plain stupid and hypocritical. That's not the point. It's an ideology that the Marketplace of Ideas tries to sell and people are only willing to buy it for the emotional comfort it brings. So Alex Jones' followers all drink from that same kool-aid repeating "it's not America's fault, America is still the same one we love, it's all the NWO's fault, it's still all the commie's fault, it's still all the liberal's fault." And they will bend any fact to fit that predetermined ideological framework, and that includes bending Orwell's work to make it look right-wing when it obviously was not. It includes praising Kennedy even though they probably hate his guts on any other topic. It means worshiping Reagan even though he was obviously as much a figure in the NWO/Illuminati as anyone else (Pat Buchanan I'm looking in your direction!). And it means they can cry "fascism" while being closet fascists themselves. They'll claim others are trying to force their lifestyles on them while doing the very same to everyone else...for their own good. Hypocrisy knows no limits to these people.

The vast Ruthless and Monolithic conspiracy is not made up of fools. They get wolves in sheep clothing to get the sheep to act like wolves and do their bidding. One degree at a time, and Alex Jones is part of the equation.

 

[the_last_name_left]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

hi OPINMYND81.

I have no doubt that you understand what I was getting at. Actually you seem to understand it far better than I do :)

You perhaps have no idea what a relief it feels for me not to be viciously attacked for those views? So thanks for that. very good post btw. Lots I could comment on, but I have been typing most of the day it seems - I have to stop - so excuse me if I don't comment further atm? There's nothing I'd disagree with anyway, I reckon.

But thanks - my heart is cheered. I had the impression this might be pretty anti-left place. I'm sure it is in ways? sometimes it's nice to be wrong? so good night/morning/whatever it is........."workers of the world - it's bedtime!"

 

[Mr. Premise]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

This place is not anti-left or anti-right, it's anti-sacred cow. Also anti-lazy thinking or no thinking. Examples of left sacred cows I used to have that I have had to think hard about after hanging around here are: the revolutions of the last 200 years were, on the whole, "good things," the liberal universalism that says all people have souls, etc.

The people who get a negative reaction ("viciously attacked" is probably not the right term) are those who, when their sacred cow is threatened, cling to it harder and lash out.

I agree, great post by opinmynd.

As for this,

Have you wondered why the Powers that Be have no problems having a lot of Marxist academics around?

Don't really see anything leading into that, aside from the materialist/cult of science angle. Most academics are eggheads who think too much, like Marxists, so it's natural that they would end up in Universities, however the idea that the universities are CRAWLING with them is a flat out lie...one that's spread not just by Alex Jones and his ilk (to promote his alleged anti-NWO effort), but by the even worse David Horowitz and his brand of nazi a-holes.

I agree, but the fact that there are a few is useful because it gives the David Horowitzs and Lynne Cheneys of the world something to scare right-wingers with to raise funds and enthusiasm.

The academic humanities department I was involved with as a student 20 years ago was probably 70 percent liberal, 20 percent marxist and 10 percent conservative. This was in the North, though. In the southern United States you would find a very different story. But the fact is, marxist academics have enough of a position that they can defend and so far haven't been purged. That's what made me think that they are not a threat to the system. And most of them would agree that they are not a threat to the system, although they wish they were. The problem for graduate students is that, to have a career, you need to pledge allegiance to one of the three major ideologies and get with a network. If you try to take bits from different points of view, or if you ever change your mind about things, you cannot survive long enough to get tenure.

hi OPINMYND81.

I have no doubt that you understand what I was getting at. Actually you seem to understand it far better than I do :)

You perhaps have no idea what a relief it feels for me not to be viciously attacked for those views? So thanks for that. very good post btw. Lots I could comment on, but I have been typing most of the day it seems - I have to stop - so excuse me if I don't comment further atm? There's nothing I'd disagree with anyway, I reckon.

But thanks - my heart is cheered. I had the impression this might be pretty anti-left place. I'm sure it is in ways? sometimes it's nice to be wrong? so good night/morning/whatever it is........."workers of the world - it's bedtime!"

 

[a.saccus]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

Basically they don't call it the "marketplace of ideas" for nothing. It's ideas and they all cost money, real money not in terms of rational validity. And it's all owned by the same giant "corporation." And like any good marketplace it's got something for everybody.

Your take on the phrase "marketplace of ideas" really captures the "juiciness" of the current situation. "Truth" is the last thing anyone would think to look for in the Global Emporium: "I'm sorry ma'am, we don't carry that and it's not in our catalog." All that's left is shelves and boxcars and warehouses of different "flavors" and "sizes" of ideas - all of which have been sanitized and irradiated and shrinkwrapped and barcoded and are guaranteed 100 per cent free of anything to sink one's mental teeth into.

[...] He [Karl Marx] was actually quite into spirituality among other things.[...]

This remark caught my attention. I admit I know very little of Marx: all I found down my memory-hole was the "religion is the opium of the masses" bit. But I never got a hint anywhere in my reading that spirituality played any part in his thinking or his life. Could you point me in a direction to a writing of his or biographical reference to get me started? Thanks.

 

[Mr. Premise]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

There's not a lot, probably. Marx certainly wasn't what we would call "spiritual" and did not believe in metaphysics. What is useful, to me, is Marx's critique of spirituality as it exists (not as it could be) and as it is used to butress the status quo. It is probably necessary to read between the lines to get at what spirituality could be by understanding what it currently, given the state of society, is not.

[...] He [Karl Marx] was actually quite into spirituality among other things.[...]

This remark caught my attention. I admit I know very little of Marx: all I found down my memory-hole was the "religion is the opium of the masses" bit. But I never got a hint anywhere in my reading that spirituality played any part in his thinking or his life. Could you point me in a direction to a writing of his or biographical reference to get me started? Thanks.

 

[a.saccus]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

There's not a lot, probably. Marx certainly wasn't what we would call "spiritual" and did not believe in metaphysics. What is useful, to me, is Marx's critique of spirituality as it exists (not as it could be) and as it is used to butress the status quo. It is probably necessary to read between the lines to get at what spirituality could be by understanding what it currently, given the state of society, is not.

Thank you. I was just concerned that Marx had written some major work on religion that I was not aware of.

[...]Examples of left sacred cows I used to have that I have had to think hard about after hanging around here are: the revolutions of the last 200 years were, on the whole, "good things," [...]

I read this comment of yours with a jolt of recognition that was so abrupt that it actually made me chuckle out loud! Up to now, I had only only unconsciously come to that conclusion -- the cumulative but unacknowledged effect of my reading for the past few years -- but when I consciously ticked off on my fingers 1. the American revolution, 2. the French, 3. the revolutions of 1848, and 4. the Russian revolution, sure enough, I no longer believed either, as I once had, that these revolutions had actually improved the lot of man. I guess the demise of a sacred cow is sort of like rebooting a computer after having reset the defaults. Thanks for the re-booting!

 

[OPINMYND81]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

This place is not anti-left or anti-right, it's anti-sacred cow. Also anti-lazy thinking or no thinking. Examples of left sacred cows I used to have that I have had to think hard about after hanging around here are: the revolutions of the last 200 years were, on the whole, "good things," the liberal universalism that says all people have souls, etc.

The people who get a negative reaction ("viciously attacked" is probably not the right term) are those who, when their sacred cow is threatened, cling to it harder and lash out.

I wholehartedly agree. Anyone who has read this site for awhile will realize that we are NOT pushing any ideology, rather the opposite. And that is most likely why the site has so much appeal, it's pro-rational-thinking/anti-wishful-thinking a la ideology. Most intelligent people can't really be placed conviniently anywhere on the ideological spectrum anyway because their ideas are all over the place, precisly because they don't accept conviniently pre-packed "truths." Because this site challenges those truths and programmed thinking, the same kind that people base a lot of their emotions on, it will no doubt elicit hostility from both rightwingnuts and lefties who are upset that we don't fit their particular mold. Indeed, in the marketplace of ideas, we're that small ghetto kiosk outside the reach of mall security. :D

One important thing to consider when trying to break people out of their programmed thought and beliefs. Assuming that the person is not an OP, or Bio-robot, or whatever and that they can actually think we have to handle the "giving the red pill" in a delicate way, otherwise we can just end up pushing them further into the comfort of their own ideology and make our jobs a lot harder. The important thing to realize is that these beliefs are often instilled, by parents/society/media/teachers, etc., at a very young age and gets "set in before the concrete dries" so to speak. It becomes part of their identity or framework and so a lot of emotions are heavily invested into it. Not only that but for them, to maintain that belief is DIRECTLY LINKED to that most basic need of all: SECURITY. This is why people will fight to the death for a belief they know, rationally, to be wrong. They will argue, pout, stamp their feet and the more you show them the truth the more they'll resist, not just to preserve the emotional investment they made but to acknowledge that they were wrong would violate that fundamental SECURITY that is a prime, if not the, motivator in humans.

I can't stress how important this factor is for our work. It is because of that factor that most people still refuse to accept conspiracy theories or the fact that there are people out there that will screw them over; to admit such a thing would to admit one's own impotence, and the fear from that for many is too powerful and it is too easy and convinient to go into that river in Egypt aka Denial. In order to get people out of the "matrix" of controlled thought we have to find someway to break that link between "ideological belief" and "security." Obviously that sounds easier said then done and I doubt the latter can even be achieved. One method that might be useful is the platonic dialogue technique, which starts off on the persons beliefs and slowly, holding their hand, getting them over to your side by having them agree to you (do this slowly enough and people won't recognize what's happening). Otherwise arguing with them just triggers DEFENCES and no matter how logical and rational and convincing your arguments are, you have better success with a brick wall.

There's not a lot, probably. Marx certainly wasn't what we would call "spiritual" and did not believe in metaphysics.

I have to admit that Marx being "spiritual" is based on something I read a long time ago and long forgot but that thing managed to stick in my head. In other words, "don't quote me on this" :). I just assumed that since Marx is constantly wrongly caricatured and attributed things that are flat out wrong by his critics that the spirituality part is one of them. Heck, it could be worse, we could have Alex Jones and his friends who constantly call him a homosexual satanist!

Like I've said I've never read Marx simply cuz I can't understand his writing, but for some reason I just naturally think like him. Funny, lost in translation or something. Biography may be useful but most are waterdowned I would imagine, and don't reveal crucial details. I do have a biography on Lenin that asserts that Stalin did in fact murder him, which makes sense, especially when one reads Red Symphony. Another interesting fact was that Lenin was not Russian but rather 1/4 German, 1/4 Swede and 1/2 Chuvash the later being a tribe of people who live on the Volga. No where does it mention about him being Jewish or a Freemason.

The academic humanities department I was involved with as a student 20 years ago was probably 70 percent liberal, 20 percent marxist and 10 percent conservative. This was in the North, though. In the southern United States you would find a very different story. But the fact is, marxist academics have enough of a position that they can defend and so far haven't been purged. That's what made me think that they are not a threat to the system. And most of them would agree that they are not a threat to the system, although they wish they were. The problem for graduate students is that, to have a career, you need to pledge allegiance to one of the three major ideologies and get with a network. If you try to take bits from different points of view, or if you ever change your mind about things, you cannot survive long enough to get tenure.

Well I won't argue with your experience there. I totally agree that university is just one big propaganda mill that gets people attached to the system. Having been 3 years in poli sci at Concordia I felt that I wasn't there to "learn" i.e. develop our own thinking and knowledge for our own sake. It was more INDOCTRINATION then anything else. I obviously did not fit into any of the predetermined ideological categories offered in the program and became very disenchanted. Felt like I was in Soviet Russia where I had to go along with the teacher and/or party line to get anywhere.

The topic of school as socialization is another important factor we need to consider. For those who haven't read James Loewen's Lies my History teacher told me I HIGHLY recommend you do, not just for the material (including a handful of secret history, i.e. visitors to America before Columbus) but for the last part of the book where he points out something very revealing. Doing a survey back in the early 70s he asks his students who would be likely to support the vietnam war, high school grads and dropouts, or college/univ. grads? The students said high school grads since their dumber, not as sophisticated as college grads, and more likely to support the war. As it turns out "the answer will surprise you." The more educated you were the more likely you were to support the war. He gives two reasons, one of them being the socialization factor, whereby the more schooling you do, the more indoctrinated you are, the more tied into the system you will be. I'm not surprised since most "BMW Bolsheviks" at school end up being Reagan worshipping yuppie stockbrockers a few years down the road. The more successful (materially wise) you are the more likely you are going to support the system and the state.

Anyway, back to what you were saying, yes I do believe that there are many marxists in university, particularly the humanities department for obvious reasons. But I believe that they are a very small minority. I actually encountered many self-described Neo Con professors at both Cegep (quebec's college) and Concordia. I even got into an argument with a neocon back in the school newspaper at Cegep about 5 years ago (I called him a Fascist and mispelled his lastname by accident, he didn't appreciate either. Funny cuz he actually said there's no gas or oil in Afghanistan, typical Neo Con arrogance and delusion). So I doubt that university is crawling with subversive marxist professors hoping to brainwash the current generation as the raving lunatic Horowitz would have you believe. But I'm not at all surprised that they would "funnel" or "pigeon hole" people into different categories in order to get tenure. Politics i.e. POWER relations is everything. And this is especially true in university where the system lives and thrives and has it fully under its tentacle's grasp.

Your take on the phrase "marketplace of ideas" really captures the "juiciness" of the current situation.

Indeed, I'm considering writing a full article for SOTT on the topic, if only to at least explore the idea, since it does have important resonance with our work, and be a way to conceptualize another ponerological tool used by the pathocrats. I have a lot of school work to do plus I got to look for another job, and when I write articles I usually overkill them but it's still a good idea to explore. Aside from that I've been studying Plato and found a lot of his work can be tied to the esoteric and stuff on this site as well, I'm considering exploring that as well.

 

[OPINMYND81]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

Examples of left sacred cows I used to have that I have had to think hard about after hanging around here are: the revolutions of the last 200 years were, on the whole, "good things," the liberal universalism that says all people have souls, etc.

Indeed, this is where we may start to sound more "right wing" who are more inclined to believe in "evil" and think that the revolutions of the 250 odd years are all bad (except for the American one of course, despite the fact that it was just as bloody, violating of human rights, suppression of freedom, and full of corrupt power hungry individuals as any other revolution. If anything it was a HALF revolution since the middle men who already ran things just kicked out the old boss and took over).

To the Left revolutions seem always progressive which is normal considering their views on history going forward, etc. The funny thing about them is that its very difficult to judge revolutions, normally cuz we have no way of comparing them. They happened and that's that, even if the people behind it don't have the best of intentions, and exploit those that do. Afterall, the American and French revolutions spread liberalism and fraternity, liberty and equality all across America and Europe. The Russian Revolution got rid of a brutal Czar, brought a 1/6 of the Earth into the 20th century and inspired millions elsewhere to get out of the system and that "another world is possible" (even if it grew to be a huge disappointment relatively early own). The Chinese revolution brought China back to its place in history as the supreme civilization on earth after being knocked out for 2 centuries by the West. The Cuban revolution turned an island that was ran by a brutal dictator and the mob and was nothing more than a whorehouse/casino for American businessmen partying it up on the weekend, and turned it into one of the most advanced countries in the fields of medecine.

But of course the arguments and crimes against those revolutions are miles high. And that's where reality sets in. History and events are complex, there is no real clear cut "good" or "bad" that a lot of people on both sides of the spectrum would want you to believe. Revolutions are always a mixed bag, and sometimes they lead to relatively better things, sometimes they don't. I think the only distinction worth noting is that it is always the "CONTROLLED" revolutions that seem to succedd (i.e. the ones who are behind the ruthless monolithic conspiracy who manage to get the outcomes they desire in the chaos of the revolutions). The uncontrolled revolutions are ALWAYS brutally surpressed by by BOTH sides (in cold war terms). Examples include the USSR allowing Britain to crush the communist revolution in Greece after WWII, and the US allowing USSR to crush Hungary. That should indeed tell us something about the nature of revolutions.

 

[Mr. Premise]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

There's not a lot, probably. Marx certainly wasn't what we would call "spiritual" and did not believe in metaphysics.

I have to admit that Marx being "spiritual" is based on something I read a long time ago and long forgot but that thing managed to stick in my head. In other words, "don't quote me on this" :). I just assumed that since Marx is constantly wrongly caricatured and attributed things that are flat out wrong by his critics that the spirituality part is one of them. Heck, it could be worse, we could have Alex Jones and his friends who constantly call him a homosexual satanist!

I do think that there is at least a horizon of spirituality in Marx when he talks about what a non-exploitative society would be like. Couldn't find any quotes in a quick check, though.

Indeed, I'm considering writing a full article for SOTT on the topic, if only to at least explore the idea, since it does have important resonance with our work, and be a way to conceptualize another ponerological tool used by the pathocrats. I have a lot of school work to do plus I got to look for another job, and when I write articles I usually overkill them but it's still a good idea to explore. Aside from that I've been studying Plato and found a lot of his work can be tied to the esoteric and stuff on this site as well, I'm considering exploring that as well.

You've already written your article! Just cut and paste your posts in this thread in an organized way and there you are. Good stuff.

 

[a.saccus]

Alex Jones - Fascist Tool?

I have to admit that Marx being "spiritual" [...] In other words, "don't quote me on this."

No problem; I won't. It was just that -- having lost so many sacred cows of my own in the past 5 years -- I am open to the fact that I can be as much as 180 degrees wrong about things I once thought to be true.

One important thing to consider when trying to break people out of their programmed thought and beliefs [...] [is]that most people still refuse to accept conspiracy theories or the fact that there are people out there that will screw them over; to admit such a thing would to admit one's own impotence, and the fear from that for many is too powerful[...].

You are absolutely right about this. I just had a wonderful phone conversation on Thanksgiving with my sister, who's five years younger than me and of whom I am quite fond. She was telling me about some interesting work she's been doing on our family geneology, and I was recounting some of the information I was finding about ethnic matters, as discussed by Douglas Reed.

I must have got carried a way a little, for she suddenly said -- out of nowhere to my mind and with a distinct note of fear in her voice-- "You're not going to tell me that the Twin Towers were brought down by detonation, are you?"

There was a very awkward ten second silence on my end, because, of course, that IS what I believe. And yet HER fear was so strong that I finally managed to say, "No," although my silence probably communicated otherwise. But it was a place that she was simply not ready to go to yet, because to acknowledge this truth does carry some consequences with it for the rest of one's Weltanschauung. She lives 2000 miles away, and I think whoever offers her the red pill should be closer. She'll always be my sister, and at some future date, I'll tiptoe back in there on the topic and help a little bit more. Perhaps this gaffe even created that future opportunity. Who knows?

[...]The funny thing about them is that its very difficult to judge revolutions, normally cuz we have no way of comparing them. [...]

Fascinating. I don't think it's ever been done.

In order to compare revolutions -- not by the sequence of events or by the amount of violence and death generated-- but by whether, how, and to what degree they improved the human race would result in some very interesting observations. It would point out who started the revolution and who really benefited from it. It would require real objectivity, and provide an Archimedean "place to stand" to afford the adherents of Truth the needed leverage to move the world. Perhaps that's why the PTB are not wild about having such comparisons made......

You've already written your article! Just cut and paste your posts in this thread in an organized way and there you are. Good stuff.

Good stuff indeed.