Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 From: Carolyn Ballard <•••@••.•••> Subject: CONSPIRACIES OF HISTORY To: •••@••.••• (philosophy of history) Nikolai wrote: from theoretical viewpoint i keep contending that without real knowledge (theories and models supported empirically) of historical dynamics (and then periodization) all other central problems of phil of hi (course and direction of history, meaning or idea of history, place of human being or nation in history, etc) cannot be seriously posed and solved ========================================= The topic of "conspiracy theories of history" has recently been raised on this list. Understandably, this is a topic the discussion of which makes reputable historians nervous -- much like discussing one's crazy aunt or uncle in the attic. Why? Because to acknowledge that they, like the crazy, sequestered aunt/uncle, exist -- as they surely do -- seems to call into question the historian's integrity and credibility. They are an ugly reminder that something is amiss in "the family tree." I would suggest that in regard to "history," that something which is amiss is "factual knowledge." THAT is what makes conspiracy theories so disconcerting to historians, because they challenge the validity of what historians are recording as "history." Nikolai states, "that without REAL KNOWLEDGE of historical dynamics all other central problems of phil of history cannot be seriously posed and solved." But how does the historian get to the facts in order to form opinions and theories of historical dynamics? They do so through primary and secondary resources, among which are human resources <the oral interview>, newspaper accounts, government documents, and so on. It would be a great leap of faith indeed, if the historian were to presume that all of the facts which he/she recounts and records for posterity as history were TRUE. Why? Because quite often, human beings -- those who make history -- obfuscate, put a "spin" on truth, or simply lie to suit their own agenda or that of others. These lies <for simplicity's sake, let's call them that> are sold as truth in the name of such noble sounding purposes as "national security," "national interest," "balance of power," or perhaps to fulfill some quid pro quo. That is the nature of power. But power does not operate in a vacuum. There are always some who know the facts, and they must either acquiesce and perpetuate the lie or expose the truth. In the lofty reaches of power and politics, it is more often the case that the former is standard practice. Moreover, those in power are aided and abetted in their deceptions by The Mainstream Media, who themselves put their own particular slant or spin on events (*See posting at end for good example.). Consequently, if we are honest, we must admit to ourselves that history is replete with "conspiracies." Further, they are conspiracies of self-interest perpetuated by a particular group or class of people -- an "elite ruling class." So, perhaps one of the most important historical dynamics which we should be studying is that of "power." I would assert that this would necessarily include "elite conspiracies." Who are these elites? Well, they have been changing throughout history. They are elites by virtue of the fact that they -- this minority -- have gained the power to rule over the majority. They gain and maintain power by various and sundry means, not the least of which are brute force, deception, the "selling" of an ideology or theology, or simply "divine right." Thus, we have had a constant jockeying for power since humans began to walk upright, beginning with the clan or tribe leader. Regardless of which class is in power at the time, they ARE an elite because they ARE a minority and they DO conspire to maintain their position of power. That is the very nature of power -- to preserve itself. And as the good Dr. Kissinger observed: "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac." So it should come as no surprise that those possessed of power and under its narcotic spell would go to extraordinary lengths to preserve it....even to the extent of lying and conspiring. Are they forever meeting to conspire among themselves? No....it's not necessary. They simply adhere to the rules of the game to further the ends of whatever "ism" happens to prevail at the time (pharoahism, capitalism, communism, fascism, etc., etc.). My tattered old Webster's defines "conspiracy" as "the act of conspiring together, an agreement among conspirators." To conspire (according to Webster's) is to "join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act, to scheme, to act in harmony." We don't have to look far into the recent past (or the present, for that matter) to find any number of examples of this type of behavior by the ruling elite. Elite conspiracies present a real dilemma for Mr./Ms. Honest and Reputable Historian. Do they acknowledge that such conspiracies exist, or do they deny them? IF they acknowledge their existence, then they must also acknowledge that their understanding of history is compromised, as well as "real knowledge of historical dynamics." It is not, of course, true that this elite minority lie at all times and in all situations. Sometimes, it is more convenient for them to tell the unadulterated truth. But as someone wise once told me: "You can tell me the truth a thousand times, but if you tell me one lie, then everything which you tell me, including those thousand truths, becomes suspect." If, on the other hand, historians deny the existence of elite conspiracies, then they themselves are perpetuating the "lies of history." They do themselves, their profession, and all the rest of us a disservice. As a result of all this intentional and unwitting duplicity, "Grand Conspiracy Theories" are born. A contradictory statement here, a "smoking gun" there, and fact is exposed as fallacy. The bond of trust is broken between the masses and those they trusted to lead and inform them. Disillusionment and cynism sets in and they begin to form their own hypotheses. Inevitably, there will be those who, desperately trying to pull the threads of events together to get to some understanding of the truth, will come to believe that those who lied -- the political leaders, the media, the religious leaders, and even the historians -- are all in the deception together. These we will brand "the lunatic fringe," the "conspiracy theorists." Then, there are those of us like myself and fellow listmate Richard K. Moore, who have diligently analyzed and researched the events of world history and concluded that yes, there are and have been elite conspiracies throughout history -- because power is held by an elite minority class who "act in harmony" and "scheme" to "commit unlawful or wrongful acts" to preserve that power. Because we are bold enough to publicly admit what should be obvious, particularly to academics, please do not paint us with the same broad brush of "conspiracy theorists." ===================================================================== A piece posted to the World Systems Network List: this is worth reading . . . It's Francis Boyle--U of Illinois Law professor, international law expert, radical public intellectual activist and his communication with NY Times reporter. PLEASE FORWARD ---------- Forwarded message ---------- "Boyle, Francis" <•••@••.•••>: Dear Friends: Today's New York Times has a scare-piece entitled Iraq's Deadliest Arms: Puzzles Breed Fears, co-authored by Judith Miller. Attached is the correspondence between us in conjunction with the preparation of this article, where Miller asked my for assistance beforehand. As you can see for yourself, she had obviously read my Testimony to the United States Congress in support of the legislation which I authored, the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, as well as my comments about how hypocritical and duplicitous the charges made by the United States government against Iraq were, especially in light of outstanding US biowarfare programs. I then proceeded to send her all of my e-mail postings on this subject that have been generally put on the internet in circulation and in particular on the Abolition Caucus site. She was aware that I was the Author of the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, and I offered to go on record about US biological weapons programs, as indicated in my correspondence to her below. I also offered to go on record as to the legal and criminal accountability of United States government officials for providing weapons-specific biological agents to Iraq. And yet despite this mass of information that I forwarded to her at her explicit request, there is not one word about the United States biological weapons program that I analyzed in my Testimony and numerous other posts, and I am certainly not mentioned at all in this article. That shows you the way the mainstream news media work in the United States of America, including and especially the New York Times, which has been mongering for war against Iraq for quite some time. By the way, and most critically of all, she deliberately refused to point out in the article the well-known fact that former UNSCOM inspector Raymond Zalinskas admitted to National Public Radio that UN inspectors had already seen all reasonable weapons sites and had destroyed whatever potential existed. But of course that critical piece of information did not matter to the New York Times that is so hell-bent upon manipulating these biowarfare charges into manufacturing public support for more war against Iraq. I will not bother to review the article and point out all the serious distortions, half-truths, and omissions. But again, this article is nothing more than a piece of pure propaganda mongering for war against Iraq. All the news that's fit to print? Well in America, the only news deemed fit to print and make it on the television sets are those that monger for war. George Orwell had it right: In America today, war is peace;freedom is slavery;ignorance is strength; we all love big brother; and Ronald Reagan was President in 1984. Miller really works for the NEWSPEAK TIMES. Yours very truly, Francis A. Boyle Professor of International Law Author, Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Carolyn Ballard, freelance writer Email: •••@••.••• "You write in order to change the world, knowing perfectly well that you probably can't...The world changes according to the way people see it, and if you can alter, even by a millimeter, the way...people look at reality, then you can change it." - James Baldwin - ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ~=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~-~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by: Richard K. Moore | PO Box 26, Wexford, Ireland •••@••.••• | www.iol.ie/~rkmoore/cyberjournal * Non-commercial republication encouraged - with this sig * ~=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~-~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Share: