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: