some dialog about the Matrix & belief systems

2005-09-22

Richard Moore

--------------------------------------------------------
From: "John Bunzl" <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: rkm posting policy
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 08:27:38 +0100

Hi Richard,

I was tempted to respond to your first message on this but
refrained, I think because I sort of agree with both sides
(typical coward! eh?).

All the points you and others have made in support of your
policy seem fine and fair enough. But despite that I have
sometimes felt that there tends to be a preponderance to
conspiracy theories where other far more likely rational
explanations also exist. I can't recall specific examples now
but I think one might have been the Asian financial crisis
where, if I recall correctly, you imputed this to a conscious
conspiracy of investors whereas it is in the very nature of
the herd-mentality of markets that what looks like a conscious
conspiracy is far more likely to be, simply, the herd
mentality at work.

Perhaps this view of mine stems merely from a differing view
of the Matrix that is our world. Conspiracy theories tend to
imply, by and large, that the Matrix is a conspiracy, is thus
based in 'conflict theory'; i.e. in the belief that SOMEONE
must be in control of it. This SOMEONE (group or individual)
is therefore to be exposed and blamed and is consequently to
be fought against. By contrast my own belief, by and large, is
that NO ONE is in control of the Matrix. Despite the fact that
there may undoubtedly be SOME genuine conspiracies at work
here and there does not, for me, change the fact that,
essentially, NO ONE is in control. As such, understanding this
essential nature of the Matrix is probably the first and most
crucial step to escaping it.

All the best
John

--------

Hi John,

Thanks again for another of your thoughtful and diplomatic
messages. I'm pleased to have you as a subscriber.

I am intrigued by your comment about 'conflict theory'. What
you are saying, basically, is that one's model of the world
arises from one's general psychology, or from one's
understanding of psychology and sociology. For some, and it
seems yourself, this may indeed be true. For people who base
their beliefs on such considerations - whether they believe in
conspiracies or the opposite - the actual events in the world
have little relevance. Whatever happens, they can just stick
to their theories, whatever they might be. The same could be said
of people who believe the Bible is literal truth; such people
perceive no need to investigate anything; they already 'know'.

In my case, my understanding of the world arises from studying
the facts. I don't _believe elites control the world, I have
_learned, from long investigation, that elites control the
world.

The interpretations I present about certain current events,
interpretations which you call 'conspiracy theories', are not
the basis of my understanding of how the world works. Rather,
given my understanding, which is based on historical research,
I am using current events to discover the nature of current
elite objectives, to illustrate how these elites are currently
pursuing those objectives, and to show how they are covering
their tracks with their Matrix fabrications.

If the only thing I posted were these current-event
interpretations, then I wouldn't be offering people very much.
They can find better treatments of that kind of material on
other websites, written by people who are good investigative
journalists, which is not my calling. My reports of this kind
are intended to supplement my more historical and analytical
postings; these current-event reports are in many cases not
very interesting, or persuasive, on a stand-alone basis.
That's why I say most of my postings are for subscribers,
rather than for general audiences.

My latest article, on Apocalypse, is intended for general
audiences. That's why the first section is devoted to
historical background. Unfortunately, it is difficult to
convey an entire and non-standard historical perspective
in a relatively brief introduction to an article. I was able to
present the perspective clearly enough, according to initial
responses, but I wasn't able to also provide in-depth
justification for many of my observations. I have however
presented such justifications in earlier postings.

I fully agree with you when you say that understanding the
essential nature of the Matrix is the first and most crucial
step in escaping from it. That's why I spent many years
investigating 'how the world works' before I began thinking
about 'what we can do', and why I continue to develop my
understanding of the world by continuing to read historical
studies.

To be perfectly candid, I find it amusing how so many people
put opinion at the same level as logical argument. Certainly
everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but there are many
people - and I'm not referring to you here - who actually
think that expressing a contrary opinion about a conclusion,
without any substantiation, can serve as an adequate rebuttal
to a reasoned argument. In this regard, I think that the
horrible way in which mathematics is taught in schools is one
of the most politically disempowering aspects of our society.

Mathematics is the only subject taught in primary and high
schools that has the potential to effectively develop logical
thinking. Plane geometry, to take one example, is usually
taught as if congruent triangles were the important part! 
Students are left to figure out how to develop proofs on their
own; the teacher just tells them whether they got it right,
not how to approach such problems.  Since most youngsters
cannot deal with the way math is usually taught, most adults
suffer from logic-illiteracy. They respond to persuasive
language without really internalizing the arguments they found
persuasive. As they read different material they find
themselves swayed first by one view, and then by a competing
view, without developing their own internal models. In the
end, they can only throw up their hands, thinking it's all too
confusing to draw any conclusions.

Confusion is uncomfortable, and people try to escape from it
in various ways. Some say, "I'm not going to think about big
issues; I'm just going to take care of my family."  Some just
choose a belief system that is comfortable emotionally, and
take the view that one belief is as valid as another. Others
find comfort in religions and other cults, substituting
agreement for understanding. Most have few tools with which to
resist the carefully orchestrated Matrix story line, and the
carefully circumscribed 'range of views' that seem, by design,
to be presenting 'all sides'.

I do try to be persuasive in what I write, but I also try to
present things in a way that encourages the reader to think
about and understand the material that is being presented. In
particular, I try to give people tools that can help them
figure things out for themselves, and better resist the
Matrix. This is a two-way street, by the way, as many of these
'readers' understand more than I do about various subjects,
and their responses have over time added much to my own
understanding.

best regards,
rkm
http://cyberjournal.org

Share:

ekbonus bahis forum linkegit.com