[Peace-discuss] Re: [sf-core] Fw: don't be afraid

[C. G. Estabrook]

"Conspiracy," etymologically, means "breathing together," a rather poetic way to
describe conscious planning.  Of course there are conspiracies, and all 
institutions - which the sociologists think of as just patterned ways of doing 
things - are conspiracies in a morally neutral sense of the word. (In a less 
neutral sense, G. B. Shaw observed a century ago, "All professions are 
conspiracies against the laity" - by which he meant ordinary people.)

When the old man in the British Museum wrote (as a young man), "The history of 
all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles," he surely 
didn't imagine that those struggles went on as it were instinctually, entirely 
without conscious planning.  But class struggle is not perspicuous: it's not 
obvious what's going on.  We need to analyze those institutions in fact, not 
come to conclusions about them a priori (e.g., "the Bush administration must 
have been consciously involved in 9/11 because it served their interests").

Regards, CGE

unionyes wrote:
> "Worse, this listing of "conspiracies," even if they can be brought together
> under that heading, implies nothing about the circumstances of either 9/11
> or the lap bomber."
> 
> That's true Carl,
> 
> Some of it was dubious, but a lot of it was factual events. Which as you
> state, some of these may not be considered to some as conspiracies. Which in
> my opinion is a matter of semantics.
> 
> What do you consider a conspiracy ?
> 
> David J.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at illinois.edu> 
> To: "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net> Cc: <Undisclosed-Recipient:>;
> <@smtp119.sbc.mail.re3.yahoo.com>; "Socialist Forum"
> <sf-core at yahoogroups.com>; "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net> Sent:
> Monday, January 04, 2010 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [sf-core] Fw: don't be afraid
> 
> 
>> The piece from "New World Order Report" contains some interesting material
>> that a real democratic political discussion in this country would consider
>> - rather than momentous issues like whether Obama is smart and Bush stupid.
>> 
>> 
>> But as it stands the piece is at least a bit credulous - e.g., it's not the
>> case that "The Rothschild dynasty owns roughly half of the world’s wealth,"
>> and the "Secret Team" stuff has been been pretty well exploded; also, I had
>> the pleasure of listening as a callow youth to J. K. Galbraith's account of
>> his experience in the Kennedy administration, and I don't doubt his view
>> that "The Report from Iron Mountain" is a hoax, in the sense of a
>> cautionary tale.
>> 
>> Worse, this listing of "conspiracies," even if they can be brought together
>> under that heading, implies nothing about the circumstances of either 9/11
>> or the lap bomber.
>> 
>> But it may help us to examine institutions and their behavior, notably the
>> USG and the American corporate structure.  --CGE
>> 
>> 
>> unionyes wrote:
>>> *Since were on the topic of conspiracies, check out the link below that a
>>> friend of mine just sent me ;* *" 33 Conspiracy Theories that turned out
>>> to be true "* ** *I don't agree with all of them as being " conspiracy
>>> theories " but still an interesting read.* ** *David J.* ** ** -----
>>> Original Message ----- *Sent:* Monday, January 04, 2010 5:28 PM 
>>> *Subject:* Re: don't be afraid
>>> 
>>> http://www.newworldorderreport.com/Articles/tabid/266/ID/980/33-Conspiracy-Theories-That-Turned-Out-To-Be-True-What-Every-Person-Should-Know.aspx
>>>