Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
My belief in “conspiracy theories” is a bit complicated. I am reluctant to believe in them because I don’t have confidence in people’s ability to communicate fine details to each other, one time, the first time, with accuracy, and surreptitiously. People can train together and get it right with repetition. But to do a one-time thing, “Ocean’s Eleven” style or “Great Escape” style, and get it right the first time requires meetings. I’ve been in meetings. I’ve chaired meetings. I think, by default, everybody misunderstands everything. By default, it’s an exercise in herding cats. Defaults exist to be countered and overriden, and this is possible…but the effort is expansive, inertia is great, and progress is slow. So I doubt it.
And I doubt people can keep secrets. People can keep state secrets if their livelihood is attached to the secret-keeping. Or if they’re threatened with real jail time. Even then it’s not foolproof.
OTOH…I do believe large numbers of people can be affected by a common incentive that will fill them with a common passion, that manifests consistently even as they operate with something resembling autonomy. I think this is intensified if they show off for each other. I believe our public education system has been perverted into an abomination that trains children to be good subjects in a quasi-communist collective state and it’s been training them to show off for each other. I believe higher education intensifies this. And, from my experience in high tech, I know how fond high tech is of higher education.
Now I understand Twitter, YouTube, Apple and Facebook have banned President Trump and/or any mention of the election results being in error. Several other platforms are de-platform-ing Trump. At. The. Same. Time. Hmmmm…
This is ominous. Best case scenario, the high tech whiz kids are showing off for each other the way they’ve been trained. They don’t know shit from Shinola about whether the election’s been fixed but they’re eager to show off for each other that they embrace the correct and approved opinion. Banning the opposite opinion, to a weak or unfocused mind, just intensifies the signalling. Nothing wrong with that! Even though, to a more resilient and better focused mind, it’s a way of forfeiting the argument. But they’re not applying their resiliency, they’re not focused and they don’t need to worry about arguments anyway. Because nobody in their peer group disagrees.
Worst case scenario…there is a secret that is being kept because someone is worried about their livelihood, and/or going to prison. Someone knows more than they’re saying. And what they know must run contrary to the narrative they’re pushing, because if the truth supported the narrative they’re pushing, they’d enjoy the luxury of openly discussing it.
After all, in the few circumstances in which conspiracies can actually function and remain secret, they’re still very expensive. There is no reason to maintain a narrative by way of conspiracy, if there are alternative methods for supporting that narrative. No reason, if truth supports the narrative. You would only opt for this clumsy and difficult coordination and secret-keeping, and banning of the opposition, if truth is aligned against it.
So yeah, I’m unsure about “conspiracies,” but I’m very sure Joe Biden did not win that election.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.