Subject:
|
Re: An armed society...(what if?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:34:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1752 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
>
> > How many must there be for a conspiracy?
> >
> > What if there are a few people at the top manipulating things with the use of
> > their power bases (law enforcement officers)? Is that a conspiracy? I am • not
> > asserting that is the case, merely hypothesizing and clarifying.
>
> As further clarification, it might be useful to distinguish between the
> Foucault's-Pendulum-style Conspiracies and simple two-guys-working-together
> conspracies. The former generally cannot exist in its described form, since
> it demands far too much coordination, efficiency, and secrecy to be viable
> in anything like the real world, despite what conspiraciphobes might assert
> to the contrary. • [snip]
> The essential difference relates to the level of organization and the
> breadth of the enterprise in question. I would suggest that disparate
> factions working toward a similar goal do not constitute a Conspiracy; some
> deliberate coordination between them is fundamental.
In our nation (and every nation?) those with the power of wealth have a large
amount of power over the laws of the land. They wield this power to assure
that they keep their wealth. What degree of conspiracy is going on?
If rich guy X figures out a great new law and presses his senator to make it a
part of the tax code and then rich guys Y and Z read about it and love the
loophole it will open for them, so they press their senators to support it, is
there a conspiracy?
What if X writes about it in the _Rich Guys 'R' Us_ exclusive "trade" journal
in order to garner a wide support base? Does that change anything?
How big does the C have to be before you/we find it troubling?
There are 'rich guys' out there teaching the sheep how we can start to exploit
these same loopholes. Those rich guys aren't being murdered in their sleep, so
is it not a Big-C(tm) conspiracy?
When you write "it demands far too much coordination, efficiency, and secrecy
to be viable" it rings of other conspiracy conversations that I've had in which
conspiracies were passed off as impossible simply as a premise. Why? How many
people have to be involved before it is impossible? Were the events
surrounding JFK's death a (or part of a) Conspiracy? How many (or few) people
had to be involved? Fifteen maybe?
I have been involved in conspiracies (of a much less significant nature) with
nearly that many people who seem to have kept secrets for over a decade.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: An armed society...(what if?)
|
| (...) In what way are you asking? Do I think that a number of corporations are working independently, but simultaneously, to further their own wealth? Certainly, and the factions of each company are likely "conspiring" to achieve that end. Are (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: An armed society...(what if?)
|
| (...) As further clarification, it might be useful to distinguish between the Foucault's-Pendulum-style Conspiracies and simple two-guys-working-together conspracies. The former generally cannot exist in its described form, since it demands far too (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
179 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
