With Corona, the term “conspiracy theory” has finally established itself as a killing argument. Political conspiracies are secret agreements by powerful actors for their own benefit. To deny in principle that there can be such collusion is either a lack of credible naivety or a malicious deception. It would be time to turn the moral tables on this issue.
The existence of political conspiracies is undeniable, historical and current: when Western NATO states ally themselves with Gulf monarchies to arm al-Qaeda warriors with the aim of overthrowing the Syrian government, then this is a tangible conspiracy. Indirectly, those Western (and German) journalists who have kept the myth of the “democratic Syrian people’s uprising” alive for more than ten years and who have defamed the critics of the regime change attempt as “conspiracy theorists” have also participated in this conspiracy.
If Western actors join forces with sometimes right-wing extremist movements in Ukraine with the aim of driving out the Yanukovych government with a militant overthrow, then this is a tangible conspiracy. This conspiracy would not have been possible without the support of many German journalists and their defamation of critics as “conspiracy theorists”. The same applies to the process when Western states ally themselves with a militant and sometimes right-wing radical opposition in Venezuela and build an “alternative head of state” with the aim of overthrowing the current government.
Corona: The radicalization of conspiracy deniers
European countries are also targets of conspiracies. This is well documented in the case of Italy, for example, with the aspects Strategy of tension, GLADIO and P2 and the proven conspiracies between US intelligence services, parts of the (deep) Italian state, media, terrorists and mafiosi. There are now even mainstream Hollywood films about some particularly shrill US conspiracies, such as the large-scale CIA drug smuggling in connection with the ramified Iran-Contra affair: “Kill The Messenger” and “Barry Seal”.
Conspiracies could also include collusion on illegal and cruel economic sanctions against non-compliant countries. Or also the currently observed cooperation between states and tech companies to suppress corona information: Is this not a conspiracy to censor? In addition, there are current agreements of powerful actors in the sense of a mass control unimaginable up to Corona, which could be introduced via the vehicle of the generated virus panic: These plans documented by journalist Norbert Häring and currently implemented can also be found in part in the official texts of the WEF or the EU. These plans are not hidden, but openly described-you just have to read it and thematize it, as Häring and some alternative media do in contrast to most major media.
The existence of political conspiracies and the associated international PR firms, think tanks and conferences and the" revolving door " between corporations and politics is undeniable. The examples described here are arbitrary and only a tiny detail. Nevertheless, there are numerous influential and wide-ranging conspiracy deniers who already defame the mention of the theoretical possibility of covert collusion more powerfully than “muddled” or even “anti-Semitic”. Since Corona, this phenomenon has increased again and the conspiracy deniers have also become radicalized.
Naivety or malice
The conspiracy deniers can be roughly divided into two groups: On the one hand, there are those who, through naivety, lack of political imagination and lack of political knowledge, are rather “innocent” in this position of blanket defense against the existence of confidential agreements. And on the other hand, there are those who, fully aware of the absurd nature of this defense thesis, nevertheless generally call political conspiracies absurd-the goal of this group is to carry out quite deliberate propaganda against better knowledge and to defame critics. They are motivated by a roar of applause from the major media and other social benefits.
Of course, there are political weirdos, outlandish political claims and anti – Semitic agitators-these should be met with disregard or, in the case of justiciable statements, with the harshness of the Criminal Code. The semi-private censorship practices that have now been introduced in “social media”, which act independently of concrete laws (incitement to hatred, insult, etc.), must be strictly rejected. The collusion on this private censorship can, as I said, also be described as a conspiracy against the diversity of opinion.
The following practice often applies to the defamation of points of view that presuppose a more powerful collusion: Nazis and UFO spinners who are actually irrelevant in the respective debate are then presented as relevant or central in numerous media contributions, their meaning absurdly inflated in order to subsequently make contact guilt possible. In addition, serious physical concerns (such as the JFK assassination or 9/11) are mentioned in one breath with bizarre alien fantasies. At the same time, numerous conspiracy reflections in large media are on the level of a primary school seminar, a protagonist of these infantile and from the same phrases existing perspectives is the “expert” Pia Lamberty.
The hypocrisy of the conspiracy deniers
The path of the conspiracy deniers is paved with hypocrisy: as soon as the topic addresses one’s own political culture and a certain order of magnitude, the well-known aggressive defense takes place. But it is quite different when talking about competing states or systems – then suddenly state participation in terrorist attacks is no longer absurd, for example when it comes [to Russia]. Here, by the way, it is not to be claimed that political conspiracies are a specialty of the West: presumably there are similar efforts on the part of Russia or China to strengthen their own advantages with this means. So far, however, German citizens have been at the mercy of alleged conspiracies from the West.
Covert political agreements do not have to take place in principle in bad faith: a group of powerful actors could also decide out of noble personal drive to “save the world”. But even such self-empowerment to do “good” would be uncontrolled and only justified by one’s own wealth and therefore always associated with excessive arrogance and would trample the democratic idea underfoot. And even those who want" only the best for everyone " can be incendiary. Viewed from this angle, the dominant hypocrisy of super-rich “philanthropists” is also a single presumption.
Corona and conspiracy theories
The Corona complex is also associated with numerous speculations (“conspiracy theories”) about the “true motives” for the proclamation and the consistent enforcement of the “pandemic"idea. These partly conclusive, partly absurd speculations are aggressively and generally defamed by almost all media and politicians as “conspiracy theories”. This aggressive “self-confidence” of the lockdown defenders does not falter even when numerous pillars of the organized corona panic falter: for example, the dubious way of counting the “dead of or with the virus” or the questionable statements of the PCR tests or the unfounded fear of the destroyed life expectancy or the unfounded fear of too few intensive care beds or the (missing) excess mortality. For many lockdown defenders, the world hunger massively increased by the corona measures (not by the virus), the explosion of wealth and poverty, the deprivation of fundamental rights, the bans on protests, bullying and the impending mass control have no influence on the evaluation of corona policy. The world view of many lockdown defenders remains equally unaffected by the fact that it can be established without any doubt that the extremely destructive effects of the lockdown policy and the vaccination campaign are disproportionate to the potential danger of the real corona virus.
This attitude of many lockdown defenders, decoupled from the development of the facts, in turn fuels the counter-movement with its partly obvious, partly absurd speculations. The various alternative explanation patterns (“conspiracy theories”) to Corona beyond the official theory we will soon introduce in a separate article.
Who is the real “covidiot” here?
Also because of the weakness of one’s own position and the refusal of political reassessments, it must stop that conspiracy deniers (i.e. political naivets or conscious propagandists) can defame and muzzle serious critics of political or economic processes with the label “conspiracy theory” in the cheapest way. This untenable practice also includes the aggressive insults as “swearers” or Nazi, which have become naturalized and no longer cause outrage. Who is the real “covidiot"here?
The “Off-Guardian"recently dealt with the “[Psychology of conspiracy deniers] (https://off-guardian.org/2021/03/12/on-the-psychology-of-the-conspiracy-denier/ “On The Psychology Of The Conspiracy Denier”)” in an article.