Conspiracy and the Morality of Politicians.

I've been a regular reader of Jean Michael Greer's Blog - 'The Archdruid Report' - since its inception. The guy has a handle on the implications of 'peak-oil/energy' for our globalised industrialised economic/political systems that produces regular keen insights into the way things are likely to unfold. His analyses of human societies' handling of unwelcome change is deeply thoughtful and clearly springs from extensive pondering of the issues it raises. Put all that together with with a certain gift of expression and you have a highly informative and readable blog.

So it happened that I was enjoying his latest piece when I was struck by a couple of jarring notes. They are the subject of this post.

Jean Michael is clearly a gentle man who seeks the best in people. I have no issue with that and admire him for it. But it was his repeated use of the term 'Conspiricist' and his assertion (to paraphrase) that politicians are broadly representative of the populations that they spring from - good and bad - that jarred.

Firstly the term 'Conspiracist'. Like other pejoratives, (Holocaust denier, Anti-semite, Communist, Fascist Flat-Earther etc) its use is generally intended as a debate changer by making those it is applied to appear 'beyond the pale' or 'ridiculous' and thus unworthy of a hearing. So, what is it supposed to mean? and why is it ranked right up there with those other powerful debate changers?

Jean Michael uses it to dismiss those who he sees as proposing wide-ranging or all-encompassing conspiracies as having a significant role in human affairs. Put that way it seems to me that the 'anti-conspiracists' are the ones with some explaining to do. At the most basic level of meaning, it really ought to be beyond dispute that conspiracy by constituent cliques and cabals prior to ANY type of  minuted, publicly accountable meeting or action - from the lowly local club right up to the highest reaches of government decision-making - is actually the driving force behind pretty much any and all collective human endeavour. IOW the Public Agenda is largely driven and determined by hidden, private agendas that are furthered by conspiracy. It is simply the way the world works.

So why is it that the terms 'conspiracist' and 'conspiracy theorist' have become such powerful debate-clinching pejoratives? 

Since it is invariably applied to those suggesting conspiracy and complicity by elements of the State in violence against its own people, I suggest that it has to do with peoples' overwhelming need to believe in the basic good intent of the State, its Government and Agencies. Granted they can be stupid, bungling, incompetent - even corrupt at times, but the idea that they would or could EVER act deliberately and with calculation against the interests of the general population, let alone be involved in persistent gross deception and/or deliberate acts of domestic terrorism, is simply too abhorrent and downright scary to countenance - And that in spite of overwhelming evidence that latter day Western Governments are literally up to their necks in all of those things.

Which brings me to the morality of politicians.

At the outset of a political career and discounting the allegiances that political dynasties impose, I guess the aggregate of wannabe politicians are indeed representative of the aggregate of the populations they spring from. Self-evident really and in that sense Jean Michael is quite right in his assertion. However, it is the attributes required to produces a 'successful' political career that are the nub of the matter. 'Successful' here meaning one that achieves ministerial/cabinet/Privy Council Rank in the UK or their equivalents elsewhere.

I suggest that, whatever genuinely altruistic public-service ideals may originally have motivated a politician or 'public servant', it is the progressive compromise and ultimate abandonment of any such principles that is the sine-qua-non of elevation to the high offices of State. The career progression of such an individual can be likened to the degrees of initiation bestowed by a Masonic Order. Following initial elevation by the masses, any further advancement is by invitation and appointment by superior initiates. Ability and merit may have a bearing on the matter but if so, it is ability and merit in the promotion of the official narrative of events and the State's part in them that is the crux of the matter. Such narratives effortlessly accommodate the divisions between the major political parties which boil down to little more than froth. But on their substance, no departure from orthodoxy is tolerated.

Thus, an alliance of superior, freedom-loving democracies is valiantly striving to fight the evil of terrorism and generally to do good in the world; with its heroic armed forces sacrificing their lives selflessly in multiple distant desert countries that we might avoid having to fight their malign evil in our own lands.

Take a step back and try to look at that as might a visitor from another world - or better yet as a young innocent staring at his naked Emperor. It is so self-evidently absurd as to be risible, yet it IS the basic official narrative of the early 21st century, lapped up by a fearful, insecure and gullible population. It is trotted out endlessly by mainstream political parties and media of ALL persuasions in the manner almost of a religious creed and woe-betide anyone - especially an ambitious politician - who dares question it.

It is the sordid realities behind that and other absurd 'official narratives' that the ambitious politician is gradually initiated into such that, by the time the higher degrees are reached, there is little of principle left in the initiate beyond defence  of the existing power structures at any price. My latest (somewhat seasonal) analogy for the relationship between the State and its general population is that, as a matter of rigid orthodoxy, communication is conducted around an intellectual and emotional framework not unlike that of a parent and 5 year old child but absent any altruistic/parental bond - such that the official narratives of most events of importance are massaged to a level of factual accuracy resembling those of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. In other words - in the interests of an over-riding imperative to maintain 'The System' and protect its corrupt, self-serving interests, we are lied to systematically as a matter of time-honoured and sanctified practice - PERIOD. In the immortal words of that venerable Irish muckraker Caud Cockburn therefore: "Never believe anything until it has been officially denied".

On the narrow subject of 'conspiracy theories' and terrorism, I personally doubt more than about 10% of all so-called terrorist outrages in the West occur without deep complicity on the part of our SIS's and their 'assets' - its called 'calibrating the level of violence and tension the better to further the policy agenda and secure compliance from a fearful population',  and anyone who thinks that an exaggeration - or more likely absurd - should first of all read up on 'Operation Gladio' as a primer before moving onto the more outrageous stuff. The information is readily available; it is just studiously ignored, other than as the occasional butt of ritualised ridicule, by the MSM.

So personally and in spite of JMG's admonitions, I'll stick with 'conspiracy theory' rather than 'coincidence theory' as a consistently superior explanation of events, with States, their Governments and especially their SI Agencies - per Spymaster extraordinaire Robert Cecil and his foolhardy dissident victim Guy Fawkes - as the model conspirators.

Bank bailouts? - What's needed is a MORAL bailout

Chris Hedges is always worth reading. This 'Truthdig' essay from him struck some particularly resonant chords for me. He castigates the USA for its nihilism and the co-opting of its universities to the requirements of the 'Corporate State' and the 'American Imperial Project', but the general thrust is no less applicable to the UK and I have 'Anglicised' a few paragraphs below as a taster.

"In decaying societies, politics become theatre. The Elites, who have hollowed out the democratic system to serve the Corporate State, rule through image and presentation. They express indignation at RBS bonuses/pensions and empathy with a working/middle class they have spent the last few decades disenfranchising. They make promises to desperate families that they know will never be fulfilled. When the spotlights go on they read their lines with appropriate emotion. Once they go off, they make sure RBS, Northern Rock, HBOS and other Banksters and large corporations, have the hundreds of billions of pounds in losses they incurred playing casino capitalism repaid, with taxpayer money....

We kneel before a cult of the self, elaborately constructed by the architects of our consumer society, which dismisses compassion, sacrifice for the less fortunate, and honesty. The methods used to attain what we want, we are told by reality television programs, business schools and self-help gurus, are irrelevant. Success - always defined in terms of money and power - is its own justification. The capacity for manipulation is what is most highly prized. Our moral collapse is as terrifying, and as dangerous, as our economic collapse......

Our elites are imploding. Their fraud and corruption are slowly being exposed as the disparity between their words and our reality becomes wider and more apparent. The rage that is bubbling up across the country will have to be countered by the Elite with less subtle forms of control. But unless we grasp the “societal play of forces that operates beneath the surface of political forms” we will be cursed with a more ruthless form of corporate power, one that does away with artifice and the seduction of a consumer society and instead wields power through naked repression....."

Read the whole thing - it's worth it.

Craig Murray Blacklisted ?

I was not in the least surprised to hear that Craig Murray seems to have become a sort of 'Black spot' character for the BBC and other main stream media.

In similar fashion to John Pilger and a few others, his habit of speaking truth to power is seen by the Establishment as dangerously subversive and threatening, and must therefore be dealt with accordingly. The comment I posted on Craig's blog was in danger of turning into an extended rant (as usual) so I thought I'd better cut it short and do the elaborating here instead:

I see Craig's experience as illustrative of the manner in which power in the UK deals with the sort of dissent that cannot be cowed by fear of its career consequences. There are certain unspoken but well defined boundaries for debate on pretty well all the major political issues. They encompass a globalised 'free'-trade world view with perpetual economic growth and 'progress' as its obligatory creed. The West is its embodiment with an over-arching narrative that tells of an alliance of progressive well-meaning but misunderstood and put-upon Nations (The Goodies) forced to defend themselves against aggressive reactionary forces of darkness that 'hate us for our freedom' and other such inanities (The Baddies). Step outside those boundaries in a manner judged threatening by and to the Establishment, and your card is marked accordingly. Craig's card has clearly been so marked.

The fount of real political power in the West is a Corporatocracy whose very existence is dependant upon such a world view. With honourable exceptions, its politicians, are either bought and paid for (or soon to be paid for "we promise") PR men (and thus eligible for high office and privy council status), or simpler-minded jobsworths, dependant upon their respective Parties for position and place (aka Sir Joseph Porter: 'I always voted at my party's call and I never thought of thinking for myself at all'). Speaking truth to power has become an infallible short cut to ending a career in UK politics. The MSM - especially the Murdoch press and the BBC - are the Corporatocracy's means of filtering and presenting news and current affairs for public consumption in a manner that is not only non-threatening, but that actively promotes this obligatory 'world view'.

Where dissent of the Craig Murray variety cannot be wholly ignored it is usually presented, either as the opinion of a lovable eccentric that can thus be safely indulged a little, or the rantings of a 'conspiracy theorist' (or other similar pejorative) to be ridiculed, hated or feared, depending upon context.

I wonder which of those roles Craig is being earmarked for?

The politician's credo

The politician's credo and guide to greasy-pole climbing. (in furtherance of the noble purposes of the State)

Creed: I believe in one God - His name is 'PROGRESS'; and in his handmaidens: 'FREEDOM' & 'PERPETUAL EXPONENTIAL ECONOMIC and POPULATION GROWTH' - on our finite planet (now there's a miracle-in-progress for you)

Leitmotif: There has never been a civilization so wise, clever, advanced and all-knowing as ours. (My name is Ozymandias)

Liturgical guide - In furtherance of the one true faith:

Anyone who does not subscribe and adhere to the latter-day religion of PROGRESS, based on Perpetual Economic Growth and Globalisation, is a REACTIONARY which, in this most fundamental of matters, is heresy - if not treason - and must be dealt with accordingly.

Evangelise; Demonise; Cajole; Interfere; Regulate; Tax; Ban; Force; Grant Rights; Impose duties - All in the name of PROGRESS & FREEDOM. (our enemies hate us because we are free you know - so we must fight the enemies of freedom).

Feed the population a diet of faux-culture - of soccer, celebrity, reality TV and sex - as the very pinnacle of civilized living. Define the boundaries of political debate. Ridicule or ostracize those who dare speak outside those boundaries, or question the official narrative of history, or of who and what we are. Silence them if they show signs of becoming effective. Make them dependent on the State for their wellbeing and protection from the things they most fear. Do not allow them to protect themselves. If necessary, manufacture those fears. At least stoke them up and exaggerate them. They will become correspondingly grateful, docile, compliant and complicit in 'The System' (that imprisons and enslaves them). But, above all, distrust them and remain vigilant for signs of effective dissent.

Be hyper-active about ruling the minutiae of their lives. Control both narrative and agenda. Reality for the masses must be what we say it is. The truth is the Official Record. All hail the Nanny-State and it's iron-fisted enforcers (those fine upstanding executioners in blue).

-----------------------
And on these fundamentals, it matters not what political party you vote for. In orchestral terms they are all 'variations on a theme' - the same tired worn-out, discredited theme of PROGRESS (towards what I wonder)

Climate change? Pollution? Resource constraints? Poverty? Population overshoot? Sustainability of the unsustainable? Our solemn right - nay duty - to invade any country we choose in furtherance of our 'Values'? - Forget them. They are anathemas and the preoccupation of fools, knaves, revolutionaries and traitors. WE ARE THE GOODIES - at the very pinnacle of humanity's PROGRESS (that word again) to date and so, the world simply MUST be made to see things our way, OR ELSE !"

---------------------
"So, Let's see. We're having a light policy day. What new pearl of political wisdom can we politicians propose for the poor dear Sheeple to chatter aimlessly about?

I Know! - let's ban plastic bags!"

Says it all really.
---------------------
(This post arose from a comment I posted on Ian Dale's Blog in response to his proposal that plastic bags be banned. It pushed some buttons and I had a rant - as is my way these days)

'Mr Fawlty - I no want to work here any more'

It seems His Toniness paid a visit to the Home Office yesterday.

After the comprehensive rubbishing dished out by ministers over recent months - for PUBLIC consumption, it was apparently deemed advisable that their new Boss's Boss give those who work there PRIVATE assurances that they were really jolly fine chaps 'n' chapesses and doing a grand job.

This from one of those obliged to listen to him (Courtesy of an anonymous comment to one of Guy Fawkes' postings):

".... the Glorious Tony came and gave a "morale-boosting" speech to us plebs in the Home Office today. It was exactly like Young Mr Grace from Are you Being Served telling us "you've all done very well".

Patronising crap in other words.

That 'Kipper and the Corpse' episode from Fawly Towers sprung to mind too

Tags: His Toniness, Tony Blair, Grace Bothers, Home Office, Manuel, Fawlty Towers

Should Prescotution be legalised?

I took some advice from Chicken Yoghurt and nipped over to Simon Carr's new site. Agreed, definately one for the regular visit blogroll. Among a welter of juicy snippets I found this little gem:

"But with Blair hinting that he’ll be around for next year’s G8, the DPM fears he’ll have to stay the course as well. This is all a nightmare for him. As long as he’s there the press will flog away at him. It’s not the peccadilloes that worry him. Having sex with your diary secretary with the door open and civil servants in the next room - that’s a John-is-John misdemeanour. But - hypothetical question - what if he’d pushed the career of someone whom he’d been Prescotuting? Down to getting the person into Parliament? Wouldn’t that count as infringing the Ministerial Code?" [My emphasis]

Written in the context of Rosie Winterton's 'Clearly, clearly clearly clearly' prefixes during her regular health questions performances

I feel a new neologism coming on

Tags: John Prescott, Rosie Winterton, Sleaze, Prescotution

Conspiracy Theories & Highway Robbery

No real need of a plug from me but Guido Fawkes has a 'must read' piece on the cosy consensus developing at Westminster on public funding for political parties.

Just who the hell do these people think they are? Some kind of necessary public service?

Fact is that santimonious, patronising self-importance allied to the corrupt fund-raising practices of the entire political class has finally come home to roost. They can't raise enough money for their grandiose 'let's humour the gullible electorate' spin machines through membership subscriptions, so now they intend to dip their grubby little mits into the public purse. And if that sounds a bit harsh, they should ask themselves just why it is that public respect for the political classes is at an all-time low - and falling. Do they REALLY think that will be reversed by forcing people to keep them afloat.

Oh - and by-the-way they, the big ones that have already majored in corrupt fund-raising, will decide which minority parties are deserving of public largess - the politically incorrect ones need not apply.

So! - Who said crime doesn't pay?

Tags: Public funding of political parties, UK Politics, Corruption, Sleaze

Brown tries to teach us an English lesson

Simon Lee in the Yorkshire Post

"ENGLAND is a strange country, politically speaking.

If it was an independent nation-state, England's population of 50 million and national income of £861bn in 2004 would make it both one of the largest member-states of the European Union and a prospective G8 member. Paradoxically, as the New Encyclopaedia Britannica acknowledges: 'Constitutionally, England does not exist.' England and its political identity have been subsumed within and conflated with the institutions of the British state, symbolised by the playing of the British national anthem at England's World Cup matches."

Read the rest here

Chris Smith's 'Cri du Coeur'

Chris (Now Baron of Finsbury, no less) Smith - formerly minister for culture media and sport. Remember him?

Josie Appleton interviews him in Spiked about his new book 'Suicide of the West'. She describes it as 'Smith's cri du coeur for fundamental enlightenment values'. I read it with increasing irritation and contempt. She dubs the book "a timely intervention". If the stuff quoted is any guide, 'self-serving tosh' would be more like it - as in:

"We are now at a fork in the road. One way lies cynicism and despair, the other is rediscovering a belief in the things that we hold dear."

or

"I joined the Labour Party because I thought that it was the best vehicle for social change, for making people’s lives better"

Oh really? how very touching and original. "Furthering my own political agenda and forcing my own [suspect] morality on others" is a reasonable translation from the Orwellian doublespeak of those two little gems I'd say.

As a member of a recently persecuted minority group, Chris Smith might have been expected to have some insight into what it feels like to be demonised and marginalised prior to being legislated against. Apparantly not. This is the man who voted consistently for the most extreme options on hunting with hounds, including support for the original 'Foster Bill'. Over 700 hours of parliamentary time squandered on a spiteful tribal measure introduced for precisely the kind political expediency he claims to abhor. With his full support, it finally resulted in a total legislative ban farce.

The man is a regulating/banning/social engineering control freak of the kind now sadly typical of much of left wing UK politics. He (they) wouldn't recognise genuine enlightenment values if he fell over them.

If the West really IS committing suicide, then it is Smith and his kind that are the immediate proximate cause.

Tags: Chris Smith, Hunting, Hunting with Hounds, Fox Hunting, Animal Rights

Lammy to the slaughter as minister attones for rural slur

From the Sunday Times Atticus column:

"Culture minister David Lammy will be enjoying plenty of fine country fare next month: namely, several large slices of humble pie. Lammy is off on a tour of the countryside to atone for an ill-advised speech at the Labour conference last year in which he referred to rural folk as “inbred”.

Luckily for Lammy, his remarks to the Fabian Society were overshadowed by the eviction of 82-year-old Walter Wolfgang from the conference hall. But they did not escape the attention of the Countryside Alliance. After an angry exchange of letters, Lammy has apologised “unreservedly” and has agreed to slip into his government-issue green wellies for an instructive tour."

What he actually said was that all members of the Countryside Alliance looked alike, as a result of inbreeding. (I wonder what would happen to anyone saying something similar about - coloured people say?) The remarks were made at a Fabian Society fringe meeting. He clearly didn't realise that CA Chairman John Jackson, a lifelong member of the Fabian Society was in attendance. And of course he was only parroting the routine insults of many Labour delegates (commonly known as ingratiating yourself). For the second year running they had vandalised the CA stand in the conference exhibition area and hurled routine foul-mouthed abuse at those manning the stand.

His notoriety increased again recently with his "ICONS of England" initiative.

With any luck he'll learn a little about real breeding during his forthcoming tour - especially if he can steel himself to visit a - a -a horror-of-horrors! - a HUNT KENNELS; but I suppose that would be asking just toooo much,

Tags: Hunting, Hunting with Hounds, Fox Hunting, Animal Rights, Animal Rights terrorism

New Labour - Tabloid Slaves

As expected, the Sunday papers were full of His Toniness' and Bruiser Reid's latest lectures on the inadequacies of 'The Criminal Justice System'. Most highlight the absurdity of it all (see for example the Telegraph, Times & Guardian), so I won't labour their well made points.

Suffice to say that after nine + years of responsibility for the whole shebang, 40+ new pieces of criminal justice legislation and over 700 new criminal offenses, "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" is wearing just a little bit thin.

What sticks in my mind most about this latest bout of pious outrage though, is a widely reported phrase used in his Bristol speech on Friday. It was: "Tony blair has accused the political and Legal Establishments of being in denial about the state of the criminal justice system". See here, here, and here for a report selection

So, just WHO does he think has been at the head of the 'Political and Legal Establishments' these past nine years I wonder, if not himself and his old flatmate Charlie Falconer?

2 Jags - 2 planes

Can't resist a good Blair/NuLab-bash.

'because they're worth it'

Hot on the heels of news that his Toniness is to order 2 jets for use by ministers and HMQ, here's a hoot of one from Beau Bo D'Or

Hazel Blears - off on another planet

Tony Blair's newly appointed (much to Gordon Broon's chagrin) 'Chair' of the Labour Party with the irritating Anthea Turner-like manner and overall appearance that has landed her with the affectionate title of 'Squirrel Nutkin', demonstrates her grasp of reality. In last Thursday's Guardian she writes:

“The BBC's adaptation of The Line of Beauty is a reminder of the Tories in government: arrogant, decadent and elititist "

OK, we see the point she is struggling with, but as Jasper Garrard puts it in today's Sunday Times:

"for a senior Labourite to dare peddle such a critique at this time is, well, nutty."

Quite! But the sad thing is, she clearly has no idea just how nutty!

Touching isn't it?

Labour don't do hairdressing...

Another well deserved plug for the Labour Don't Do web site.

Labour Don't do .....

<Here's> another 'brighten your day' website. Only launched yesterday but off to a flying start.

I particularly liked the above posting. Not only does it make a telling point about their uselessness in securing the borders and making effective self-defence against burglars a very risky business for the burgled; it also illustrates their susceptibility to one of the favoured forms of imagery of the militant animal rights movement - pictures like that are guaranteed to open purse strings and organisations to which Labour are in thrall (not to mention under financial obligation) are masters in their use. Nice to see the boot on the other foot for a change.