Conspiracy Theories

From my point of view I'll relate what happened to me in a discussion around a pub table not long ago. I was talking to some people who were very active in a campaign to highlight Israeli misdeeds against the Palestinians and beyond. I thought they were making good arguments, supported by apparently solid evidence. Another person at the table started to take the anti-Israeli argument into a new dimension which, I have no doubt, crossed the line (and left it miles behind) into anti-semitism territory. He didn't talk about Israelis, he spat out the word Jews with venom. He went on to rant about the global Jewish conspiracy stretching back hundreds of years.

The people at the pub table who made the original points in support of the mistreated Palestinians were left dumfounded and embarrassed. After that evening I started getting emails and Facebook posts from this guy, linking to holocaust denial sites and other sites dripping with poisonous rhetoric and dubious history. I had to unfriend him from Facebook and block his emails.

So my point is that, if the debate is stifled (and I mean generally, not specifically on this forum), it may be because those who might be concerned fear they might also be drawn into, and identified with, that culture of hatred which is all too accessible out there.

I agree with your last paragraph here and I would not even begin to discuss my thoughts and questions about Judaism with someone I didn't think was mature enough to discuss it dispassionately. The search for objectivity in an issue like this is very difficult.

Part of the issue is that it is difficult for outsiders to pin down what Judaism / Zionism really is. Is it a race? Is it a religion? An ideology?

There is a social stigma (and rightly so) around discussing the pluses and minuses of various races because the potential and tendency towards racism and bigotry is in everyone. Almost everyone deep down wants to have a feeling of superiority and if they identify with (in their minds at least) a superior race, then they can get their pride fulfilled that way without demonstrating any merit of their own. It is a very positive development for human consciousness that a stigma has been placed on racial pride and most people now judge one another based on actions and ideas rather than race, and it would be a tragedy to undo all this progress. Since most people are not intellectually mature enough to have a discussion about qualities of race without ressurecting racist tendencies, I think that public figures and most people in general should probably avoid it altogether. Many have criticized Alex Jones, the premier American conspiracy theorist, for ignoring the Zionist aspect of globalism, but I think he is wise to do so as this would certainly be counterproductive and stir up needless divisions along race.

But there ought to be a way for intellectual thinkers such as those of us here, to examine these things dispassionately. The man at the pub who began spewing venom, why did he do so? Is it okay to spew venom at Nazis and Marxists for their actions? They tortured, starved, and murdered millions. But it is socially acceptable to spew venom at Nazis and Marxists for their misdeeds because they are not a race (well Nazis sort of were) but an ideology.

It is fair game to openly critique a person's ideology or religious doctrines, but not their race.

But the ideology and religious doctrines of Judaism and its subset of Zionism cannot be crtiqued because Judaism is also seen as a race. Islam is not a race. Christianity is not a race. Only Judaism is seen as a race because Judaism contains divine promises passed down through birthright and contains commands to maintain racial purity and to wipe out or enslave lesser races. Jews see themselves as a race even though ancestory is mixed and muddied now.

So how can we have an unemotional objective investigation and critique of Judaism and Zionism? We have to treat it as an ideology and a religion and not as a race.
 
We have to treat it as an ideology and a religion and not as a race.
Would it be less egregious if we condemned Jews for their religious beliefs? Jews believe they are God's chosen people, I believe Christ opened the covenant to all. Many people would call us both mad for believing such things. There was considerable discussion in the early church whether the Old Testament should be included in a Christian bible, but it was decided that the books gave context to Christ's claim. Most Jews I've met have been secularists, are they included in the conspiracy by virtue of their birth? In the last hundred years Jews have been condemned as communists and the force behind capitalist exploitation. That sounds like a universal scapegoat to me.
 
Would it be less egregious if we condemned Jews for their religious beliefs?

I don't think we should "condemn" Jews or anyone else based on a religious belief. The word I used was "critique" - not "condemn". Religious beliefs should always be open to criticism.

Jews believe they are God's chosen people, I believe Christ opened the covenant to all. ... Most Jews I've met have been secularists, are they included in the conspiracy by virtue of their birth?

That's why it is confusing to try and pin down what it means to be Jewish. Many modern Jews are secular atheists and to them being Jewish is an ethnic identity as well as tradition and a mindset more than an ideology. Judaism allows for Gentiles to convert to Judaism and there is a more generous thread of Jewish thought that recognizes ALL men were made in God's image. There are many interpretations and a wide variety of opinion within Judaism like any other religion, and I would find common ground with many of the more esoteric and mystical ideas in Judaism. And let me reiterate, I obviously don't believe all Jews are involved in a conspiracy. I am interested in the nature and dynamics of power structures, historical events, and the ideologies, motives, and social evolutionary origins of the string pullers in our modern society.

In the last hundred years Jews have been condemned as communists and the force behind capitalist exploitation. That sounds like a universal scapegoat to me.

In most Christian dogma and myth, Lucifer was considered God's chosen as the most beautiful and most powerful. But he became prideful and fell from grace to become the ugliest and most hateful inversion of his former self and the archenemy of God. This archetypal myth can be recast onto individuals as well as peoples. King Saul and Nebuchadnezzar for example. The truth being conveyed by this myth, I believe, is a dualism and a balance: the higher they rise, the harder they fall. To the extent to which anything becomes great, it may be perverted into its opposite. There was a branch of Judaism that was perverted, and if you believe the Christian Bible, it is written there again and again. The Jews were a contentious rebellious and proud people always straying from their God and taking pride in their racial identity rather than their righteous actions. Jesus was the last of many prophets sent to warn and reform them. His words for them were very harsh. He called them whitewashed tombs full of dead mens' bones, the spawn of the devil, a brood of vipers, a synagogue of Satan, etc. Those who could not join Jesus in the reformation of Judaism into a rediscovery of the principles of righteousness from the heart were cut off and reprobated.

What is a people to do when they are still full of racial pride, but their God has moved on from them? Disbelieve in that God, fight him, fight his new chosen ones, and fight for the people. So for generations and millennia there has been a war - at times open and at times covert - between the secular reprobated version of Judaism and Christianity. Once again, I am not speaking about the ordinary common Jew here, but the ideology of Jewish leadership, the Pharisees, the string-pullers.
 
I agree with Hurm here (big surprise I know). While being politically correct has its virtues, it can also act as a massive barrier to acknowledging certain realities

As well intentioned as it is to want be as inclusive and accepting as possible, we cannot allow this to cause blindness. Humanity is not served by this in the long run.

And when a group of humans behave in a way to destroy, annihilate, dominate or control others, they're bad people and the rest of us need to stop them. I give zero shits what race, nation, religion or gender you identify with, cruelty is cruelty, murder is murder, and you get absolutely no forgiveness from me for that, just because you want to identify as something you see as giving you just cause.
 
Last edited:
And when a group of humans behave in a way to destroy, annihilate, dominate or control others, they're bad people and the rest of us need to stop them. I give zero shits what race, nation, religion or gender you identify with, cruelty is cruelty, murder is murder, and you get absolutely no forgiveness from me for that, just because you want to identify as something you see as giving you just cause.

I didn't give your whole post a like as I didn't follow some of it, but I totally love this paragraph! :)
 
To try and condense what I was saying above...

I think the majority of people in every religion and race are basically good empathetic people whose religion gives meaning to their lives and provides wisdom on how best to live it. Their heritage, ancestry, and traditions imbue other traits.

On the empathy spectrum, a few people in every religion and race are sociopathic. Sociopaths tend to climb hierarchies and therefore end up running the show. (This doesn't mean every leader is totally sociopathic, but the tendency over time is in that direction.) How individuals in leadership express their sociopathy is filtered and altered by particular religious beliefs as well as heritage and ancestry.

So the sociopaths who wound up running the Catholic Church have a certain flavor of tyranny. Muslim sheiks and clerics in certain locations around the world have a different flavor of tyranny. And Jewish sociopaths who wound up at the top of banking dynasties have a different flavor of tyranny.

If you want to fully understand the particular flavor of tyranny promoted by certain groups, you have to analyze what all goes into that.

To use an engineering analogy... You can have various metal alloys that have different chemical compositions, apply various heat treatments or coatings, and from the combination you can get a variety of physical characteristics.
 
I get ya, Hurm. If anyone wants to try and misappropriate your words, that's on them. I'm sure you have your biases and all, but I've never seen you be anything but respectful and kind to everyone here, so if someone wants to take your comments as some sort of bigoted or racist rant, again, that's on them and honestly says a lot more about their psyche than yours.

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your desire to clarify yourself here, but I understood what you were saying and I didn't see anything suggesting your were racist or bigoted or whatever, and I'm getting the feeling you were concerned others saw it that way(?).

Again, if I'm wrong I apologize.
 
I get ya, Hurm. If anyone wants to try and misappropriate your words, that's on them. I'm sure you have your biases and all, but I've never seen you be anything but respectful and kind to everyone here, so if someone wants to take your comments as some sort of bigoted or racist rant, again, that's on them and honestly says a lot more about their psyche than yours.

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your desire to clarify yourself here, but I understood what you were saying and I didn't see anything suggesting your were racist or bigoted or whatever, and I'm getting the feeling you were concerned others saw it that way(?).

Again, if I'm wrong I apologize.

No worries, I was just trying to think about how to explain better what was in my head... I've considered writing a book someday titled: An Engineer's Guide to Spirituality...

And nah, I don't have any biases! And thanks for the support... Us Texans have to stick together... We know how the cow ate the cabbage ;)
 
So the sociopaths who wound up running the Catholic Church have a certain flavor of tyranny. Muslim sheiks and clerics in certain locations around the world have a different flavor of tyranny. And Jewish sociopaths who wound up at the top of banking dynasties have a different flavor of tyranny.
Do you have any evidence for that assertion?
 
Do you have any evidence for that assertion?

I thought this would be common knowledge...

In regards to Catholicism... Martin Luther staked his 95 theses in protest of Catholic abuses of power such as the prevention of the printing/teaching the bible in the common language or selling indulgences (taxes) to take years off a soul's time in torment in purgatory. The Catholic Church has lost some power since the reformation, but it is still an obscenely rich and influential center of power. You can go back in history and see other examples of Catholic tyranny and brutality: the crusades, purges of Jews, the inquisition, the destruction of native peoples and lands by the conquistadors. The Catholic Church had its tentacles into everything in Europe in the Middle Ages. Galileo was condemned by the church for "vehement suspicion of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the last 27 years of his life under house arrest.

In regards to Islam, I don't think I should have to go into that in detail here. Sharia law is stiflingly oppressive. Husbands can beat their wives. Young boys are abused. Gays are stoned. Women are forced to wear bee-keeper-suits and have few rights. Those who abandon the faith must be killed. Etc. and many Muslims want to bring the oppressive Sharia law to the whole world. 60 minutes reports on "Sharia Patrols" in London:

And in regards to Jewish tyranny... Well that is the subject in question here at the moment: is the debt slave dumbed down Huxleyesque Orwellian globalist empire merely the modern Jewish spin on tyrannical organization? Are they smarter than the Christians and Muslims by playing these groups off against each other, having covert rather than overt expressions of power, and "Mastering the Human Domain" including complex media driven psychological manipulation rather than simple bullying and intimidation used by failed tyrannies (these are always cause for uprisings).
 
I thought this would be common knowledge...

In regards to Catholicism... Martin Luther staked his 95 theses in protest of Catholic abuses of power such as the prevention of the printing/teaching the bible in the common language or selling indulgences (taxes) to take years off a soul's time in torment in purgatory. The Catholic Church has lost some power since the reformation, but it is still an obscenely rich and influential center of power. You can go back in history and see other examples of Catholic tyranny and brutality: the crusades, purges of Jews, the inquisition, the destruction of native peoples and lands by the conquistadors. The Catholic Church had its tentacles into everything in Europe in the Middle Ages. Galileo was condemned by the church for "vehement suspicion of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the last 27 years of his life under house arrest.

In regards to Islam, I don't think I should have to go into that in detail here. Sharia law is stiflingly oppressive. Husbands can beat their wives. Young boys are abused. Gays are stoned. Women are forced to wear bee-keeper-suits and have few rights. Those who abandon the faith must be killed. Etc. and many Muslims want to bring the oppressive Sharia law to the whole world. 60 minutes reports on "Sharia Patrols" in London:

And in regards to Jewish tyranny... Well that is the subject in question here at the moment: is the debt slave dumbed down Huxleyesque Orwellian globalist empire merely the modern Jewish spin on tyrannical organization? Are they smarter than the Christians and Muslims by playing these groups off against each other, having covert rather than overt expressions of power, and "Mastering the Human Domain" including complex media driven psychological manipulation rather than simple bullying and intimidation used by failed tyrannies (these are always cause for uprisings).
I believe Christianity has been a net force for good in the world. You only have to look at the abuses of the pagan societies that preceded them, or alternative belief systems to see the benefits Christianity offered. This may be an unfashionable view, but it is born out by history.

Here's an article by Peter Hitchens - a confirmed Anglican protestant - on Philip Pullman's attack on the Catholic church: http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co...out-of-the-bag-plus-thoughts-on-the-pope.html
 
I believe Christianity has been a net force for good in the world.

I agree. But I am not talking about Christianity as practiced by ordinary individuals. When I say that every religion has its own expression of or its own unique twist on tyranny, I am not saying every aspect of every religion is bad. I am saying there is a perverted and corrupted form of each religion that arises out of aging hierarchical institutions which attract sociopathic personality types.
 
I believe Christianity has been a net force for good in the world. You only have to look at the abuses of the pagan societies that preceded them, or alternative belief systems to see the benefits Christianity offered. This may be an unfashionable view, but it is born out by history.

Here's an article by Peter Hitchens - a confirmed Anglican protestant - on Philip Pullman's attack on the Catholic church: http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co...out-of-the-bag-plus-thoughts-on-the-pope.html

There is no defence of the church in that article beyond 'paedophilia exists outside of the RC church as well as within it and the RC church is belatedly trying to stop it'.

Unless you include this short paragraph 'in defence' of the bloated, disconnected cult:

And what of its artistic, musical and architectural heritage? How will that survive if the church that nurtured and sustained them is gone?

You may be correct. Even with the regular atrocities carried out in God's name, it maybe the lesser of all evils before us, but surely we can do better?
 
I agree. But I am not talking about Christianity as practiced by ordinary individuals. When I say that every religion has its own expression of or its own unique twist on tyranny, I am not saying every aspect of every religion is bad. I am saying there is a perverted and corrupted form of each religion that arises out of aging hierarchical institutions which attract sociopathic personality types.
It would be extraordinary if an institution included only good people, if such a thing existed it would enjoy exclusive support. It would be even more incredible for a belief system based on the ubiquitous nature of sin. The church believes it is the deposit of truth even if not a single individual believed in it. You can argue with the claim, but it's difficult to debate the reality - evil is everywhere and everyone is subject to its temptations.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top