Vast Liberal Conspiracy

I'm giving some thought to "vast political conspiracies". I didn't think they were possible in our "Open Society", until taking a moment to seriously consider Iraq.

Specifically, I wondered: if I were a neocon wingnut hell-bent on making America a Conservative Christian Nation, how would I go about that?

I don't know. I'm not a neocon.

I am a liberal, though. So I asked: if I were hell-bent on making America a heathen, pot-smoking, sodomizing nation of rock and roll, debauchery and recklessness, how would I go about that?

Well. As I recently stated (look back a few post on my blog), I think most conservative beliefs are rooted in not understanding things. Like homosexuality, for example.

So my conspiracy would be to get these people to understand these things. I'd start by sneaking in "nice gay couples" into their preferred media. I'd make bad-guys into homophobic assholes. I'd make funny movies and TV shows where people smoked pot like it were no big deal, and have them be funnier while doing it. I'd create shows and movies where the main characters were--powers preserve us--atheists, and give them amazing powers of deduction that seemed like magic to others, blurring the line between strong faith and good science. I'd unleash skeptic magicians into society. And I'd make damn sure that grocery stores started playing Guns'n'Roses or some-such. I'd pay attention to what kids wanted, then inject whatever media they preferred with hyper-sexuality and open-mindedness.

I'd "take over" by exposing people to the fringe, until the fringe became commonplace.

My point, which I hope is obvious: that's already happening.



Victor said...

Woohoo! Awesome post, dude!

We rule!

If only I could also start getting my dividend check from the Zionist Elders... :)

r_b_bergstrom said...

Jeremy, I'm unclear what the point / motivation of your post was. Are you trying to make a serious case for your theory? Are you mocking the radical right for it's theory of the Liberal Media? Are you presenting a non-humorous critique of the way people see conspiracies in events that are more likely to have a more coincidental explanation? Any of the following could be taken from your post, just depending on whether the reader approaches it with or without a sarcastic tone.

For the sake of discussion, I'm going to assume/pretend you mean it in my next couple comments...

r_b_bergstrom said...

As you know, I am most definitely a Liberal, and a conspiracy theorist. I clearly have an agenda, I must admit.

I believe that yes, such a conspiracy does exist.

Said conspiracy is fairly benign, and to the best of my knowledge has resulted in no murders, vote rigging, or other high crimes, but it exists none the less.

These forms of entertainment get made, not just because they sell, but because people have agendas they are trying to promote. Much of the establishment in Hollywood and the music industry has a more liberal slant, and would be happy seeing such leanings become more prevalent.

A movie, tv show, or song can achieve the highest popularity without any obvious political depth. After all, most Americans don't vote, and won't list "a long and hard-hitting talk about politics" as one of their favorite ways to spend an evening. Yet a great many shows are made with overt or hidden political messages, because the authors of said programming have an agenda they wish to see unleashed upon the world.

In many cases, such as the overall liberalization of society, and the increased acceptance of those of other cultures/races/religions, it's a message/agenda I too would like to spread.

It's hard to tell whether or how well such a conspiracy is organized. The majority of it may just be that like minded individuals produce work that is coincidentally achieving this set of goals. On the other hand, it may be more organized, it may be discussed behind closed doors by pot-smoking multicultural atheist entertainment moguls. I don't know.

But I could certainly point you towards a "smoking gun" in support of the existence of this conspiracy. You ever see the TED talk by Jeff Skoll (first President of Ebay, now film producer)? He was in a group of mostly-liberal technology icons, talking quite proudly about how he was making films designed to change the world (Syriana, An Inconvenient Truth, Good Night and Good Luck, etc).

If Skoll's out there making films that push that part of the so-called Liberal Agenda, he's probably got counterparts / analogs who are actively and intentionally pushing other parts of it. Do these guys talk?

Jeremy Rice said...

Interestingly, the post sort of "wrote itself". I was motivated by recent activity by Bush that suggest a possible (though hopefully unlikely) coup. I wondered if Bush rose to power via concerted conspiracy to usurp power by whatever group. I legitimately tried to consider how such a group would go about such a thing, thinking it would--at worst--give us a few possible indicators to keep our eye on. ...When I came up empty, I wondered what the Left could do to "rise to power". I was tickled by the fact that my approach was actually what we're seeing.

Thus the post.

I think an underlying motivation for writing it, though, was to say:

We (liberals) are doing what we're doing because of our beliefs and ethics. I'm not cognizant of the Right's beliefs and ethics, so I wonder what they are, and how they believe their "new world order" will actually come about. I'd like to know, because I'd like to stop it.

Mostly I just think it's interesting.

r_b_bergstrom said...

So, if you're interested in proving/disproving the theory, there's several logical next steps.

I'd start by brainstorming a list of the various interpretations of the things you've noticed have happened.

1. Obviously, one possible explanation is a wide sweeping conspiracy.
2. Another possibility is a coincidental occurrence of these events. While individuals may have agendas, they never discussed it or actively conspired towards the same goal.
3. A third would be a middle-road between them, a micro-conspiracy of a handful of entertainment moguls pushing this agenda, with others riding the coattails of their success without intending to conspire.
4. A fourth would be some other non-conspiratorial outside factor promoting these developments. Perhaps Holmesian detectives, pot-smoking slackers, and homophobic villains just sell movie tickets. Perhaps Guns'N'Roses makes people buy more groceries. Perhaps the tots just really dig that tinkywinky. Perhaps liberals just spend more on media. This is coincidental, as in theory #2, but it differs from that view in that in this interpretation, it's market pressure, not agenda, that results in things loosening up.

Once I'd made my list of possible interpretations (which I've conveniently at least started for you), I'd brainstorm what details might be different if one theory were more true than the others.

Then we go looking for data that supports such interpretations. Can we find a comparison of how often Liberals vs Conservatives attend movies in the theatre? Can we compare sales for grocery stores that play Rock vs grocery stores that play Classical? Can we dig up more things like the Jeff Skoll speech, and is there a way to quantify to what level they support theories 1 or 3?

Jeremy Rice said...

Okay, good suggestions, thanks. But I'm not sure I really want to prove or disprove a liberal conspiracy.

As I think about it, I suppose what I'm honestly interested in is hearing what the dominionists (and others like them) would conspire, so we can be more watchful.

r_b_bergstrom said...

I was motivated by recent activity by Bush that suggest a possible (though hopefully unlikely) coup. I wondered if Bush rose to power via concerted conspiracy to usurp power by whatever group. I legitimately tried to consider how such a group would go about such a thing, thinking it would--at worst--give us a few possible indicators to keep our eye on. ...When I came up empty,

Empty? Here's what I'd do if I were the Bushes...

1. Establish business relations with wealthy foreign nationals, investing in their construction business. Done. (Bin Laden family)

2. Use my powers as VP in the 80s to get said foreign business a peach CIA contract to build a so-called "cave" bunker system in Afghanistan and Pakistan from which to base covert war against the Russians. Done.

3. Cut a deal with them, where they publicly (but not in actuality) disown the black sheep of the family. He goes and lives in the caves they built, and plans all sorts of nastiness. Done. (Osama)

4. Have multiple Bushes run for Governor to establish their political resume, and put them in position to help each other. Done.

5. George runs for Presidential election, Jeb pulls hanky-panky to get him into office. Done.

6. Osama attacks the US, George and Dick covertly order a stand down to let it happen. It has to be a big attack, something with as much potential as the Reichstag fire. Done.

7. Lie to the public about how it came to be, ineptly conduct the resulting war so that Bin Laden is never caught, and the war never ends (just like in 1984). Done.

8. Make money off peach government war contracts via Haliburton, Carlyle Group, Blackwater, etc. Use that money to finance further gains and your re-election. Done.

9. Make phony court cases alleging vote-rigging by the opposition. The point of this is to make the public accept that it's not just the Bush's rigging elections. If both parties are doing it, the public will just roll over and accept it as part of the political game. Done.

10. Threaten Pelosi with Martial Law should they try to Impeach Bush. Alleged (by a Democratic congressman) to have happened 2 years ago.

11. Pick a smokescreen for successor - a maverick with a history of bipartisan ship. This will make people believe that it's not worth rising up, since even if Bush's party wins, things will have to get better. Done.

12. Somehow convince that Maverick to flip-flop on 60% of the issues compared to his positions 4 years ago, thus grooming him to be a puppet. Done.

13. Pick a VP candidate that will appeal to women voters and right-wing religious extremists at the same time. Amazingly, Done.

14. Prepare troops within the country for illegal police duties. Done.

15. Provoke Russia into a conflict in hopes that the threat of war will result in justification for martial law. Attempted, successful in starting the fight in Georgia, but failed to capitalize on it or broaden the scope.

16. Manufacture a financial crisis that my candidate can solve. Attempted, possibly failed, still debatable.

17. Betray Bin Laden, send special forces into Pakistan to get him. This "October Surprise" makes my party look good, despite our 8 years of failure. Possibly attempted, and failed, that could be why Pakistan shot missiles at US Helicopters a week ago.

18. I don't know? Another terrorist attack? Further financial meltdown? Martial law? Rigging the election? Remains to be seen...

19. Perhaps McCain wins, probably via more rigging in Ohio, then has a health failure. Palin is sworn in, and appoints a Bush chrony as VP. Since Palin's experience is minimal, the public accepts Rove or someone similar taking a very active role in running the country.

20. More nonsense to ever increase the climate of fear, and justify the stripping of more liberties year after year.

21+. Rule from the shadows forever after.

Close enough?

r_b_bergstrom said...

I keep writing these long comments, hitting the publish button, and then finding you already replied to the previous post. It's funny.

r_b_bergstrom said...

Point being, #s 15-18 kinda answer your latest question.