Today in world-historical perspective (why not?)

[American Dream]

I'm noticing/reflecting on how big of a gap there seems to be between those who assume that there is a monolithic and universal Conspiracy (with a Capital "C") and those who do not. I have no a priori assumption that there is only one, nor that it existed for many centuries before, nor that it is fundamentally mystical, nor that there is a capstone.

Seems to make a big, big difference in where we come down on a lot of fundamental questions...

[brainpanhandler]

I'm noticing/reflecting on how big of a gap there seems to be between those who assume that there is a monolithic and universal Conspiracy (with a Capital "C") and those who do not. I have no a priori assumption that there is only one, nor that it existed for many centuries before, nor that it is fundamentally mystical, nor that there is a capstone.

Seems to make a big, big difference in where we come down on a lot of fundamental questions...

A useful thought experiment is to imagine yourself into that head space where you are certain that there is a central conspiracy overarching everything else and there is a central, all powerful cabal at the top intent on controlling everything and manipulating everything to it's own ends. This requires a kind of faith because in that worldview it is always the case that the power at the top is hidden, unknowable. It's visible lieutenants are not it. Faith of this kind has an effect on our brains. The way we perceive the world. The way we process information. The quality and kind of our filters. Even on our general emotional state. Even more so when times are hard or bleak. An often useful question to ask is "what psychological purpose/s does a belief serve?" The answer almost always includes a purpose unknown or ignored by the believer.

I had an english professor when I was young that believed she was accompanied everywhere by a companion spirit, a sort of guardian angel. She was really quite compelling in her conviction and I was young and impressionable and perhaps had a greater flexibility of imagination, and I found myself imagining that I too had a beneficent guardian angel, intent on protecting my well being and assisting my spiritual growth. Invisible to the senses the only way to experience my guardian spirit was to interpret it's effects. Typically small signs, timing and configuration of events, but also a sort of sixth sense, like feeling you are being watched. Literally it feels as though someone is always floating about, observing, witnessing your life and it's events and everything you do or think. You are not alone. Someone understands and knows every last detail of your life. This is a deep and central longing of most of humanity. We long to not be alone, to be understood. I think this desire manifests itself in myriad ways. At least it has in my life. It's a very compelling and comforting delusion. (which is not to say I discount the possibility of incorporeal beings taking an interest in our lives, I just want to make sure I am aware of the other purposes it serves to have such a belief. To my way of thinking there is no more noble goal than "know thyself".)

The same general mechanism is operative whether the invisible beings have malign or beneficial intent. both fulfill deep seated needs.

Another useful question/thought experiment: From the perspective of the cultural engineers how can a belief in a central conspiracy be used in the service of the 1%? Is it useful to them? What are it's targets? What are it's effects?

The invisible boogeyman has always played a key role in the mental lives of human beings. Which is not to say the invisible boogyman does not exist. Indeed, obviously a deep state does exist and it is intentionally largely invisible. Or at least I believe it does. Maintaining an awareness of whether this makes me more or less useful in opposing the deep state by slashing a tiny chunk off of one of it's tentacles is a helpful thing to keep in mind and at least serves as a signpost in the wilderness. If the goal is to acquire accurate knowledge of the deep state then one has to be vigilant against one's own biases and also the ways that the deep state might try to coopt accurate knowledge and obscure their existence/plans/intentions. We want to fool ourselves. They know this.

[BrandonD]

I'm noticing/reflecting on how big of a gap there seems to be between those who assume that there is a monolithic and universal Conspiracy (with a Capital "C") and those who do not. I have no a priori assumption that there is only one, nor that it existed for many centuries before, nor that it is fundamentally mystical, nor that there is a capstone.

Seems to make a big, big difference in where we come down on a lot of fundamental questions...

Your statement here actually reveals your assumptions and black/white thinking more so than anyone else's.

You state that there are essentially two different groups: 1) Those who assume a monolithic and universal conspiracy (because of course their opinion is not based upon any evidence), and 2) Those who do not (ie, the rational ones)

Of course, you fail to mention: 3) Those who assume there is no monolithic and universal conspiracy (ie, the majority of the public), 4) Those who are open to either option.

Not to mention position 5, my personal position: Those who think that neither of your presented scenarios are valid, as both are too simplistic and restrictive in their definitions. The actual scenario is something that does not fit neatly into our tired and cliche intellectual categories (which is not to say that I know what is going on).

What a speaker chooses to say, and what he chooses to leave out, reveals the inherent bias in his thinking. Sort of like a newscaster saying, "There is a war in Iraq between the Americans and the terrorists."

[American Dream]

I'm noticing/reflecting on how big of a gap there seems to be between those who assume that there is a monolithic and universal Conspiracy (with a Capital "C") and those who do not. I have no a priori assumption that there is only one, nor that it existed for many centuries before, nor that it is fundamentally mystical, nor that there is a capstone.

Seems to make a big, big difference in where we come down on a lot of fundamental questions...

Your statement here actually reveals your assumptions and black/white thinking more so than anyone else's.

You state that there are essentially two different groups: 1) Those who assume a monolithic and universal conspiracy (because of course their opinion is not based upon any evidence), and 2) Those who do not (ie, the rational ones)

Of course, you fail to mention: 3) Those who assume there is no monolithic and universal conspiracy (ie, the majority of the public), 4) Those who are open to either option.

Not to mention position 5, my personal position: Those who think that neither of your presented scenarios are valid, as both are too simplistic and restrictive in their definitions. The actual scenario is something that does not fit neatly into our tired and cliche intellectual categories.

What a speaker chooses to say, and what he chooses to leave out, reveals the inherent bias in his thinking. Sort of like a newscaster saying, "There is a war in Iraq between the Americans and the terrorists."

Sorry, I can't really agree with your formulations. When I refer to the gap between those who believe strongly that there is that ultimate smoky room and the rest of us who are not convinced, there is room for a variety of perspectives. But the gap is very, very real- and supports radically different views of human affairs. The former often forms a self-sealing belief system that is not amenable to critical inquiry.

[American Dream]

I'm noticing/reflecting on how big of a gap there seems to be between those who assume that there is a monolithic and universal Conspiracy (with a Capital "C") and those who do not. I have no a priori assumption that there is only one, nor that it existed for many centuries before, nor that it is fundamentally mystical, nor that there is a capstone.

Seems to make a big, big difference in where we come down on a lot of fundamental questions...

A useful thought experiment is to imagine yourself into that head space where you are certain that there is a central conspiracy overarching everything else and there is a central, all powerful cabal at the top intent on controlling everything and manipulating everything to it's own ends. This requires a kind of faith because in that worldview it is always the case that the power at the top is hidden, unknowable. It's visible lieutenants are not it. Faith of this kind has an effect on our brains. The way we perceive the world. The way we process information. The quality and kind of our filters. Even on our general emotional state. Even more so when times are hard or bleak. An often useful question to ask is "what psychological purpose/s does a belief serve?" The answer almost always includes a purpose unknown or ignored by the believer.

I had an english professor when I was young that believed she was accompanied everywhere by a companion spirit, a sort of guardian angel. She was really quite compelling in her conviction and I was young and impressionable and perhaps had a greater flexibility of imagination, and I found myself imagining that I too had a beneficent guardian angel, intent on protecting my well being and assisting my spiritual growth. Invisible to the senses the only way to experience my guardian spirit was to interpret it's effects. Typically small signs, timing and configuration of events, but also a sort of sixth sense, like feeling you are being watched. Literally it feels as though someone is always floating about, observing, witnessing your life and it's events and everything you do or think. You are not alone. Someone understands and knows every last detail of your life. This is a deep and central longing of most of humanity. We long to not be alone, to be understood. I think this desire manifests itself in myriad ways. At least it has in my life. It's a very compelling and comforting delusion. (which is not to say I discount the possibility of incorporeal beings taking an interest in our lives, I just want to make sure I am aware of the other purposes it serves to have such a belief. To my way of thinking there is no more noble goal than "know thyself".)

The same general mechanism is operative whether the invisible beings have malign or beneficial intent. both fulfill deep seated needs.

Another useful question/thought experiment: From the perspective of the cultural engineers how can a belief in a central conspiracy be used in the service of the 1%? Is it useful to them? What are it's targets? What are it's effects?

The invisible boogeyman has always played a key role in the mental lives of human beings. Which is not to say the invisible boogyman does not exist. Indeed, obviously a deep state does exist and it is intentionally largely invisible. Or at least I believe it does. Maintaining an awareness of whether this makes me more or less useful in opposing the deep state by slashing a tiny chunk off of one of it's tentacles is a helpful thing to keep in mind and at least serves as a signpost in the wilderness. If the goal is to acquire accurate knowledge of the deep state then one has to be vigilant against one's own biases and also the ways that the deep state might try to coopt accurate knowledge and obscure their existence/plans/intentions. We want to fool ourselves. They know this.

I think absolute surety in these matters- a faith in things unseen that are rather far out, really- can and does fulfill a variety of psychological needs including the certainty that one is in the know and can identify the source of all our problems. An added appeal is the permission to hate an externalized other. Magical thinking only adds to the problems.

This does, ironically, serve the interests of the 1% well in that it can undermine real political solidarity work and drive people into the arms of right wing extremists with bogus solutions for the ills of the world. These are very big problems.

[JackRiddler]

Thanks bph, that was great. Other than your inability to distinguish its from it's.

I'd say only that the deep state is visible and requires no faith. The elephant in the room is only partly covered by a sheet. The "invisible" part indeed gets to act in secret, and has an unknown number of parapolitical tentacles and adjuncts, but there are a limited number of structures such formations can take. However, the deep state within the U.S. warmaking and "security" agencies has public budgets that we know amount to about $80 billion currently, plus a set of contractors and corporate allies with their own other revenue streams, plus foreign secret-service allies who are also known to exist. All this has a shape that can be roughly outlined, mentalities that can be understood, interests that can be identified, actions that can be seen and studied, histories that have in large part been documented.

I think absolute surety in these matters- a faith in things unseen that are rather far out, really- can and does fulfill a variety of psychological needs including the certainty that one is in the know and can identify the source of all our problems. An added appeal is the permission to hate an externalized other. Magical thinking only adds to the problems.

This does, ironically, serve the interests of the 1% well in that it can undermine real political solidarity work and drive people into the arms of right wing extremists with bogus solutions for the ills of the world. These are very big problems.

Yes. The funny thing is that the sourcES of pretty much all of "our problems" can be identified and studied to the point where what's left unmapped (because it's shrouded in operational secrecy) is nevertheless reasonably well-explained and can be sounded out via informed speculation. This involves the application of sociology, psychology, history, political economy and anthropology, generally all in their alternative paradigms, since the formal disciplines tend to be dominated by the hegemonic ideologies in each case. Obviously, as this thread shows, I have very little patience for those who trash that fine pursuit with their mystified quasi-religious bullshit about “capstones” of Ultimate Lizards (whoever/whatever these may turn out to be). I mean, I can tolerate it up to a point, but not when it gets like with the Ds in this thread. (Both Ben and Brandon, as it turns out. Maybe there was a reason I confused them?) These display an unwarranted air of superior knowledge, exuding from vague formulations that say nothing other than to serve as passive-aggressive proclamations of stone-cold ignorance. And yet I'm the aggressor because I say they're full of shit, basically because that's one of the seven words that the Amerikan Middle Class mentality and the FCC believe are bad words. I could say they're full of nonsense, or delusions, or "stuff," but can I help it when "full of shit" is the most accurate descriptor? In any case, as I get busier and busier there will be less of me around here, but no one need ever think I'd be driven off by the likes of the D brothers, other than through the tedium of it.

[coffin_dodger]

Could someone more familiar with the term 'Deep State' help me out here with a question I have? JR or WR seem possible candidates.

Is the Deep State comprised of human beings?

[American Dream]

This- while not perfect- is one entry point:




Deep state

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Deep_state

[Wombaticus Rex]

Is the Deep State comprised of human beings?

Entirely, yes. While I accept the reality of egregores, tulpas and demons, I don't believe they occupy many boards or committees.

While it is a bit chauvnist of me, I also discount the possiblity of cetacean, fungal or mycelical intelligences playing much of a role in NatSec decision-making, too.

AD's entry is good, also recommend this thread on State Crimes Against Democracy
viewtopic.php?p=526508

Edit: ...hopefully JR gives you a completely different answer.

[zangtang]

Djinn Djinnie?

[coffin_dodger]

Is the Deep State comprised of human beings?

Entirely, yes. While I accept the reality of egregores, tulpas and demons, I don't believe they occupy many boards or committees.

While it is a bit chauvnist of me, I also discount the possiblity of cetacean, fungal or mycelical intelligences playing much of a role in NatSec decision-making, too.

AD's entry is good, also recommend this thread on State Crimes Against Democracy
viewtopic.php?p=526508

Edit: ...hopefully JR gives you a completely different answer.

Forgive me if I'm making a leap beyond credibility, but if the Deep State comprises a set of human beings, each autonomous but working as a part of Deep State, could that not conceivably be claimed to be a 'capstone' of the entire sytem?

[alan ford]

Earlier from this thread:

Is the Deep State comprised of human beings?

AD's entry is good, also recommend this thread on State Crimes Against Democracy

The common word here is "State" - and some time ago a famous duo Marx / Engels defined it in affect as:

the modern state is a tool of the ruling class, which it uses to defend its interests as against the interests of the vast majority of society

Quote from here :

http://www.socialistappeal.org/faq/the_state.html

By this definition there is not too much of a difference between State and Deep state. One could argue that wherever is State there is a Deep State too. If the State is disbanded will the Deep State end? Personally I believe that unfortunately this is not the case, I'd say that Deep State comes in existence ( not under the name ) before modern states were formed, and that it comes from power struggle between groups or individuals as soon as the idea comes to mind , something similar to "Better to keep this secret, it will be in my advantage" . The start of Deep State is in secrecy.
Now, the question is how Deep State comes in existence - I would argue that it's not necessary consciousness decision ( Let's start the Deep State), I would say this process starts slowly , spreading eventually to the number of people, even including "the top level" there might be various rationalizations of this type of action :

1. It's better like this for country / people / state
2. Everybody is doing it
3. I'm doing this for the better cause
4. I'm just doing my job
5. They don't know all the details

etc. etc.

For sub-consciousness part, I'm afraid it's deeply buried it the behaviour of power struggle, even on the individual level people will tend not to be open completely in their plans for various reasons.

FWIW complete openness in all the state decision could remove the Deep State - how far are we from that ?

As for demons and other creatures - a metaphor of the evil powers ? Alas, humans have often show their demonic side in the history , I'd say that some examples of human behaviour surpass what's attributed to the demons.

[seemslikeadream]

thank the lord some members here are so lucky to be tolerated by RI's elite

[JackRiddler]

"Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living."

It's all people, yes, but what made the people? Why is a given individual constructed to understand his interests one way and not another? Why does this understanding, or the understanding of right and wrong, differ from one person to another? What shaped a person's preordained emotional reflexes, his majority of irrational beliefs, his default assumptions, his responses to expressions of authority? Culture, upbringing and specific childhood experiences, group and class, traditions, religions, institutions, conventions, language itself: these are the "egregores," but without the need of a magical force or higher sentience or different species at its head. (Not that this is impossible, but it's a pretty insulting idea coming from people who want to sell it to others on "faith" alone.)

[82_28]

Formative song for the character you know as 82_28. I can't believe this shit came out in 1990! 24 fucking years.