Meh. That one is once again one of these where I think we are both better off if I actually write a proper reply because it's actually an interesting topic. But just in case my existential dread once again wins the upper hand over my work ethic:
I feel like the very charge you're defending against is the one that needs to be dismantled because it has been providing diminishing returns for a while now. The question whether there is or isn't a "conspiracy" is sort of a moot point. It's only relevant insofar it's a deciding factor in the question whether or not you're a conspiracy theorist.
And while "conspiracy theories" have been playing a major role in fascist thought, real conspiracies have been coasting on the easy side of the scrutiny spectrum for a while now by acting as if this all was just an authoritarian prompt. Of course there are conspiracies. The issue is with the stuff that has what German political theory calls a "Zentralsteuerungshypothese" (central directing hypothesis) which is the type of conspiracy you find for example in die-hard antisemitism (i.e. the Protocols etc.) and all the stuff that provides you with global explanatory theories that become unfalsifiable. (Every absence of proof becomes proof, for example, as this just shows how deep the conspiracy goes. Blah.)
That's not what we should be thinking about. We should be thinking about which things are a) plausible and b) worth thinking about.
A) will provide us with a bunch of actual conspiracies and B) will make sure we don't get lost in stuff that is ultimately a moot point because it really doesn't matter THAT much. (Do we REALLY care if something that is locked behind secret service archives NEEDS to be released? By which I mean, do we care ENOUGH to make this a main focus of our political lobbying or are there more important things to worry about?)
And not to promote my own stuff on your page, but I think you - and some of your readers - would be really interested in this essay I just published yesterday on AI and writing. I’d be curious for your take. The comments are getting interesting. I’m getting really burnt out at this point. https://www.godofthedesert.org/p/pro-israel-influencers-pump-out-ai
If you’re going to write about conspiracy theories and the BS around them then he’s the one.
You know how deep you got into Chomsky leftism and the TESCREALists? I got that deep into Wilson and Aleister Crowley and occultism instead. And that’s why my views and writings are so weird.
Doug Rushkoff is in this tradition too. He knew RAW and was friends with him.
I am the only one I know of our generation who made the mistake of picking Wilson as a career model. My views and approach are too weird for people now.
First of all, great article as always, Émile. I mean, you already know how aware I am of the TESCREAL ideologies and the people part of them, but that doesn't mean I get tired of you talking about it!
Anyway, moving on to what I wanted to share: I definitely agree with you that, despite how crazy and suspicious it is that a lot of the most well-known people in the TESCREAL field seem to know each other or have worked with each other at some point, that doesn't necessarily make it a conspiracy theory. The MAIN thing I want to add to the conversation is to possibly give an answer as to why all of these people know each other and why it's connected: Globalisation.
Think about it: We live in a time of amazing technological innovation: Smartphones, computers, satellites. And with that has come near-instantaneous ways of communication with texting, emails, and even Zoom calls. And that's not to mention the advent of the Internet in the '90s, which brought with it the ability for people to share their niche interests with the World and hopefully find others like you. That's something that simply wouldn't have been possible 100 years ago. I would've already had to be deep in my interests and actively seek people out, possibly even learning new languages if I was a fan of a particular work or author that had yet to be translated.
Obviously, many people like Yudkowsky, Bostrom, Legg, and more were part of many different email lists over the years. Now, is it crazy that ALL these people know each other? A little, but we also think it's crazy because of how ingrained/important these people are in the tech world, and for the most part that's because of some very generous (And CRAZY!!!) donors like Thiel, Tallinn, and even Larry Page (Maybe not a donor, but he did give Kurzweil a job). And they are ingrained partly because of globalisation.
Of course, I want to say that I'm not saying that globalisation is a bad thing. What I am saying is that there are a lot of human beings out there with screwed-up views. There are also a lot of human beings with screwed-up views, AND they have money to fund these views. It's just a shame that at this point in time (In which you and I live in), the ability for these people to meet has never been greater.
Would love to hear your thoughts on my ramblings, Émile :)
Meh. That one is once again one of these where I think we are both better off if I actually write a proper reply because it's actually an interesting topic. But just in case my existential dread once again wins the upper hand over my work ethic:
I feel like the very charge you're defending against is the one that needs to be dismantled because it has been providing diminishing returns for a while now. The question whether there is or isn't a "conspiracy" is sort of a moot point. It's only relevant insofar it's a deciding factor in the question whether or not you're a conspiracy theorist.
And while "conspiracy theories" have been playing a major role in fascist thought, real conspiracies have been coasting on the easy side of the scrutiny spectrum for a while now by acting as if this all was just an authoritarian prompt. Of course there are conspiracies. The issue is with the stuff that has what German political theory calls a "Zentralsteuerungshypothese" (central directing hypothesis) which is the type of conspiracy you find for example in die-hard antisemitism (i.e. the Protocols etc.) and all the stuff that provides you with global explanatory theories that become unfalsifiable. (Every absence of proof becomes proof, for example, as this just shows how deep the conspiracy goes. Blah.)
That's not what we should be thinking about. We should be thinking about which things are a) plausible and b) worth thinking about.
A) will provide us with a bunch of actual conspiracies and B) will make sure we don't get lost in stuff that is ultimately a moot point because it really doesn't matter THAT much. (Do we REALLY care if something that is locked behind secret service archives NEEDS to be released? By which I mean, do we care ENOUGH to make this a main focus of our political lobbying or are there more important things to worry about?)
Have you read any of Robert Anton Wilson’s books?
No, I haven't! What am I missing? :-)
And not to promote my own stuff on your page, but I think you - and some of your readers - would be really interested in this essay I just published yesterday on AI and writing. I’d be curious for your take. The comments are getting interesting. I’m getting really burnt out at this point. https://www.godofthedesert.org/p/pro-israel-influencers-pump-out-ai
Start here and you’ll see: https://youtu.be/A7N6TOFyrLg?is=1lptYT6qk_eFrR5s
If you’re going to write about conspiracy theories and the BS around them then he’s the one.
You know how deep you got into Chomsky leftism and the TESCREALists? I got that deep into Wilson and Aleister Crowley and occultism instead. And that’s why my views and writings are so weird.
https://www.godofthedesert.org/p/i-have-been-a-practicing-occultist?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
This is my favorite book: https://www.hilaritaspress.com/portfolio-item/cosmic-trigger-1/
Doug Rushkoff is in this tradition too. He knew RAW and was friends with him.
I am the only one I know of our generation who made the mistake of picking Wilson as a career model. My views and approach are too weird for people now.
First of all, great article as always, Émile. I mean, you already know how aware I am of the TESCREAL ideologies and the people part of them, but that doesn't mean I get tired of you talking about it!
Anyway, moving on to what I wanted to share: I definitely agree with you that, despite how crazy and suspicious it is that a lot of the most well-known people in the TESCREAL field seem to know each other or have worked with each other at some point, that doesn't necessarily make it a conspiracy theory. The MAIN thing I want to add to the conversation is to possibly give an answer as to why all of these people know each other and why it's connected: Globalisation.
Think about it: We live in a time of amazing technological innovation: Smartphones, computers, satellites. And with that has come near-instantaneous ways of communication with texting, emails, and even Zoom calls. And that's not to mention the advent of the Internet in the '90s, which brought with it the ability for people to share their niche interests with the World and hopefully find others like you. That's something that simply wouldn't have been possible 100 years ago. I would've already had to be deep in my interests and actively seek people out, possibly even learning new languages if I was a fan of a particular work or author that had yet to be translated.
Obviously, many people like Yudkowsky, Bostrom, Legg, and more were part of many different email lists over the years. Now, is it crazy that ALL these people know each other? A little, but we also think it's crazy because of how ingrained/important these people are in the tech world, and for the most part that's because of some very generous (And CRAZY!!!) donors like Thiel, Tallinn, and even Larry Page (Maybe not a donor, but he did give Kurzweil a job). And they are ingrained partly because of globalisation.
Of course, I want to say that I'm not saying that globalisation is a bad thing. What I am saying is that there are a lot of human beings out there with screwed-up views. There are also a lot of human beings with screwed-up views, AND they have money to fund these views. It's just a shame that at this point in time (In which you and I live in), the ability for these people to meet has never been greater.
Would love to hear your thoughts on my ramblings, Émile :)