Link to video.
weeder gander, in his quest to defend all things Leftie writes:
In 1936 American commentator H. L. Mencken wrote:
The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true deserts. He ascribes all his failure to get on in the world, all of his congenital incapacity and damfoolishness, to the machinations of werewolves assembled in Wall Street, or some other such den of infamy.
Belief in conspiracy theories has become a topic of interest for sociologists, psychologists and experts in folklore since at least the 1960s, when the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy eventually provoked an unprecedented public response directed against the official version of the case as expounded in the Report of the Warren Commission.
n his two volume work The Open Society and Its Enemies Popper used the term "conspiracy theory" to criticize the ideologies driving fascism, Nazism and communism. Popper argued that totalitarianism was founded on "conspiracy theories" which drew on imaginary plots driven by paranoid scenarios predicated on tribalism, racism or classism. Popper did not argue against the existence of everyday conspiracies (as incorrectly suggested in much of the later literature). Popper even uses the term "conspiracy" to describe ordinary political activity in the classical Athens of Plato (who was the principal target of his attack in The Open Society & Its Enemies).
In his critique of Marx and the twentieth century totalitarians, Popper wrote, "I do not wish to imply that conspiracies never happen. On the contrary, they are typical social phenomena."
He reiterated his point, "Conspiracies occur, it must be admitted. But the striking fact which, in spite of their occurrence, disproved the conspiracy theory is that few of these conspiracies are ultimately successful. Conspirators rarely consummate their conspiracy."
Popper proposed the term "the conspiracy theory of society" to criticize the methodology of Marx, Hitler and others whom he deemed to be deluded by "historicism" - the reduction of history to an overt and naive distortion via a crude formulaic analysis usually predicated on an agenda replete with unsound presuppositions.
October 23, 2008 10:14 AM
As usual weeder tries and reframe the question. In this case by writing of conspiracies. It is the old, "Make the other's claim so large that it is easily dismissible," trick.
But I am not going to let you get by with it.
No one has claimed that there is a conspiracy between Ayers and Hussein. I have no doubt that they have never sat and decided that one would do this and the other would do that. If Hussein wins, Ayers will not be part of his administration.
And the video doesn't say that. It merely shows what Ayers has done and presents the thought that Ayers would support Hussein because Ayers sees the radical in Hussein.
The video is merely proof of Hussein's radicalism.
That's why he launched his political career from his home. That's why he appointed him Chairman of one of the boards.
Hussein is a complex person. His early childhood did expose him to Muslim teachings. He did tour the world with a Muslim friend at an early age. His schooling was in a very left wing setting. And his religion was received from a man and church which does preach Black Liberation Theology.
Do I think he is a Muslim? No. I think he is a mixture of his schooling and life experiences, as we all are. I think that made him a radical and I think he saw a fellow radical in Ayers and they both used each other.
So forget your theories, gander. They don't work around here.