> their protectors, the monarchs and nobles if those were our "protectors" then there was no need for a conspiracy, they were bad enough to be thrown out without any conspirators pushing for it. if they want to "go back" to before the enlightenment it's because they want to reconstitute oligarchy, if they complain about the enlightenment it's not because of the liberty/brotherhood/equality it's because those things make life more difficult for oligarchs. that's what all this billionaire vs deep state nonsense is, one group of oligarchs trying to dislodge the other. the hint of fear is that the next group of oligarchs will have even less control than the current ones. the tools for dislodging them can't be put back in the box at the end of the game and will rapidly get to work dislodging the next group of oligarchs. the revolution to me is oligarchy becoming difficult or impossible due to the spread of information.   > neither of these got any traction on the internet, yet we're here talking about it aren't we? on a not very private or small bbs. i think they very much care about questioning and the general direction of discourse which is veering more into conspiracy theory rather than away from it. it's fine to execute jfk publicly because you're sure you can control the narrative after. i think the basic reality is that for most of a century now the west has been run on the intelligence agency model, security clearances, need-to-know, psyops, lies, etc. basically people doing stuff outside of what the law provides and away from public accountability. they very much care what people ask questions about or talk about because the main thing any conspirator fears is daylight. the difference between weinstein and clinton was just getting named and discussed publicly. at root these things are all head games and they will become much less effective the more plugged in everyone is. without narrative management we are left in reality.
United States