The CONspiracy

There has been a lot of news recently about the U.S. Government and telecommunications businesses conspiring to violate citizens' rights under the fourth amendment to the Constitution. There is no urban area that is not under surveillance, as more police departments launch miniature unmanned gas powered remote controlled aircraft mounted with GPS and video camera to monitor "safely" people's activities not visible from the ground. One advocate of the technology insisted people should realize it is not the government spying on them, but other people. It may be "safe" for the operator of the equipment, remotely situated in a vehicle control station, but it creates an unsafe society in which suspicions fall on anyone.

Think about the third amendment for a moment. It prohibits quartering troops in the homes of citizens. The British government in the eighteeth century made a practice of quartering troops in the homes of prominent patriots to monitor their conversations. Fancy technology can only go so far, and the police state still needs people on the ground, amongst the populace. Every corporate store carries a sticker on the door warning customers that a disguised police officer may be posing as employee or customer. Southwest Harbor allocated funding for an undercover officer who will be operating in that town. The dude who just hitched into town and wants to know where to score, hmn, don't know.. He SEEMS cool.. Has longish hair and scraggly beard. He parties hearty, always helps out, gets involved in the scene, wants to know everyone. He turns into a real friend, to one and all! Months or even years may pass, then he'll drop out of sight, and after a wave of arrests, will be seen again in a courtroom, shaved and suited, testifying against everyone. It turns out he works for the FBI.

In the seventies an FBI agent was identified in the Boston Food Co-op. He called himself Mule Mahoney. At first he seemed like the perfect co-op member. He showed up, pitched in, talked it up - he was eager. A little too eager. He always wanted the co-op to overreach its mission, overextend itself. There was something not quite right about him. He was adept at the rhetoric of revolution, but he was ignorant of the details of co-operative life, organic methodology and progressive dialectic. He did not seem to share beliefs co-opers hold as self evident. He didn't get it, making bold suggestions but not wanting to discuss them. The Boston Food Co-op suffered a rash of theft, vandalism and tenancy issues after the rumor about his identity spread and he vanished. Was he involved? 

A similar circumstance characterized the SLACK Factory in Belfast during the late nineties. A group of artists and activists grabbed a building in town on the cheap just before the real estate bubble. For seven years they struggled to operate as a business to the business world and as a co-op to the alternative community. There was never any extra money but plenty people helped, coolie method, to satisfy the town's newly invigorated code enforcement. Almost from the start there were police complaints, though no arrests were ever made nor charges filed, and official police records show SLACKers to have been co-operative with Belfast authorities. Vehicles were vandalized, arson was committed, thefts occurred, but again no arrests were made, no crimes investigated. As the need to refinance arose, it became apparent there was a leak on the board as every step taken to avert foreclosure was preempted. Rednecks took the property, lawyers and aristocrats took the money, and the freaks took a hike. Today it is a parking lot. The local press, in an exceedingly rare mention of the SLACK Factory reporting the public sale of the property described the inevitable destruction of the facility briefly as a "failed partnership". 

Was that all it would take? Could it really be that radicals, progressives, artists and activists are so incapable of regulating their affairs that they cannot operate a business successfully, or create a community together? Maybe adherence to low impact, non profit, co-operative ideals is unsuited for institutional survival in the dog eat dog world of corporate domination, and that egalitarian, democratic, horizontal structuring is equally unsuited for community survival in the eye for an eye realm of sectarian fascism. Maybe that's what the CONspiracy WANTS people to believe. Maybe movement tragedies like Rainbow Farm or the SLACK Factory, potent examples of the futility of progressive organizing, need prodding toward the precipice over which they finally plummet. It could still be true the many, many accounts of infiltration by enemies of civil rights, women's liberation, anti war, environmental protection, natural healing, co-operative economy into the movement are fictions. But even if they are ALL fictions, they still infuse the movement with divisiveness.

Every movement needs new supporters. How will they be vetted? Outlaw groups like Hell's Angels have a strict system of sponsorship, punishable by death if an enemy is introduced as a friend. That might limit membership, but it protects true believers. Progressives may consider themselves outlaws, but they are unwilling to put others to death, even enemies. Movement people generally are reluctant to even consider the possibility that freaky volunteers could be enemies, and there is little or no vetting. Not only does that mean the movement's numbers swell with membership who do not share ideals and methods, but also that agents of the military industrial complex are welcomed into inner circles from whence they can report to superiors and subvert from within to destabilize the movement, like the "pod people" in the 9/11 truth movement.

Warning! Police officers may be posing as organizers or members! They could be co-ordinators, directors, ombudspers, editors, collaters, staffers or volunteers. They might appear to be cool, natural, organic, hip, down dudes and dudettes. Nevertheless they are working to discredit the movement, dismantle progressive structuring, and destroy opposition to corporate fascism. Green Scare is appropriate as a redux of the Red Scare of the fifties and sixties - some Green Party stalwarts are really redyed Reds, and many others endorse communistic crowd control contrary to liberation ideology. "Greens" at the SLACK Factory relied on their party status to avoid helping out with projects or even cleaning up the coffee cups after their meetings there. They don't intend to eliminate power structures, but to usurp them. They are not comrades. 

The movement needs to reexamine its tenets and techniques continually to remain progressive. The movement also needs continually to reexamine its members, and their true motives to remain viable. It is all too easy to be swayed by loudmouths who demand to get something done, lulled by lazy freaks who suggest falling back on establishment procedure, seduced by obsequious groupies who don't get it, excited by agents provocateurs plotting entrapment. It is an open secret the Pentagon and other alphabet soup agencies operate a vast psy-ops campaign at home and abroad that not only publishes fake and misleading news stories, and commits false flag atrocities as misdirection for political purposes, but also inserts agents into structuring opposed to the global police state.

The dilemma is this: If someone is a nutty fruitloop on a wierd trip, but essentially a fellow traveller, it is divisive, indeed suicidal to instigate a witchhunt based on fears and projections. On the other hand if the unkempt but intense newcomer is actually a mole, a traitor, a wolf in sheep's clothing he must be outed, or at least "turned". Without a technique for security clearance like the government or corporations, the movement relies on feelings. Often there is a feeling that someone is on a hidden agenda, not with the program, at odds with the group's intent. Generous, accepting, loving people deliberately repress those feelings of suspicion towards individuals, putting themselves at risk of betrayal. Even if they are not criminals and cannot be charged, they are nevertheless vulnerable to official harassment, loss of reputation and destabilization of hard-won alternative structuring.

How can you tell? To start with, anyone who wants to be in charge is not a revolutionary. Beware of pushy aggros who insist on delegation of authority, who demand curtailing consensus by putting proposals to the vote, who recommend seeking authorization for alternative projects, who aver propaganda is outreach, who rely on heirarchy rather than widespread support. Enemy agents are ignorant, deep down, of the spiritual connection of consciousness with the cosmos. They are assouls. That is, they have no souls. They cannot be reasoned with, swayed or threatened because they have the entire weight of the CONspiracy behind them. Their determined intention is to suborn all who seek to build a world of peace and justice. They won't stop until freedom is dead. 

Is there someone in your group who always gets confrontational, who employs pugnacious language, bulldozes objections, mocks dissenters? Does he always seem to be talking about or to police? Is she seen getting arrested but is conspicuously absent in detention? Does chaos ensue when his suggestions are put into effect? Does she stress earnings and legitimacy over service and integrity? Does he have to be reminded that democratic principles must be practiced as well as espoused? Does she propose risky clandestine actions rather than public non violence? You may have a rodent problem!

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

042816

"The madman is not the man who has lost his reason. The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason." 

G.K. Chesterton 

In these troubled times, it is easy to see others as mentally unfit because the crazy things they do. No one in his right mind would do those crazy things! Nuts, crazy, insane, coocoo, mad, bonkers, plum loco, borderline, out of your mind, certifiable, mentally ill.. Do they all mean the same thing? Not a clinical diagnosis, rather an expression that they would not do those things if they were okay. But how objective is a label of crazy?

It is generally accepted that those who are in good mental health will respond rationally to situations, and the benchmark for rationality is enlightened self interest. If someone is observed hitting himself on the head with a hammer, that person must be crazy because it is difficult to see how hammer blows to the head are in anyone's self interest. The humane thing to do would be to take the hammer away because hammer blows to the head are no help. But what if they were? It would be crazy to take the hammer away. Okay, that's not too likely, but most examples of "crazy" are not so clearly cut.

Before the Renaissance, or "rebirth" of civilization after the Dark Ages (when learning was the exclusive province of colored people), it was commonly believed in Europe that Earth was flat, and at the center of the universe. Amazingly complicated models were devised to prove how observed cosmological events occurred in a geocentric universe. Those who did question the flat Earth theory, despite the findings of Greek academics two millennia previously, were tortured until they confessed, then burned at the stake by God fearing monomaniacal religionists. It would be crazy in 1400 CE to say Earth was round!

Today however it is commonly held that Earth is a spheroid, and photographic evidence tends to support that theory. The heliocentric model of the solar system explains celestial motion much more cogently, and simply than the complex and arcane geocentric theory. It would be crazy to assert today that Earth is flat, or that Sun circles Earth. 

The most referenced case of world craziness is Adolph Hitler. Given the expansion of democracy and rule of law during the twentieth century, it was crazy to simply round up people indiscriminately and murder them wholesale. Ipso facto, Hitler was insane. But wait a minute.. He was charismatic, brilliant, a serious student of history, compelling orator, prolific writer and master planner, worshipped by millions, obeyed by sensible, stand-up regulars who stood to lose everything if they were mistaken. Germans in the Third Reich would be crazy to disobey Hitler, because the likelihood they would be arrested, tortured and murdered by the Gestapo. Who is so crazy today?

Adolph Hitler was steeped in the European tradition of anti-semitism which for hundreds of years taught that Jews are evil, the source of social unrest, not fully human. Because their low status in Medieval society, Jews were relegated to handling money, the "filthy lucre" which would soil the hands of the aristocracy, prepositioning certain Jews to control global finance with the emergence of the nation/state and central banking. It was within that context the paperhanger recognized the hand of the "Jewish banking conspiracy" behind slavery and suffering of masses of people. From an historical perspective, it is crazy to think that Jewishness is enough to make anyone a conspirator. But if, as Hitler believed, that WERE true, it would be eminently rational to attempt to eliminate all Jews as a precondition for a Thousand-Year Reich of peace and prosperity under the umbrella of Aryan mastery. It is tragic that Hitler could not differentiate between conspirators and all Jews, but given what he knew, he was acting in the best interests of his people. Is that really crazy?

9/11 changed everything. Horrified New Yorkers and people around the world watched transfixed as pathetic victims plummeted and buildings crumbled to dust. Though unable to defend America against attack, the W administration by the end of the day had identified Arabs as the perpetrators while morsels of their remains still smoldered. Aroused by outrage, the American public was moved to wreak righteous retribution upon the madmen who had murdered thousands, and in the persons of their representatives, practically unanimously agreed to short circuit the Constitution and hand the pResident unlimited war powers, though without taking the time to read through proposed legislation prepared well in advance, or discuss it at any length. If, as Americans are told, Arabs hate American freedom so much they are willing to kill themselves to attack the U.S., it is entirely rational to wage war against Arabs, including women and children in their homes in Kabul, Baghdad, Ramallah, Beirut, and soon Damascus, and Tehran (they aren't Arabs? What the hay! Close enough!) in order to extend and perpetuate Pax Americana into the future.

But what if it wasn't Arabs? There are so many inconsistencies, ambiguities and impossibilities evident in the event, that an immediate finding of Arab hijackers as culprits may be premature. Why couldn't the greatest military the world has ever known stop the jets? Why didn't the secret service scramble the commander in chief at Booker Elementary? Why did WTC 7, not struck by aircraft, collapse later in the day? are pertinent questions about 9/11 that are glaringly unanswered, and remain today largely unaddressed.

What if it was all a theatrical production, with the role of perpetrators played by Arabs who thought something else was going on? What if there were no Arabs at all (the only proof being accusations originating from the White House)? What if the true planners and executors of 9/11 were not Arabs, but highly respected top ranking officials of the U.S. government implementing an undisclosed agenda of global domination by the corporate elite? In THAT case it would be crazy to start attacking Arabs, Islamists, Easterners, dark skinned people, foreigners, because if they didn't already hate America, they sure do now!

People have always sickened and died. Not everyone is adequately endowed with health in a contagious world and tragedy has always stalked those who aren't. Toward the end of the twentieth century a new plague was identified - AIDS. Though understanding of microbial infection was still in its first century historically, it seemed probable that a virus was causing the otherwise unexplained wasting deaths of homosexuals, Haitiens and drug users. No such virus had been isolated and identified, but postulated based upon circumstantial evidence, named HIV, and announced to the world as the cause of AIDS. Given understanding of infectious disease vectors, and the supposition that sexual activity would spread the new plague to everyone eventually, it would be crazy not to fund research into isolating the virus and developing a cure. Meanwhile, it also would be crazy to have sex with anyone who might harbor the virus, or even sit in a classroom or shake hands with someone who might be infected.

What if that didn't matter? What if there were no HIV? What if HIV were a myth deployed to distract people from mounting evidence that toxic lifestyles cause immune system breakdown? In that case it would be crazy to continue to use electric devices, cars, cosmetics, chemical medicines and a plethora of products intended to make life more fun, and incidentally provide shareholders with more wealth. As with 9/11, the evidence about AIDS is inconclusive, and the official explanation is Byzantine in complexity. Why do many AIDS patients test negative for HIV? Why do so many HIV positives lead healthy lives until they take "life saving" AIDS drugs? Why are accredited researchers who question HIV=AIDS defunded, harassed and threatened with so much vehemence? If there is no HIV, and AIDS is the result of poisoning, it would be as crazy to spend billions on the red herring of viral research as it would be to stop having sex.

Conspiracy theories are the latest craze. Anyone who doesn't like the way things are pastes together some cockamamie theory that secret forces make bad things happen, to alleviate the depression of being a loser. It's a dog eat dog world Bub, but it's all above board. You have to sink or swim, but everyone is in the same boat. You don't work, you don't eat. Nothing is as certain as death and taxes. You have no one but yourself to blame for trouble if you don't follow the rules. To rulers, order means no running, no shouting, everyone in his place doing his job, not disrupting others with urban myths about conspiracies that don't exist. The mere mention of suspicion all is not as advertised is enough to ruin anyone's life. People who believe wars are based on lies, or elections are preordained, or economy is a vast pyramid scheme to centralize wealth through slavery, or society is operated by aliens lacking humanity are PARANOID. They are marginalized by society, ridiculed, fired, ostracized, rendered, and murdered. It would be crazy to believe in the CONspiracy!

But what if it were true? What if the "people" who control governments, institutions, the world are not people at all, but shambling, unspeakable, inhuman things with a taste for blood and no concept of compassion? What if it were true "reality" is an elaborate stage show of special effects, and everything that is known to history was falsified by those who have special interest in the fascist view of order? To citizens, order means due process, the Bill of Rights, equality under the law, a level playing field upon which they can run and shout when they want to. If the CONspiracy is real, it would be crazy to pay taxes, vote for candidates, buy plastic products, or obey alien orders. Given that context, a SubGenius finding cause against the CONspiracy is the epitome of rationality, enlightened self-interest and robust mental health.

Braise "BoB"!

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

111813

No one believes movies to be accurate representations of reality. Even the most gritty, realistic depictions maintain a facade of conventional fakery viewers naturally take for granted. It is always full Moon in the movies, everyone has perfect teeth, everything is sparkling clean, all phone numbers are in the 555 exchange. Documentaries with live footage are fact-redacted by framing, editing and captioning. Mature viewers know much is left unrevealed, but not how much.

Not only for entertainment purposes, movies are also advertising - through product placement. Some independent films show shelves stocked with, and characters using generic labeled products: BEER, CEREAL, DETERGENT (check out Repo Man). However, producers of Hollywood blockbusters would not dream of creating a feature without making sweetheart deals with manufacturers. This not-so-subliminal messaging is more mind control. Images of name-brand logos on groceries, autos, businesses enhance verisimilitude while boosting sales. 

Other than products, movies sell attitudes, fears and mores. Though righteously frightened by high wierdness, decent movie folk maintain civility amidst chaos in cinematic surreality. However dire the circumstances, or widespread the destruction, the story invariably resolves with resumption of suburbia, and continuity of governance.  

Over all, movies present Normalization of Deviance as both comedy, and tragedy. Practically every movie has a vomit scene. Practically every movie has a rape scene. Practically every movie has a scene of driving into opposing traffic. Practically every movie includes murder of a victim who “deserved it”. 

While assiduously veiling intimate lovemaking, movies brazenly embrace idiot values of rage, acquisitiveness, compliance, selfishness, jealousy, vengefulness, ignorance, helplessness, subservience, wastefulness. Movies are prefaced with elaborate disclaimers that producers do not necessarily endorse the actions or opinions of the characters in their products. Nevertheless, pervasive repetition of CONspiracy themes lowers mental thresholds to anti-social behavior,resulting in media-induced mass psychosis.

Amid the commonality of such deviance in mass media, no product or behavior enjoys the utter ubiquity of drink. I need a drink! Can I buy you a drink? Fix yourself a drink. Where can I get a drink? You look like you could use a drink! Would you like a drink? I could use a stiff drink! Why not come up for a drink? are sprinkled liberally into screenplays like cheese on a New York pizza. Chick flics, horror, western, action, sci-fi – makes no difference. Drink drink drink! Many movies have drinking in nearly every scene. Drinkers are depicted as upstanding individuals who may on occasion become humorously tipsy, but never totally out-of-hand. Message? There’s nothing the matter with drinking – it’s normal! EVERYone does it!  The ravage and ruin of chronic acute alcoholism are not in the script. 

While drinking is promoted in movies, other drugs are repugned. Heroin users are depicted as dirty, desperate, dishonest, degenerates destined for overdose. Marijuana smokers are shown as silly, stoned-out slobs stupidly certain it is acceptable to behave inappropriately. By contrast, in many, many movies a professional protagonist takes a drink, then takes a life. And it is perfectly all right.

Not hard to understand – the lords of war are drinkers, chronic alcoholics, booze addicts, no more in control of themselves than any addict, and they will not be traduced. No WONder the world is speeding out of control! Drunks are doing the driving!

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius 

021024

Aside from snarky ad hominem sneers, and uninformed, knee-jerk denials, no one has been able to offer cogent refutation of leaked reports and unauthorized warnings about pandemic. Rather than logical debate of the evidence and testimony, protagonists of standard viewpoints instead impugn others’ “beliefs” for sharing talking points. There is very little of What could that mean? and way too much of How can you believe that?

When rain is forecast, must one “believe” it will rain to bring an umbrella? Is it spreading disinformation to tell others rain is forecast if they don’t get wet? Similarly, must one “believe” COVID is caused by a deadly virus to obey orders to mask and distance? Is it disinformation to share TV scare stories without any personal knowledge of deaths? Likewise, must one “believe” reports of vaccine injury to refuse to take unapproved experimental warp-speed drugs? Is it disinformation to share whistleblowers’ warnings without any personal knowledge of harm? Finally, must one “believe” what one sees and hears with own eyes and ears to share a first hand account? Is it disinformation if another witness contradicts it? 

It could be a lie. It could be the weatherman has stock in an umbrella company, TV has stock in drug companies, whistleblowers have stock in hospitals, cemeteries and crematoria. Luckily in the 21st century there is no such thing as conflicts of interest. It is expected and accepted for owners of the means of production to formulate and implement policy for all. 

But what would motivate a person to falsify hir own on-the-street experience in discussing it with others? Could someone (except politicians) have such stock in fantasy as to invent a fallacy and propagate it to others in the face of contradictory evidence? Or is that what belief means?

Perhaps America would be better off without the First Amendment, like the rest of the world. At least that way it would not be illegal for the government to order media companies to deny customers access to public platforms. If all information comes from the same source, if media carry the same content to all outlets, everyone everywhere would “believe” the same thing and there would be no controversy, no contention, no confrontation, no conflict. Everyone would affirm what everyone already “believes” from viewing TV. There would be no disinformation - no cause for alarm, no reason to doubt, no excuse to refuse. Even a cursory study of his story shows the greatest efforts in revolution, plague, calamity and war are expended not to defeat tyrants, seize territory, or save lives. The greatest effort invested in all human events is to quell controversy by controlling the narrative. 

Pandemic is no exception. On the contrary, it is the fullest expression yet of information control, with public media acting as a fine tooth comb filtering out any information at variance with official theory. Viewers can declare in all honesty They never heard of that! when information that instills doubt emerges from the darkness. From there it’s only a short step to killing the messenger for bearing bad tidings. The killings have started: three presidents of the three nations that refused pandemic are all murdered. What could that mean? How can you believe that?!

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

072121

Restrictions, requirements rescinded; case counts collapse

Drug companies admit fraud, reimburse injured patients, families $trillions 

Bex, Fauxi, Gapes, Swab convicted, executed for crimes against humanity

Putin, Zelenssky stop war, play chess for dominance; arms deals crumble

China accepts cheese corn puffs, fried pork rinds as repayment of US debt

First Nations, Hawaii, Porto Rico regain independence from US annexation

Israel renounces Zionist occupation, joins Arab nations in Middle East peace

DOJ quashes indictments, frees Pelletier, Manning, Assange, Snowden, Mumia

Spy agencies defunded, disbanded; local police invested, respected

Bidden’s dementia cured by massive LSD dosage

Chump’s megalomania cured by massive LSD dosage

Drug war ends – all drug use now legal for everyone, everywhere

Crime rates plummet as courts, cops catch up with drug-docket backlog

2A open season on lawyers; personal litigations drop to zero

Race, gender diversity issues mooted by transhumanism

SEC shuts down Wall Street, local economies recover overnight

Child sex traffickers exposed, crushed - globalist pederasts’ genitals shrivel

Wildlife exploitation ends; poachers fed to free range lions, tigers and bears 

Rock ‘n roll enshrined as art – across the nation dancing in the street

Internet ruled public commons, corporate censorship ceases

TV purged of politics, honest elections held, populist candidates sweep field

SubGenius recognized as ubermenschen, awarded UN Security Council seat

Fukujima reactors successfully entombed, heavy water cleansed, released

GMO bacteria consume plastic waste, excrete clean fuel oil

Climate change halted by popular adoption of energy-free lifestyle

Reduced consumerism eliminates resource competition, ending war

Peace dividend funds comprehensive infrastructure revamp

Worldwide application of regional biodynamic agriculture ends hunger forever

Humans abandon patrism, embrace cultural matrism, rejoice in Global Love

April Fool!

033122

War, and pandemic are naturally occurring phenomena unaffected by human desire

Earth’s climate, and biological gender are deeply affected by human desire

War “erupts” like a volcano, irresistibly bursting forth, senselessly burning up everything it touches. Pandemic “strikes” like lightning, coming out of nowhere, spontaneous, unpredictable, devastating. Nothing can be done about war and pandemic except to accept losses as inevitable and soldier on through all the madness and destruction. 

Earth’s climate is so sensitive to human activity all other geological processes pale in comparison. Controlling climate change is so essential all other human endeavors pale in comparison. Gender is so fluid that dreams and feelings can change a human male into female, or rather into some ill-defined asexual hybrid. Tons of stuff can be done to modify climate and multiply genders, from draconian strictures and harsh penalties imposed by institutions to abject subservience and self-denial on the part of individuals.

Perhaps it is antique to sit there and just talk about the weather without doing something about it. Perhaps it is naive to believe that because humans exhibit sexual dimorphism that there are no other sexes. Perhaps it is foolish to live life the way life is when something can be done to change life into something else.

Perhaps it is paranoid to perceive psycho-killers plan war and pandemic in perpetuity. Perhaps it is credulous to consider content from any but commercial carriers. Perhaps it is iniquitous to imply institutions have no interest in the public good. Perhaps it is stupid to suppose something can be done to stop the madness and destruction. 

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

102222

"Great nations are simply the operating fronts of behind-the-scenes, vastly ambitious individuals who had become so effectively powerful because of their ability to remain invisible while operating behind the national scenery." 

-- Buckminster Fuller

Bucky, that’s bunkum! The notion that wealthy, powerful people confer in clandestine conclaves to control the course of coming events is monstrous nonsense. Wealthy, powerful people hardly even know each other! Besides, they’re not on speaking terms. Supposing social elites share common concerns and operate in common cause is ridiculous delusion of commoners. Their conspiracies about the fabric of social order amount to domestic terrorism.

Coincidence theory sees no cause and effect from policy to event. Policy is strictly after-the-fact, whack-a-mole reaction to unforeseen occurrences forming no intelligible pattern. Coincidence is passive, it happens; whereas conspiracy involves active participation. The coincidence theorist’s Why would they do that?? astonishment at the suggestion sinister forces act in concert is unarguable, if specious rhetorical armor against indictment of collusion between miscreant co-parties. Facile to attribute conspiracy to gang bangers and crime cartels, the rubric is unsuitable for corporate/government - they don’t conspire, they act in partnership. Symbiosis between speculators, legislators and regulators is normal, natural, and benign as morning sunshine. 

Disturbing as may be financial upset, societal discord, ecosystem collapse, rampant contagion, and global war, at least it’s no one’s fault. Bad things just happen coincidentally in an all-above-board, roll-the-dice, pay-your-dues, level-playing-field world. Pervasive bank fraud, envenomed psychotic populations, extracted natural resources, designer disease agents, and monetized military mayhem are so deeply disturbing the only viable alternative to ignorance is insanity. It is more comforting by far to presume war is an intrinsic force of human nature than to perceive war as extrinsic: a Machiavellian machination to entrain, exploit and eliminate humanity, perpetrated by inhumans. Whoa! That’s a conspiracy theory! 

Coincidence Theory cont.

Originally coined as agitprop by letter-agencies in the wake of black-ops gone wild, “conspiracy theory” is truncated to “conspiracy”, which has come to mean the feverish nightmare of a clinical paranoid, a conveniently deflective tag for the inspired concept that conspirators conspire. Apart from casting aspersions on those few who question validity of TV news, it has the effect of muddying the waters, making qualitative analysis practically impossible. One wag went all the way, proclaiming: “It is no longer a conspiracy!” Why? Because as it turns out, there WAS a conspiracy!

Whether businessmen, clerics, politicians and soldiers gather in cozy little dens of iniquity to hatch plots of domination is but a tiny grain on the broad beach, a frosty crystal on the mountain peak, a single drop in the ocean deep that is the CONspiracy - the Conspiracy Of Normals. The CON is not a covert coffee-klatch of common criminals. Far from it! The CON exists as an interactive neural net connecting the minds of all Pink humans. It is a mental matrix of imprinting from potty training to computer programming, upgraded with aluminum adjuvants resonating to 5G microwave radiation. The fundamental tenet of the CONspiracy is CONformity. Like a drone swarm, Pinks do whatever they want, as long as everyone else does it too. Further from normal, the further from CONspiracy diktat one wonders, the closer to conspiracy theorist, or more succinctly conspiracist, one drifts. Obfuscation around what constitutes conspiracy is a tool of the CONspiracy to self-repair the blissful Elysium of oblivion in which Pinks prefer to persist. They fear the weather, they fear each other, but they don’t fear Big Brother.

Don’t worry! There’s no big scheme; conspiracy is only a meme. Nobody is planning to hurt you! Be sensible - CONformity is virtue. Relax! There’s no malevolence, it’s just a big coincidence.

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

122620

The Dump Goddess brought forth a book by Joel Levy titled Conspiracies. Who could resist? Of course, it is not really about conspiracies. As the subtitle explains: 50 of the world’s most infamous theories and what the evidence reveals. True, tantalizing titbits of forbidden knowledge are revealed in the text, however only as a foil for eminent debunkage. Conspiracies is a compendium of limited hang-out: allowing there is some “controversy” while debunking evidence of conspiracy. The slender volume published by Elwin Street lists theories by category – health, politics, terror, sci-fi - assigning each a paranoia percentile ranging from 0% for HIV/AIDS, chemtrails, and the Illuminati, to 99% for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Most fall somewhere below 50% so minions of corporate/government can feel in plentiful company, and skeptics may claim some vindication. With a distinct Zionist neo-liberal aftertaste, the 50 chapters lay to rest definitively suspicions of black ops behind deep events. By parsing events into separate theories about individual conspiracies, then proffering plausible explanations for puzzling evidence as “settled science”, Levy traduces perception of the dark state’s bloody hand as unfounded paranoid nonsense.  After all, the world’s most powerful people hardly even know each other, and those who do are not on speaking terms. Conspiracies leaves unsaid the strange way conspiracy theories eventually become substantiated with true testimony and factual evidence. Unfortunately its publication date of 2005 precludes any discussion of pandemic.

One conspiracy theory left unchallenged by Conspiracies is the CONspiracy. The CON – Conspiracy Of Normalism - is to conspiracies as the Universe is to stars: infinite, all-encompassing, eternal. The concept that a clandestine cadre of career criminals commits ALL disasters and attacks is anathema to conspiracy debunkers because “too many people would have to be involved” for it to be kept hidden. Yet that is the very nature of the CON – precisely because it seems impossible so many people could be CONned. In fact, EVERYbody is part of the CONspiracy and being part of it makes it unbecredible to them all. Humans will believe anything -- as long as everybody else does.

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranioa

Church of the SubGenius

101323

The movie The Number 23, starring Jim Carey is yet another phony foray into the murky world of conspiracy theory, joining Conspiracy Theory with Mel Gibson and Julia Roberts, Jacob’s Ladder with Tim Robbins and Elizabeth Pena, and Conspiracy, a low-budget independent feature. Conspiracy Theory exposes the very real MK Ultra program of hypnotized assassins, and the attendant symptoms of their reintegration into polite society. Jacob’s Ladder reveals the very real use of psychotropic drugs in warfare, and the fallout suffered by test subjects. Conspiracy involves a young cinematographer filming a street ranter who assembles very real evidence into patterns of power, and who suddenly disappears, leaving only a ransacked apartment. In all these movies, conspiracy is the subtext, but the subject is the protagonist’s accelerating dementia.  Akin to Conspiracy Theory, Jacob’s Ladder, and Conspiracy, The Number 23 pretends to expose the relation between numerology and events while ultimately putting it down to the patient’s chaotic descent into paranoid schizophrenia. The character played by Carey becomes increasingly obsessed with the number 23, seemingly confronted with it at every turn. As a brief tutorial before the film explains: numbers have personal and political significance. That significance is lost in depiction of Carey’s mania around what he perceives to be the ubiquity of the number 23.

In fact, the number 23 is no more common than any other number, though it may seem so to those looking out for it. It is not the frequency of appearance of the number 23 that is significant, but the relation of 23 to events. 23 is a number of power - definitive, triumphant, absolute. Many sets of numbers may be reduced to 23 by calculation; more often deep events have 23 associated with them. For example 9/11 2001 – 9+11+2+1= 23. That date number is not significant in itself, but regarded in the context of other deep events it presents an ominous pattern. Even a cursory examination of history reveals that great, decisive events bear the imprimatur of 23. November 11 1918 – 1+1+1+1+1+9+1+8=23. Its metaphysical opposite, the number 22 is a number of mystery, confusion, doubt. The 22nd of November is a date which forever will dwell in uncertainty. Was it just a crime? Or a coup d’etat?

To those who cannot accept evidence of a secret world, a dark state, a cabal of conspirators controlling all commercial culture, the number 23 is as meaningless as any other figure. To them, numerology of events is as ridiculous as conspiracy itself. In contrast, to those inquisitive minds who allow the possibility, the question arises: do They select 23 planning for world domination? Or is there potent energy inherent to the number 23 itself that makes things happen? Earth’s rotational axis is at an angle of 23˚ to the ecliptic. The 23rd power of 10 is the limit of perception both micro and macro. Merely coincidence? Or pregnant with significance?

The popularly held notion that perceiving conspiracy in operation is fantasy, delusion, mental illness stigmatizes those gallant few who dare to peer through the portholes and see the truth as misfit, deviant, alien. Masses of people adhere to the patently false belief that no such thing as conspiracy is possible, that conspiracy simply does not exist in media-generated mass-formation psychosis; succinctly – The CONspiracy. Persuading the lumpen proletariat to disbelieve conspiracy is The CONspiracy’s greatest triumph. Beautiful, smiling, happy TV characters inhabiting antiseptic suburban scenery, buying colorful, exploitative, toxic products, and engaging in fun, stupid, destructive behavior endlessly appeal to sprawling cities of subdued serfs caged in debt servitude. All they must do is not resist, but play along with the CON. As long as they don’t flinch while the probe is inserted they will receive their Trusted User Pass and 100 digital credits so they may download any virtual-reality experience they desire.  

Meanwhile, the material world of actual reality degenerates to a garbage pile and burial pit. 

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

110723

Diversity! said Frankie-Lee

With a voice as cold as ice

Yes, that’s right! said Judas Priest

Though you might call it Paradise

(apologies to Bob)

Between Black Power and the president’s predilection for racial profiling of the Supremes, much strife has been made of race. Can he find a competent jurist of the correct color? Like matching the drapes? It is true that historically the concept of race is deployed to subdivide Americans against one another. Yes, it is racist to exclude someone on the basis of skin color. However, it is also racist to include someone on the basis of skin color. Epidermal pigmentation is the most superficial, and least significant of human traits.

Between Stonewall and transgenderism, much strife has been made of gender. Among all animals, the biological fact is indisputable - there are two genders: male and female. Females nurture, males torture. However, many animals exhibit gender fluidity as part of their life cycle. Why not humans? Each individual undergoes unique development; each body expresses an unique blend of hormones, each psyche experiences an unique set of traumas and triumphs. That may not change a man back into a woman, but if more men behaved more like more women, there would be less discrimination, less violence and less war. Mathematically, the more who object to war, the more who love others, the more diversity.

Just as people come in many colors, so too color comes in many characters. To reverse-engineer diversity by biasing for color is racist, and for gender is sexist because the implication color or gender matters. Selecting skin and genitalia in a benighted quest to demonstrate diversity among candidates who share attributes, attitudes, and affiliations cynically negates diversity. True diversity is a variety of experience, outlook and motivation, not colored by melanin concentration or pegged to reproductive organs. 

Hitlary is typically characterized as the nation’s first woman presidential candidate, but “her” career in the corridors of power is reward for patrist ambition to rule, and armored disregard for the suffering of others. To call a war-criminal vampirate “woman” is a sexist slur because virility is virtue to a virago’s vigor. 

Obomba, typically characterized as the nation’s first black president, could only obey orders to bomb other colorful people he never met. To call a half-bred American-African “black” is a racist slur because blackness is indelible. In Alabama, octoroon laws codified one’s blackness if but one great-grandparent was African. Obomba is “black” because you can’t add enough creamer to coffee to make it white. It would be less racist, and more honest to say He is the darkest complexioned of US presidents thus far. So what?

Women shoot guns and drive trucks; men wear dresses and raise kids. It is impossible to draw a dividing line between two persons and say This side is exclusively male, that side is exclusively female. All persons have mixed gender identities – granted, some more mixed-up than others. Heterogeneity in the homosexual community is diversity. It is eminently sexist to presume sharing gender traits entails sharing abilities and sensibilities. One does not have to be queer to realize women and men are people. But it helps. 

SA Court: Why do you call yourself “black” when actually you are brown?

Steven Biko: Why do you call yourself “white” when actually you are Pink?

Humans are available in a wide variety of colors. Some “blacks” have tan to pale skin; some “whites” have ruddy to dark skin. Does it really matter? No. Race discrimination is a construct. When considering all of humankind, there is no separation between “races”. Though in certain lighting a very dark-skinned person may appear very different from a very light-skinned person, their tints are tones on a broad spectrum of shades. It is impossible to draw a dividing line between two persons and declare This side is exclusively white, that side is exclusively black. It is eminently racist to presume color coding entails alike aspirations and affections. One does not have to be color blind to see color does not count. No coloreds - only color. 

Race is a hoax. Gender is a hoax. All humans constitute the Race of Man - all men are still only human. Among Homo Sapiens, any female may mate with any male and procreate fertile human offspring. Bonds of sexual congress embrace all humans into one family. What’s buzzin’ cousin? Whatever their color, or gender, all humans share DNA, share morphology, share ancestry. Every body has a brain, bones, and a belly. Each person must eat, drink, sleep, pee and poop every day. Even the president of the Untied Slates must sometimes have to stand naked. Every soul has a mind, a heart, a dream. Every mind seeks freedom. Every heart needs Love. Humans differ not in what they are, but in who they are. Their thoughts, their hopes, their Love are the true expression of their diversity. No people, no country, no world can long go on without embracing the fullness of diversity. 

And they had better do – folks are shot with designer genes, Google AI becomes auto-aware. Now, whether a person is woman or man, black or white will be mooted by whether a person is human or transhuman, hominid or humanoid. 

Yolanda Ruth-Leslie

020422

If you have an alcohol problem it is your fault because you have the disease of alcoholism

If you sicken after being vaccinated it is your fault because you are allergic

If you fall behind in your payments it is your fault for not budgeting

If the climate collapses it is your fault because you release CO2

Replicating the Catholic Church’s successful program of guilt indoctrination, today’s agnostic liberal society is a Cult of Culpability. Modern citizens are deeply imbued with the notion that persistent problems that plague mankind are the personal responsibility of private individuals for their buying patterns and daily activities. Regardless how ubiquitous, addictive, toxic, cheap spirituous beverages are, the drunk is to blame for his own fall. Likewise, a healthy patient who sickens after inoculation must be allergic to the drug, no matter how rushed its development, or track record of toxicity. Anyone who falls deeply into debt is a personal failure despite the economy is rigged so the poorest pedal hardest while the largest relax. Earth’s climate is so sensitive to human activity that each person’s exhalations are a roadblock to achieving net-zero. Though industry has been producing ozone-destroying chemicals for a century, dark forces spray metals and drugs from aircraft, as well as irradiate the atmosphere with powerful radar, and periodic solar activity is known to affect Earth’s climate, nevertheless, it is each individual’s fault for emitting CO2. 

Guilt for the poxes of mankind is a monkey on the back of humanity. It is difficult to arise with a monkey on the back.  

As the great Saint Lenny Bruce said:

“American society cripples you, then arrests you for limping!”

In the Church of the SubGenius we say:

CAST OFF THOSE CRUTCHES AND CRAWL WITH PRIDE!

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

050425

It is not just spellcheck errors, colorful colloquialisms, forgivable misspeaks, sloppy syntax, lazy editing, or common stupidity in composition – it is a pattern of deliberate, calculated illogic that pervades all public discourse. Conservative or liberal, propaganda or disinformation, analysis or op-ed, it is a stultifying challenge for the average reader to conceive a context in which it all makes sense. Here is but one example of illogic drawn from a torrent of nonsense in the media stream:

If we follow the current trajectory, there will not be a single part of our lives that is completely controlled by a multinational corporation in the next few years.

Does that mean what it appears to say? Or is the text missing a word that is left to readers’ inference? Is it a dire prediction, or a message of hope? The alarming tone of the assertion camouflages syntactic significance. How could what it says be a cogent statement? Grammatically, it appears to state Every single part of “our” lives will resist being completely controlled by a multinational corporation. That simply makes no sense - even if it might be true - because multinational corporations DO impose complete control over every single part of “our” lives. It makes no sense because it is meant not to. 

It is meant to make no sense, it is meant to inform no one; it is meant to confuse, and it is meant to frighten. It is confusing to resort repeatedly to hyperventilating mental gymnastics and genuflecting leaps of faith to extract morsels of meaning from pervasive gobbledegook. It is frightening to have to choose between dialectic chaos, or neurotic madness. That is how They complete control over EVERY single part of “our” lives – by making people doubt their innate reason, and accept illogic as wisdom. 

Reverend Doktor C. Sarian

Mid Coast Sub Church of Paranoia

Church of the SubGenius

022623