News: The Power Of Unreason

“Conspiracy theorists” are officially becoming a prime target of the governments of the world. A British think tank called “Demos” recently published a 55pg policy report on the dangers of conspiracy theorists and the ideas they promote. Not only does the paper study the phenomenon of a sweeping loss of faith in government and mainstream media but it also makes suggestions about how to marginalize and discredit such theories and movements. The existence of this paper is alarming only in that it confirms that governments are using resources to combat the spread of unapproved ideas and discussions. What is said in this “Unreasonable” paper and what is “Demos”?

I’m aware that “The Power of Reason” is only a paper. A study conducted by a British company called “Demos” to investigate the phenomenon of the rise and danger of conspiracy theories, etc. But these papers are meant to influence governmental policy and as can be seen in similar “think tanks” such as the Project for The New American Century, the Brookings Institute and even the Council on Foreign Relations some of the most dangerous and freedom-squashing policies and practices of our governments have started as mere “papers” and “suggestions” by these same types of institutions.

  An unfortunate consistency within this document is it’s constant repetition of the term Al Qeada. It has made a concerted effort to link people who merely question the official story behind 9/11, JFK’s assassination of the London 7/7 train bombings with terrorist organizations. It discusses the dangers of such sentiments swaying people’s faith in government institutions. I would suggest that maybe government institutions sponsoring terror plots against their own people are doing a bit more to sway the trust of the people, but that’s just me.
Perhaps the most terrifying aspect of this document is it’s suggestions of how to remedy the situation. Mostly consisting of counteracting what it considers to be propaganda with their own state-sponsored propaganda. Mentioning the need to teach kids in school to basically distrust any independent investigations, the need to have government agents infiltrate blogs and websites and leave commentary to counteract the claims of the other readers, and the need to label anyone who suggests such things as “9/11 was an inside job” as a terrorist recruiter, or a terror sympathizer. In other words to demonize the concept of the conspiracy theory as a whole. It is alarming stuff that free speech has become such an open enemy of the state and has obviously become so dangerous to the establishment.
It almost seems like a fictional story just due to the irony of the company publishing the paper. Whenever an institution such as this has a name that is obviously designed to influence our subconscious into thinking it is harmless, it usually needs to be looked at with some distrust. And a name like “Demos” makes most in the “free world” breathe a sigh of relief as the root word for ‘democracy’ it suggests an air of freedom and an open society. But as the Attorney Garrison said in the film JFK “We’re through the looking glass here people….white is black and black is white”. In other words, usually in this world things are exactly the opposite as they seem.
Next, and even more comical, is the logo of this supposedly impartial organization. Knowing anything about the world of conspiracy theorists is to know their preponderance to reading into the logos and symbols companies use to represent themselves. And, to no surprise, Demos’ logo features the ever famous all-seeing eye. Think this is a coincidence?

I’d argue that the ever-presence of this same theme in countless company logos (See CBS, Time Warner, American Online, Chase, Target, etc) is enough evidence to make this a legit topic for debate at least. But what I have to wonder is why in the world this paper was leaked to the people. Why was this study allowed to be seen on the internet and by the very people it considers to be it’s enemy? I’m basically confirming a lot of the generalizations made within this study about “conspiracy theorists” but I find the way this thing has been leaked online and designed from the beginning to be suspect. Maybe it’s just a simple tool of intimidation, meant to frighten theorists from promoting subversive ideas on their blogs and websites. Who knows. But the mere existence of this thing definitely makes one feel a little bit uneasy about the coming storm of propaganda and infiltration that is sure to follow.

from September 01