Notes About the Conspiracy
Is the United States a sham? How corrupt is DC? Does the stock market even exist as a free market bastion anymore?
Whether I like it or not (I don't), those are thoughts that wake me up in the middle of the night (literally, but--thankfully--rarely). A few midnights ago, I came up with this formulation: A United States conspiracy would have to boil down to this statement (it's as concise as I can make it): private clandestine usurpation of the republic.
Short explanation of the concise statement: The term "republic" means "the public wealth." It stands in contrast to "personal wealth." (fn) In a republic, power is held for the public good, whereas in a monarchy, power is held for private gain. In the United States, we have a republic, but there is mounting evidence that the republic has been usurped by private interests. And they haven't done so openly and forthrightly, so it is clandestine.
More Elaboration: I think it's a safe bet that the usurpation has occurred. I honestly don't know how a person could think otherwise in light of the incidents of corruption we're seeing, like the story last week in Rolling Stone (link).
But that fact (yes, I think it's a fact) only scratches the surface of issues. I still have lots of questions: How deep is the conspiracy? How does a person get into the ruling class? How historical is it? Did it start with the Founding Fathers, or with the Federal Reserve, or with Bush? Heck, was John Locke its intellectual front man in the 17th century? And is it tied to British financial interests? Tied to the Rothschilds? The Masons? How broad and strong is the web of conspiracy? Is every member of Congress enmeshed, or just the Executive branch, or just particular Executives? How about the Judicial branch? How do State governments fit in?
On those issues, I have no opinion, except one: virtually any answer this side of The Matrix is now possible.
Other Thoughts: In a monarchy, there was natural resistance to power's encroachments. When the monarch extended his power or possessions, it was at somebody's expense, usually his own people, unless it was in the international realm. In the international realm (i.e., war or threat thereof), the king could extend his personal wealth and power, but everyone understood the gains would be his, so commoners didn't readily agree to fight his wars. He had to raise armies, at his expense. The mass mobilization that started in earnest with the first great republic (France after the Revolution), was perfected by Lincoln, and exists today as the norm ("total war"), was virtually unknown prior to Napoleon's armies. (fn)
Because the monarch's attempt to increase his wealth was a private affair, it met with resistance by everyone--his own people and other monarchs--outside his private orb. In a republic, by contrast, supposedly no one is using power for their own private gain, so there is no natural constituency to resist it, so power grows rapidly.
Now, if the conspiracy (private usurpation of the public wealth) is full-blown and thorough, we'd have to say that the conspiracy started with Locke and others who inspired the Founding Fathers. That's very far-fetched.
But backing off just a bit and moving forward in history a little, we could posit that the conspiracy started with the U.S. Founding Fathers, who established a republic with the intention of using it for private gain. There is evidence for this (Exhibit A: Alexander Hamilton).
When I think of this, I think of the Yale Skull and Crossbones, the Adams family (one "d"), the Morgans. But then I think of the Adams family (I have no idea where they are today) and new wealth like Bill Gates. If the republic has always been usurped for private gain, where does the new wealth come from? If it's such a great conspiracy, why do the visible recipients of its favors change? Is perhaps the change at the top wholly illusory and orchestrated?
[But now we're getting into Matrix territory. If you're going to contemplate the conspiracy, you need to avoid Matrix-type thinking. Once you wade into those waters, anything is possible and you have no way to get a grip on anything. And let's face it: if it's Matrixy, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it, so you might as well lapse into complete ataraxy (which isn't a bad alternative, but let's hang in there a little longer).]
My Current Position (Subject to Change). I don't have answers to any of these questions, but if I had to formulate my current position, it's this: There has been a private clandestine usurpation of the republic. From the beginning of our republic, there have been attempts to usurp the republic for private gain. But as long as the federal government was kept small, the usurpation was small: the smaller the "public wealth," the smaller the gains from pillaging it. When the federal government started to grow, the benefits of usurpation grew. The people who were in the best position to usurp the growth were the ones who pushed for it the most, and Woodrow Wilson was their first major political benefactor, giving them the Federal Reserve and the income tax. We still have a free market, but its highest levels have been breached with corruption and ties between Wall Street and DC. The ties have been growing bigger and stronger since 1900, and how we're seeing the ugliness. In previous years, the parasites sucked off relatively little, and they sucked it off a vibrant economic system. Now, they're sucking off a lot, and they're sucking it off an economic system that their shenanigans have devastated. They used to suck a little blood from a strong man. Now they suck a lot of blood from a cripple.
And in light of the enormous sums they're sucking out, it looks like they're ready to kill him off.
