“In conditions of great uncertainty people tend to predict the events that they want to happen actually will happen.”–Roberta Wohlstetter, Pearl Harbor: Warning And Decision, ca. 1962
“Man stares at what the explosion of the atomic bomb [in Hiroshima or Nagasaki] could bring with it [in the Cold War]. He does not see that the atomic bomb and its explosion are the mere final emission of what has long since taken place, has already happened [in 1945].“-Martin Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought, ca. 1971
“What could have happened if decision makers had listened to Charlie Allen and taken seriously his Warning of War [prior to the Persian Gulf War]? It is, of course, impossible to know. Alternative History is a parlor game. Moreover, Saddam [Hussein] may have been Intent on making Kuwait the eleventh province of Iraq no matter what was said to him or the degree of US intervention, but the possibility remains that he may have been deterred at a far lower cost than the eventual outcome.”-Richard Alan Clarke and R. P. Eddy, Warnings: Finding Cassandras to Stop Catastrophes, ca. 2017
Overall, I am halfway done with Part II of “Beyond the Korean Mousetrap.” I was anticipating it to take a day or two because of the fact that the Korean Mousetrap is a metaphysical minefield that one has to navigate carefully.
There has been a lot of dubious information being touted about the two Koreas on the World Wide Web that cannot be substantiated. The methodology is reminiscent of the manner in which various conspiracy theories have been conceived and allowed to circulate without anyone scrutinizing the veracity of its claims. Various conspiracy theories follow a very similar methodology and I will demonstrate below.
An anonymous whisteblower employs vague language, is very circumstantial and cites unspecifiable dates and events that cannot be readily verified. The information is a personal testimony from someone who cannot afford to reveal their identity, but claims to have access to confidential information. We cannot verify the veracity of their claims, so we are forced to believe their claims without question. They are forcing us to either believe them or disbelieve them, leaving no middle ground possibilities insofar as the most important details have been deliberately omitted, overlooked, censored, forgotten or edited out of the narrative.
This is a recurring pattern among stories of “DPRK Defectors,” which is interesting because a similar pattern of logic is also being employed in the articulation of most conspiracy theories. There are four good examples where I am encountering the same logic being replicated in what amounts to a Parlor Game among Liberal Capitalists in need of Theological Pastimes: the JFK Assassination, the 9/11 Attacks, the Coronavirus Pandemic, and the Alternative History Genre. It is always the same pattern of metaphysical thought.
- A JFK Conspiracy Theorist always focuses on “how JFK was shot” based on one of multiple locations around Dealey Plaza with a “who allowed it to happen” or a “who made it happen.”
- A 9/11 Truther always focuses on “how the Twin Towers collapsed” based on one of four methods (conventional explosives, incendiary explosives, nuclear devices, and energy weapons) with a “who allowed it to happen” or a “who made it happen.”
- An Anti-Vaxxer focuses on “how COVID-19 became a biological weapon” based on one of two methods (Originated in Nature or Originated in Lab) with a “who allowed it to happen” or a “who made it happen.”
- An Alternate History Hobbyist focuses on “how the Robert E. Lee could have won the Battle of Gettysburg” or “how Hasso von Manteuffel could have won the Battle of the Bulge,” citing “who allowed Lee to prevail at Gettysburg” or “who allowed von Manteuffel to prevail at Bastogne.”
All of them follow the same logic in a manner befitting of Cause and Effect. Something has happened and the conspiracy theorist is trying to find a “Who” and a “How.” Their Intent is to determine “Who” caused this discernible phenomenon and “How” they were able to achieve it in the specific manner that they did. Never will they rely on the “What” and the “Why” because to do so is to question and to scrutinize their own Intents in a paradoxical manner, forcing them to stay within the realm of possibility and actuality as opposed to idealism and materialism.
The language in all four cases consistently relies on a conception of history where Time advances in a Linear direction as opposed to a Cyclical direction or even a Spiral direction. I have also concluded that a Linear conception of history, where Time advances in a Progressive or Evolutionary manner, manifests itself in places like the Market/Mixed Economy, the Fractional-Reserve Banking System, the Financial Markets, and the procedures inherent within Parliamentarian governance.
I can just as easily repurpose this “Who” and “How” to be:
- “Who should be paying the most in Income Taxes and for How much?”
- “How are we supposed to afford policies such as children’s daycares or Tax Incentives for newlywed couples and Who ends up paying for it?”
- “Who is going to be receiving Social Welfare if the government abolishes it and How will they get by without it?”
- “How are we going to restore Fiscal Discipline and Who is going to address the rising costs of Higher Education?”
If I had to choose who these “DPRK Defectors” could be from a police line up, I would argue that they are clearly someone who has a lot of spare time on their hands to learn how to become a Liberal Capitalist. For a country where its central government is very strict about the flow of information, it is ridiculous to expect somebody to share the same Weltanschauung as the Jeffersonians and Madisonians overnight. Their nationality (be they South Korean, Japanese, Taiwanese, American and so forth) is irrelevant insofar as their psychic and psychological mindset resonates with Kapital and Schuld:
“The materialist view of history, which postulates economic conditions as “Cause” (in the physical sense) and religion, laws, customs, art, and science as “Effect,” doubtless has its persuasive aspects in this late period of Western culture, for it appeals to the mentality of irreligious and traditionless urban people. Not because economic conditions are in fact a “Cause,” but because art and religion have become empty, lifeless, and external, and because they now linger on as the pale shadow of the only strongly developed form that identifies our age. Precisely this state of affairs is symptomatically [Liberal Capitalist]; the notion of religion as “cant,” of art as “comfort” for the upper class and as alms for the lower (“art for the masses”) has accompanied [this] style of living during its infiltration of other countries.”-Oswald Spengler, Prussianism and Socialism, ca. 1919
Categories: Blog Post