°Cretinisation

September 24, 2005

Alphonse on conspiracy-theorising. Seems that what Taylorism accomplishes for capitalists - namely, the dis-cognition of workers on the assembly line - Cliffites phantasmatically accomplish for the same mass worker (always white and male, strangely enough) viz the otherly-complexioned hordes. *

Filed under: Multitudes
:: trackback url | permanent link |

Bookmark and Share

4 Comments »

  1. And here is Alphonse’s point broadcast a day earlier by…. George Galoway!!! . Oh, the irony!!! Ho ho ho ho!!!

    I know the background to this and agree with you as far as I can understand it; but maybe you need to fix the link to pinpoint Lenin’s Tomb’s infraction, since right now it kind of undermines Alphonse and Galoway’s good point by linking to a fairly decent counterexample, the Basra shoot out. In this case, they really did catch two white guys in a truck full weapons and other sus material, who failed to stop at a checkpoint and shot at the Iraqi troops manning it. Should these guys have not been white, there would have been five nanoseconds of discussion before establishing them as terrorists. So, it’s pretty sus. I think people have every right in the world to suspect something here; the story is obviously incomplete and it is perfectly obvious that these guys were up to something. Otherwise, why bust them out of prison like that ? Of course, it is entirely plausible that they were about to be handed over to the insurgents, which is actually a much more interesting story if you stop to think about it. Yet it would indeed be entirely naive to think that ‘our guys’ aren’t planting bombs and so on…

    TCO [September 25, 2005 @ 11:13 am]

  2. It’s incredibly sus - but I’m pretty sure the point wasn’t to suggest that ‘our lads’ don’t conspire.

    I’ve been comparing news reports when the story first broke: SBS began the story at the point where the soliders were arrested, the ABC from the footage of the tank being stoned and set alight. And the ABC didn’t mention what SBS did, namely that the soldiers (spooks, clandestine whatever) had already been moved from the prison when it was ram-raided by the tank. ABC instead said something about the ram-raid freeing the soldiers, which I think is bollocks.

    So,. as far as I can tell, they were already handed over to ‘insurgents’ - who, really, could be anyone - for questioning, but then released. The ram-raid had nothing to do with that release. It was a panic on the part of the CO.

    I don’t doubt that there’s something incredibly dodgy going on.

    s0metim3s [September 25, 2005 @ 1:34 pm]

  3. Thanks for the link, s0metim3s.

    TCO: my point was not that white people don’t conspire. My point was that the giggling term ‘conspiracy theory’ - that is, ‘crackpot paranoid fantasy’ - applied to dismiss the suggestion that white people in positions of power conspire to commit enormities against humanity whose interests they claim to champion relies on an orientalist assumption that the very same deeds, if carried out by brown people, as is officially asserted with regard to the zarkawiterror, require no ‘conspiracy,’ because such behaviour is as natural to brown zarkawians as migrating is to birds or carpooling to soccer moms. Thus the proposal that bombings in Iraq are black ops - which has now been substantiated - that is, that they are the work of a group of (white) men seeking political gain from them, can be met with derision as a ‘conspiracy theory,’ while the entirely equivalent suggestion that they are the work of another group of (brown) men seeking political gain from them, cannot be laughed at as a ‘conspiracy theory.’ White people blowing up marketplaces is assumed to be peculiar, idiosyncratic conduct, requiring secret deliberations, negotiation, coordination, risk assessment and special intent - a ‘conspiracy.’ Brown pople doing the same is just an ordinary day in the life of the zarkawikind, instinctual, and the term ‘conspiracy theory’ is never applied to the attribution of such deeds to brown protagonists, even though the precisely equivalent amount of planning, negotiating, risk analysis and coordinating would have to have been involved.

    alphonsevanworden [September 26, 2005 @ 8:54 am]

  4. I see. Galloway argues a self-orientalising oriental line, so your points are different. He says, around ten minutes into Henwood’s show, that the reason many moslems cannot believe that the 9/11 bombings were carried out by Arabs is that they believe Arabs are not capable of such organization, that in fact it takes a white agency to do something that sophisticated. You argue rather that we do expect Arabs to do these kind of thing, and are surprised when it turns out we do them as well, we actually find that almost incomprehensible.

    I defenitely agree that allegations of conspiracy theory are supposed to police thought, as you suggest, to discourage consideration of the calculation of our benefactors…

    TCO [September 26, 2005 @ 5:56 pm]

Leave a comment



PLEASE RETYPE THIS NUMBER IN THE BOX PROVIDED. ANNOYING, BUT SO IS DELETING SPAM.






Get free blog up and running in minutes with Blogsome | Theme designs available here