How to Overthrow the Illuminati (Theory)

24 Oct

cropped-illuminati-blog-final-renderTeaching in the ‘hood, I hear a lot about the Illuminati.   Some of my smartest students are hardcore conspiracy theorists, and they are quite good at preaching about the Illuminati,  a secret group of elites who supposedly control the world.  When we get into dynamic class discussions about police brutality, about the economic crisis, or about hip hop,  someone will inevitably bring up the Illuminati as an explanation for why Black people are oppressed, for why politicians or hip hop artists mislead people, or for why society increasingly seems like it’s on the verge of breaking down.

pamphlet-coverMy friends and I wrote this pamphlet to engage with these young intellectuals.   We argue against the Illuminati conspiracy theory, but we do so in a way that aims to engage with the questions these folks are trying to answer, instead of patronizingly dismissing them as ignorant:

Illuminati theory helps oppressed people to explain our experiences in the hood. Society throws horrible stuff in our faces: our family members get locked up for bullshit. Our friends kill each other over beefs, money or turf. Our future is full of dead-end jobs that don’t pay shit. We struggle to pay bills while others live in luxury. On TV, we see people all over the world dying in poverty, even though we live in the most materially abundant society in history. Most people act like none of these terrible things are happening. Why does this occur? We start looking for answers, and Illuminati theory provides one.

We believe Illuminati theory is wrong, and we wrote this pamphlet to offer a different answer. We wrote this pamphlet because we know people who think about the Illuminati usually want to stop oppression and exploitation. They’re some of the smartest people in the hood today. Forty years ago, Illuminati theorists would’ve been in the Black Panther Party. Today most of them sit around and talk endlessly about conspiracies. This is a waste of talent.

I am sharing this pamphlet mostly to reach any youth reading this blog.  For teachers reading this, I also wonder whether it might be useful in the classroom?  I imagine if you teach a lesson on the Illuminati theory, your students will probably be engaged and interested since many of them are studying this stuff  already on their own.  I’m not sure if you can get away with assigning this pamphlet as part of such a lesson; it may be too direct and too radical for most schools.   But at the very least, I hope it can serve as a reference to help get you started.

In any case, I will cover the printing costs of a class set of pamphlets for the first person who manages to teach this text in a school classroom.  I will do the same for the first person who convinces your colleagues and administrators that teaching it aligns with the new Common Core standards we are required to teach.   If you do that, send me your lesson plan, and we can post it here so others can use it. 

We tried as hard as possible to make the pamphlet a considerate text, meaning we define key vocabulary within the narrative, or in the glossary, and attempt to break down complex social theories in everyday language, with references to daily life experiences.   The intended audience is not necessarily all youth; it is written for intellectuals in the ‘hood who are already interested in the Illuminati, so it presumes some level of prior knowledge.  But it is intentionally written in a non-academic way with as little jargon as possible.

We are trying to reach intellectuals in the ‘hood because we think they could have a tremendous impact on the world  if they end up catalyzing social movements, but their conspiracy theories are holding them back.  Also, we see many of these young intellectuals dealing with similar problems that older  intellectuals and activists are dealing with; they are asking “why do more people around me not see what’s  wrong with our society?  If they do see it, why aren’t they willing to take action to change it”?

Many academics and activists answer these questions by suggesting that they are the only enlightened ones,  destined to teach others who are too blinded by false consciousness, too brainwashed by the media, by their privilege, or by their religion.  Young intellectuals in the ‘hood develop an analogous explanation when they say they are the only ones who are not fooled by the Illuminati’s lies.  These elitist reactions to our alienation fail to help us overcome it, and fail to explain why more people are not fighting back,  and how this might change; instead, they simply widen the gap between the intellectuals and everyone else.

We need a theory we can use to overcome this alienation, to catalyze the processes through which we all  fight back together.  Conspiracy theories are a roadblock in the way of this.

I am confident that some of my students will  overcome his roadblock and will come up with  new explanations for their social oppression, and creative strategies for overcoming it.

Advertisements

14 Responses to “How to Overthrow the Illuminati (Theory)”

  1. RigoHC October 24, 2013 at 3:34 am #

    I have to say Thank you for doing this! I have had to many conversations with friends not kids but grown up friends in their twenty’s trying to talk to me about the ‘illuminati’ and yeah often or mostly citing rappers and you tube videos it can be pretty frustrating when I want to tell them that their real enemies are right in front of them, the corporate power they spend their lives working for then paying for lifes necessities. I’m interested in learning about how this all started in so much as it helps fight this waste of potentially critical minds

    • mamos206 October 24, 2013 at 3:36 am #

      You’re welcome! I hope it helps in those conversations.

  2. Sheila Stark October 24, 2013 at 12:33 pm #

    I have been “teaching” about this issue for the last two years in my 8th grade class. I have groups who are die-hard believers, and I try to approach it as you suggest. Last year, I decided to let the kids have debates. I posted a couple of them on youtube. How much of the details of the lessons are you interested in? I know it was like anti/pro Illuminiati for a few weeks at school, and other teachers (math, science) tried to get into in with their lessons to use it as teachable moments. My VP is a life-long Mason and he came in and talked to my classes, too. Let me know how much detail you need.

    • mamos206 October 27, 2013 at 10:21 pm #

      Thanks Sheila, that sounds great, especially the debates. Would you be interested in publishing your lesson plan on this blog? If so, could you please write up a summary of what you and your students did, with enough detail that someone else reading it could print it out and teach it? E.g., with the different learning activities listed in the order you did them, any worksheets or handouts you used, and if you want maybe you could include a link to the youtube videos to give an example of what the class would be working towards? Also, if possible, it would be great to list the objectives and the common core standards they align to. Then, stressed out busy teachers could draw from it without having to reinvent the wheel. Also, if you’d like me to send you a class set of the pamphlets, please email me at mamosrotnelli@gmail.com

  3. metrobusman October 24, 2013 at 5:29 pm #

    Why does it have to be either/or? Are you not guilty of the same vice as those whom you seek to expose?

    In the White working class home I grew up in in the 60s the idea that the US had trained death squads roaming the globe killing heads of state was dismissed as shear lunacy. The idea that agents of the state were targeting Black civil rights leaders for entrapment, false imprisonment, and death was taken as a sure sign that the exponents of these conspiracy theories were absolutely nuts. My family and neighbors were not in denial, not in the sense that deep down they knew it was true but couldn’t bring themselves to accept it. On the contrary, they just didn’t believe such outrageous allegations.

    They were wrong, weren’t they?

    The then private discussions held in Versailles after WW1 by European capital leave no doubt as to why they had agreed to an armistice, and what it was that concerned them. The socialist revolutions in Russia, Hungary, and Germany had to be checked and reversed. (Woodrow Wilson: “We are in a race against socialism, and the whole world is on fire.”) It was there that fascism was conceived. We have this literally in their own handwriting–a conspiracy fact! The various factions assembled at Versailles may not have called themselvs the Illuminati, but they certainly were the ruling bourgeois elite. So what’s the difference?

    In your pamphlet (which, incidentally, is quite good) you dismiss the idea that AIDS was designed to kill Africans. There is a book entitled “AIDS, a Crime Beyond Belief,” written by a Dr. Scott, who was the long-term editor of the Canadian counterpart to the Journal of the American Medical Association. It might make you change your mind.

    There is an article entitled “33 ConspiracyTheories that Turned out to be True,” on the web which you and your students might find interesting. And here’s a very good discussion of the topic of conspiracy theories and the hegemony of capital: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jsua0m6GreY

    I think it is an absolutely false dichotomy to contrast conspiracy theory to class power, and you do a disservice to your students when you insist that they view these concepts dialectically. Rather, in my view, you should encourage them to critically evaluate every theory they encounter, and to, as Mao put it, seek truth from facts. Teaching them to dismiss conspiracies as a category is as bad as blindly accepting them. Capitalism cannot survive without coercion. And the effective use of force requires a plan (i.e. colluding/conspiring). you should encourage your students to examine everything carefully, and if they conclude that a conspiracy did in fact occur, to figure out what motives the conspirators had.

    And you should do the same.

    • mamos206 October 24, 2013 at 9:34 pm #

      Metrobusman, you admonish me to “encourage your students to examine everything carefully, and if they conclude that a conspiracy did in fact occur, to figure out what motives the conspirators had. And you should do the same.”

      That is what I teach my students, and it is also the method that my friends and I used to write the pamphlet.

      We are not teaching anyone to “dismiss conspiracies as a category”. We are simply trying to point out that “conspiracy” is not a static or isolated category; everything is connected, everything is a product of everyday people’s self activity, and everything can be changed – including the capitalist system, the capitalist class that runs it, and the state and other institutions they use to conspire to maintain control.

      We never deny the fact that the ruling class coordinates their class power through these institutions. We also acknowledge that they often make decisions undemocratically and secretly. I would agree with you, your peers were wrong when they naively thought this state would never use death squads, COINTELPRO, etc. to attack people of color. This one of the many gems of truth that the Illuminati theorists discover in their own research; their movement is a protest against undemocratic power, and as such it’s a good development.

      I also agree with Parenti’s point in the video you linked – that actual Marxist analysis is undermined by the same knee-jerk dismissal of conspiracy theories that became popular among elite intellectuals in the “end of history” anti-communist triumphalism of the 90s. Marx, like many conspiracy theorists, didn’t take anything at face value, he always looked for the interconnections between phenomena, interconnections that are not always visible and hence cannot be detected by strict empirical research. For example: on the surface, work under capitalism appears to be an exchange between equals – the boss gives the worker a wage, the worker sells the boss her labor power. Only when we look deeper do we see it’s actually exploitation and wage slavery.

      Where the Illuminati theorists go wrong is NOT in calling out coordinated class power. They go wrong when they describe this power as static, omnipotent, and unconnected from the rest of society. Many Illuminati theorists think that the Illuminati can never be overthrown because it is the same group of families who have ruled for centuries, and they are all powerful, sitting on top of society as an overlord class that essentially doesn’t need anything from us. This destroys the possibility of developing strategies to fight back; it presents class power as a unified whole, instead of a contradictory process with its own weak points that can be analyzed and exploited by oppressed people. In particular, it overlooks the fact that the ruling class is dependent on our labor to survive; we produce and reproduce society every day. Most of our pamphlet was an attempt to make this point.

      Similarly, I think your own framework may be overestimating the unity of ruling class power. I agree with you that the post WWI Versailles diplomacy was conspiratorial and anti-communist. However, I disagree that the ruling class simply planned and roled out fascism as a response to the communist threat. If this were the case, why did the US not overthrow the constitution and implement an overtly fascist republic here? I think the ruling class’s response was authoritarian, but not fascist. Fascism was (and still is) a movement from below, a right-wing revolution against the bourgeois ruling class. It unites the petty bourgeoisie (managers, cops, small shop owners, etc.) with unemployed workers, displaced veterans, and thugs to rise up and take over the state in the name of their nation, race, gender, etc.

      Fascism is a form of populism ,and it’s ideological arguments are structurally very similar to the Illuminati theory itself; in fact, many of the white rural partisans of the Illuminati theory are flirting with fascist movements that are growing right now. That’s one of the reasons that we wrote the pamphlet – we want to point out how youth from the ‘hood may find themselves allying with people who want to kill them if they’re not careful. For more on this kind of perspective on fascism, check out: http://threewayfight.blogspot.com and http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/books/fascism.html

      On top of the fascist threat from below, there are also tensions and contradictions within the ruling class today. There are tensions between national and international capital, the privileges defended by the North American colonial settler states founded in the 1600s are in tension with the needs of multi-racial global capital, there are contradictions around the privatization of repression and military capacities, and there are tensions between short term and long term profits seen most acutely around financialization and ecological destruction. In short: I’m not sure that the rulers completely have their shit together. The world is pretty unstable right now, and could shift very rapidly for better and/or for worse. We need theories that can make sense of this, instead of presenting class power as a static, unchanging whole.

      • metrobusman October 30, 2013 at 12:49 am #

        Well that’s a surprise. The tenor of your comment here is quite different from the essay above or the pamphlet, the central them of which is that “conspiracy theories” hamper, or are in some way a hindrance (i believe the word you used was “block”) to arriving at a proper understanding of the nature of class rule, and, therefore, an impediment to effective emancipatory theory and/or practice. This is the point which you argue well (if, in the end, unconvincingly), and make at some length. My view (and Parenti’s) is that not only are “conspiracy theories” not an obstruction (another word you used if I remember correctly) to arriving at the truth, but can in some cases be a rosetta stone of class consciousness. And if not quite that, then at the very least a manner of validating a Left point of view.

        To cite another example: Even the most casual investigation into the circumstances of the murder of JFK leads to one conclusion and one conclusion only–conspiracy. This leads to the question “why?”

        As I’m sure you know, Malcolm X suggested that “America’s chickens had come home to roost,” or this is the form of the quote one most frequently encounters. In full, he said the above prefixed with: “You can’t send death squads roaming the globe and expect them to stop at your border…” Clearly he was suggesting that the assassination was an inside job, and that JFK was killed by the same US death squads who murder other heads of state. I have no doubt that he was correct, and I’m in good company nowadays thanks the the “conspiracy theorists.”

        This idea was met with the same skepticism by the same people in my life who likewise rejected categorically that the same hit teams were killing civil rights leaders. These people are now confronted with the idea that what they believed about America was at least in part untrue, and that the gocernment has been lying to them about a great many things. I, like them, was raised on the deceptions thhat I lived in a democracy; that the government was acting in my interests; that when it made mistakes that they were honest errors. The war in Vietnam may have been a mistake, but it was a poor policy and not a nefarious intent which led to the debacle. All of these delusions are brought into stark relief when one examines the “conspiracy theory” surrounding the death of JFK. Not everybody will face them, but the scale tips in our favor. The JFK “conspiracy theory” doesn’t gainsay class analysis, on the contrary, it cleaves nicely with it, confirms it.

        Linking this idea to fascism: When I entered the school system long ago, I was taught that Germany started WW1; that America remained neutral because of isolationist sentiment; that America entered the war because of the sinking of the Lusitania; that the war was won when America finally did enter it and kicked the Kaiser’s ass all over Europe; that Wilson went to Europe to achieve a lasting and equitable peace; that he wanted to “make the world safe fopr democracy.” All of these hallowed beliefs are now demonstrably false.

        The war ended when the national bourgeoisies ended their rivalries and circled their wagons because of socialist revolutions. Wilson and his co-conspirators were trying to make the world safe for capitalism by halting the spread of democracy. The Wilson quote i cited above, that he was in a race against socialism, is hard, incontrovertible evidence that the state, in this case the American government, represents the interests of the ruling class and not the nation as a whole. There’s no wriggling off this hook–Woodrow Wilson is one of the founding fathers of fascism–full stop. And that reality is in sharp contrast to what it is the American people are taught.

        Again not everybody will face this fact, but the scales tip in our favor once again.

        Now we come to the more important matter. Re:

        “Similarly, I think your own framework may be overestimating the unity of ruling class power. I agree with you that the post WWI Versailles diplomacy was conspiratorial and anti-communist. However, I disagree that the ruling class simply planned and roled out fascism as a response to the communist threat. If this were the case, why did the US not overthrow the constitution and implement an overtly fascist republic here? I think the ruling class’s response was authoritarian, but not fascist. Fascism was (and still is) a movement from below, a right-wing revolution against the bourgeois ruling class. It unites the petty bourgeoisie (managers, cops, small shop owners, etc.) with unemployed workers, displaced veterans, and thugs to rise up and take over the state in the name of their nation, race, gender, etc.”

        I cannot fathom the idea of a fascist republic. To me this is an oxymoron as “anti-parliamentarism” and the Fuehrerprinzip were cornerstones of fascist theory, so I will respond as though you asked about a fascist dictatorship a la Mussolini, Hitler etc.

        The unity of ruling class power is easy to demonstrate. First, the Versailles example cited above. There is simply no disputing why the war ended and what the heads of state were concerned about. They gave up their internecine spats and rallied one to another. The terms of the treaty allowed Germany’s army in the east to remain armed and in place to check the spread of the Russian Revolution west. That army and later units that did attack the Soviets were funded/provisioned by Herbert Hoover and his fake philanthropic organization. Likesise, when the victorious Allies attempted to disarm the German army in the west, the latter complained that if you disarm us we cannot “put down the (German) working class.” Wilson agreed, and the kept their cannon etc.

        Similarly, when the French Revolution erupted the Eastern Euro powers, ever at each others throats, suddenly overcame their ancient antagonisms and formed the most unlikely alliance in diplomatic history with the EXPRESS aim of stopping the spread of bourgeois revolution.

        After the Franco-Prussian war, Bismarck released the captured French army from his camps and rearmed them. This is unheard of! But he did it so that these soldiers could crush the Paris Commune, and they did.

        The “strange defeat” of the French army in WW2 was occasioned by Petain himself saying that “if we fight the Germans we will have another Paris Commune on our hands. We will keep our soldiers to fight the communists.”

        I could go on and on. The ruling class knows what it has to do to survive. They always unite (i.e. conspire) when need be.

        You are simply wrong when you deny “that the ruling class simply planned and roled out fascism as a response to the communist threat.” That is precisely what fascism was and how it came into being–even the name. Again, we have it in their own handwriting. It was planned at Versailles, and the March on Rome” occurred before the Treaty was finalized. In fact it was directed in part by Robert lansing (Wilon’s SoS, and uncle of the genocidal Dulles Brothers). You would know this if you were not so hostile to “conspiracy theories.” The German brand was entrusted to the German bourgeoisie. We have their correspondence, which is called the Fueherbriefe (letters of the leaders), in which they discuss how to concoct a movement that would be an antidote for socialism while at the same time mimicking it to attract as many workers as they could. No room for doubt here either, they talk about it as a faux revolutionary movement etc. They discuss the leader principle, racism as an antidote for class theory, mysticism, and all the rest of the horseshit which goes by the name of fascism. Fascism was concocted of, by, and for the elite. (Some of this correspondence is reproduced and analyxed by R. Palme Dutt in his brilliant “Fascism and the Social Revolution.”) One example among the many is of Hitler’s infamous Toelz speech in which he blames Jews for class struggle. It ends something like “Workers of the world unite against the Jewish conspiracy to enslave you.” That’s fascism, ersatz Marxism with race and nation replacing class.

        Re: “why did the US not overthrow the constitution and implement an overtly fascist republic here?” First, fascism and the bourgeoi republic are two sides of the same coin. When that carrot suffices it remains, when it fails the ruling class brings out the stick–fascism. Additionally, the central myth of the bourgeois line on WW2 is that it was a conflict between “democracy” and fascism. This would be impossible if the US, UK etc. went fascist. Second, they did attempt it- twice. Once in ’36 (http://www.amazon.com/The-Plot-Seize-White-House/dp/1602390363), which was foiled when General Smedley Butler exposed it. It was investigated by the McCormick-Dickstein Committee which concluded that there had been such a plot. And there was another attempt later involving people from General MacArthur’s office. which didn’t get as far as the earlier effort. (MacArthur had a hand in each.) I suspect this represents a split in the ruling elite as to whether it was best to provide overt aid to the Nazis or covert help which is what in fact occured.

        There are now a few historians who believe that the Hess flight was a part of a fascist coup in the UK to oust Churchill. Admittedly the evidence isn’t overwhelming, but I beleve it to be the case. In a different context Churchill reportedly said that those Brits who supported the Germans over the Russians were “shortsighted enough put their class interests ahead of their strategic interest.” It makes sense that Hess intended to meet with the leaders of the “shortsighted” faction of British capital.

        Re: “Fascism was (and still is) a movement from below, a right-wing revolution against the bourgeois ruling class. It unites the petty bourgeoisie (managers, cops, small shop owners, etc.) with unemployed workers, displaced veterans, and thugs to rise up and take over the state in the name of their nation, race, gender, etc.”

        Oh no, you’re a Trot! Ugh!

        Fascism is, was, and never wil be a movement from below. It connot be, it’s not possible. It must try to garner support from below by deception, as discussed above, but it cannot generate a mass consciousness from below as mass movements are by their very nature emancipatory, and as such is in irremediable conflict, dialectical conflict, with the interests of hierarchy and capital, i.e. with fascism. The very act of rebellion is anti-statist, anti-conformist. It is the masses defying power, which is an intrinsically anti-fascist act, whether the rebels understand it as such or not, and regardless of their demands. Central to facist theory, such as it was expressed by its leading theorists and understood by its opponents, is the duty of the individual to the race-state, the duty of the one to the whole. Fascism expressly demands that thhe proletariat accept its station in life, and cooperate with the bourgeoisie for the supposed benefit of the race-state as a whole. Such an idea cannot come from below. In fact, it required a great deal of criminal statecraft to win the meager support it did from below. Remember, Hitler, Franco and Muss never won an honest election. Hitler did worse in the ’32 election than its predecessor. It was then that his handlers realized that he would never win enough support from below to get into office by legit means and brought him into the government directly.

        Fascism, as its creators understood and discussed, requires deception of the masses, such a thing cannot come organically from below. As evidence I offer the fact that it never has. Nobody has ever taken to the streets screaming for less freedom and power, less dispensation over the product of their labor, for the state to have greater power over their lives. Consequently all capital can do is to create diversionary spectacles and tailor them to artificial, irrational fears such as the Jews are responsible for class struggle and other such inanities. Or as Dutt put it in his book:

        “The revolt against science…is not only the expression of a dying and doomed social class; it is an essential part of the campaign of reaction. This is the basis which helps prepare the ground for all quackeries and charlatanries of chauvinism, racial theories, anti-semitism, Aryan grandmothers, mystic swastikas, divine missions, strong-man saviors, and all the rest of the nonsense through which capitalism to-day can try to maintain its hold…There is method in the madness. For capitalism can no longer present any rational defence…Therefore it can only endeavor to save itself on a wave of obscurantism, holding out fantastic symbols and painted substitutes for ideals to cover the reality of the universally hated moneybags. Fascism is the final reduction of this process to a completely worked out programme.”

        He’s spot on, in my view, and such as that cannot come from below. I’m pretty sure that the first book ever written on fascism (finished late 1920, published early ’21) was by an Italian anarchist, Luigi Fabbri. It’s entitled “Fascism, Preventive Counterrevolution.” (It’s interesting to note that Dutt’s book is written a decade and a half later, and from a Stalinist perspective, and they pretty much agree on everything.) Gramsci’s observations are pretty much the same.

        Fascism is not a revolution in any sense, it’s counterrevolution. It just adopts anti=plutocratic, revolutionary rhetoric to glean support from political insophisticates, of whom, unfortunately, there are always plenty. And it is not truly right-wing, it merely appeals to the latter for support as it is the only place where it might find it. Fascism cannot be against the ruling class, it can only pretend to be, because it is coterminus with it. State and capital can never diverge without the demise of the latter. The cartelization of industry which occurred under the fascist regimes were to protect capital, not to destroy it. It didn’t end plutocracy, it rescued it. There were four large cartels in Nazi Germany and every one of them was owned in part by American capital. The electrical company, aptly nicknamed the “German GE,” was thiry-percent owned by GE. The Ford, Dupont, Rockefeller, Dulles, Bush families, to name a few, were balls deep into Nazi Germany. And that’s a fact! Rockefeller struck a deal with one of the cartels, I. G. Fahrben (which he owned in part), to supply Nazi Germany with the petroleum without which it could not have waged war.

        Revolution from Below?

        If what you are suggesting were true, then we can consign Marx into academic oblivion.

        And Trotsky’s analysis of fascism is perhaps the most deeply flawed of all Leftist interpretations. The “Prophet” may have produced important commentary on a great many subjects, but his writings on fascism and anarchism are absolutely vapid and worthless. This argument that the polarization caused by capitalism in its (perceived) later stages had squeezed some at the top out of the ruling class and forced them into an alliance of the de-classed with the petite bourgeois and lumpenproletariat and that is was this mongrel class which formed the core of the fascist movement is defeated at every turn, not in the least by an examination of voting results in Weimar Germany. It is simply false, demonstrably wrong. It is an attempt to fit an incongruous social phenomenon into a Marxist framework, a square peg into a round hole. This argument has been disproved a thousand fold.

        Re the Constitution: Why would they overthrow the Constitution? It works for them, not us. The Constitution is the legal enshrinement of property rights etc. It doesn’t represent the Revolution, but the subsequent Thermidorian reaction. And this is now another conspiracy theory which has proven to be true. Read James Madison’s “Notes on the Constitutional Convention.” As the recording secretary, Thomson, put it years later when asked to write a tell-all book on the topic to set the record straight: “I have no desire to undeceive future generations…” The works of Terry Bouton, Woody Holton, and Ray Rafael are very helpful on this topic. “Taming Democracy” is a good place to start. Every “right” in it is suspendable or repealable, the Constitution is the central myth of American prpaganda.

        re “Fascism is a form of populism,and it’s ideological arguments are structurally very similar to the Illuminati theory itself; in fact, many of the white rural partisans of the Illuminati theory are flirting with fascist movements that are growing right now”

        If you mean that fascism exploits various folk myths and and prejudices and attempts to cobble together disparate aggrieved groups into a political movement then i agree, that’s precisely what fascism does and must do. But if you refer to actual populism, i.e. those movements so described in American history, then I do not agree. None of these were fascist in any sense. While none had the ideological purity which modern Leftists wish they would, none of them were remotely fascist.

        “White rural partisans of illuminati theory”? To whom do you refer? Do you have some first-hand knowledge of these folks? How about White urban? Or Black rural? I don’t know quite what to make of this. Why there may actually be “White rural partisans” and they may be”flirting” with fascism, it is useful to remember that just about all of these Right hate groups are in fact propped up, protected, and funded by the state. They would collapse without Uncle Sam’s help. The relationship between the Golden Dawn and the Greek parliament is the world’s worst kept secret. In fact, it’s no secret at all, even though it is officially denied, the ruling class wants everybody to know

        It would also be important to note that While fascism is growing in America and Europe, it pales in comoparison to its growth in Africa, which in turn is negligible when measured against Indian fascism, which has grown to frightening proportion. Like America, these African and Indian fascist movements are clandestinely supported by their respective states, who will make great use of them. As eluded to earlier, “democracy” and fascism arre capital’s carrot and stick. Fascism as a movement is largest in India because of the threat posed to the ruling class by the success of the Maoists in garnering popular support, hence the Hindutva movement is brought forth. Yes its sentiments were held by a few and always latent, but now it is tacitly state-sponsored and can proliferate.

        As I’ve stated in other fora, capital maintains itself by the three “f”s: fear, force, and fraud. Once the masses have seen through the fraud and are just pissed off enough–and most people need to be driven near made before they will rebel–to overcome their fears, capital throws off its democratic mask and rules by brute force. That’s fascism.

        I’m going to stop here as this is overlong. I will read Dan’s essay to which you link, and I will hold my nose and read J. “White people are the problem” Sakai’s piece too. The primary purpose of fascism is to break international, interracial proletarian solidarity, and that is precisely what J. “There’s nothing white people enjoy more than abusing people of color” Sakai has been doing all these years. I’m not saying he’s a spook–he may actually believe the racist drivel he writes–but if he didn’t exist the Bureau would invent him. Above you say you don’t want to unite with people who might shoot you in the back, well that’s precisely how Sakai makes some White radicals feel. But I shall read his analysis of fascism, he should know.

        Here’s a synopsis of Dutt’s book:

        http://richgibson.com/synopsisfascim.htm

        A break down of fascism by the same author:

        http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/What_Is_Fascism_Gibson.html

        And another essay which I like:

        http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/06/toward-a-definition-of-fascism/

        Not endorsing everything linked to, but just about.

        Thanks for the interesting discussion of fascism.

  4. metrobusman October 30, 2013 at 1:05 am #

    Oops. My bad. When I said above that the breakdown of fascism was by the same author, I should have specified that it was the author of the synopsis, and not the author of the book itself. My apologies.

  5. pholx February 5, 2014 at 6:35 pm #

    hey man! awesome! I was just piecing together some stuff for students. I am a substitute in Phoenix Metro and the Illuminati comes up quite a bit. Especially when I show students my recent revelation with number theory, since the patterns are symbol shapes. (check my site for info pholx.com or a small youtube video you can find by searching “numbers spiral”). I’ve always been a big fan of conspiracy but also understand it as a function of narratives, and side rather with the idea of autonomy versus empire.
    I am headed to a history class right now, and was interested in discussing freemasonry as a vanguardist movement for many major historical events.
    I’ll print a few and read it and share some.
    looks great btw.
    thanks!

    • mamos206 February 6, 2014 at 2:27 am #

      Thanks. I’d love to hear your thoughts on it once you get a chance to read it. I think freemasonry was an elitist movement of the bourgeoisie, trying to take power over the kings and queens and feudal system. They failed because they scorned the masses, who made the French Revolution and other revs without them. Now, ironically, many working class conspiracy theorists act like the Fremasons they theorize about, because they develop a theory based on the assumption they are enlightened and everyone else in their class are an ignorant mass of sheeple. This underestimation of the intellectual capacities of their peers makes it hard for illuminati theorists to become leaders of movements. Which is a shame because they’re some of the smartest and most sincere youth out here today, and if they could connect with their peers who knows what might happen.

      • pholx February 6, 2014 at 9:22 pm #

        hey Thanks for the reply mamos206! So I was not able to print any up like I thought, but I kept sharing the site with students and read through it myself. I think its written well, addresses the issue decently and offers some insight as to why/how it spreads.
        Personally though, “overthrowing capitalism” sounds pretty close to “overthrowing the illuminati,” or it sounds straight outta a marxist course on economics, which for some reason is celebrated in colleges everywhere. I mean I get it, but is he the jesus of communism? And the traditional idea of the state withering away feels quasi apocalyptic. ‘when we die – utopia’ transforms into ‘when the state dies – utopia’. Worldwide communism also begins to sound like a new world order. Though I suspect your intentions are not the same, nor is your communism the more organized communisms of previous eras or the RCP.
        While arguing over these ideas may be fun at some point, our main concern (if I am judging right) is empowerment of youth. And lets say I am in front of a class, do you think telling them they need to organize and overthrow capitalism sounds any more empowering than the illuminati is the modern bogeyman.
        I also (and believe students do as well) feel alienated from the concepts of labor and capital. To speak in these terms feels like 20th century union and manufacturing jargon. Much of the manufacturing base is gone. The global system of commerce has diversified so much of our lives, that people feel lucky to have any kind of job, much less a trade they can rely on for decades.
        Just like you divorce your concepts or true concepts of communism from MAO, Stalin, or Lenin, capitalism is also a wide playing ground including small scale independent shops and MNC’s. Convincing people that corporate capitalism lends itself to abuse will be easier than convincing them that an indy bookstore is wrong (for whatever reason).
        While I like your critique of illuminati theory, mainly because of your intent, it feels like an oversimplification of its scope. Behold a Pale Horse was more of an assorted collection of pieces, rather than some unifying conspiracy. and that 2nd (chapter) Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars is an interesting analysis and incorporation of consumer watching many giant sales corps would be happy to know. Indeed the NSA vaults could easily be used to fine tune what junk to sell you. There is also a gamut of conspiracy theory that enables people to see a different take on history. I thought David Icke’s info about priest child-molesters was blown out of proportion until the last ten or so years have shown elaborate sex scandal coverups within the Catholic Church. Michael Parenti (against empire) has a decent talk about accidental versus conspiratorial views of history. So, while it may be easy to dismiss conspiracy/illuminati theory, it may very well be worth checking out different ideas. I mean, how much money do we spend on science fiction movies and games and books. Whether its real or not, people are gonna get into it.
        I would be interested in what overthrowing capitalism entails. Take over Exxon and give the shares to the workers? So much of industrial capitalism is set up to create material gain in the short term while wasting non renewable resources in the long term. So, collectivizing capital or the giant companies might not benefit peoples as much as we would like to think.
        Things students can do, as well as the people in our neighborhoods, is help develop the cultures that are happening right around us. Lets not turn McDonalds into a communist chain, lets frequent the small shops in our neighborhoods. Lets invest in the people and the projects and the businesses around us. Lets develop autonomy everywhere, celebrate the development of culture that happens under our feet. I would argue that every neighborhood needs a free store, a library, a park, a rec center, and then some encouraged socializing (dinner partys) so we become aware of the needs and the resources around us. Then we start building movements. get the youth to help make clothes, food, furniture, whatever. We encourage the development of small scale organizing, resource utilization, sharing spaces, and producing culture. Like you said in your essay, theres a million Jay-Z’s out there, lets put them on. Get kids to record albums, paint murals, play music, write articles.
        My major concern is that our culture is too centralized. Decentralize everything. thats how the power is brought back to the hood, not by toppling a giant behemoth. Lets start small clusters of culture and keep networking.
        thanks again man. not many people I get to discuss this biz with.
        and check out my number spiral! It can help with math literacy. the more people that can crunch numbers the more apparent it becomes that 85 people should not own half of everything.
        respect.
        joey

  6. silverpen123 July 26, 2016 at 3:40 pm #

    Well, when you wrote that this pamphlet aligns with the Common Core Standards, I seriously have to wonder if you did your homework. Have you analyzed, with rational and critical thinking skills, who wrote up those standards, and why, and used your emperical evidence for its results? Maybe your students are onto to something, but youre busy thinking that all conspiracy theories are wrong, when the facts of at least some of them can wake up your own thinking skills and prove your students right. If you want to dumb down people, just ignore all aspects of self preservation, sovereignty, creative ability, rationale, and teach them garbage without real philosophy or the structure of a good argument. Illuminati or not, these students are seeing what many people are concluding on their own: That we live in a careless, illogical, insane, unfair world. The humanity of the laws are gone. I could rationally, and logically, go into the mains aspects of our society to show you how and why we have a puppet biased media reporting in fear and for fear. Or how people are living in ignorance of real health and using a broken medical system that neither heals nor educates individuals how to heal, but just take pharmaceuticals that treat systems, ineffectively. why? Or how the structure of corporate business motives are behind most everything they blame the illuminati for. Look further before you discount or show your students in a “respectful” manner to see clearly yourself all the facts. I never heard of illuminati or conspiracy theories before I figured out the chain of events and results that we are on a runaway train. There are a few very talented and creative people out there doing things to improve this world, but not much is allowed to flourish or be known. Why is that? Who are those stopping good productive healthy things from being easily available? Greedy corporations with motives. People with undeveloped thinking skills. People who lack all perspective of emotional development. Lack of creativity. I’m not saying you’re completely wrong, because I really don’t know what you’re teaching, but I’m urging you to look more carefully at what your students are saying before you throw the baby out with the bath water. They are asking why. Ithe can be taught simply to see clearly. No need to get hung on all the details and call it complex.I have taught many difficult subjects that made me roll my eyes and tell my students, I have no idea why they complicate such simple concepts by using their crazy meaningless jargon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: