The other day I was amused to read a critique of The Coronation in which the author was absolutely certain that I am a closet conspiracy theorist. He was so persuasive that I myself almost believed it.
What is a conspiracy theory anyway? Sometimes the term is deployed against anyone who questions authority, dissents from dominant paradigms, or thinks that hidden interests influence our leading institutions. As such, it is a way to quash dissent and bully those trying to stand up to abuses of power. One needn’t abandon critical thinking to believe that powerful institutions sometimes collude, conspire, cover up, and are corrupt. If that is what is meant by a conspiracy theory, obviously some of those theories are true. Does anyone remember Enron? Iran-Contra? COINTELPRO? Vioxx? Iraqi weapons of mass destruction?
During the time of Covid-19, another level of conspiracy theory has risen to prominence that goes way beyond specific stories of collusion and corruption to posit conspiracy as a core explanatory principle for how the world works. Fuelled by the authoritarian response to the pandemic (justifiable or not, lockdown, quarantine, surveillance and tracking, censorship of misinformation, suspension of freedom of assembly and other civil liberties, and so on are indeed authoritarian), this arch-conspiracy theory holds that an evil, power-hungry cabal of insiders deliberately created the pandemic or is at least ruthlessly exploiting it to frighten the public into accepting a totalitarian world government under permanent medical martial law, a New World Order (NWO). Furthermore, this evil group, this illuminati, pulls the strings of all major governments, corporations, the United Nations, the WHO, the CDC, the media, the intelligence services, the banks, and the NGOs. In other words, they say, everything we are told is a lie, and the world is in the grip of evil.
So what do I think about that theory? I think it is a myth. And what is a myth? A myth is not the same thing as a fantasy or a delusion. Myths are vehicles of truth, and that truth needn’t be literal. The classical Greek myths, for example, seem like mere amusements until one decodes them by associating each god with psychosocial forces. In this way, myths bring light to the shadows and reveal what has been repressed. They take a truth about the psyche or society and form it into a story. The truth of a myth does not depend on whether it is objectively verifiable. That is one reason why, in The Coronation, I said my purpose is neither to advocate nor to debunk the conspiracy narrative, but rather to look at what it illuminates. It is, after all, neither provable nor falsifiable.
What is true about the conspiracy myth? Underneath its literalism, it conveys important information that we ignore at great peril.
First, it demonstrates the shocking extent of public alienation from institutions of authority. For all the political battles of the post-WWII era, there was at least a broad consensus on basic facts and on where facts could be found. The key institutions of knowledge production — science and journalism — enjoyed broad public trust. If the New York Times and CBS Evening News said that North Vietnam attacked the United States in the Gulf of Tonkin, most people believed it. If science said nuclear power and DDT were safe, most people believed that too. To some extent, that trust was well earned. Journalists sometimes defied the interests of the powerful, as with Seymour Hersh’s expose of the My Lai massacre, or Woodward & Bernstein’s reporting on Watergate. Science, in the vanguard of civilization’s onward march, had a reputation for the objective pursuit of knowledge in defiance of traditional religious authorities, as well as a reputation for lofty disdain for political and financial motives.
Today, the broad consensus trust in science and journalism is in tatters. I know several highly educated people who believe the earth is flat. By dismissing flat-earthers and the tens of millions of adherents to less extreme alternative narratives (historical, medical, political, and scientific) as ignorant, we are mistaking symptom for cause. Their loss of trust is a clear symptom of a loss of trustworthiness. Our institutions of knowledge production have betrayed public trust repeatedly, as have our political institutions. Now, many people won’t believe them even when they tell the truth. This must be frustrating to the scrupulous doctor, scientist, or public official. To them, the problem looks like a public gone mad, a rising tide of anti-scientific irrationality that is endangering public health. The solution, from that perspective, would be to combat ignorance. It is almost as if ignorance is a virus (in fact, I have heard that phrase before) that must be controlled through the same kind of quarantine (for example, censorship) that we apply to the coronavirus.
Ironically, another kind of ignorance pervades both these efforts: the ignorance of the terrain. What is the diseased tissue upon which the virus of ignorance gains purchase? The loss of trust in science, journalism, and government reflects their long corruption: their arrogance and elitism, their alliance with corporate interests, and their institutionalized suppression of dissent. The conspiracy myth embodies the realization of a profound disconnect between the public postures of our leaders and their true motivations and plans. It bespeaks a political culture that is opaque to the ordinary citizen, a world of secrecy, image, PR, spin, optics, talking points, perception management, narrative management, and information warfare. No wonder people suspect that there is another reality operating behind the curtains.
Second, the conspiracy myth gives narrative form to an authentic intuition that an inhuman power governs the world. What could that power be? The conspiracy myth locates that power in a group of malevolent human beings (who take commands, in some versions, from extraterrestrial or demonic entities). Therein lies a certain psychological comfort, because now there is someone to blame in a familiar us-versus-them narrative and victim-perpetrator-rescuer psychology. Alternatively, we could locate the “inhuman power” in systems or ideologies, not a group of conspirators. That is less psychologically rewarding, because we can no longer easily identify as good fighting evil; after all, we ourselves participate in these systems, which pervade our entire society. Systems like the debt-based money system, patriarchy, white supremacy, or capitalism cannot be removed by fighting their administrators. They create roles for evildoers to fill, but the evildoers are functionaries; puppets, not puppet masters. The basic intuition of conspiracy theories then is true: that those we think hold power are but puppets of the real power in the world.
A couple weeks ago I was on a call with a person who had a high position in the Obama administration and who still runs in elite circles. He said, “There is no one driving the bus.” I was a little disappointed actually, because there is indeed part of me that wishes the problem were a bunch of dastardly conspirators. Why? Because then our world’s problems would be quite easy to solve, at least in principle. Just expose and eliminate those bad guys. That is the prevailing Hollywood formula for righting the world’s wrongs: a heroic champion confronts and defeats the bad guy, and everyone lives happily ever after. Hmm, that is the same basic formula as blaming ill health on germs and killing them with the arsenal of medicine, so that we can live safe healthy lives ever after, or killing the terrorists and walling out the immigrants and locking up the criminals, all again so that we can live safe healthy lives ever after. Stamped from the same template, conspiracy theories tap into an unconscious orthodoxy. They emanate from the same mythic pantheon as the social ills they protest. We might call that pantheon Separation, and one of its chief motifs is the war against the Other.
That is not to say there is no such thing as a germ — or a conspiracy. Watergate, COINTELPRO, Iran-Contra, Merck’s drug Vioxx, Ford’s exploding Pinto coverup, Lockheed-Martin’s bribery campaign, Bayer’s knowing sale of HIV-contaminated blood, and the Enron scandal demonstrate that conspiracies involving powerful elites do happen. None of the above are myths though: a myth is something that explains the world; it is, mysteriously, bigger than itself. Thus, the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory (which I will confess, doubtless at cost to my credibility, to accepting as literally true) is a portal to the mythic realm.
The conspiracy myth I’m addressing here, though, is much larger than any of these specific examples: It is that the world as we know it is the result of a conspiracy, with the Illuminati or controllers as its evil gods. For believers, it becomes a totalizing discourse that casts every event into its terms.
It is a myth with an illustrious pedigree, going back at least to the time of the first century Gnostics. Gnostics believe that an evil demiurge created the material world out of a preexisting divine essence. Creating the world in the image of his own distortion, he imagines himself to be its true god and ruler.
One needn’t believe in this literally, nor believe literally in a world-controlling evil cabal, to derive insight from this myth — insight into the arrogance of the powerful, for example, or into the nature of the distortion that colors the world of our experience.
What is it that makes the vast majority of humanity comply with a system that drives Earth and humankind to ruin? What power has us in its grip? It isn’t just the conspiracy theorists who are captive to a mythology. Society at large is too. I call it the mythology of Separation: me separate from you, matter separate from spirit, human separate from nature. It holds us as discrete and separate selves in an objective universe of force and mass, atoms and void. Because we are (in this myth) separate from other people and from nature, we must dominate our competitors and master nature. Progress, therefore, consists in increasing our capacity to control the Other. The myth recounts human history as an ascent from one triumph to the next, from fire to domestication to industry to information technology, genetic engineering, and social science, promising a coming paradise of control. That same myth motivates the conquest and ruin of nature, organizing society to turn the entire planet into money — no conspiracy necessary.
The mythology of Separation is what generates what I named in The Coronation as a “civilizational tilt” toward control. The solution template is, facing any problem, to find something to control — to quarantine, to track, to imprison, to wall out, to dominate, or to kill. If control fails, more control will fix it. To achieve social and material paradise, control everything, track every movement, monitor every word, record every transaction. Then there can be no more crime, no more infection, no more disinformation. When the entire ruling class accepts this formula and this vision, they will act in natural concert to increase their control. It is all for the greater good. When the public accepts it too, they will not resist it. This is not a conspiracy, though it can certainly look like one. This is a third truth within the conspiracy myth. Events are indeed orchestrated in the direction of more and more control, only the orchestrating power is itself a zeitgeist, an ideology… a myth.
A Conspiracy with No Conspirators
Let us not dismiss the conspiracy myth as just a myth. Not only is it an important psychosocial diagnostic, but it reveals what is otherwise hard to see from the official mythology in which society’s main institutions, while flawed, are shepherding us ever-closer to a high tech paradise. That dominant myth blinds us to the data points the conspiracy theorists recruit for their narratives. These might include things like regulatory capture in the pharmaceutical industry, conflicts of interest within public health organizations, the dubious efficacy of masks, the far-lower-than-hyped death rates, totalitarian overreach, the questionable utility of lockdown, concerns about non-ionizing frequencies of electromagnetic radiation, the benefits of natural and holistic approaches to boosting immunity, bioterrain theory, the dangers of censorship in the name of “combatting disinformation,” and so forth. It would be nice if one could raise the numerous valid points and legitimate questions that alternative Covid narratives bring to light without being classed as a right-wing conspiracy theorist.
The whole phrase “right-wing conspiracy theorist” is a bit odd, since traditionally it is the Left that has been most alert to the proclivity of the powerful to abuse their power. Traditionally, it is the Left that is suspicious of corporate interests, that urges us to “question authority,” and that has in fact been the main victim of government infiltration and surveillance. Fifty years ago, if anyone said, “There is a secret program called COINTELPRO that is spying on civil rights groups and sowing division within them with poison pen letters and fabricated rumors,” that would have been a conspiracy theory by today’s standards. The same, 25 years ago, with, “There is a secret program in which the CIA facilitates narcotics sales into American inner cities and uses the money to fund right-wing paramilitaries in Central America.” The same with government infiltration of environmental groups and peace activists starting in the 1980s. Or more recently, the infiltration of the Standing Rock movement. Or the real estate industry’s decades-long conspiracy to redline neighborhoods to keep black people out. Given this history, why all of a sudden is it the Left urging everyone to trust “the Man” — to trust the pronouncements of the pharmaceutical companies and pharma-funded organizations like the CDC and WHO? Why is skepticism towards these institutions labeled “right wing”? It isn’t as if only the privileged are “inconvenienced” by lockdown. It is devastating the lives of tens or hundreds of millions of the global precariat. The UN World Food Program is warning that by the end of the year, 260 million people will face starvation. Most are black and brown people in Africa and South Asia. One might argue that to restrict the debate to epidemiological questions of mortality is itself a privileged stance that erases the suffering of those who are most marginalized to begin with.
“Conspiracy theory” has become a term of political invective, used to disparage any view that diverges from mainstream beliefs. Basically, any critique of dominant institutions can be smeared as conspiracy theory. There is actually a perverse truth in this smear. For example, if you believe that glyphosate is actually dangerous to human and ecological health, then you also must, if you are logical, believe that Bayer/Monsanto is suppressing or ignoring that information, and you must also believe that the government, media, and scientific establishment are to some extent complicit in that suppression. Otherwise, why are we not seeing NYT headlines like, “Monsanto whistleblower reveals dangers of glyphosate”?
Information suppression can happen without deliberate orchestration. Throughout history, hysterias, intellectual fads, and mass delusions have come and gone spontaneously. This is more mysterious than the easy conspiracy explanation admits. An unconscious coordination of action can look very much like a conspiracy, and the boundary between the two is blurry. Consider the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) fraud that served as a pretext for the invasion of Iraq. Maybe there were people in the Bush administration who knowingly used the phony “yellowcake” document to call for war; maybe they just wanted very much to believe the documents were genuine, or maybe they thought, “Well, this is questionable but Saddam must have WMD, and even if he doesn’t, he wants them, so the document is basically true…” People easily believe what serves their interests or fits their existing worldview.
In a similar vein, the media needed little encouragement to start beating the war drums. They knew what to do already, without having to receive instructions. I don’t think very many journalists actually believed the WMD lie. They pretended to believe, because subconsciously, they knew that was the establishment narrative. That was what would get them recognized as serious journalists. That’s what would give them access to power. That is what would allow them to keep their jobs and advance their careers. But most of all, they pretended to believe because everyone else was pretending to believe. It is hard to go against the zeitgeist.
The British scientist Rupert Sheldrake told me about a talk he gave to a group of scientists who were working on animal behaviour at a prestigious British University. He was talking about his research on dogs that know when their owners are coming home, and other telepathic phenomena in domestic animals. The talk was received with a kind of polite silence. But in the following tea break all six of the senior scientists who were present at the seminar came to him one by one, and when they were sure that no one else was listening told him they had had experiences of this kind with their own animals, or that they were convinced that telepathy is a real phenomenon, but that they could not talk to their colleagues about this because they were all so straight. When Sheldrake realised that all six had told him much the same thing, he said to them, “Why don’t you guys come out? You’d all have so much more fun!” He says that when he gives a talk at a scientific institution there are nearly always scientists who approach him afterwards telling him they’ve had personal experiences that convince them of the reality of psychic or spiritual phenomena but that they can’t discuss them with their colleagues for fear of being thought weird.
This is not a deliberate conspiracy to suppress psychic phenomena. Those six scientists didn’t convene beforehand and decide to suppress information they knew was real. They keep their opinions to themselves because of the norms of their subculture, the basic paradigms that delimit science, and the very real threat of damage to their careers. The persecution and calumny directed at Sheldrake himself demonstrates what happens to a scientist who is outspoken in his dissent from official scientific reality. So, we might still say that a conspiracy is afoot, but its perpetrator is a culture, a system, and a story.
Is this, or a deliberate conspiratorial agenda, a more satisfying explanation for the seemingly inexorable trends (which by no means began with Covid) toward surveillance, tracking, distancing, germ phobia, obsession with safety, and the digitization and indoor-ization of entertainment, recreation, and sociality? If the perpetrator is indeed a cultural mythology and system, then conspiracy theories offer us a false target, a distraction. The remedy cannot be to expose and take down those who have foisted these trends upon us. Of course, there are many bad actors in our world, remorseless people committing heinous acts. But have they created the system and the mythology of Separation, or do they merely take advantage of it? Certainly such people should be stopped, but if that is all we do, and leave unchanged the conditions that breed them, we will fight an endless war. Just as in bioterrain theory germs are symptoms and exploiters of diseased tissue, so also are conspiratorial cabals symptoms and exploiters of a diseased society: a society poisoned by the mentality of war, fear, separation, and control. This deep ideology, the myth of separation, is beyond anyone’s power to invent. The Illuminati, if they exist, are not its authors; it is more true to say that the mythology is their author. We do not create our myths; they create us.
Which side are you on?
In the end, I still haven’t said whether I think the New World Order conspiracy myth is true or not. Well actually yes I have. I have said it is true as a myth, regardless of its correspondence to verifiable facts. But what about the facts? Come on, Charles, tell us, is there actually a conspiracy behind the Covid thing, or isn’t there? There must be an objective fact of the matter. Are chemtrails a thing? Was SARS-COV2 genetically engineered? Is microwave radiation from cellphone towers a factor? Are vaccines introducing viruses from animal cell cultures into people? Is Bill Gates masterminding a power grab in the form of medical martial law? Does a Luciferian elite rule the world? True or false? Yes or no?
To this question I would respond with another: Given that I am not an expert on any of these matters, why do you want to know what I think? Could it be to place me on one side or another of an information war? Then you will know whether it is OK to enjoy this essay, share it, or have me on your podcast. In an us-versus-them war mentality, the most important thing is to know which side someone is on, lest you render aid and comfort to the enemy.
Aha — Charles must be on the other side. Because he has created a false equivalency between peer-reviewed, evidence-based, respectable scientific knowledge on the one hand, and unhinged conspiracy theories on the other.
Aha — Charles must be on the other side. Because he has created a false equivalency between corporate-government-NWO propaganda on the one hand, and brave whistle-blowers and dissidents risking their careers for the truth on the other.
Can you see how totalizing war mentality can be?
War mentality saturates our polarized society, which envisions progress as a consequence of victory — victory over a virus, over the ignorant, over the left, over the right, over the psychopathic elites, over Donald Trump, over white supremacy, over the liberal elites…. Each side uses the same formula, and that formula requires an enemy. So, obligingly, we divide ourselves up into us and them, exhausting 99% of our energies in a fruitless tug-of-war, never once suspecting that the true evil power might be the formula itself.
This is not to propose that we somehow banish conflict from human affairs. It is to question a mythology — embraced by both sides — that conceives every problem in conflict’s terms. Struggle and conflict have their place, but other plotlines are possible. There are other pathways to healing and to justice.
A Call for Humility
Have you ever noticed that events seem to organize themselves to validate the story you hold about the world? Selection bias and confirmation bias explain some of that, but I think something weirder is at work as well. When we enter into deep faith or deep paranoia, it seems as if that state attracts confirmatory events to it. Reality organizes itself to match our stories. In a sense, this IS a conspiracy, just not one perpetrated by humankind. That might be a third truth that the conspiracy myth harbors: the presence of an organizing intelligence behind the events of our lives.
In no way does this imply the New Age nostrum that beliefs create reality. Rather, it is that reality and belief construct each other, coevolving as a coherent whole. The intimate, mysterious connection between myth and reality means that belief is never actually a slave to fact. We are facts’ sovereign — which is not to say their creator. To be their sovereign doesn’t mean to be their tyrant, disrespecting and over-ruling them. The wise monarch pays attention to an unruly subject, such as a fact that defies the narrative. Maybe it is simply a disturbed trouble-maker, like a simple lie, but maybe it signals disharmony in the kingdom. Maybe the kingdom is no longer legitimate. Maybe the myth is no longer true. It could well be that the vociferous attacks on Covid dissent, using the “conspiracy theory” smear, signal the infirmity of the orthodox paradigms they seek to uphold.
If so, that doesn’t mean the orthodox paradigms are all wrong either. To leap from one certainty to another skips the holy ground of uncertainty, of not knowing, of humility, into which genuinely new information can come. What unites the pundits of all persuasions is their certainty. Who is trustworthy? In the end, it is the person with the humility to recognize when he or she has been wrong.
To those who categorically dismiss any information that seriously challenges conventional medicine, lockdown policies, vaccines, etc., I would ask, Do you need such high walls around your kingdom? Instead of banishing these unruly subjects, would it hurt to give them an audience? Would it be so dangerous to perhaps tour another kingdom, guided not by your own loyal minister but by the most intelligent, welcoming partisans of the other side? If you have no interest in spending the several hours it will take to absorb the following dissenting opinions, fine. I’d rather be in my garden too. But if you are a partisan in these issues, what harm will it do to visit enemy territory? Normally partisans don’t do that. They rely on the reports of their own leaders about the enemy. If they know anything of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s or Judy Mikovitz’s views, it is through the lens of someone debunking them. So give a listen to Kennedy, or if you prefer MD’s only, to David Katz, Zach Bush, or Christiane Northrup,
I would like to offer the same invitation to those who reject the conventional view. Find the most scrupulous mainstream doctors and scientists you can, and dive into their world. Take the attitude of a respectful guest, not a hostile spy. If you do that, I guarantee you will encounter data points that challenge any narrative you came in with. The splendor of conventional virology, the wonders of chemistry that generations of scientists have discovered, the intelligence and sincerity of most of these scientists, and the genuine altruism of health care workers on the front line who have no political or financial conflict of interest in the face of grave risk to themselves, must be part of any satisfactory narrative.
After two months of obsessively searching for one, I have not yet found a satisfactory narrative that can account for every data point. That doesn’t mean to take no action because after all, knowledge is never certain. But in the whirlwind of competing narratives and the disjoint mythologies beneath them, we can look for action that makes sense no matter which side is right. We can look for truths that the smoke and clamor of the battle obscures. We can question assumptions both sides take for granted, and ask questions neither side is asking. Not identified with either side, we can gather knowledge from both. Generalizing to society, by bringing in all the voices, including the marginalized ones, we can build a broader social consensus and begin to heal the polarization that is rending and paralyzing our society.
Thanks a feckin million Charles I’ve been thinking about trying to find a way to say all of this, you do it so well….. I just hope now a lot of the polarisers can read this and see where others are coming from and stop with the slagging!! X
Michaela Whiteman says
Thankyou so much! I felt very lost in the middle of both sides swaying from Argument to headline to truths & dribble.
I now feel peaceful in the middle for now- thats the best I can do
Wow Charles, great read again. Thank you for this insight. I have been experiencing alot of similar concepts in my life over the last 6 months. Your words are gratefully received. 💚
Jill Garsden says
Thank you, Charles, for yet another vitally important, well-balanced essay. May your message be transmitted, comprehended and acted upon, far and wide!
Absolutely brilliant! Thank you for your contribution – a very much needed and appreciated breath of fresh air! Kindest, Nellie B.
Jodi Menard says
WISDOM! I love it so much! This is true intelligence for me…take no sides, listen to both sides, create answers from a middle ground of Unification and STEP out of our dang repeated history – of repeated history – of repeated history of Separation!!!! Thank you for this article!
Thank you for this essay emphasizing seperation . The Other is within afterall. In Western culture we highly value security , forgetting we are going to die. We have been nannied and de-natured to the point that we doubt our own intuition , our inner knowing, our compass. Do we desire freedom anymore or has that been replaced by comfort at any cost , the cost of the ecosystem, the cost of others’ suffering , the cost of the loss of integrity within ourselves, the cost of giving away all our power to imagine another way forward.
William Blake said ” If you do not wish to be enslaved by one mans system , invent your own.
Thanks for the reality check. I have been feeling like a weirdo for vacillating between not knowing what to think and considering various conventional and not conventional ways of thinking. I honestly still don’t have a clue what is happening but it has helped to read your words and realize that I am not the only person thinking unconventional thoughts and doing my best to care for a hurting planet. Blessings to all.
Great post Charles, thank you for your thoughts and words. You hit the nail on the head that is that at the heart of it all – this perpetuation of an artificial division and separation. In my unverifiable opinion, this is the real goal of any may or may not be NWO: to misdirect/trick/mystify those as to the true nature of themselves. It is a Roman circus of global proportions. This is why the war drums are continuously beaten. This is why we are continuously divided and distracted. The addition of the engineered turbid confusion that has clouded the constitutions of the general populace only further serves to drive this. It’s easier to believe what you are told when it becomes too hard to decipher the information for yourself.
If there was a verifiable set of data points/narrative to explain everything, the jig would be up, thus, it is always up to the discerning observer to attempt to see through the veil for themselves, based off of their own objective investigation of whatever is presented to them. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.
I think the difficulty with this particular myth is that as more ‘coincidence theories’ are confirmed as actual facts/truths, that the likelihood of the greater myth being true becomes more likely/logical and at this point, depending on who you ask, the evidence is too strong to ignore. I’m not sure of your inclination/knowledge around the occult aspects of this myth and the connection to ancient Babylon etc but it would be great to see you explore that at some point.
Regardless of whom or what is ‘driving the bus’, the responsibility and solution always comes down to the individual to drive their own bus to arrive at the destination of their choosing. Looking for those deeper, intuitive, universal truths will always steer us right.
Thank you, Charles. I love your perspectives. I’m curious if you can elaborate on what may be practical action steps to follow up on your suggestions in the last paragraph? Keep writing and sharing, please. Your voice is important in this time!
Artist as Family says
Thank you for writing this Charles, and thank you for the goodly mind and soul labours you share. This essay is a much needed third space, and a beautiful articulation of complexity. Thank you for helping to compost us-them duopolies and brew up so much potential for post correct/incorrect ideologies. Much warmth from near winter Australia.
What an open, well rounded discussion. Thank you Charles, I’m grateful for a calming voice in these times. I will take your invitation to tour the other side of my perspective.
Jon Rose says
Thank you for your very comprehensive analysis. I especially like the notions of recognizing the underlying meanings / feelings / issues being the important issues which conspiracy believers and conspiracy skeptics are likely to agree on. That conspiracy theories are a real symptom of some overt issues which need to be addressed. I also like the idea of visiting the ‘enemy camp’ – not to prove them wrong, but to learn something…
I suspect different values as well as ‘identity politics’ – the need to belong to a particular group who have a particular set of beliefs, also contribute to different sides of the conspiracy fence. These issues can be challenging to overcome with rational discussion (rationality itself is easily challenged with those who value intuition or gut feeling much higher).
A really insightful post which points to several core underlying issues that need to be addressed from those on both sides of the conspiracy fence…
Darren Ashmore says
Thank you for this.
Marta Alvarenga says
Cher Llew says
This is the most intelligent piece of writing I have seen on the current issues. Well done. I hope many people will read and absorb. We need people like this author advising our leaders. Please share this to every possible place to be read by the masses. Thank you
Charles!! I love what you do. Thank you!!
Adam Shapiro says
This gives me hope that, rather than a toppling of the powerful and destruction of entrenched systems, an awakening can be / will be what saves us…
Jim Smith says
Something I continually take from your work is a reminder that there is wisdom everywhere. In this climate of polarization, BOTH sides own some of it. BOTH sides spin their narratives and activities to support what they believe, and neither side is totally right or wrong. The one thing I cannot do is just sit still, so I love this idea in the last paragraph, “We can question assumptions both sides take for granted, and ask questions neither side is asking. Not identified with either side, we can gather knowledge from both.” Thank you, Charles, for that.
I’m glad you released this essay instead of relegating to the trash. It is very relevant!
Silvio Finley McIntosh says
“Given this history, why all of a sudden is it the Left urging everyone to trust “the Man” — to trust the pronouncements of the pharmaceutical companies and pharma-funded organizations like the CDC and WHO? Why is skepticism towards these institutions labeled “right wing”? ”
I think you using the labels left and right and generalizing about them perpetuates the binary/dichotomy/separation that you are against.
I do not think the “Left” is urging everyone to trust the man. I do not think that skepticism of the who and cdc is right wing. I think in a pandemic it makes sense to follow directions from these entities and other health experts while being aware of the power they hold and where their funding comes from. How did you arrive at your belief that the “Left” is urging everyone to trust the CDC and WHO? What is your personal definition of the left?
What is your personal definition of Right Wing? How do you know that skepticism of The CDC and WHO is labeled right wing?
I do not agree with you lumping black and native communities into the “Left”. If you know of specific groups identifying themselves as “Left” then that is accurate. Many native and black peoples hold their indigenous and black identities as more important than “Left”, as many native communities do not hold white/European society, culture, politics as legit, it does not make sense to use our political words to describe them.
“The UN World Food Program is warning that by the end of the year, 260 million people will face starvation. Most are black and brown people in Africa and South Asia. One might argue that to restrict the debate to epidemiological questions of mortality is itself a privileged stance that erases the suffering of those who are most marginalized to begin with.”
Do you think the debate is being restricted? By whom? Do you argue that the debate should be opened up, or you’re just saying that one could argue this? I think you should be more direct in stating your opinions. You sometimes make generalized and obscure statements, and I as a reader have no idea what you believe, think or feel. I would like to know these things as a reader, to connect more and understand better, you the writer.
dale ruff says
That is exactly how I feel: when I finished the article, I said to myself: where does he stand in a world of lies……asking us to balance lies and truth with a middle course? Telling us NOT to take a stand. The only question that matters is Which side are you on? His argument is that this is a false question and therefor we can melt back into obscure and
vague reasons not to act, not to take a stand. In all, he justifies the lies and myths that pervert the truth and asks us to be tolerant. Tolerance of intolerance leads to the destruction of human dignity and freedom. That is the lesson of history he ignores.
Frank Visser says
A great read.
Here’s more on David Icke as modern-day Gnostic:
Modern virology needs a defense against the disinfo from Icke and Andrew Kaufman (his scientific side-kick) where they deny the reality of the virus.
This goes far beyond being critical. There is rational suspicion and irrational suspicion – and Icke c.s. have crossed that line big time.
Connie Baxter Marlow says
Brilliant, Charles. So well articulated from the eagles’ perspective. I would like to add the myth of scarcity which along with separation drives the prevailing behavior of greed and power and control over others. We have all created, and comply with, the prevailing myth because we think it is the only game in town. It’s physics – vibration and frequency – There’s a party going on, and we are all invited, we just forgot the directions, because we don’t understand how the Universe works. Unified Physics is taking the logical mind to the next level so we can stay with the Earth as she moves into a higher frequency. How do we get to the party? We change our assumptions and the world changes with us. We access The Trust Frequency. Onward to Peace on/with Earth!
Christine Takacs says
I see what you did there, Charles, you sly devil. You met us all half way. You are the prophet and role model we need right now to find our way through to each other, and even to ourselves.
Phil Hodgson says
Thank you for this excellent and thoughtful essay.
Ron Tocknell says
Perhaps we focus too much on whether this or that conspiracy theory is true or not. As long as they remain theories, they are always deniable.
Perhaps what we need to focus on is whether or not a particular conspiracy theory COULD conceivably be true. That is a very different question and the answer is undeniably YES. The level of opacity, opportunity and incentive is a fertile seedbed for corruption. When police investigate a crime, the first factors to come under scrutiny is Opportunity and Motive. Well, is there opportunity? Absolutely. Is there motive? Well, if a more totalitarian level of control is required, then certainly. Another factor police would consider is Risk. If Opportunity and Motive exists and the risk factor is low, there is an increased likelihood of transgression. Here again, what meaningful authority is there to ensure that government at the highest level cannot break the law? The police are answerable to the Home Office so the likelihood of a sitting Prime Minister being prosecuted is virtually non-existent. Back in 2012, the then Conservative Party co-treasurer, Peter Cruddas was secretly filmed offering access to then Prime Minister David Cameron and then Chancellor George Osborne in return for ‘donations’ exceeding £250,000. Cruddas stated on camera that both Cameron and Osborne were complicit in this arrangement. Cruddas was effectively soliciting bribes (prohibited by the Bribery Act 2010). I actually contacted the Met to ask what action was being taken. I was told that, as there had been no report of a crime, no action was to be taken… so I reported it officially. As I had seen the video (along with the rest of the nation), that qualified me (and, indeed, everyone else) as a witness. So it had to be recorded. I was told that Parliamentary conduct was not a police matter. I retorted that it is not just a matter of Parliamentary conduct but also a crime under the Bribery Act 2010 and, therefore, very much a police matter. I felt that, as both Cameron and Osborne had been implicated by Cruddas, the police had a responsibility to at least interview them as part of an investigation into alleged bribery. I was told in no uncertain terms that no investigation would take place and, as far as the Met were concerned, the matter was closed. So, as far as ‘Risk Factor’ goes, about as minimal as it can get.
The opacity behind which activities can be concealed, the opportunities to transgress the law, the financial and political benefits to be gained and the power to deny approval for police investigations into their activities add up to not only a possibility of corruption but a high PROBABILITY.
The term “conspiracy theorist” was not coined by those who challenge power. It was coined as a dismissive term by those who prefer not to have to answer questions. Allegations have to be taken seriously but “conspiracy theories” can be ignored. Politicians can justify not engaging with conspiracy theorists. But what is a conspiracy theory if not an allegation?
Trying to prove that the government has engaged in inappropriate or illegal activity is extremely difficult, if not impossible. However, there is no need to prove that such activity COULD take place. This is what needs to be addressed. Political conduct cannot be left to the integrity of politicians. It is a ridiculous situation.
A very good example Ron. And I like the way you apply a logical template to how this is operating in the real world. I agree that the term ‘conspiracy theory’ is being thrown about as a distraction and a way of shaming people, who consider themselves very sensible, into not looking in that particular direction.
Excellent! Thank you! My husband and I are currently diving into RebelWisdom’s “Sensemaking” interviews with Daniel Schmachtenberger. This works so perfectly with them! It is definitely making us think outside our comfort zone which of course is a great thing!
Michelle Simonson says
I know that hero worship is probably the last thing you want, but you are my hero, Charles! I am sharing this widely and it will be required reading for anyone who wants to debate either side of the issues with me. THANK YOU!!!
Apparently the Swedes have listened to the right wing conspiracy thought on Covid-19 by remaining open instead of all sheltering in place. If they of all peoples have succumbed to conspiracy thinking who is safe! More seriously, most likely the powers that be in Sweden listened to a set of credentialed university trained experts and came up with the outlier Swedish approach to the virus. It will be interesting to see how it works out for them over the next couple of years. I appreciate Jim Smith’s words that everyone has a piece of the truth and wisdom.
Yes to finding ways that don’t involve ‘othering’.
It is not so easy to do though. What comes to mind is the way some people treat climate change denial conspiracy – wanting to give equal time to both sides of the argument. This can end up legitimizing dangerous mis-information.
I am also concerned that with the masses of conspiracy theories now circulating there will be theories sneaked in that have as their aim the re-election of Trump and that many will be swayed in that direction.
Charles – you make my heart sing!
Dear Charles, I have been following your wisdom for years. This essay says it all and helps me to feel normal in these abnormal times. I agree with all the comments except one, so don’t need to write more. I want to send this on to others but have to be careful because I am finding so many folks do not do critical thinking anymore.
Thank you for being a prophet in these difficult times!
Peter Adair says
A marvelous essay. As Joseph Campbell said, a myth is neither true nor false; it is either living or dead. And as you have elegantly pointed out, sub-myths can exist within larger ones. Our stories are fracturing, and this is revelatory of a deeper narrative that has fractured our relation to Earth.
We are, most fundamentally, an Earth species. Our metabolism is coordinated by bacteria, our immune system is undergirded by fungi and parasites, our genetic makeup is at least half the contribution of viruses. We are an expression of Earth’s dreaming. We have lately, as Charles points out, imagined a dream of separation. We have explored and exploited that dream. To enter a new dream we must fracture the old one. We are on our way.
Jonathan Evelegh says
Another thanks for some great truth telling. Intelligent thought and writing are such a welcome relief at this time – even if the truth is somewhat inconvenient. But, yes, the task of our times is to deal with the human psyche as it has become in a world of complexity and paradox.
Annette Kaye says
Thank you, Charles, for another thoughtful reflection. I was reassured by “After two months of obsessively searching for one, I have not yet found a satisfactory narrative that can account for every data point.”, as I have done the same, with the same results, and decided by the end of last week to accept that I had to live with uncertainty – so I also loved your phrase ‘the holy ground of uncertainty’. I appreciated in this piece your refusal to be lured into any form of dualistic dialogue, but instead look behind and within the conspiracy theories to understand the conditions they point to.
I find your writing very helpful, you feel to me like a trustworthy voice – please keep going!
Pascal Beran says
Very thoughtful and helpful in making sense of the paradigm of paranoia. My only constructive criticisms would be 1)to make it more accessible and clear; the danger with using so many professional and erudite terms is that they bring in a life and history of their own and undermine a lot of the common sense you are striving for. And 2) so much of conspiracy-theory is emotionally and psychologically driven, you touch on this analytically but don’t really engage and seem overly cautious of grappling those beasts here. Nonetheless, an excellent article.
Todd Lejnieks says
Oh man this is so good! My mind has been tumbling about as it tries to make sense of all the shenanigans being tossed around as “facts”. Whether I watch either an expert epidemiologist or an “anti-vaxxer”, I see opinions and striving to understand being presented as “truth”. It’s dizzying. Thank you for suggesting Zach Bush. He’s so great to watch.
“People easily believe what serves their interests or fits their existing worldview.”
Sadly, this is true for most of us. It is only by checking our views at the door and approaching alternate views with curiosity and a willingness to understand, will we move ahead together as a species.
Thank you for your illuminating insightful essays.
While I agree in principle with the “brilliant narrative” of Charles, I harbor what I’m sure will be an inflammatory perspective: The humble, middle, watercourse way is the easy way out here. It’s lazy. Charles you say Illuminati/Cabal cannot be disproven. That is as lazy as saying: “We don’t know the origins of the Universe.” Of course it can’t be proven! That is so easy to say. Where is the value in saying it? At some point, we must make our choices. One person (at least) commented that in the end, it comes down to our intuition. I agree. Our intuition as informed by facts. Reality. Sickness and Death are real. Theoretically, NO! we can’t prove the absence of Illuminati. Just as we can’t prove anything we can’t see. Such as the Alien machine directing all of this from the huge pink bowling pin parked on the dark side of the moon. Etc. But in real terms… WE are driving the bus. Intuitively, and based on tons of pretty clear facts, there is no Cabal of Illuminati. There are greedy tycoons and power hungry egoists and deeply altruistic front line defenders of forests… so where do you want to put your energy? Right down the middle, in relaxation?
Andrew Stephens says
Just gratitude for your courage and strength to publish your thoughts. They are of enormous benefit.
Brian Dodge says
The scientists did not say DDT was safe ” In very general terms the Surgeon “General stated: “We have no information on which to indict DDT either as a tumorigen or a a carcinogen for man and on the basis now available, I cannot conclude DDT represents an 1mm1nent health hazard.” The regulators(political appointees) at the EPA made the legal conclusion that DDT was “safe” e.g., the benefits outweighed the risks.
CBS News probably said what the NY Times reported “WASHINGTON, Sept. 18—Two United States destroyers fired upon, and presumably hit what they took to be four or five hostile targets today in the Gulf of Tonkin, Government sources reported. [<<<]
Information from the scene 50 miles off North Vietnam, was still incomplete tonight. The Administration limited itself to a brief statement acknowledging that an action had occurred involving American warships.
The Defense Department said [<<<] that it was investigating the report and that there had been no damage to American vessels or loss of American personnel."
A lot of conspiracy ideation is the result of inability to understand or think critically, pay attention to what is actually said instead of implied, and the lack of differrentiation between what one knows(rational, logical, forebrain analytical; type 2 thinking) and what one believes(irrational, subconscious, lizard brain; type 1 thinking)
Patricia Edith Kaplan says
Thank you Charles for walking the tightrope here…of course all the way through I hoped for a clear-cut solution to the us/them paradigm, a way out of the mess….the message for me here is to hold the middle, to stay inside something unknown, something without assigning right/wrong. Challenging and necessary, just as one individual, can I do it???
Stephen B says
I wrote this last week … On Plandemic, 5G causing COVID and other conspiracy …. My personal POV is that all narratives that ask us to examine our belief structure, our blind spots, our sacred cows … are extremely valuable. But I also believe that I’m (relatively) unique in that I can hear the “message” beyond the particular (bullshit?) story. I value the logical and the intuitive. I’m personally open to being wrong, and I’m open to changing my mind. I respect my POV and I like dialogue with others that might prompt me to change and grow. I’m not sure, but I wonder if I’m in a minority in that sense. I worry about people who (hook, line and sinker) believe conspiracy, just as I worry about people who ingest the standard narrative without questioning. There must be a balance.
And in this time of pervasive fear, eroding institutional trust, widespread suffering and foreign actors efforting to destroy us with propaganda … it is DANGEROUS to spread disinformation. It normalizes what is fringe, creates a veneer of legitimacy when there is an absence. Friends of mine who can swim in the currents of ambiguity and paradox with ease: you need to remember that not everyone is like you, and that posting these ideas in public ways lends your personal credibility to the illegitimate. This can do harm.
Brian Lomas says
I can’t help but think that your missing something important here Charles. I do think this is an excellent essay and your analysis of the situation is broad in its scope covering both sides of the polarisation and the potential causes therewith. But something doesn’t add up by catagorising these different views as equal and opposite. To my mind you have characterised these views as being like 2 sides of the same coin. The coin of separation. Us vs them yet still the same coin.
Broadly speaking I can see how it appears that way from an expanded idea of ‘self’. If we are all one living organism, then both sides are seeing themselves as seperate and trying to contol the narrative with their version of the truth and to each side their version is true. In so doing each side obfiscates the other. They both therefore cannot see the others perspective and must therefore both be wrong. Otherwise there is no unity and since we are all united and separation is an illusio we all must be in possession of some of the truth. Unless I’ve completely misunderstood.
Isn’t it equally possible that some of the views comes out of the paradigm of separation and
some of the other view from a more explanatary paradigm. When Galileo was placed under house arrest he couldn’t get the pope to look through his telescope. Like Galileo Isn’t it more a case of the old clinging on for dear life in the face of the new? Our biology appears to be rooted in an outdated Newtonian physics that still hasn’t updated. Our approach to cancer is a case in point. Kill the pathogen vs Improve the health of the individuals within the population and their respective immune systems though prevention and health of the whole.
The old paradigm of governments ruling through authoritarian one size fits all. Deciding on our behalf what we can and cannot do, can and cannot say. We already defeated that illusion in the 1940s but the dominator Alpha male control freak ego driven kings of seperate selves, our powerful leaders who appear born out of the system you describe have imposed their paradigm upon the rest of us yet again, whether we like it or not, as they always have. Under the spell of fear these bullies rise to the top and use fear to subjegate us all. The meek shall inherit the earth?… 2000 years later and it’s same old, same old. If Jesus couldn’t stop the dominators who perceived everything as seperate, how on earth can we achieve that? (I’m not saying one way or another if Jesus existed but the myth is real eh?)
From a perspective of compassion for these dominators, whose illusion of seperateness compels them to control us. If we could get them to see we are one being, one organism then a new health system, economic system etc might come into being. But they are not going to give this up. And within this illusion they think nothing of squashing anything which challenges the status quo.
A new paradigm is emerging but this is not 2 sides of one coin. This is the last gasp attempt of the old paradigm to maintain its stranglehold on a dying worldview. Your right Charles and your intuition of a higher understanding and expression of the self is spot on. I think we need to avoid the adversarial new view vs old view. (which it kind of is) and find a way of reframing it so it’s palatable to everyone.
Just an idea but for starters we shouldnt elect anyone incapable of empathy. Although genetic susceptibility doesn’t mean gene expression we cannot afford have psychopaths in charge of people. If you cannot empathise with people your must not be allowed to be in charge of them.
Brian Lomas wrote:
” If Jesus couldn’t stop the dominators who perceived everything as seperate, how on earth can we achieve that? (I’m not saying one way or another if Jesus existed but the myth is real eh?) ”
Hey Brian Lomas. You talk about the author covering both sides of different views and being on two sides of the same coin.
And so you don’t take one side or the other that Jesus existed. Talk about calling the kettle black
What is a “dominator”? Were you confused on what to give a name of something from the period around 33 A.D. and so you threw out there some made up word ? What did this “dominator” perceive as separate? Separate from what?
I doubt anything is enough that could satisfy you which came from non-biblical historical evidence and from non-Christian sources documenting a man named Jesus of Nazareth who lived on earth and was crucified by the Romans. I’d be willing to bet that you would argue some Greek philosopher who you believe lived back from that period existed even if you couldn’t produce a single archeological finding of evidence to back up your argument.
Your comment isn’t even funny . . . it’s plain stupid
and you can’t fix stupid
Actually Jess I disagree that it’s plain stupid. That is unfair and divisive.
I will agree with Brian that sociopaths/ psychopaths in power are a serious threat – of course for thousands of years sociopaths have tended to grab power – in a system of separation where power is seen as dominance and control over the other – as Charles points out in this essay.
And, I also agree that we are on the edge of a paradigm shift – comes a point that it will happen whether the majority wants it or not… and we will hopefully be able to bust out of this either/or mentality which is one of our most pervasive myths.
Wonderful. Thank you. I’m left with a predominant sense though that I’ll try to articulate.
I’ve tried to be a participant in the land of uncertainty and humility for some time. The crushing reality of this place to stand is that it ends up being an unbearable burden and unreasonable expectation to place on any single person. We simply don’t have the time and energy to cull through the data and spend a few hours in everyone’s garden regarding every topic and issue facing us today. Even if we do, say, have and take the time to deep dive into a very important topic like say COVID-19 (in all its many facets) or climate change, we often then don’t have the powers and skills of discernment to really know who is telling the truth, who is manipulating the data to tell their own story, who is speaking with genuine earnestness from their perspective and worldview and has been simply caught up in the stream of the giant system.
And so we need our experts. We need people we can rely on and trust to do some of the data work, the wisdom gathering, the truth seeking. We cannot do it all ourselves. But how will we know who to trust? Who of the experts is not wrong–in the ever over-lapping extensions of various fields of training or even their primary field (trained within the system)? Who is simply appealing to my general proclivities and inclinations and who is speaking verifiable truth outside of my current understanding and framework. If I am always and ever the judge, who says I’m qualified even to discern through the thicket of information and misinformation? If I can’t trust “science” who can I trust? (I don’t trust “science”).
What are the new credentials for trust and expertise? And how can we trust our own actions (and even at times our lives) on the work of these people in such a system as you describe and that we find ourselves in?
I feel your frustration and can relate!
Raymond Powell says
“the perpetrator is indeed a cultural mythology and system”
That system is called Game A.
Charles, I think The Coronation was the most brilliant piece of writing I’ve read in probably a decade! You are a truly great thinker, with a big heart. You say what I think and feel – just far more eloquently and well than I could. I look forward to finishing this essay tonight.
Cathhy Pagano says
Knowing both your wife Stella and your friend Susan Belchamber, I’ve been following your work for a while now.
Thank you Charles for articulating so well the archetypal background of our divisions. I’ve been working on listening to both sides and find I come out right in the middle — some things I’ll choose to do and believe, others I won’t. It is a whole mythic story we’re up against and which is about to die. But of course, is fighting all the way as it exits our cultural mindset.
I’ve often asked these questions to my die-hard conspiracy theory friends, but a mythic outlook on life is hard for most to understand. I call it the flat-earth belief system — it’s hard for many people to understand the symbolic life and depth of mythic meaning.
As always, another brilliant discussion. My son in Dubai was just telling me he read this essay — which I hadn’t done yet. A mythic mindset is the best way to understand how the world is coming apart around us. but what mysteries await us behind the scenes!
kevin long says
Interesting read and analysis. What you have aptly described is the human condition.
We have have been dong this to one another for thousands of years. Cunning, lies, deceit…
to entrench our beliefs and agenda. For me, your writing represents the nature of the
egoic mind which is projected onto the larger social fabric/institutions. And what does
the ego do? it creates suffering…in small and large scales. Someone can be kind and sensitive
and then kick the dog when they are home. Why? because of separation. For me, this is
the operative word in your essay. Separation from others, nature, curiosity…ourselves leads
to the establishment of territory-physical and psychological and the need to defend that territory
at any cost. Separation, suffering and grief. This is our human condition but we are not
necessarily bound to this condition, we can transform and heal. Buddha said, “look within, the
truth is there” (paraphrasing). How do you get the goose out of the bottle? No goose, no bottle
Thank you, Charles.
I’m reading Dr. Judy Mikovits’s book, “Plague of Corruption” now. I had to because we’ve been given too many reasons to doubt the mainstream narrative when just about everything that is said about Dr. Mikovits in the media follows the ad hominem fallacy of logic. That’s what happens to whistleblowers when big money is involved. There is a systematic takedown of the person’s career, character, voice leading to banishment by every “respectable” person. I’ve been seeing this in my favorite alternative media sources, too. It’s disappointing. Is any journalist doing their own research anymore? But there are consequences even for me. My best friend asked me the other day if I was in any danger of becoming a “Trump supporter” because I’m questioning what we are being told. No, I’m not going alt-right. But things are not adding up. I feel uneasy beyond the “predictable uncertainty” of this moment on Earth.
I love your writing Charles. You always help me to think more deeply and beyond the appearance of situations. I am with you about the story of Separation being THE driver behind motivations of apparently different sides of an issue. This story is in hyperdrive in our time, fueled by injustices, a widening wealth gap, systemic violence against people of color and the poor, environmental destruction and species loss, etc. etc. And now a global pandemic that is creating a literal separation as we all endure what seems like “house arrest.” Where the Story of Separation has been driven by religions, turf wars, and fear of The Other in the past (and today), there is another huge driver that leads to insanity and total disregard for consequences.
A globalized economy that insists on growth, no matter the cost to Earth’s living systems, the Other-than-humans, and her People, DOES NOT SERVE LIFE and should be abandoned. It causes people in high places to act like criminals, involving themselves in crimes against humanity to meet the quarterly profit projections. It can become a habit when these criminal actions are rewarded and these people are given authority they do not deserve. There are no real checks and balances in such a system! We need a different system. We need local economies that are orchestrated to SERVE LIFE that can then be connected to other local economies that SERVE LIFE, and connected to other polities of larger circumferences as long as they SERVE LIFE!
Thank you, Charles. Please don’t stop writing and speaking out.
Love the peaceful intelligent nature of your article. Thank you, there is nothing like this out there that i have come across. How beautiful it would be if this inspires more of the reporters, (journalists, scientists, podcasts, famous figures, etc) who may be afraid. thank you for blazing the trail of cooperation verses attacking and dividing humanity. We are starving & thirsty for cooperation & oneness. blaming is a victim mentality – we all know this. Let us move on without shaming, we all make mistakes, it’s the human condition called learning.
Thank you Charles, most helpful, blessings.
Can I get me time back?
This is straight out from “Thank you for smoking”. The biggest mistake you make is that science isn’t an Institution of Power, that is shitty post modernist thinking. Science is a method that allow us to work around intrinsic human defects and discover how the world works with increasing degrees of confidence. It has no need to appeal to power or authority as you implied, and if someone that isn’t using that method believes the earth is flat, then it is more than justified to call him ignorant.
In summary, what I read here is an appeal to feelings and trying to make people feel better because they don’t want to deal with the fact that a microorganism brought our civilization to a halt.
One thing I sort of agree, conspiracy theory is a misnomer for something that could be better characterized as mental masturbation.
“That, that can be claimed without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence”
Malcolm Clark says
“What then is truth? A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding. Truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions.”
– Frederich Neitzsche
“If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing it. In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”
– Edward Bernays, “Propaganda”, 1924
“Then something happened…..Our convoluted language became even more ciphered in a world that so deifies technology as to strip out fundamental context clues in deference to technology itself – sacrificing communication quality in favor of convenience, commerce, and sensation. Before long, original impressions – already clouded by the jumble of language – were scrambled further by the filter of machines – people talking to machines that talk to other machines that talk to people…Virtual worlds begin to displace authenticity, definitions dissolve, and fabrications shout down actualities.”
– Beau, “Babel” – https://bohobeau.net/
Edi Giudetti says
At the risk of not pulling in the same direction of what seems to be a fan base, I actually don’t think this essay wise in the least. Taking the middle-ground approach is never wise and is certainly far from brave, but the author justifies it because, I am sure, we all feel safe in the middle ground.
There is a book that speaks very clearly of a global government system, presenting itself in what it refers to as, ‘the last days’. Conveniently ignored by most, but embraced by some as true, it makes a claim that is ever persistent and seems to be manifesting itself with a considerably high degree of clarity through time. Perhaps this is the basis for the modern ‘myths’ you refer to, and if so, is this book itself a myth even if the “signs of the times” its author wrote of seem to be manifesting themselves in what could just as easily be called the ‘Time of the signs’?
Charles, you rightly discharge the common “conspiracy theory” claim as lazy, and yet spent no time whatsoever refuting the claim you state is a myth with factual research of your own. Is there ‘no’ evidence of a plan toward a so-called “New World Order”? Even though many US Presidents and other leaders around the world have promised a literal “New World Order” of Global Government to be their own ultimate aim? Is there not an annual World Government Summit held in Dubai? This would have been worth dissecting as false if it could be shown that there is truly no ‘common breath’ approach to creating a world government!
Sadly, all you seem to have done is provide a reasonably good philosophical justification for not dealing with the claim itself. You took the middle road, safe, easily acceptable as it makes no claim on any of your readers, nice and….lazy.
Sorry Charles, I had actually thought this essay was going somewhere and saying something of value, but I truly feel I wasted my time on a good body of writing that said nothing. You did succeed however in fluffing my pillow.
It would definitely be worth my while if and when you might decide to take the time and pull apart what you claim is a ‘true myth’ (an oxymoron you at least got me scratching my head over). Please give to your readership some evidence of courage as you deal with that myth you began writing of with some effort.
I’m not being sarcastic in that request, I do believe you have a desire to know the truth of a matter, you don’t seem to come across as a writer too settled in your own opinions.
Take good care
Sincerely yours, Edi.
Jaguar Kukulcan says
Thanks for another balanced and thought-provoking sharing Charles 🙏
YES! Separation is emerging as both cause and result of the virus ‘misadventure’
One thing I DID want to comment on . . .
“Aha — Charles must be on the other side. Because he has created a false equivalency between peer-reviewed, evidence-based, respectable scientific knowledge on the one hand, and unhinged conspiracy theories on the other.”
It seems to me that in the case of CV19 it’s the so called ‘conspiracy theorists’ who have the peer-reviewed, evidence-based and respectable scientific knowledge . . . just saying . . .
Gillian Sanger says
Thank you thank you thank! I am truly grateful to have your words to sink my heart, mind, and spirit into.
Jaguar Kukulcan says
I just reread my earlier comment and geez I sound like such a smartarse
Sorry, please ignore the ‘just saying’
I guess maybe I’m a little frustrated
Conspiracy Theory or Conspiracy Fact this bullshit has gotta stop! Right!?
Kids in masks, social distancing in the playground, terrified of germs and each other, denied full breath, not fully seen and breeding bacteria all day behind their masks. And everything sanitized? Our greatest microbial swabbers out of the very job that keeps their immune systems healthy. How will they be able to be healthy without their naturally constant interaction with the microbiome (on each other and the world around them)! And what is it doing to their psyches, to be told they should be afraid of something that is ALL around, at all times. Afraid of each other. It’s a crime Charles! A crime against Humanity!
(please don’t post this! or my one before . . . )
Martin Wendelboe says
There is nothing much to say but BRAVO !
Thanks – Martin
Lawrie Abbott says
Thank you Charles for another cogent essay. I spent a fair bit of time a year or so ago trying to understand a flat eather’s perspective, and I think you have it right that it is a symptom on the lack of trust in our institutions. Trust, as you point out is lacking to such an extent that is hard to imagine what possible new story could be put forward by any one person that people would be prepared to embrace? A new story also needs corresponding new institutions to propgate it into the future, otherwise the new story fails immediately by the dominating nature of that old story of the rule of power. What value is there in any ones persons view over another? Does a flat earth believers views carry the same weight as any other? I’m still not convinced that the separation you talk about, isn’t just another symptom of a more fundamental problem.
Yannis Grigoriou says
Well put… Charles as always!! However, in think, power structures favor those that have the control and the means to exercise this power. For instance big pharma exert their power directly or indirectly, either by bribing politicians and researchers or by simply using the leverage of advertising on media. When there is a crisis, a war, inevitably there will be victims. Big social revolutions were not parties and opponents were not exchanging ideas or trying to see the point of view of their opponents. Surely, love and compansion heal, but when fundamental human rights are abolished in a matter of weeks when big pharma in front of our eyes is planning to expose the entire humankind into unknown vaccine territory, based on the fear they have created, it may be time to hold our ground by any means. I am Greek and I feel in my blood that freedom is more important than life itself.. in fact there can be no life without freedom. Human life is personal..freedom is the cocοon that nourishes life. We need to walk out of the darkroom with our heads up, proud of our humanity, celebrating our god inside, manifesting beauty and harmony
v. van haltern says
Wonderful essay- brings much to mind – the years at CDC – when I so admired the front line folks going into the field to study Ebola, HIV-AIDS, Malaria, Dengue, Lyme Disease and so on. Real heroes, great scientists and epidemiologists with great heart and commitment to truth and disease prevention. It was the politics and the drug companies that crippled their efforts – waiting until the numbers reached a place that would assure profit margins most desired – while humans died or suffered. I saw the shock, the upset of the Agent Orange numbers. The political appointees who head these gov’t organizations have guidelines to follow that are not necessarily the guidelines of the educated, the ones there to do the work they were trained to do. Every detail released to the general public must be reviewed by the “Public Affairs” people – aka the office of propaganda as to assure the power hungry of continued status, to assure the politics of the ungodly-dollar. I think of Su Tungpo of Mencius: “when educated people lose their manners and morals and the common people are not educated, then destroyers of society will arise and the country will soon perish.” We are in a position to act with high morals and to educate. Tracing and certain study needs to be done – it’s when good things are abused, misused for political or monetary that we all suffer. Conspiracy can arise in the heart of one being deciding against doing “the next right thing.”
Andrew Hewett says
I rarely enjoyed your article 🙂 and completely resonate with you viewpoints 🙂 – I have made a thread dealing with Hydroxychloroquine, yes 🙂 one must look at all sides to a story and perhaps my bias will show itself, but this is a work in progress 🙂 –
Constance W Foss says
Thank you, Charles, for your thoughtful essay. I appreciate your efforts. My only concern is that, unfortunately, those who would benefit most from reading this are not interested in reading big words and ideas that are “other.” Which, I suppose, verifies your observations. As I read, I was thinking about posting your essay on my Facebook page. But then I thought again: about the abysmal few who would bother to read it all the way to the end, and the many who would instantly take offense and start blasting me for daring to post something that defied their made-up-minds. As you may have said somewhere in the essay, the best thing for us to do is to “drive our own bus,” which I am trying to do. Your atlas of ideas helps.
Richard Russell says
I am a new fan, Charles, and absolutely love your balanced, intelligent engagement. I was intrigued by your idea of visiting the “enemy encampment” as a fact/opinion-finding (when/if feasible) tour rather than as an infiltrator intending to expose, challenge and repudiate. Of course, sometimes the best efforts to acknowledge someone else’s bias can tend to reinforce our own, and the well-intentioned foray can still be construed as a malevolent spy-like mission where the interloper faces a verbal firing squad, if not worse. Still, I like your dangling question that, risks notwithstanding, we need to to explore the relativity of experience and perspective and the multi-faceted nature of truth. A society in siege mentality – and its concomitant separation – is just as alienated spiritually, psychologically and functionally – as one on perpetual lockdown.
Caroline Metzler says
Charles, I deeply appreciate the well-thought-out perspectives you express here, and resonate with them. I have been accosted on many occasions by others’ certainty about a worldwide conspiracy and NWO, and grieve the paranoia and separation that this belief system expresses and engenders. And at the same time, I protest and mourn the lack of trustworthiness exhibited by so many in power (be they individuals or institutions).
I do question the labeling of conspiracy theories as a currently right wing phenomenon. I have commonly seen this manifestation among my primarily left wing peer group. That is an interesting phenomenon, don’t you think? The myth at this point seems to transcend the left/right polarity and appears to settle more along the lines of the powerful and wealthy vs. less powerful and under-resourced.
The need for humility and unbiased examination is indeed real, and would expose the complexity that is Life itself. The need to follow one’s own values and create a life that makes sense has always been the mandate. Now more than ever we must see ourselves as connected to everything, and evaluate our choices within that context.
What utter bilge. Goes all around the houses and says nothing of import.
Eisenstein’s attempts at helping create an inclusive world are noble and on display here, even when considering conspiracies. But the bottom line at this time is this: we are in a war — right here, right now. Trying to offer reflections for a more nuanced understanding of what might legitimately be considered a conspiracy or not seems to miss the point — that in a war one has to take a side. Like any war, this is not one which you can sit out or decline as pacifists, since the battelfield is our minds, hearts and souls, and the bullets are words and images, and the target is truth. And to win any war, one has to clearly establish who the enemy is.
Some maintain that when they look they merely find bias, rather than conspiracy, while ironically their own bias makes use of the same kind of reductive thinking (or non-thinking rather) that allows for the label of “conspiracy theory” to be applied against others in the first place.
It strikes me that there are plenty of relationships that can be seen reasonably enough which share approximate meaning: for example, one can move from bias (personal inclination) to mutual interest (agreement) and on to conspiracy (proactive dimensions of those interests) — without any loss of sense in arriving at the use of the word “conspiracy” as a shorthand term, when it serves to indicate the cooperation of certain actors rather than nefarious, sinister activities of some indeterminate global cabal. These actors are never indeterminate, but one has to be willing to look and take in as much as possible before one begins to see that the same names appear in certain contexts, as well as together. If one can define or recognize some of their interests, beginning with the superficial level — eventually the real interests and motivations become clear, and unfortunately for them, self-revealing.
Naturally, “mutual interest” doesn’t have the same character or ring as “conspiracy” — which more accurately reflects the fact that there are those whose mutual interests allow them to act on those interests — together with others, who attend Bilderberg meetings or the World Economic Forum at Davos — and that these are not in the interests of the people at large in the world. And because these interests are selfish, and often exploit, deceive, oppress, even injure the public, the term “conspiracy” is necesarily a pejorative term, that not only seeks to expose such actors but to properly judge and condemn them. And it is precisely that human cognitive performances such as judgement and condemnation that are required in a time of war, because winning that war includes and necessitates it. Understanding and forgiveness is desired by many too soon, even with war is already underway, and can only come in the aftermath, often bitterly: the understanding on the part of those who were wrong, alongside the forgiveness of those who were right.
To those with more sensibility rather than mere sensitivity, the above should suggest persuasively why those who stupidly insist on applying the label to anyone else of being a “conspiracy theorist,” especially at this time, should remind themselves that they might be called something worse: a moral coward. In wartime, there are those with dubious certainty, and then those with courage. In wartime, there is also the question of collaborationists, which usually act in assisting the goals of the enemy.
And so, the real dilemma is not determining what of conspiracy is real or not, since in a war such activity is already a given, including deception as part of strategy. The crisis for each of us consists of not knowing who the enemy is.
Joe AM says
Reminds me of Joseph Campbell: “Myths are other peoples’ religion.”
My conclusion: Your Obama admin either lied or had no access to the Deep State reality. You really think the Dems that are still locking down their States are doing it for the people? Your naivete is surprising and until you can unravel the history of the hidden governments, the NGO agendas, etc etc, I wish people would at this take your stance and investigate for themselves. If you go to the weforum.org site and look at strategies you might conclude something else. How about Bill Gates proclamation of killer vaccines as the only cure? I guess time will tell but if anyone still believes that their government is operating in their best interest really is not paying attention. If anyone wants to investigate for themselves they do have to overcome cognitive dissonance and an acceptance that there is real evil in the world.
Thank you Mr. Eisenstein for your contributions both to clear thinking and psychological health along the way. I suspect it will be a long time before your gifts to society and culture are fully appreciated: likely posthumously. Please forgive me for indulging in a little partisanship here in defense of this essay:
Response to Silvio Finley McIntosh:
Definition of Left-right:
A crude place to start in defining left-right would be an examination of self identifying prominent commentators and influencers. One could begin with politicians and cable news: what do Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, Lawrence O’donnel, Tucker Carlson, Stacy Abrams, Bernie Sanders, AOC, etc. think of lockdown protestors, vaccines and “conspiracy theories” and what language do they use in describing them? If you don’t watch cable news and are not plugged into any mainstream democratic or republican influencers than I respect you immensely but it would be worthwhile for you to gain some general context before criticizing the use of terminology here. It would be a valid concern that the loudest voices on the so called left are white people who may only position themselves as mouthpieces for natives and racial minorities. In fact there are leftwing people who question dominant narratives vigorously and one must have immense respect at the very least for their ability to evaluate matters independently of groupthink.
Importance of the personal opinion of the author:
The standpoint that the author out to embrace a personal bias, likely formed by their personal position in life, is antithetical to the act of political dialogue and openness, for any reason other than manipulation in favor of a hidden agenda: if the “pursuit of truth” is nothing more than an empty front for personal quirk or self interest than any rational white person would be a neo-nazi. Do you see the problem?
Obey the dominant authorities now and question them later:
This position is dismissive of the significant hardships that have been caused by lockdown measures, disproportionately affecting the poor and the middle class (thankfully not myself or my family who are government employees): it only makes sense to listen to the dominant authorities if you believe their narrative.
Sheila Lange says
Charles – I never have any doubt that whatever I read from you will be timely and useful. I appreciate that about you and always look forward to your essays. Thanks for applying your gifts to helping me to further develop my own thoughts and ideas. Your way of writing and expressing your thoughts always gives me permission to be uncomfortable in the moment and with the subject, knowing that if I listen, I will find a moment of clarity here and there. Ah, those lovely moments! But not to rest there, because they never last…..there is always more, and it’s ok not to know.
Good piece, but the part on right wing conspiracies is disappointing and missing some important history. Conspiracy claims by the right wing long predate even the existence of a real left. Claims of anarchists and communists behind every labor movement, Jews behind every newspaper, and foreign enemies of all kinds conspiring to destroy America came along in the 19th century, if not earlier.
The reason it’s crucial to see today’s narratives as primarily right wing is that they mainly target the most important and essential institutions of western liberal democracy: Science, the academy, journalism, representative government, NGOs, grassroots activists.
They are also, in fact, coming from avowedly right wing forces.
Ricardo Gonçalves says
Thank you for this insightful essay, particularly the call for humility and openness to inquire into both sides of the story. I take a lot from your words and I find them so relevant, specially when I am putting myself out there more in my own native language.
Love and blessings
Cyber Gypsy says
A good read as always, I like the way you guide people into looking at both sides, unplugging people from the term ‘conspiracy theorist’, but not am sure where we’re going with the myth of separation. Isn’t everything around us separating all of the time, bifurcating, our cells keep separating until we have a body then we have more separation until we have personality. There’s a wonderful book written over 200 years ago by Sidi al Jamal of Fez called the meaning of man that describes this…. what concerns me are the people who manipulate knowledge for their own hegemony, this is usually because they have a plan. A plan is like a map, if people have a plan they don’t need to conspire, the direction is kind of obvious.
The thing is that plans can be called predictions, if you say you have a prediction about what’s going to happen in the future, people can start to treat this like a map. Perhaps a little conspiring along the way, but not much of that would be needed really…
“Right-wingers” like Winston Churchill?
Thank you for Never “fluffing my pillow” (as one commenter said). You grapple with untying the ball of string that is “conspiracy”, “theory” and “polarization”. You are a true philosopher to posit and then unravel such multi layered questions. Indeed, this current phenomenon is the biggest yet, unprecedented in its scale and perceived consequences.
I hang on your words not to give me the answers but to help guide my questions deeper, with more energy and excitement than one could heretofore imagined possible in The Space Between Stories.
Peace and Love Always,
Amanda in Atlanta
Kelpie Wilson says
Funny you did not mention 9-11. That was a true conspiracy of the most evil kind and one that is much more off-limits to discussion than the Kennedy assassinations. There are truly evil conspiracies that are not myths. I wish I had an explanation for 9-11 and knew who was to blame.
Julian Crawford says
Wise words indeed, thank you: “Rather, it is that reality and belief construct each other, coevolving as a coherent whole. The intimate, mysterious connection between myth and reality means that belief is never actually a slave to fact.”
As an old saying goes; the truth is always somewhere in between… Be open, critical and assertive, and find what’s true for you. But then, what’s truth anyway?
Fuck yes 🙏🏼 Thank you
George McConnell says
Thank you – whilst recognising that this itself may be simply another case of confirmation bias (!) I was pleased to read a number of things that I have been writing/saying (albeit perhaps in a less eloquent way) over recent times. Specifically there were echoes of a blog post I wrote over a year ago in the context of Brexit, but describing a wider issue that you have pointed out here, that I entitled “Usandthemism”. As you say here, I was arguing that having this conflict over everything does not lead to any chance of ‘understanding’. Instead we align ourselves with one side or another and refuse to budge even in the face of the strongest evidence.
The other specific thing that I have been saying is regarding what you have described as humility – the willingness (and acceptability) of admitting that one is wrong. It is, without doubt, something that so many people now find almost impossible – I hope I never fall into that rut – yes, sometimes I will not realise I am wrong, but that is a different (and more understandable) problem to being unwilling to ever admit that you are wrong.
Camilla Fadum says
As always, after having read your texts, I am feeling grateful. For years your writing has ressonated wonderful to my being and thus been a great comfort. I think you are one of the most important voices in our time.
In your newsletter you share with us your struggle writing the article above and your doubt as to whether your message is to the point.. or something like that.. and thus inviting your readers to comment:
There might be one problem as I see it, and it would be that you come off a bit lik a fan of relativism.. I know that you of course are not a relativist, pero alas…
Perhaps it would be helpful if you talked more about what it is you mean, exactly, when you talk about «the orthodox paradigm» or «the old story». What does the old paradigm consist of? Is it possible to define it in a precise and short matter? Is it a system? Or a model?
I realize it is of course very difficult to do so, but I think perhaps the effort in it self is gold – especially if many people try – and might help elevate the dialoge on where we come from and where we want to go.
You gave it a good name. However, the the conspiracy myths have 5 actors:
1. The creator of the idea. This is person or small group that either by failed reasoning, but many other times with malicious intent, exaggerates some idea to an extent that provokes extreme feelings from other people. Enough to make the idea viral.
2. The second actor is the leader. Usually a politician, Hollywood personality, singer or cheap self-help book autor that buys the idea and repeats it.
3. The 3rd actor is the public that follows the idea blindly from the 2nd actor. This is when the idea explodes and becomes unstoppable. There’s nothing that anybody can do beyond this point to stop it. It is toothpaste out of the tube.
4. Actor #4 are the collective of stakeholders that are interested in suppressing the idea. It could be because it is true, and they are really bad. Or it could be because it is false, and the idea is or could hurt the public.
5. Actor #5 is the education system that created a distrust gap between those that are educated and those that aren’t. A system that teaches every topic like if a paint-by-numbers book was an art class – following orders from the teacher, instead of discovery in an experiential learning setting. Everyone can learn enough reasoning to separate unreasonable conspiracies like credible ones. But also, also, it is important to to know what is beyond our grasp too. Making conclusions that we aren’t qualified to do is not reasonable.
This article correctly blames one of those 5 actors. Obviously, all other to actors love it. But it is not correct to clear the others actors from their participation. #1 are #5 are the root cause and deserve the blame for it, together with #4. However, the imprudence of #2 is unacceptable. “With great power comes great responsibility.”
I finish with a link to an interview to an expert on conspiracy theories. It disagrees with your position that blames one side (left or right), as the generator of conspiracy theories. Hopefully you are open to see what he has to say.
Conveniently left out of an essay on conspiracy theories is the grandaddy of them all – the HumanScum of the demorat party from Obama on down through all the executive branches Hillary, Comey, Clapper, Lynch, Rice, Jarret, Schiff, Pelosi, Schumer and on and on……the conspiracy theory around their attempt to subvert the very foundation of this great nation that gives comfort to little guys like you who can sit hunched over a computer and write articles about conspiracy theories – that one however, was not only 100% a true conspiracy but much worse than anyone imagined. That makes your article nothing more than misdirection psy op to divert attention and discredit real conspiracies
Jason Guzak says
Thank you for admitting that we all know so little and answers are so far from black and white.
I have loved your work for quite awhile now and have been following your work on the COVID issue as well. While I think you make a strong and valid point (which you have made before) about the othering, the idea of the “evil doers”, the enemy and other terms that separate us, I am disappointed that you stayed so middle of the road on this issue. I think the world is in a crisis right now. We are being led down a road that could possibly eliminate 2/3rds of the population if some would have their way. I think the morality issue needs to be part of the discussion of “two sides of everything.” Is is morally okay to have someone in a non-elected leadership position deciding how many people should be on the planet? Is that still an acceptable side while it might seem reasonable from his perspective (Im talking Bill Gates here — for those who are offended by this suggestion please do your research). Is it morally responsible for governments to decide on this lockdown at the expense of thousands of lives of those who are starving, committing suicide or dying inside their houses out of fear of getting treatment — based on the numbers being manipulated to present as significantly higher deaths from COVID than the true cause of death. (again there is lots of evidence of this). I guess I hear and understand your intellectual argument for understanding where we are each coming from, however, do you take into consideration that some of these folks who are deciding things are psychopaths who don’t have a moral compass? I wish I could say your article got me thinking but instead it just made me frustrated that you did not stand up against this crazy and corrupt lockdown of the entire planet.
to shake hands with the enemy, we must first remove the wallet. Certainty is a purchase, certainty is the media circus that needs a sale, more than the truth, the truth only brings harm to the narrative selling of stories.
We all know the corporate structure is called a living entity with rights, that is written in law, it can not die, so what corporate entity could tell the truth?
The indigenous have said this from day one, we perpetuate the myth of a human corporation with human rights, although a human in me, also has empathy, and this has never been talked of in how an altruistic human, will survive by begging for another’s humans survival, not another corporation survival, from the love of another.
This is a structural deficit that has never been addressed by the colonial dominance to rule, and the laws to rule over others, to become of success, does this not just make us the little kings, or the ‘mini me’ of endless denials?
What I loved about your Coronation article is that you did ask many questions vs point to conclusions. I have been witnessing more polarization than ever before (and there was much before Covid- anti/pro Brexit, Trump, left/right, black/white). What I am saddened about is that conversations these days are not possible: I have witnessed so many people shutting others down unless they share same viewpoints. As one who has been asking many questions, believing that still much is unknown, I have been craving meaningful dialogue. PS I love this article as well, at the same time I hope you were not put too much on the defence- in the name of free speech.
I think you need to read the Bhagavad Gita…
this was a great ” philosphical read” but in my humble opinion Id like you to get off the high horse of detached witness with the PHd . there is fake and real. right and wrong.. are you going to tell a Holocaust denier.. ” well maybe there is some truth to what you say :” its the fault of govet and media you dont trust what you hear and read.. its your parents fault you are antisemtic
. you can try to psycoanalyze the minds of the conspiracy theorists for ever and say its all the fault of the lying media and goverment but there are still people out there with integrity and wisdom telling the truth. Hello Preet Bharara, Nancy Pelosi, Fareed Zacharia.. maybe its really just a dumbed down society with no abilty to discern, discriminate or question.
Thank you Charles for this erudite and cogent analysis of an increasingly contentious subject.
I have been tying to convey the ‘non-polarized perspective’ to many friends and colleagues who inevitably try to lable me as being on the ‘side’ opposite the narrative they accept.
This is a wonderful conversation starter that can hopefully lead to a more enlighened and egalitarian understanding of world events currently occupying the minds of many.
George Wallville says
In general this puts better words to my own experience than I’ve been able to conjure.
I find myself wanting to say something that when I see others say it kind of makes me cringe. But here it goes: I think you have taken one step towards seeing the actual truth of things, but you aren’t there yet. In the simplest possible terms, I think you still overlook how inevitable this all is from human nature and attribute this instead to zeitgeist, and also don’t give enough credit to how thoroughly “hijacked” many sources of information (particularly scientific) have become – the growing lack of trust is for better reasons than what you indicated.
Elyse Pomeranz says
The trees understand , as you do, globally, compassionately and both aware of harm and no interest in polarizing. I do a research with mature and ancient trees. I listen and the trees “co”mission or I co-create a drawing using my hands and the inner life of both myself and the tree in conversation. I know. Crazy. Ha ha. I was researching based on my observation of trees dying in most urban settings. Trees indicate that the signals we believe are harmless are like continuous penetration without permission, a kind of constant high pitched scream. And , they convey that human beings need to experience true connectedness in order to be able to understand why we wouldn’t create 5G ( or continue with 4G for that matter). I know. I’m a wingnut. ( There is a wonderful Caucasian Wingnut tree in the Brooklyn Botanical Garden!!!)…..Anyway. Thank you from the trees! And from me.
Hi Charles. Sigh….I really appreciate what some of the community has written here as a response to your essay. I really enjoyed reading your essay, “The Coronation”, in April. However, this essay and also, some of the interviews you have given lately, especially the one this past week with the SANDS community and the one with rebel wisdom, has left me feeling confused about what your values are Charles.
I’m not sure you are fully aware of your healthy white body advantage in the way you speak about folx who are aged and bodies of culture (aka bodies of color) and the devastating affects Covid is having within these communities as a result of white supremacy and structural racism in this country and around the world. It seems you skim over these issues through lumping aged bodies into the faction of the expendable and bodies of culture into certain factions of the binary political system, as well as stating (in your interviews), that looking at these very real issues is not going to change at the individual level, but can only change at the collective level. But then in this essay, you are calling for us to look deeply within to shift our separateness conditioning. I’m finding this to be extremely confusing and absolutely paradoxical.
In my deep and often devastating work of discovering my white body supremacy within a mixed cultured body (I am Mexican, Irish, and Italian) within the spheres of social activism and restorative justice, I have found that the individual work is not separate from the collective healing. They are intertwined. Its like what Dr. Siegal and Dr. Sara King teach about science and mindfulness, or the science of social activism, creating a movement called Mwe= Me+We. I invite you to visit his talk with the incredible Dr. Sara King through the SANDS conference. If one is serious about social justice and all of its implications on all bodies of culture, as I’m hoping you are, it is my inclination that one cannot straddle both ‘sides’ of white body supremacy and restorative justice. If one isn’t actively aware of and transmuting their own internalized white body supremacy, then one is complicit in the perpetuating of white body supremacy and thus the structural racism. I’ll just leave it there.
Although I’m in agreement with the concept of looking to myth as a way of conceptualizing these times (as an avid student of Michael Meade’s) the way you have presented it here, seems a bit distorted in how you speak about myth to talk about the onslaught of conspiracy theories that has ravaged our communities. Myths are traditional stories that help human beings make sense of their world through imagination, which is nonlinear and nondual. Conspiracy theories are not myths. They are actually antithetical to the mythic way of understanding because they are a product of a lack of imagination and nonduality, which leads to fantasy and delusion. Although you may say for yourself that conspiracies are ‘myths’ (which again I don’t agree with the use of this word as such), but for certain the faction of folx espousing conspiracy theories certainly believe them to to be absolutely real. They are not looking at them as ‘possibilities’. I can understand your desire to straddle the “two sides”, I’m assuming, to make the point that one side isn’t more right or wrong than the other and/or to point out separation and othering as the core issue of our faltering confirmation bias. Again, I’m assuming because I actually have no idea what your values are due to your vagueness.
However, it is so very important that during these uncertain times, that we hold all possibilities along the spectrum and continuum of who we are as human beings. Not from an intellectual, bypass sort of way, which is what I’m sensing from this essay and your latest interviews, but from a deeply felt sense of soma, spirit, and critical rational thought. If you do not know what is happening in these times, then please simply state that instead of entertaining the “truth” of the “left” or “right” last gasps of holding onto some kind of narrative that is outside of the innate internal intelligence and knowing as human beings, not just in modern times, but of all times.
In my opinion, this is the place of deep knowing, the liminal space of not knowing: where myth, in its truest form, can serve us to recognize we are in a rites of passage experience that is unknowable and completely disorienting but needed for us to grow into initiated human beings to further a thriving life paradigm; where the indigenous paradigm can support us to understand more deeply our interconnectedness to Nature by holding Her and all Her forms as sovereign beings who have consent, putting all life at the center of every decision we make, that which we have completely ignored and dismissed to serve the power over paradigm which has led to countless amounts of degradation to the Earth and all bodies of culture; where science and quantum systems have taught us about our neuropsychology and neurobiology in response to trauma and the unknowable within the context of our modern culture and the multiplicities of crises we are now facing and how a variety of mindfulness practices and modalities can transmute this trauma within our own somas which then liberates everyone else, seen and unseen.
Conspiracy theories are without the deep teachings of mythic rites of passage, of indigenous paradigm, of science and quantum systems, and critical thought processes because they are still mired in the sickness of othering and do not take into account the totality of human experience, human culture, and traditional cultural cosmology.
What I see reflected in this essay and in your latest interviews is your confusion and lack of your own imagination, of your own innate story of who you are and what your values are. I’m not hearing your voice Charles.
What I’m curious about and would like to invite to you, is to take a pause from gathering information from the outside, and go inside. I invite you to allow all that you have learned and considered and wondered about over these last months in particular, and over the course of your lived experience in general, to integrate within you without any other voices influencing you. I invite you to see what emerges for you. I invite you to willingly enter inside of this liminal space of the true mythic landscape, of the ordeal of rites of passage, and discover your gift that awaits you there. I invite you to bring that gift back to us through your excellent capacity for the written word and tell us what you found. We will be here awaiting your return with reverence.
Ian Sanders says
You commented at the beginning that conspiracy theory is not falsifiable, and that is the defining character of a conspiracy theory. Any evidence contradicting them can be dismissed by making the conspiracy bigger: forensic evidence from the Dallas police contradicts your theory about the shooting of JFK? Then the Dallas police (all of them) must have been in on it. Problem solved. Another is that they breach Occam’s razor, they are unnecessarily complicated explanations for events which can be explained more simply. Real conspiracies have happened and we know about them because evidence has come to light, people talk, officials leak informaton, politicians stab each other in the back. We aren’t speculating or joining the dots about Watergate or Iran Contra, the evidence is there, and no one was speculating about these things before the evidence was there. Conspiracy theory is usually what you have when you don’t have evidence. You’ve got it backwards about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The weapons inspectors, the people whose job was to find evidence of WMDs, repeatedly said they had no evidence of WMDs, and certain politicians idly speculated that they must be there, even though there was no evidence. The theory that Iraq HAD WMDs was the conspiracy theory. Brian Dodge (comments above) makes a similar point about the gulf of Tonkin. You see conspiracies as myths, like the Greek Gods, but unfortunately many people take them far too literally and they become distractions from real issues. 5G conspiracies distract from real issues of online privacy, accountability of telecommunications firms etc.; belief in free energy draws people away from renewable energy (why install a solar water heater or insulate your loft if the energy crisis is just a myth to enslave us?), concern for the Palestinian people gets muddled up with anti-semitism and so on.
Just for the record I have been involved in various forms of environmental and peace activism, been under surveillance, and knew full well that it was going on. How? By using logic and reason. If the police know in advance about your secretly planned protest action, then they have either listened to your phone, bugged your home, or infiltrated your group. We narrowed it down by process of elimination to the latter, and before too long the identity of the snitch became clear . In many cases the police actually told us that we were being watched and showed us the surveillance records as an act of intimidation. The important thing is not to slide into paranoia.
Too many points to cover but here’s a few: The Judy Mikovitz case can be resolved very simply by a successful repeat of her experiment. That’s the standard of science. Which is a simpler explanation: All the scientists of the world are collaborating in a vast lie or one scientist made an error (or fabricated her data)? Either we are all infected with XMRV from vaccines, or we aren’t, it’s a testable hypothesis. I’m told that the answer to that question is somewhere in a 20 hour audio book, I don’t have a smartphone, so I’d rather spend those 20 hours in the garden, which brings me to another point: If you think you have something I need to know, please FFS WRITE IT DOWN, citing your sources (unless it’s how to mend shoes or something needing a visual demonstration), that way I will most likely be able to skim read the important stuff that I haven’t heard before in about 10 minutes and if it is genuinely interesting or informative, fact check it and look for related information. I refuse point blank to sit and listen to another youtube video consisting of nothing more than people talking (and I want the 2 hours I spent listening to that f*cking youtube geoengineering video back). Information presented this way is almost impossible to fact check, but conspiracy theorists seem to love getting their “research” this way. Do their brains work differently? Are they only semi literate? Do they lack social contact and find listening to human voices soothing? It’s a horrible rhetorical trick that seems to make some people believe total bullshit.
Ron Tocknell: great points, yes, in many cases political systems encourage corruption. This should not be confused with conspiracy theory. The term “conspiracy theory” was , however, coined by the great philosopher Karl Popper. He was not opposed to radical politics, he had been a Marxist in his youth, but eventually concluded that Marxist social theory was unfalsifiable and therefore irrational. Conspiracy thinking he rejected for the same reason.
Oscar: blunt and to the point!
It seems to me that our current situation owes a lot to the internet, and how we are failing to use it right. In a similar way the invention of the printing press brought us Newton’s Principia, but two of the most popular and influential printed books were the Bible, leading to an explosion of bickering religious cults and Malleus Malleficarum, leading to the Witch hunts. We have access to all the information in the world at our fingertips and we are drowning in bullshit. I don’t think censorship is the answer. Facebook’s belated attempts to curb fake news are seemingly well intentioned, but top down authoritarian and a bit hit and miss. Wikipedia, run on anarchist principles, looks like a shining beacon of light compared to most other information sources out there.
Charles, I LOVE your work so far. I have read your book “A more beautiful world”, attended several of your courses online, and read many of your recent articles. I am so happy that there is a source like you to give me the perspective I need — or that I, myself, see and can’t always express so well. AND, that being said, if I may say so… I would love it if you could simplify your — at times — a bit “too academic” wording for us “less eloquent” speakers (non native, or less educated in those fields of economy, politics, philosophy and spirituality.) Hope you take this request to heart. Thanks! Anne
Sergio Caredda says
Thanks a lot for this.
Was really needed.
Paula Carnell says
I came across this article, shared by a friend, and following hearing your name mentioned several times over the past few weeks. What a delightful and inspiring read. As is also mentioned above, you have described clearly feelings that I myself have, society encouraging us to take a stance on ‘one side’ or ‘the other’. I too have spoken about new ways of managing and keeping bees, which several years ago created much upset and anger. Yet now many of my ideas and that of more ‘thoughtful’ new thinkers are now being accepted, and validated by respectful scientists in the bee field. I too have respected experienced beekeepers speaking to me in private after a talk, saying that my words ring true and that they have been practicing my recommended methods for many years, but in secret for fear of the collective criticism of their peers. I have spend many years researching my beliefs on health, nutrition and beekeeping to provide me with the confidence to stand up in public to express my beliefs, yet still, some close to me think that I am completely ‘wrong’. It hurts that they will chose who to trust without doing independent research, which comes back to your point about separation. We each need to find who we can trust as we have lost connection with our inner guidance and inner truth. When something ‘feels’ wrong, we are taught to justify why it could possibly be that way. Ignoring that we each have our own truth and paths we need to follow. Accepting that we will all die, and be recycled into the connectivity of all things would be a start. I shall delight in sharing your wise words to in some way explain my own beliefs and justification in walking a sometimes solitary path.
Please watch this, as it directly references the redemption of the Self / Other problem (The Grand Miracle):
Paul Jenkins says
Thank you for this insightful and balanced essay. It is a brave act to express your thoughts in words, because words can never fully encompass the reality and so will always be “wrong” from certain perspectives. It is often just at these points that are “wrong” that are the most interesting, because it is just here that other perspectives can inform and widen the view that you have already come to.
You talk about the story of separation and it is out of this separation that the need to “live in unknowing” arises, but we cannot afford to stay in unknowing otherwise we cannot heal the separation and realise it’s evolutionary purpose. To do this we need to develop our capacities for knowledge, love and freedom. These can then build a bridge back to the world and others that we have separated from. As we develop these capacities we can also consciously work to help others to develop them for themselves. On the other hand it is possible to consciously work to keep others ignorant, afraid, hateful and compliant and in fact in order to develop the capacities of knowledge, love and freedom we need the resistance provided by the workings of these counter forces, just as we need the resistance of the stairs to enable our legs to propel us up to the next floor. We all have the potential for both the progressive and the retrograde capacities and therefore if we are intent on moving forward, to a more beautiful world, we need to learn to know, love and freely engage with our enemy both in ourselves and in others.
Knowledge, love and freedom are pretty noble things to strive for, but in their full reality also very scary. So we all have a tendency to work against their development, but we do not like to admit it, often even to ourselves. Therefore we usually try to hide the fact that we are working against the development of these capacities and also if we are trying to manipulate others it is often easier if they do not know that we are trying to do it. It is therefore not surprising that there is a lot of underhand work going on to undermine the development of these capacities and when we work with others in organisations this underhand work necessarily becomes conspiracy. In every organisation that I have worked in or been associated with these conspiracy have worked out in all sorts of ways. Given that these conspiracies are part of our everyday lives it would be very surprising if they were not also working on the national, international and multinational stages.
As soon as we try to develop our capacities for knowledge, love and freedom or to promote their development in others we are necessarily working against these conspiracies, even the ones that we are involved in. In doing so we make ourselves an enemy of the conspirators, but if we fight them we are also working against the attributes that we are trying to promote which is why we need to learn to know, love and freely engage with our enemies.
Thank you again and please keep up all your good work. It is really important for our times that we have your clear, eloquent, balanced and insightful voice sounding in the world.
Best wishes, Paul
Joanna Freer says
Thank you, Charles, for sharing your well balanced ideas with us. Such an article helps redress the balance in a world that is becoming very separated, where fear and lack of thought are growing. It helps me to hear your views when trying to show people that humanity has so much more potential, that community and trust between individuals has such a healing power, that life is not to be controlled but to be allowed to flow. Growing up in the hippy era, I hold on to dreams of collaboration, working together with Nature and each other, in a spirit of trust and respect – polarization and separation being counter to that dream.
Thank you for your thoughts.
Society is the result of a conspiracy in which everyone is complicit. We have all agreed to lie to ourselves, and to one another in order to collectively reinforce these lies. In the same way that a man will value his identity even above his own life, society will value its lies even above its own continued existence.
So lovely to trip upon this essay. I have long questioned authority and like that Charles refuses to be crowned by an essay called Coronation.
It brings me warm feelings of a long time mentor, John Heron, who NEVER said he KNEW anything, he was merely proposing to any inquirer to inquire within a community and learn their own “answers.”
This dear man is now in his 90s in NZ and I noticed recently that he reposted an old paper I believe called “The Transference of Power” in which he was arguing against licensing of therapists and making them experts (and in my view convincing people they are “sick.”) That paper and Charles not taking a firm stand, also brings to mind The Black Butterfly, by Richard Moss, a therapist, in which he proposes that what “heals” is friendship. World-famous trauma specialist Bessel von der Kolk, does yoga and creates friendships with clients and has apologized in his bestseller, The Body Keeps Score, for all the years he medicated people as an “expert” with “answers.”
One of my core questions at some level may be how do we know what we know and I have proposed knowing occurs first in our own body and in relationship with others. There is a very beautiful Lew Welch poem that feels similar:
[First You Must Love Your Body, In Games,]
First, you must love your body, in games,
in wild places, in bodies of others
Then you must enter the world of men and
learn all worldly ways. You must sicken.
Then you must return to your mother and
notice how quiet the house is
Then return to the world that is
that you may finally walk in the
world of Man, speaking.
I feel our lack of ability to “know what and how we know”, to be discerning, perhaps intentional, based on patriarchal or capitalist creation of “experts” as the ONLY way we can really know anything, to be sad and just about heartbreaking. NO Native people would raise a child like this to defer to another without great reason.
I love Charles’ work and he has given me lots to consider and bump up against and I delightfully appreciate that he offers no easy “answers” even as he will name his own preferences and understanding.
While Corona has been in many ways, in my eyes/heart, a blessing that seems to be a deep opportunity to NOT return to normal, to know a deeper connection, that so many have to grab on to theories of panic and fear and war, saddens and upsets me (I have had some run-ins with deniers and have had friends attacked who I have defended, natural grocery workers as those are my about the only places I go. What they put up with is shocking). I do find our government literally obscene.
I do not spend time often these days engaging in much of this. Indeed I have found great solace in ignoring much altho I do slip, I have to shut down much of my paying attention to all the information being created.
How would it serve me in this NOW? A Carnival of Carnivores comes to mind at this moment. Gaslighting runs amok.
I for one, while living humbly on an edge, am enjoying this time alone and with friends and neighbors, and quarantine which I feel expresses my respect for the health of my community based now on the 93K deaths the NY Times announced, in memoriam just yesterday. A time of grief and possibility in my view.
I have long felt after working with Joanna Macy in the mid 90s that we might all be hospice workers to each other and as David Abrams suggested to me, to speak words as if an endless prayer. May all be well.
Care to elaborate on the following proclamation:
“conspiracy theory is a misnomer for something that could be better characterized as mental masturbation.”
Kate Kinoshita says
Sometimes your writing is the only thing that helps me feel safe. Thank you for your abundant sanity.
Jan van Eijck says
This piece baffles me. I
don’t understand how shifting to the mythical can save the obvious
conspiracy nonsense. I suspect Eisenstein is making this move to avoid
at all cost to pass judgment on what the conspiracists believe. And
this I find strange. It is madness to balance the truth with a
lie. And tilting the balance by calling the lie a myth does not remedy
this. It is like saying that the Genesis story in the Bible is a myth,
but at the same time refusing to accept the story of the Big Bang as
truth, on the grounds that they are both just stories.
Susan Pitcairn says
An open mind is surely a key to healing the divides this crisis has engendered. Equally so, an open heart. Like others, I have been somewhat surprised by how many “progressives” who probably consider themselves openminded are so quick to dismiss those who dare to question the mainstream media narrative. It is surprising to me how many do NOT see red flags in the scientifically unprecedented and authoritarian quarantine of the healthy, the immense damage to civil liberties and people’s livelihoods and savings, the widespread irrational rituals of social distancing, the unquestioning belief in vaccinations over strengthening natural immunity and recognizing natural cycles of infectious disease, the failure to recognize the many ways that authorities are creating fertile grounds for tyranny. These are things we SHOULD question, especially as they threaten democracy. And that means we may need to take a stand or engage in civil disobedience.
I think that tribal identity is blinding many on the “left” who understandably dislike Trump’s gruff style and policies. Disdain for Trump causes people to automatically reject anything he says, including valid statements we all should consider, such as “the cure is worse than the disease,” comparisons to seasonal flu, evidence supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine and the urgent need to reopen society. Likewise, hatred of Trump causes too many people to automatically side with his foils (Cuomo, Fauci, Gates, MSNBC, Democratic governors going overboard on lockdowns, etc.), without an examination of THEIR agendas.
The dismissive term “Conspiracy theory” is a label that stops people from digging deeper and realizing how corrupt mainstream journalism has become, particularly in matters concerning major ad buyers and funders: Big Pharma and Bill Gates, who essentially own all the major reporting on global health. While Charles’ advocacy of an open mind is spot on, there can also come a time for courageous action. We can’t know all the facts, but we can all readily uncover much more than the official narrative, consider vested interests and realize our own values. Then, at some point a caring heart and an open mind may call us to take a stand for the things that truly matter: liberty, freedom of speech and human rights. Taking a stand may include educating others, protesting, refusing vaccines or microchipped ID, civil disobedience and calling for full investigation of the agendas driving the extreme responses taken to an outbreak that is still far less than the 1968 Hong Kong Flu that killed up to 4 million at the time (equivalent to 7-8 million today). Taking a stand is not always easy, for sure. Not only does it take courage, but it takes an ongoing openness of heart and mind that, alone, is capable of unifying us all in our common core values and in creating the more beautiful world we all wish to see.
Andria E says
Yes, we need to be willing, open and honest, brave enough to think these profound life and death issues through. I think your critique guy is not a Baddun, but I often need to know what to DO? There are great minds discussing so much..Yes! I do think yours is one of them but I suppose having to think everything through so profoundly takes time away from working out how to reduce the suffering of those who choose a Vaccine say, or get ill with CV – WHATEVER! Painting cycle lanes in London 😁
Moreover, there are many great academics and philosophers. It’s a very human thing to want to follow one or two. Why were you amused by the critique you refer to at the beginning of this fab piece? Call what many of us do war-thinking..possibly is but I do think most of us are just searching for answers because in the end, most of us want to BELONG somewhere to someone’s. … It sure is looking like we are diving into civil war though, so really appreciate your attempt to just get us thinking instead of fighting.
Why am I crying?! (Rhetorical question… obviously!!). I need to know WHO/what to believe in while chaos reigns.. anyways love love solidarity.
First time reader. Found myself here through the musings of an old friend on instagram.
First of all, where is the link to the critique? Oh, it’s here:
Considering how much energy Charles puts into advertising his humility in The Coronation, you’d think he could at least offer us a link to the critique… (maybe I’m missing something here, but I didn’t see it anywhere. I had to google.) But instead of letting us decide for ourselves, he writes it off as an ‘amusing’ takedown that paints him as a ‘closet conspiracy theorist.’ As it turns out, it’s actually an incredibly thorough and intellectually honest look at all of the ways in which Charles manipulates emotions and oversimplifies complex problems. And, it’s written by someone in the field of holistic medicine, a qualification I imagine will bolster many readers trust.
Anyways, read the rebuttal to The Coronation and decide for yourself. While I may resonate with some of Charles bigger ideas, I’m weary of his way with words, particularly now.
Such a beautiful treatise. Your brightness makes my eyes water with joy. Thank you.
Nyck Jeanes says
Absolutely brilliant Charles. I agree with every word, and so many words that deepened my own ideas. Love to have you back on radio in Byron Bay. On the phone. I will be in touch. thank you Nyck Jeanes Bay FM
Wow! so many comments.
1st time I have read one of your essays/articles and I am impressed. Thank.
Regarding “Separates”, I remember I had read a novel that had to do with “Separates”, but I had read it in my mother lang which is Greek and were called “ksehora”, greek word from “ksehorizw”, meaning “I separate”. This term really had impressed me and from this point on, I noticed how people were more and more were becoming “Separates”.
Anyway, great article, I ll start being a loyal reader 🙂
It feels like the further we collectively squeeze down the tunnel of time, the more transparent and obvious the underpinnings of our social and cultural systems become.
I’ve learned to place a great deal of value on the embrace of unknowing. Why do we have to know everything all the time? It doesn’t always help.
So what can we do?
Be present. Stay connected. Move & speak thoughtfully. And pay attention. Like a wild animal, we must begin to reawaken our instincts.
This next decade is going to be interesting. That’s all I truly know for sure.
Great questions Charles. As always.
Chris Hart says
Thanks Charles, nice to read
The question I guess I am still with after this your explanation is that you seem to beleive in an invisible hand, that there is not some super powerful force dictating our economy and affairs but that we do we what we do to avoid being in the out group. I can understand that but there is no invisible hand, the rules are absolutely enforced and written. I remember a film I watched about an MP from either Australia or New Zealand in the 70’s I think who simply couldn’t understand the basis on why economic decision were made the way they were when it seemed insane. She kept asking simple question that were never answered. She actually resigned and brought down the government as it only has a majority of one. She spent the next 4 years finding the source of the rules she kept getting quoted back to her. She went to New York to the office of the Bretton Woods insitution and spent three years reading all the rules. They were laid out so throughly and were so appalling and yet every government was enforced by military power to implement them. I wish I could find the film to post. It is facinating. This powers are not equal that is point. It is not a zero sum zen koan to sit with, it needs naming and acting. For anyone that hasn’t seen the Spiders Web, this a fact based and well researched film on economic power. One could try to discredit it but that would be to do a big diservice https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+spiders+web+you+tube&docid=607988784122825537&mid=57EA43C6EB53FEEB6B7957EA43C6EB53FEEB6B79&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
Prince Isaac Ofori says
This is an interesting take which succinctly explain the mess the globe is in. Open mindedness is key to we liberating ourselves from facade created by our adherence to global norms. Most of these alleged “conspiracy theories” have iotas of truth in them. If one takes a back seat and look at what is happening now in relation to the global pandemic, it is clear and obvious how a very small group of people are gaining, be it power, control and money through the chaos that has been created, with the inducing of fear in order to ensure adherence. The WHO moving quickly to declare a pandemic, pharma companies with the world on standby as we wait on them “messianically” for a vaccine so we can return to normalcy and government fiercely controlling and monitoring movements of it citizens. All these actions begat lots of questions and doubts instead of answers as we cringe in our fears to protect our lives. Time to ACT seems to be now.
Ross W says
I saw this article on Facebook. I enjoyed it, but it still bugged me- after a few days I wrote the following reply-
This has been bugging me, and thinking about it, I now can articulate that I largely disagree with this guy. The article basically leads up to him rhetorically asking himself if he believes in various conspiracy theories, and then concluding that it shouldn’t matter whether hr does or doesn’t. But it DOES matter. It matters if people get their kids vaccinated. It matters if people seek medical help that actually works, particularly when they are making that decision for another. It matters that people don’t get control os school boards and get myths like creationism taught as science. It matters the world never again votes in somone like Trump.
Ross Whittle Yes, it’s fine to have the conversation- but eventually there needs to be a conclusion. And many conclusions aren’t matters of opinion, they are cold hard fact. He raises an interesting point that we have eroded trust in those able to inform us of those facts, and there are a lot of nefarious reasons why that is so- but that’s why critical thinking is so important- being able to look at data and sort out what’s real and what’s not, and challenging baseless ideas is not futile, it’s necessary- more so now than ever.
Look at Trump baselessly making accusations of murder and voter fraud- myths that will perpetuate through his support network and translate to real votes in a real election. Countering BS like that isn’t small minded tribalism- it’s treasuring reality over delusion.
ahlam st says
Thank you for another wonderful post. Where else could anybody get that type of information in such an ideal way of writing.
Just so you know Charles, I love you dude. Amazing essay that I will doubtlessly share with others.
John N. says
Thanks for the article. In addition to the other sources mentioned that question “the narrative”, I would also strongly suggest the work of MIT Ph.D. Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, on a range of topics.
Your insightful wisdom is so helpful. Shared. Thank you.
Benjamin David Steele says
“Given this history, why all of a sudden is it the Left urging everyone to trust “the Man” — to trust the pronouncements of the pharmaceutical companies and pharma-funded organizations like the CDC and WHO? Why is skepticism towards these institutions labeled “right wing”?”
I would agree with one other commenter that right-wingers have been obsessed with conspiracy theories for a very long time. It arose at least with the reactionary thought during or after the revolutionary era. It then really took off during the 1800s and heading into the next century, such as with the fascists.
As for leftists, plenty of them continue to be focused on the problems with those who conspire. If most of us don’t know about them, it’s simply because they are being silenced with mainstream media and public debate. Left-wing “conspiracy theorists” are dangerous to those who conspire.
Warren Scott Fentress says
Great points made, and I see you are enjoying the view from the fence. I’ve been there, too. But consider these facts missing from your ‘diatribe’:
1: Conspiracies are real, and they exist. Operation Mockingbird by the press – CIA infiltration and pushing agendas, obvious by the way Leftist/ anti-Trump ideologies are being promulgated by the press. Also, watch “The Dead Zone” episode “Plague” from 2003. As Bill Cooper describes in his brilliant “Behold a Pale Horse”, the Satanic Syndicate (NWO/Illuminaughty/Bilderberger/Deep State) – a perverse group of elite billionaires and bankers who DO embrace Luciferian rituals and pedophilia – do meet and conspire to control world events, using predictive programming as a part of their ritual. Clearly, the alignment of this television program with the Covid reality is beyond coincidence. Then, there is the Rockefeller and Rothschild financing of both sides of the World Wars. These conspiracies aren’t myth – they are fact; reality; truth. Can I prove it? Impossible, given the lack of credible resources. But my intuition guides me, and I see them as real.
2. Yes, it is often simple Greed and Megalomania at work, and this mental illness IS spreading, as wealth continues to concentrate at the upper levels, making these egotists more powerful, more perverted, and more dangerous. And society embraces this mental illness as a desired trait that should become each person’s life goal. The Satanic Syndicate uses this human shortcoming to its advantage, knowing that for the past 1000 years, divide & conquer has worked as a tactic towards chaos, and that chaos has kept these elite families rich and powerful for generations. Again, not myth; history.
I hope you will apply your intellectual blade to your confirmation bias, and look further. Look at David Icke’s work. Sure, some is beyond belief (Reptilian Aliens hiding under royal blood lines). But his research on the Illuminaughty (as I like to call them, but prefer “Satanic Syndicate”) is outstanding. I can’t be sure if he’s correct, but much of what he presents is. It’s actually apparent if you use common sense and a bit of deduction. And we’d best get a handle on it, before it causes Rome to burn once again.
C.A. Christian says
As someone who has experienced being off the model called planet Earth for an indeterminate time via a death and re-entry into the same body, I will state that there are many things that are knowable even if not explainable; gravity, for one. To discover more I would recommend becoming an avid student of languaging, both your own and others. Perhaps think less in terms of sides and polarities and more in terms of continuums and spirals which both reflect more accuracy and gives one more leverage in discernment. As I wrote recently – “The human eye can distinguish between millions of colours, shades and tones. Why do we limit our discussions of how we “look” at situations to only black, white or shades of grey? Unschool yourself.”
kamir bouchareb st says
thanks for the last information
John Schmeeckle says
One could say that conspiracy theories are intelligence assessments for dummies. It would seem that the intelligence analyst performs an intellectual exercise very similar to that of the trained historian, only focused on the present, rather than the past. Years ago, I trapped a senior reporter for the Los Angeles Times into admitting that, in a front-page story on the ozone hole, he passed on a government lie EVEN THOUGH HE KNEW THE TRUTH. Davison Budhoo’s 1988 resignation letter from the International Monetary Fund confessed to crimes against humanity in “our own peculiar Holocaust.” His letter, an international sensation, was blacked out of the news media in the USA. More recently, a telltale pattern of discrepancies from the exit polls provides strong evidence that the status of Democratic front-runner was stolen from Bernie Sanders through computerized vote fraud. I, for one, have no trouble with the assessment that covid-19 was manufactured, and not by China.
Roberta Werdinger says
Charles, you present convincing arguments and make brilliant, nay, scintillating statements. And, your moral compass is utterly broken. That’s a bad combo, dude. A really bad combo.
Before I go further, I am urging everyone to read Devon’s comments above, and Victoria’s (great job Victoria!) Also Ian Sanders and Jan van Eijck. I hope and pray there are more, as people are able to reason out of the dangerous morass our author is leading us into. Here is another link (the same as Devon’s) to a good beginning of a critique of The Coronation, which Carolyn Baker reposted on her site.
Notice that the essay posted here gets through a long disquisition on conspiracy theories without mentioning anti-Semitism. The two go together, and have for centuries. Jews were blamed for poisoning the wells during the disastrous Black Plague in medieval Europe and chased into synagogues, which were set ablaze while they were burned alive. When times are hard and circumstances develop which are puzzling and stressful–because there is a lot we don’t know about the virus, no doubt–it is almost a given that Jews will be blamed for pulling the strings behind the scene. It’s been happening for centuries.
Fast forward to the 21st century, where conspiracy theories thrive on the Internet. Merging real and imagined life, mass shooters film their murders, as the shooter in the New Zealand mosque did. (Muslims are Semites too by the way, and often targets.) Their Facebook feeds are later found to proliferate with all sorts of these theories. Communities are formed around them, normalizing the fabrications. We must face the fact that conspiracy theories kill people. Don’t let anybody play mind-games with you around that basic fact.
Chinese people, or anyone who appears Chinese, are also blamed for the virus and have been attacked on the streets. These awful facts are ignored in this essay, creating a moral quicksand where the threats that minority groups face can be conveniently ignored. Also ignored here and in The Coronation is any mention of how black and brown people are more likely to contract the virus and are dying of it in larger numbers. I am all for discussing the finer moral shadings of an issue, but to do so when lives are at stake is to violate the social contract that holds us together as human beings who are able to care for each other. Read about these issues here. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/american-nightmare/612457/
Our country is blowing up because a black man was killed–I would say, executed–by a white policeman while three other police officers stood by. We cannot create the more beautiful world we want if we don’t walk through the darkness of our past, of a country founded on slavery, of white supremacy perpetuated in Jim Crow institutions. The myth of African people’s inferiority was perpetuated through a barrage of fake news, through bogus science that put white people at the top of the evolutionary ladder and blacks at the bottom. Tell me–if you put that hateful theory in a link along with others of its kind, and then asked, “How do you know what you believe is true?”–isn’t that a form of brainwashing? Don’t believe me–ask your heart. And then realize that something similar was done in The Coronation, when Charles posted a link to David Icke, who posits theories which demonize and dehumanize Jews.
Finally, I would like to state what I believe is true. I believe–I know, with every cell of my body–that life is sacred. All forms of life. And all people. I don’t believe that some ethnic groups are really pulling the strings, or that some of them are inhuman. I don’t see a way to transform this mess we’re in without honoring all peoples equally. If I see someone who is involved in making me believe otherwise; thinks his own needs or that of his child is more important than that of his nonwhite neighbor; or employs rhetorical techniques to blow dust in the reader’s eyes… I see someone who has lost his way.
Jack B. Quick says
Thank you Charles for such an erudite and strongly reasoned perspective on these complex questions. I’ve posted the link on multiple social media posts because your article contains so many great insights applicable across the spectrum of various political and intellectual divides. I’ve argued online with 5G scare pundits who “insist” that “it’s 60GHz signals are hurting people”, when in fact the carriers can’t use that frequency band because their signals will drop off to useless levels a few hundred feet from the tower, absorbed by the oxygen in the air. Meanwhile, the many Jesuit and Masonic players in the visible COVID response nomenclatura change their stories, flash secret handsigns, manipulate models, hide data, drop “peer reviewed” studies of drug efficacy that are basically garbage to bolster Pharma agendas, amid flurries of in-your-face gematria code correlations around the number 201 and other key “ritual” numbers. In other words, the conspiracy catcher is covertly signaling pitches to their pitchers, the camera is showing all of us, but everyone seems satisfied with the official explanation that the catcher is simply making discrete adjustments to his jock-strap. It’s enough to drive a conspiracy theorist crazy.
Alex C. says
1) Yes… the crazy conspiracy theories CAN be seen as myths that reveal deeper truths… such as the distrust in science and the government, etc, that the article so articulately explains.
I’m concerned about so to speak putting a positive spin on crazy conspiracy theories and on those who propogate them.
You see.these theories, and the persons who generate and propagate them:
They are still VERY _dangerous_ in and of themselves, and thus should be challenged and IMO marginalized whenever possible.
Many examples…. The various versions of small group runs the whole world theories (such as the Illuminati are actually running the whole show right down to dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s) implicitly, and often explicitly have the message “don’t bother voting or trying to participate in the political or social level at making a better world. And when folks don’t vote, don’t lobby their legislators, get to a “it’s all useless ‘they’ run the world anyway stance that results giving away power to the few and special interests. Some of them directly cause intense suffering… such as when some claim that no children were shot at Sandy Hook and make death threats to the children’s parents; or when the insanity of claiming Cosmic Pizza was a Hillary Clinton child sex trafficking operation results in a man shooting up the place.
2) The article wrote in part —
“…A couple weeks ago I was on a call with a person who had a high position in the Obama administration and who still runs in elite circles. He said, “There is no one driving the bus.” I was a little disappointed actually, because there is indeed part of me that wishes the problem were a bunch of dastardly conspirators. Why? Because then our world’s problems would be quite easy to solve, at least in principle. Just expose and eliminate those bad guys. That is the prevailing Hollywood formula for righting the world’s wrongs: a heroic champion confronts and defeats the bad guy, and everyone lives happily ever after…”
I agree with the ex-Obama person that the reality is frankly more frightening than the Illuminati (or whomever) run the whole world. I use the same words he/she does “There’s NOT ONE driving the bus. Lots of folks grabbing at the wheel now and then and jerking it in different directions while we’re carrening towards the cliff. I have a SORT of similar response to folks who believe that an all powerful, super clever, elite (Illuminati or whomever) is running the world.
I say “That would be wonderful for me to know. Because I’m sure such clever all powerful people aren’t going to let the climate crisis (or any of the other looming catastrophes) happen. Because they and their children and grandchildren are going to have to live on this planet and if they’re one tenth as clever as you say they are they know that if climate reaches serious tipping points all their money and political power won’t mean shit and they’ll be fucked too.”
Kate B says
I needed this today, thank you. After a week of overwhelming reports, mounting frustration, and isolation panic, I sat down and turned to to my online support community to remind me that I’m not alone and see that folks are still creating a more beautiful world. You have an incredible gift for putting words to complex thoughts and feelings. Thank you for being a lighthouse in the storm. You and others like you give me strength when my light flickers, so that I can in turn give strength to those who need help. We truly do need each other in this life. That is the biggest lesson I am learning.
Andie Timar says
I have read this a number of times, as I did your first article Coronation. I resonate and there is much to say about both. In the name of brevity, I
appreciate how you ask many questions (vs posit answers) and the perspective about myth is perfect. It actually inspired me to re-watch The Power of Myth
series (Joseph Campbell with Bill Moyers). In it Joseph Campbell cites that each myth has a ‘hero’. This has me ask, who is the hero(s) in the myth of these times? Is it each of us who chooses not to take sides or identify with either side, but “who are bringing in all the voices, including the marginalized ones, building a broader social consensus and beginning to heal the polarization that is rending and paralyzing our society. “? I believe so.
Muriel Strand says
yes, the most stubborn conspiracy is the one of unconscious social belief.
i find there are many issues where i can’t be certain of what’s true or false. i remain agnostic about these issues, such as the truth of 9/11.
the world is not black & white.
and not everything has been discovered yet.
Thank you for anchoring my thoughts!
“Belief is toxic, I live in the felt fact of immediate experience, everything else is conjecture” –Terence Mckenna
Invisible John says
Thanks, E.B. — Somebody finally said something here that makes sense to me. The words of C.E. indicate a highly developed intellect
guided by love of people and hope for a “better” world. His essays tend to make intelligent, compassionate people relax and feel warm
fuzzies that their hearts are in the right place. (no harm in this at all, of course) Sadly, this also means he plays more the role of an
entertainer, an intellectual pop star of sorts singing songs that a certain kind of person likes to hear rather than present an actual voice
capable of inspiring action that will result in real, lasting change.
“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” – H.D. Thoreau
To anyone out there reading C.E. essays looking for guiding wisdom in these crazy times, you have indeed arrived at the root of
the whole mess. Simply having ones’ heart in the right place, well……this is only a good starting point. The real journey, the only
human action that really matters, awaits your first step.
Alejandro Jenne says
Hello Charles or anyone who reads this….. Thank you Charles!
Indeed, once we see the truth that our lives are full of paradoxes we know we must go deeper, we must look within, and then act from our most sincere wish for the benefit of all.
Four Arrows says
In other words, think critically, counter-hegemonically (knowing what educational/cultural hegemony is), aware that everything is interconnected, that beauty and love is the default, that mythology is wisdom of the ages, that conspiracies both exist and are fabricated so open-minded research is needed. And I would add on more thing to this brilliantly conceived and thorough article, do some reflection on the two “worldviews” (the Indigenous one and the dominant one) before it is too late for any of this to do some good. For More see fourarrowsbooks dot come.
I haven’t read your previous essay Charles, so where this one refers to it I’m a bit lost.
I did however notice a welcomed intensity drop to the fear I’ve been feeling after reading. This was received more on an instinctive, intuitive level than an intellectual one.
I’m not as knowledgeable on a vocabularic level as yourself and others so even some of the words you use just passed me by. I ‘ve read so much since this all started that constantly having to look up words has become a chore. I’m not saying you should dumb it down by the way.
I live in the UK – England. The situation here is extremely oppessive. We’re constantly being told to “stand here”, “don’t do this”, “wear this”, “walk in this direction not in that direction” – and it goes on and on and on. This is all under threat of punishment for noncompliance.
There are signs everywhere, even on the pavements (sidewalks) in every town and city reminding us to keep a two meter “social distance”. This alone, to anyone with common sense, just doesn’t make any sense at all. Just the terms “social distancing” and ” new normal” feel on any level extremely dehumanising and damaging.
Peoples best intentions are being manipulated to inform on each other if it’s witnessed “rules” are being broken. All in the name of “showing you care about others” and “keeping everyone safe”. So if you question these rules you’re branded as someone that just doesn’t care about others and turned on. The police here have even set up special telephone lines for those informing on others for breaking rules.
The sheer amount of psychological manipulation that is going on here by the government and the mainstream media is relentless and frightening. Everyone is afraid of everyone else, either because of the virus or because common sense and evidence makes them question the necessity of all these restrictions. Military personel specialising in behavioral psychology techniques have been incorporated into the UK government to advise them. The fear here is palpable.
I appologise if this has little to do with the essay but it just gushed out of me.
I know things aren’t much better in the US and maybe worse in some repects.
If this comment is regarded as irrelevant please don’t publish it.
P.S. I will read your previous essay.
I notice you’ve used the word “planet” in this essay, does that mean you are not taking the advice that you are giving here, to look at both sides of the Flat Earth, Reality.
Again, an eye and heart-opening outlook unto these highly polarized times. I enjoyed that you included the possibility of an intelligent force beyond the two polarities, an organizing intelligence as you put it. A force that knows, whatever it is. Although there is no proof that what you nourish your mind with becomes reality, just like Rupert Sheldrake’s off the record scientists, I think that if prompted, many would disclose in confidence that they have had experiences that confirm the law of attraction. So I consciously choose the side of Peace, of oneness, hoping that my thoughts and my heart will have an impact on building the new world. Please keep on writing, you are essential.
Mark Enoch recommends:"Prosocialize!" says
Humanity bless you for being a light of the world. I’m a big fan. I summarize the solution with the advice to seek complementation where there seems to be conflict.
CALL TO SHARE THE WORLD
Please share this message. Raising awareness is how we change the world! If you want to learn how to create the beautiful, sustainable, shared world our hearts know is possible, we have a simple, effective formula to do so as an individual. Simply by spending as much time as watering your plants, in 2 years you will see your town/city start shifting into a prosperous, generous and sustainable society. It may seem simple or obvious but it really does work, just like meditation and exercise seem simple or plain but really do work. It’s called Prosocializing (the DIY Transition Plan).
Sow a Shared World: Promote generosity and sharing (by teaching people the benefits)
Expand Free Collaboration Networks (FCN): Facilitate generosity and sharing by expanding FCNs.
Teach Prosocializing: Inspire others to Prosocialize by introducing them to the concept and by telling people how you are working on projects 1 and 2.
For more information and examples on how to get started, to find a quickly growing list of FCNs, or to connect with the global movement visit https://changingtheworldiseasy.com
You can start by forwarding this message to 3 or more of your friends! The Great Transition to a shared world of universal sustainable prosperity and peace starts now, thanks to YOU!
If you (1) start sharing this Call to Share The World to 100 people a week, if just 1 out of 1000 of them starts also sharing this Call to Share The World to 100 people a week, by the end of a year, 6 people will be prosocializing for a Shared World (1x100x0,001×52, + you).. If you continue to do so, after the second year, 37 people will be prosocializing (6×5,2+6), then 229, then 1.419, then 8.797, then 54.541, then 338.154, then 2.093.554, then 12.980.034, then 80.476.210, then 498.952.502, then 3.093.505.512…in just thirteen years, more than 19 Billion people will be prosocializing for a Shared World of universal sustainable prosperity and freedom.
It takes me 30 minutes a week to reach 100 people online or in real life with this message. What about you?
Excellent essay. I might point out that the expression, which you attribute to “New Age,” means that we create our own individual experience of reality by looking through our mythological filters. This is precisely the point you are making. It is not intended to mean that our perceptions turn water into wine and turn back tides. To put it another way, all perceptions are somewhat illusionary. Humility is advised. Hubris is discouraged.
kamir bouchareb st says
Avigail Abarbanel says
Bravo! Great, clear analysis reflecting everything I have been thinking and feeling too, but expressed much better than I have been able to.
Jüri Eintalu says
Excellent essay by Charles Eisenstein.
It contains a lot of very clear and exact logical analyses of some particular issues – like the treatment of conspiracy theories. Many excellent quotations can be obtained from this essay.
It is also a very good attempt to talk “about everything”, to talk on a large scale. Very few authors are able to provide readable conceptions of the developments of society.
Because of the huge number of issues treated in the present essay, different levels are appearing unavoidably, also different issues are argued with different rigour.
On a large scale, I would say that this essay is a good description and good criticism, while the constructive part of the essay is rather utopian. You can influence particular readers of your essay but not the whole of mankind (even if you would create some sect or community, it still would not help to cure the whole planet with billions of people on it).
One particular example of what needs to be analyzed in more detail.
We can discern between the following cases:
1) institutional censorship;
2) self-censorship in the community;
3) self-censorship that has been induced by institutional censorship.
In all these cases, it is we, people, itself who are acting. But it is important that people start to censor themselves because of the fear that the institution shall punish them again.
Therefore, even if people are censoring each other, it is crucial if they have been threatened by, say, governmental actions.
In sum, the conspiracy theory about governmental interference has not been ruled out by the fact that there is self-censorship in the community.
There are many such controversial passages in the present essay, but I suggest to concentrate on those passages where author’s thought is excellent and exact.
Thank you for these words. Very profound.
Patrick Borson says
There must be more to the Rupert Sheldrake story of assigning telepathic powers to dog because they know when their owners are coming home. The simplest explanation of dogs knowing when their owners are coming home, is that the dogs are taking cues from the environment – the time of day, the sound of a car or other neighborhood events. If the audience members were assigning telepathic powers to their dogs without carefully examining confounding explanations, I think they were jumping on the bandwagon and bypassing critical thinking.
Duncan Dow says
Excellent! Thank you for this and The Coronation. It binds together much of my disjointed suspicions, thoughts and feelings, and expands my understanding and questioning.
I have found that when someone tries to brand me a as “conspiracy theorist”, I let them know that no, I am a “conspiracy analyst”.
Because, as you point out, there are verifiable conspiracies in our history. And that statement changes the narrative immediately.
Its mind blowing that people can religiously believe what the media says.
Just found out that the Sars CoV2 was computer generated.
There is no real virus isolated, it was processed.( refer to below link and info can be verified from virology.org).
There are also no new set of symptoms( ie no new disease ) and no proof that a “sars Cov2″ causes a disease (” covid” ).
And as you know the tests they use are meaningless(PCR) does not show a virus nor prove disease or viral infection it just amplifies a few nucleic acids.
Sars CoV2 was not ever isolated, it was processed by computers in a lab from a mix fetal bovine dna, human dna and other contaminants.This information( of it being generated by the WHO in a lab) done by numerous computer programs is available at virology .org .
Lisa Lopez says
I think it’s time to update this article as it’s been 3 months now and you have more to research. The only fault l find with your “opinion”, is that you are blatantly ignoring the other side of the research. The world is run by the Cabal – a few godzillionaires. They have more money than Govts., they own the Reserve Bank, the UN, WHO, CDC, FDA, they’re all run by these extended families which hold high positions also in the Senate… there’s so much more to that other side. The virus was not caught from bats, it’s impossible to transfer an animal virus to a human. Unless of course, a certain Scientist in Beijing was commissioned to work on changing the receptors of the virus, so that they could transfer to humans. This Scientist was the first person to get it and she did not get it from the bats she visited rather, her own experiment was released. It’s easy to find. And if it is true that “evil people run the world”, then you can’t be serious when you suggest we just throw them out – problem solved! In fact – further research l don’t think you’ll find bcos you are not able to remain neutral, is that this overthrow of the Govts has been (apparently) happening in the background for years – to overthrow these evil rulers. You truly, have no idea about how the entire world is being run. None of us do. Cheers Lx 🥰
Hi Charles. You have intuitively unlocked a myth that has roots buried deeper than you perhaps realise yet. I very strongly recommend that you read ‘The Disapearance of the Universe’ by Gary Renard. Your mind has got you this far and I know that it will be open enough not to condemn the message within the book. I have been on a journey of discovery that has been like that of a detective. I have realised the threads of truth that have been woven into this world, all the different religions, cultures, metaphysics and sciences that resonate and tell one simple story and the simple answer to why we are here and what is our purpose. I cannot express here, what that is but please read this book and I know that more knowledge will come to you on your way. Be of good cheer!
Yep. The core issue: the “self” which created itself in a reflex of reflection and then with a pirouette movement fell and fell and fell (known as ‘the Fall’) ‘out’ of the *dimension of non-dualistic consciousness* and then the ‘thinker’ thinking itself into existence.
So here we are: in the dimension of dualistic consciousness.
Every human consists of:
– dimension of the consciousness of the “self”
– dimension of the consciousness of the ‘thinker’
The “self” = feminine, space, in circles.
The ‘thinker’ = masculine, time, in straight line.
Every “self” considering itself the most important, all-knowing, center of the universe, better than any other “self”. That is its life/survival strategy meanwhile the cause of polarization.
So, who’s in power?: Every “self”.
The reason why this planet is in such a hell hole of brutality and violence and bloodshed:
the decisions of hundreds and thousands and millions of “selves” each pursuing nothing more than their own unenlightened self-interests, their own unenlightened self-preservation…
The ultimate consequence of which will be that the human civilization as we know it, will destroy itself.
However, there is a third dimension: the dimension of the observing consciousness which is non-dualistic.
*It’s simply not possible to ‘personify’ or ‘localize’ the non-dualistic consciousness with which man was Created by God into a ‘spatiality’ of consciousness b/c those dualistic dimensions of consciousness of a “self” and a ‘thinker’ exist only after rather than before ‘the Fall’.
See more at: https://science-of-consciousness.blogspot.com/2013/11/commentaries-on-teaching-of-jesus-and.html by Michael Joseph Cecil.
TBH, you don’t strike me as a closet conspiracy theorist, and that seems like a pretty shallow reading of your essays. IMO, you’re much more at the narcissist end of the spectrum. This post in particular isn’t too bad however, but then -to be blunt- it doesn’t really say much. But I kind of prefer the not-saying-much Charles to the deluded Gnostic Charles, who can be painfully cringeworthy.
kamir bouchareb st says
thanks for this
kamir bouchareb st says
Here’s another “conspiracy” to sink your teeth into: thehiddenrecords.com. It will blow your mind.
John Christopher says
Yes, a great piece of intellectual commentary. Unfortunately, it is left brained, intellectual bias which has brought humanity to the edge of extinction. You are missing a huge part of the narrative. You are missing the skills of intuition & discernment, skills which you seem to be sadly lacking in. For hundreds of years we have been at the behest of reductionist, materialistic science which dismisses any invisible phenomena as superstitious nonsense. Then we have the proliferation of fluoride & chlorine into our water, toothpaste & even food. These chemicals calcify the pineal which is the seat of intuition & discernment & our connection to “cosmic forces” which science & religion have diligently kept us disconnected from for millennia.
Then there’s the burning of the great libraries by Emperor Constantine, all the great works of the ancient masters, all lost. Then later came the Council of Nicea where a few men decided what knowledge humanity would be allowed to have. Then even later the witch burnings & the Spanish Inquisition where 15 million, mainly women, in Europe alone, were killed for being herbalists or sensitives or any other crazy reason like a rash or their well, being too full.
My point is that there has been a force in this world which made sure we are kept in left brained, survival, fight & flight, lust & greed, low vibrational states. Unfortunately, Charles, you have approached this “conspiracy” in an entirely left brained, intellectual, scientific & reductionist viewpoint. This is not helpful or insightful, it just perpetuates more ignorance. Try again.
Wow, talk about an essay that didn’t age well!
It’s hard to say which essay was worse, The Coronation or The Conspiracy Myth, both are awful, treacly and obtuse, logical fallacy laden messes with little to offer.
It’s glaringly obvious by now that the Democrats did conspire with Big Media to steal the election, than conspiracies against the public occur often (including with Covid, which our political and financial elites most certainly are exploutingbto their own advantage – they certainly know perfectly well they are wildly exaggerating and lying to the public about its dangers). More and more evidence emerges each day of systematic voter fraud and illegal ballot harvesting. Eisenstein’s little pet theory that there’s no one in charge and no actual Machiavellianism at work that accounts for our political problems and crises looks increasingly wrong-headed and silly. It’s not for no reason that Eisenstein’s detractors have often described him as being extremely gullible and naive. He certainly is that, not to mention ill-informed and uneducated on many the topics he writes about with undue confidence in his own brilliance.
Siin on mida vägagi lugeda ääretult tuleb hästi järele mõelda, kes rahastab vaksiine bill gates! Saate lasta tõlkida google ghrome kaudu eesti keeles! Kallist Jumala Õnnistust ja Juhtimist!
Marv Sannes says
hahahaha Good stuff. This guy’s a little too literate for any modern reader – we need our stuff cryptic, with a picture. In the 2nd paragraph I noticed 9/11 (the seminal event in this republic’s short history) omitted. That event is now become erased from history, any examination or investigation is too painful to thought. I just wish I knew who to shoot at? Maybe that SOB looking at me in the mirror!
Alvin Gauthier says
Superb website you have here but I was wondering if you knew of any message boards that cover the same topics discussed in this article? I’d really love to be a part of community where I can get advice from other experienced people that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know. Thank you!
Check this out: https://www.naascommunity.org/
Melissa Greer says
Very helpful. A bit of balm for us. My favorite part is the question “ why do you need such high walls?“ it reminds me of Rilke’s “ all of you undisturbed cities“. Thank you.
Aspiring Centaur says
I can give you a narrative that accounts for all data points. But it will have to be over private and secure modes of communication
Something like JFKs assassination is a obvious conspiracy. It can be supported by facts. How can you call it a myth.
How did you have connections to people in the Obama administration. And also how can you accept what he is saying as the truth. What’s his position in the administration not as high as you think it is. Which department does he work in. They are all freemasons. Do r you think these officials are choosen and one of those qualities taken in account when appointing high level officials is their ability to maintain secrecy. How can he confirm that no one is running the bus. If he knows someone is running the show won’t he be instructed not to reveal it. Unless you have been there you can’t confirm everything. If he talks the truth about someone else running the show he has to provide evidence and if you reveal it to the world evidence that will destroy the way people look at the world he is gonna get killed . I sound like a cracpot right ? It’s not like how a regular conspiracy researcher who has to just hypothesize how the conspiracy is being carried out while he talks about the conspiracy. Things which are myths , theories will be proven as fact in thr future. You blindly believe in manmadeclimate change blindly despite problems in the manmade climate change theory. There is gonna be climate lockdowns in the future. 31,000 scientists have signed a petition against man made climate change. JFK assassination is a conspiracy theory despite there beingfacts supporting it You don’t understand the agenda. It’s not a bunch of hooded robes performing rituals. That’s disinfo perpetual by people like you. Have you read tragedy and hope by the academic Caroll quigley He has contributed for high level government think tanks .He talks about secret societies. Have you read about Edward Griffin’s books. Watch the video quigley formula . You haven’t researched enough to judge on whether JFK assassination is a conspiracy theory. i can’t understand why James corbett mentioned a shill like you in his podcast. What are you gonna do when these things get proven as facts.