The real Great Conspiracy

[This article is a companion piece to Virus: feared vector of health]

 There is no great conspiracy. – Me and lots of other people

There is a great conspiracy. – Me and lots of other people

I have come to the conclusion, after everything we’ve seen and heard, that the problem is not the virus. The problem is the so-called vaccines. And I am even close to coming to another conclusion, and that is: I really have very, very serious doubts that this virus, this alleged novel corona virus, has ever been isolated, properly. I think there is a very distinct possibility that all we’re seeing is a gigantic illusion, that was created by hundreds and hundreds of psychologists, psychiatrists and sociologists in order to put us in panic mode. Maybe even the gain-of-function experiments, or part of these experiments, serve that purpose. – Dr Reiner Füllmich

I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection, and I think we overplayed the vaccines and it made people then worry that it’s not gonna protect against severe disease and hospitalisation – it will – but let’s be very clear: 50% of the people who died from the omicron surge were older and vaccinated. – Deborah Birx

Introduction

There is a great conspiracy afoot. I’ve argued this point on several occasions. And yet, there is in fact no great conspiracy afoot. 

While the above paragraph may seem the basest semantic chicanery on my part, there is and there is not a great conspiracy afoot. It all depends on how we define “conspiracy”.

What I don’t believe

I do not believe there is a shadowy group controlling everything that happens in history in close accordance with some carefully constructed plan that evil ruling elites have been pursuing for centuries or millennia. Life is organic, not mechanistic. As such, it cannot be controlled. Further, being organic, we are of life much as fish are of the sea. As fish evolve, so evolves the sea, and, to some unknowable degree, vice versa. Symbiosis is the name of the game. 

Hence, control is an illusion, albeit a persistently alluring one.

On the other hand, civilisation must always be composed of shadowy groups that influence history. Civilisation is hierarchical (the vast majority of the time), so almost every instance thereof must have at least one group at the top of the pyramid, by definition. Any civilisation’s top-most group may, if so chosen, be perceived as shadowy by those outside that group. Or, it can be perceived as noble, elite, paternal, maternal, caring. This crude polarity represents the extreme ends of a dynamic range of interpretations available to us when perceiving those who have life-and-death power over us, like children trying to make sense of their caregivers. 

When we have very little information about a set of phenomena, we can project much of our hidden psychological material onto it. 

It is thus logically unavoidable that one consequence of how humans tend to operate, in combination with how civilisational structures influence human activity, is the perception of (shadowy) power groups up to no good.

But this tendency will also occur in the individuals that compose that top-most group. Just as we do, they look out into the world and project onto the various out groups that ‘surround’ them whatever of their own psychologies they are unfamiliar with. No doubt they spy great conspiracies afoot all around. No doubt, with so much to protect, with so much at stake, they feel surrounded by potential thieves and usurpers. No doubt some amount of paranoia is warranted!

So there is always, in potential, a great conspiracy afoot. It’s just a matter of context and perspective. In civilisation, there is much to gain and lose. History shows us this is so; people battle and struggle ceaselessly for as large a share of the pie as they can get their hands on. Conspiring will always represent some proportion of that process, and those who conspire will enjoy or suffer very differing degrees of ‘success’ and ‘failure’ as their plans play out.

But! Far more important than this, we are one; reality is one. We are creatures of the reality we jointly constitute. We are not cut off from reality, watching on from the sidelines of our private, isolated minds as though through a separating divide. It can seem that way, but it can only ever seem that way. Our ever changing context is composed of all of us doing, feeling and thinking everything we do, feel and think. Self and Other is necessarily a symbiosis, but one that is also a whole in its own right. 

Within that whole, it just so happens that ego needs to protect Self, at all costs, and finds Other threatening – to some extent. Ego, by my definition thereof, simply cannot perceive this organic symbiosis between Self and Other – what Darren Allen calls the “panjective” perspective –, cannot see how jointly responsible we all are as co-contributors to the context, the total situation, All That Is. Ego’s priorities are self-defence, self-defence and self-defence. So, if there is a great conspiracy afoot, you can bet your bottom pound sterling ego is responsible. And, most revealingly, ego will also be fundamentally wrong about what is actually afoot, seeing as it must filter out most of reality by virtue of its function: “consciousness in the service of fear” (Tom Campbell said that).

In my view, then, there is no shadowy group controlling all historical events.

What I believe

There is an unknowable number of shadowy groups failing to control everything that happens in history, and that failure is history. Further, our knowledge of historical events, and our perception thereof – here I mean everything that is available to humanity about the past – must forever be extravagantly incomplete, as well as subject to power struggles and groupthink, ego fears and ego ambitions around status and fame. 

As I’ve said before, it’s a mess out there, and authentic humility is the healthiest way through.

With regards to great conspiracies such as the ‘faked’ moon landing: I don’t know, nor do I really care. The same goes for lizard overlords; I neither know nor care. There are any number of ‘crazy’ conspiracy theories that appear to me as glitzy spectacle. I suspect these are nine parts opportunistic money making or mischievous attention-mania, and one part deliberate misinformation. It benefits those tasked with guiding how history unfolds – however self-deceptively and unsuccessfully – to muddy the waters, to poison the information pool just enough to keep real conspiring nicely hidden. Whether for ‘good’ or ‘ill’ – what’s wrong with maintaining control structures by any means possible and thereby preventing collapse into societal breakdown –, all sorts of tactics will be used to keep society ticking along as stably as possible. How else could it be. 

As the army chap played by Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men bellowed, “You can’t handle the truth!” Thanks to modernity’s extreme specialisation and how different humans are from person to person, most of us do not want to know the whole truth about how society is kept more or less stable over time. Eggs are always being broken to make omelettes. We may well have the stomach to consume the omelettes modernity offers us for consumption, but very little appetite to inquire into how they came to be on our plates.

What I believe with regards to the covid phenomenon is that it is partly a great conspiracy, but mostly groupthink, hysteria, incompetence and error. Why would any group want to set this hysterical state of affairs into motion – i.e. trigger mass formation? Because we are at a pivotal historical juncture – perhaps peak oil is a part of this, perhaps ‘overpopulation’, perhaps technological advance, perhaps all that and more – and something historically new is being birthed. 

Those accustomed to modernity’s top-most positions want to keep their hands on history’s reins. They feel threatened by the potential for more sovereignty to the ‘masses’ implied by the internet’s stupendous power to instantly share information globally; feel threatened by the serious potential for messy, unpredictable societal collapse as economic growth hits its own brick wall; are afraid of the havoc unmanaged collapse would wreak perhaps for centuries to come, so have grasped the nettle and are attempting to steer history through this change and, by their management, keep the unavoidable destruction to a minimum. How much patrician disdain of the hoi polloi is at play, how much avuncular noblesse oblige, I do not know; it surely differs from person to person. But I can say this: I would be very surprised if my interpretation is wide of the mark.

And yet we are all involved. We are all participants in this ‘conspiracy’ by not wanting to grow up and take responsibility for our lives, by remaining unwilling to examine our preferences, our addictions, our fears. For as long as we shy from true maturity, we remain joint architects of our victimhood, distanced from our true sovereignty and power by our fearful state of being, and thus at the mercy of those we thereby implicitly command to push history on in the direction they choose, however erroneously, however self-deceptively. 

While things remain this way, we all willingly submit to the nature of the beast. As such, we are the great conspiracy. 

(I have a sneaking suspicion we all know this, however dimly.)

Viruses are currently conspiring to infect $cience!

This is why I wrote this article. This is the accidental but oh so poetic understory bubbling along at the bottom of it all. This is the unintended consequence well underway in the form of accidentally coalescing conspiracy concealed in a mass self-deception posing as an effective conspiracy that has many people fooled into mass-formation compliance. This is the dismantling of the plans of mice and men as life grows on anyway, right under our feet and up through the thin cracks of the plan’s poorly poured concrete.

There is contagion, there is infection; we are always subject to these processes, though often want to deny it. Everything infects everything else by virtue of being co-contributors to All That Is. My thoughts affect yours, yours affect mine; my body language influences yours, yours influences mine; their advertising is infectious; their politicising contagious; their weaponising pathogenic; their music seductive; their films bewitching; their farming nourishes us, assisted by the buzzing of bees, the slithering of worms, the crawling of beetles, the health of the soil. Everything ‘infects’ everything else. 

Except for viruses. They can’t do anything at all.

Viruses are not what we think they are. Viruses are a theorised explanation for disease phenomena – contagion vectors – we still understand but poorly. Viruses are a theoretical error, a projection by flawed humans onto poorly understood observed particles that do not function as argued by virology. Those shapes arrows point at in images from electromicroscopy are not vectors of disease as claimed, are not pathogenic as claimed, they are something else; biological or biochemical phenomena that are the consequence of the experimental methods used since 1954 to ‘prove’ the existence of viruses. They are not actually the ‘viruses’ looked for so fervently by means of that methodology. They are cell detritus produced by the process virology self-deceptively calls “isolation”.

Could this be true? My previously idle curiosity on this point is now tilting strongly towards soft conviction because it is poetically resonant it should be so, namely that the only non-contagious thing in reality is ‘virus’. And the result of this beautiful possibility, should it come to light properly, could be to dissolve $cience almost over night. Just think how much money is made because ‘viruses’ are thought to be vectors of disease.

The $cience is dead! Long live the sciences!

It would be divinely sweet, humbling, and all encompassing. This is the burning question: What can science tell us? What are the sure fruits of dependent and independent variables, falsifiability, and correctly impartial experimentation? How much of reality can be defined and understood by these means? I suspect far less than we want to be the case. 

Is virology about to cause $cience to ail and wither, to purge it of its corruption, its financial toxins? Is virology pathogenic to $cience?

If ‘viruses’ deliver this outcome – ‘virus’ as chosen reason for draconian lockdowns, total surveillance, digital currencies, endlessly sustained pandemics, social-credit systems and digital IDs, ‘virus’ as the launchpad for all that totalitarian architecture –, then the erroneous idea of ‘virus’ will have reverse infected society into a beautifully crude yet poetically elegant awakening that no other thing could possibly have managed. How sweetly poetic that accidental conspiracy would be!

The biologically microscopic, the pre-life mists of proteins and RNA we have misperceived – because we can – as dirty little buggers, not to be trusted, insidious assassins infecting us all by lurking invisibly on the wind, on your children’s hands, on your shopping bags, on the words “I love you” breathed from your partner … those tiny things are a collectively projected nightmare more darkly redolent of the spiritual void where community trust used to be than anything else I could ever have imagined.