EU referendum are you in or out

[Absolute_Zero]

@KC (and the sunshine band) paragraph 5 and on...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... byn-labour

“Some of the older white Jewish folk in the local community had an issue with me portraying their beloved #Rothschild or #Warburg etc as the demons they are,”

[phattslagg]

The author of that article supports Corbyn, and was decried as a “self-hating Jew” on tv, just the other day. No one challenged the person who said that to him.

[WiteWulf]

That was quite an interesting read. First time I've heard use of Illuminati symbolism described as anti-semitic, which is a shame, as it was reasonably sensible piece up until that point.

[phattslagg]

Ever met anyone who goes on about the illuminati who doesn’t go on to mention the global Jewish and/or Zionist conspiracy, though?

[zip accident]

Ever met anyone who goes on about the illuminati who doesn’t go on to mention the global Jewish and/or Zionist conspiracy, though?

Conspiracy nuts are conspiracy nuts. they probably believe in the hollow earth and other such tripe, and some may well be nazis. That the ideas are connected in any way beyond the same very strange people supporting both is so far as I know unproven.

[Absolute_Zero]

Are we really going to quibble the Illuminati aspect when the artist has made his representational intent clear?

My horror at discovering Corbyn was oblivious (unwittingly imo) to the iconography has been tempered by the discovery that he's not alone. #Specsavers

Here's a clue paraphrased from a comment on the article: if it looks as though it was commissioned by Josef Goebbels, it's anti-Semitic.

[Harlequin]

It's not about white and black. It's about endless shades of grey, and so many people who have an interest are deliberately trying to make it worse, whether the right-wingers' now-old, now-more-widely-used tricks of dog whistles and redefining language or the people supporting the less palatable parts of the Israeli government's actions trying to nudge all criticism of Israel within the definition of antisemitism or who knows how many others.

It's not about proof as much as perception. Which makes it easier to see when it's not there - and also perniciously hard to stamp out when it is, because this stuff it's quite deliberately designed to be short of the burden of 'reasonable doubt' on which much of our justice is supposedly based.

Is not reading assumptions into shades of grey, relying on perception over proof, the basis of all fanatical conspiracy theories?

[KlaxonCow]

@KC (and the sunshine band) paragraph 5 and on...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... byn-labour

“Some of the older white Jewish folk in the local community had an issue with me portraying their beloved #Rothschild or #Warburg etc as the demons they are,”

Okay, yes, that's the evidence that was required. No question. So it is an anti-semitic image, by direct confession of its author.

But you can see why there's "reasonable doubt" without that. As, apparently, the artist is a bit of an idiot that doesn't really understand that the Illuminati symbolism he was using is related to a different set of "world domination" conspiracy theories and he's getting his mythical paranoid delusions confused with one another.

Protocols of the Elders of Zion ≠ Illuminati ≠ "Deep State"

These are three separate paranoid conspiracy theories that hilariously assert that human beings have sufficient competence to "control everything that happens in the world".

It's related to the same "false agency" delusions religious people have to attribute floods, volcanoes, plagues, etc. to "the anger of the gods". That there's always got to be agency and "purpose" behind anything that happens, they believe, so if there's nothing obvious to point at, then you invent invisible omnipotent beings - gods or super-powerful elites or secret societies - to drop the "scapegoat" blame upon instead.

Nope, shit happens. The universe is Chaotic in nature. That's all it really is.

[Absolute_Zero]

@KC (and the sunshine band) paragraph 5 and on...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... byn-labour

“Some of the older white Jewish folk in the local community had an issue with me portraying their beloved #Rothschild or #Warburg etc as the demons they are,”

Okay, yes, that's the evidence that was required. No question. So it is an anti-semitic image, by direct confession of its author.

But you can see why there's "reasonable doubt" without that.

I'd argue that the focus of the painting is clearly the Monopoly-like table... and that those seated are so strikingly close to stock anti-Semitic/NAZI hook-nosed conspiracy imagery that I'm baffled it was missed.

I'll just have to accept unfamiliarity with such as the explanation.

[Dio]

Is not reading assumptions into shades of grey, relying on perception over proof, the basis of all fanatical conspiracy theories?

I'm not so sure. The majority of (but not all) conspiracy theories seem to me to be more counterfactual than anything else - seeing black AS white. Moon landings, flat earth, antivax, climate change etc. are all about blatantly ignoring obvious proofs or at least overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Certainly there are some conspiracy theories that are largely about filling in the blanks, but even there there tends to be a foundation of what-we-are-told-isn't-right: it's not uncommon to ignore what evidence there is in favour of the grey areas where actual facts aren't readily available (e.g. Illuminati, Glen Miller, Lord Lucan, aliens - and from that list you can see it seems to be the mentalist / comedy end of the scale).

I'll allow that JFK is such a muddled mess that nobody has a clue, but isn't it mostly just that one?

[Harlequin]

`

[Harlequin]

Is not reading assumptions into shades of grey, relying on perception over proof, the basis of all fanatical conspiracy theories?

I'm not so sure. The majority of (but not all) conspiracy theories seem to me to be more counterfactual than anything else - seeing black AS white. Moon landings, flat earth, antivax, climate change etc. are all about blatantly ignoring obvious proofs or at least overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Certainly there are some conspiracy theories that are largely about filling in the blanks, but even there there tends to be a foundation of what-we-are-told-isn't-right: it's not uncommon to ignore what evidence there is in favour of the grey areas where actual facts aren't readily available (e.g. Illuminati, Glen Miller, Lord Lucan, aliens - and from that list you can see it seems to be the mentalist / comedy end of the scale).

I'll allow that JFK is such a muddled mess that nobody has a clue, but isn't it mostly just that one?

I would put theories around the 2001 New York attacks in the same category as those around the JFK killing. These are also founded on what-we-are-told-is-not-right (specifically, the official Government reports which themselves have been accused of dismissing evidence to the contrary). I do not know what evidence you think is being ignored in your second list, especially in the case of the Cabal that Tries to Control and Profit From Everything. Even the consideration that the chaos around us indicates a lack of control could be countered by asking who profits from said chaos. (Personally, in the latter case, I do think it more likely that a great many groups of vested interests try to control and profit from everything, including most professions and unions, but would usually conflict with each others' goals). All of these appear to me primarily as projections of personal assumptions and biases onto an absence of empirical data with foundational presumptions of bad faith.

[zip accident]

I'll allow that JFK is such a muddled mess that nobody has a clue, but isn't it mostly just that one?

I remember the announcement of the death of JFK. It was a more emotionally impactful event to the people around me than the death of Lennon, of Lady Di, than 9.11/11.9.2001. It's not surprising it is controversial, though there's little doubt in my mind that it was Oswald alone that shot him.

[Absolute_Zero]

^ I read an interesting/seemingly-plausible theory that the fatal/final shot was accidentally fired by a panicked secret service agent in the following vehicle as he picked up his rifle from the floor of the vehicle. Not something they'd be keen to admit.

Here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_Error

[merman]

Liam Fox, 2017: it will be easy to roll over all the trade deals we need in time for Brexit

Liam Fox, 2019: we don't have time to ratify and roll over the new EU trade deal with Japan in time, we can't just roll over the customs Union deal with Turkey, we haven't been able to sign any new trade deals since signing Article 50, and things will get worse for trade if we leave with no deal...