version

Well-known member
There are quite a few people like that now, making threads full of old newspaper clippings and black and white photographs. It's a whole little subgenre of Twitter.

Here's one I read on Cesar Chavez the other day,


There's another interesting one on him too,

 

luka

Well-known member
ive noticed. i just wish theyd tell us the material they are drawing on as im sure its not deep in the archive stuff, just a few
salacious paperbacks is my guess
 

version

Well-known member
ive noticed. i just wish theyd tell us the material they are drawing on as im sure its not deep in the archive stuff, just a few
salacious paperbacks is my guess
Jimmy Falun Gong did that somewhere in the Marilyn Monroe thread. This is one of them,

s-l300.jpg
 

william_kent

Well-known member

The Man Who Knew Too Much

Documentary about Colin Wallace, the guy behind the Irish witchcraft scare propaganda when he worked for the British Army Information Policy Unit, framed for manslaughter by the British state after he started talking about the Kincora boys home scandal, Operation Clockwork Orange ( a smear campaign against British MPs ) which may have been responsible for the resignation of Harold Wilson as Prime Minister, etc.,
 
Last edited:

version

Well-known member
ive noticed. i just wish theyd tell us the material they are drawing on as im sure its not deep in the archive stuff, just a few
salacious paperbacks is my guess
That wouldn't be very good for their brand though. There's a certain mystique to dropping this information as though they're plugged in in some fashion and not just reading a few books you can buy on Amazon, plus they're trying to hang onto subscribers and build an audience.
 

version

Well-known member
That wouldn't be very good for their brand though. There's a certain mystique to dropping this information as though they're plugged in in some fashion and not just reading a few books you can buy on Amazon, plus they're trying to hang onto subscribers and build an audience.
Not that most people would actually read the books, mind you. Those threads where they cut out all the juicy bits and chase down the clippings are exciting and much quicker and easier to read.
 

william_kent

Well-known member
The cover of that Marilyn Monroe book does give me a Craner feel; Hollywood Babylon vibes.

it's a good read - you're right, pure Kenneth Anger at some points - barbed out Marilyn menstruating all over her bed sheets while Bobby Kennedy does his business type sleaze...
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
Really amazing podcast IMO. The one about Henry Ford is an eye popper. It's kinda Gravity's Rainbow territory with IG Farben etc. I like this sort of stuff because it's in the same space as conspiracy theories but it's actually well researched, thoughtful, shows an understanding of "deep structures" without slipping off into lizard people padeo paranoia territory.
I've been trying to pin down exactly what it is that makes some stuff feel like basically being realistic about how the world works, while other stuff feels inherently crackpot. Like, it's essentially some combination of how many people are involved and how outrageous the stuff that they're meant to be doing is.

For instance, you could kind-of peg Gramsci's theory of hegemony as a "conspiracy theory" because it's essentially about a whole class of people colluding to achieve something, but you wouldn't because it's basically an emergent property of a whole load of little bits of locally plausible, self-interested behavior. Whereas MK Ultra at the opposite end of the scale involved explicitly coordinated and obviously shady stuff, but the people doing the shady stuff were basically a relatively small number of operatives of the US Government's Department for Shady Stuff, so again, it doesn't feel that out there. Whereas when you work it through, proper crackpot stuff tends to need you to believe in a whole load of people having been strongarmed into doing stuff that's way outside what they'd normally do without anyone speaking up...
 

version

Well-known member
ive noticed. i just wish theyd tell us the material they are drawing on as im sure its not deep in the archive stuff, just a few
salacious paperbacks is my guess
Judge also got fed up with people DMing him for reading lists and tweeted one a while back,

Hey, don't wanna be an asshole, but I can't keep answering the same DMs about reading lists & recommendations, so:
Douglass, JFK & THE UNSPEAKABLE
Talbot, THE DEVIL'S CHESSBOARD (best on CIA history)
Webb, THE DARK ALLIANCE
Pease, A LIE TOO BIG TO FAIL
O'Neill, CHAOS

and for general political thought,
Adorno, MINIMA MORALIA
Adorno & Horkheimer, THE DIALECTIC OF ENLIGHTENMENT
W. Benjamin, ILLUMINATIONS + REFLECTIONS, + THE ARCADES PROJECT
Derrida, WRITING & DIFFERENCE + DISSEMINATION
Pynchon, all novels

oh, and for Spider Network shit in particular,
W. Steven Snider, STRANGE TALES OF THE PARAPOLITICAL
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
I've been trying to pin down exactly what it is that makes some stuff feel like basically being realistic about how the world works, while other stuff feels inherently crackpot. Like, it's essentially some combination of how many people are involved and how outrageous the stuff that they're meant to be doing is.

For instance, you could kind-of peg Gramsci's theory of hegemony as a "conspiracy theory" because it's essentially about a whole class of people colluding to achieve something, but you wouldn't because it's basically an emergent property of a whole load of little bits of locally plausible, self-interested behavior. Whereas MK Ultra at the opposite end of the scale involved explicitly coordinated and obviously shady stuff, but the people doing the shady stuff were basically a relatively small number of operatives of the US Government's Department for Shady Stuff, so again, it doesn't feel that out there. Whereas when you work it through, proper crackpot stuff tends to need you to believe in a whole load of people having been strongarmed into doing stuff that's way outside what they'd normally do without anyone speaking up...
Yes, I think that's very well put. There was an essay in Lobster about this - it says something like politics is essentially conspiratorial i.e. small groups of people band together and attempt to exert influence without democratic scrutiny. The difference between that and "meta-conspiracies" is you have to believe these secret groups have disproportionate power and also that they exercise it cohesively over time.
 

version

Well-known member
Yeah, like the flat earth and climate change stuff where you have to believe that more or less every single scientist in the world and stretching back decades is somehow in on it.
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
I read Devil's Chessboard recently, very entertaining read. Not the most thorough account but fun. Also hilarious how little Talbot attempts to hide his complete and utter (and deserved) disdain for Dulles, to the point of being outright catty.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
Yeah, like the flat earth and climate change stuff where you have to believe that more or less every single scientist in the world and stretching back decades is somehow in on it.
Same with Covid stuff. Yeah these guys developed a very specific bioweapon, kept it secret and also coordinated a global release program.
 

luka

Well-known member
Yeah, like the flat earth and climate change stuff where you have to believe that more or less every single scientist in the world and stretching back decades is somehow in on it.
i like that stuff a lot because its sort of the ultimate degree of paranoia. you should try and seriously think about this while tripping. its good. instructive and very vertiginous.
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
What surprised me was how much sex was in the book. The big conspiracy it tackles in the latter half is the JFK assassination but you can infer how easily and effective sexual blackmail schemes can be implemented
 
Top