[Marxism] conspiracy: credulous left of today

Fred Feldman ffeldman at bellatlantic.net
Fri Mar 11 20:33:32 MST 2005

Louis wrote:
 "In reality, the USA 
came away as the big winner in the crisis. Russia removed its missiles, 
while outdated US missiles were removed from Turkey."

I think that Louis underestimates the importance of the Cuban
revolution, the survival or destruction of which was the key to all the
maneuvers. The Cuban revolution survived, and even faced down the US
effort to place the country under international inspection. It is quite
people for reasonable people -- including Kennedy-hating foes of the
Cuban revolution -- to assume this was not a great historic victory for
US imperialism.  I certainly don't think so.

But the fact is I think that a large section of the left -- the part
that isn't paranoid schizophrenic basically -- has tended to become too
dismissive of conspiracies, which are not the making of history but do
arise organically from history and the class struggle. Those of us who
are not paranoid schizophrenic, or conspiracy theorists per se, but do
tend to notice that two or more people do from time to time conspire to
accomplish things that can affect the world situation tend to get thrown
into the paranoid-schizophrenic camp when we raise our position.

The fact that there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy is a matter of
fact.  That's the main reason why most people believe it, even though
they have no theory at all.  They just know that the official story made

Was the 9/11 a vast conspiracy by the US government.  I don't think the
US rulers were that indifferent to the Pentagon and the World Trade
Center -- they lost billions and billions and looked vulnerable and
still do. But ultimately this is a question of fact, and most of the
evidence of US negligence comes from the fact that NOTHING LIKE THIS HAD
EVER HAPPENED IN US HISTORY. A country that is supposed to be
invulnerable to the casualties of war suffered thousands of them. Since
the US is really invulnerable if it really tries to be so, it must have
been a conspiracy to allow it if not carry it out.  But ultimately, this
is all a matter of fact, not theory. 

More than one person killed Kennedy.  Period. Fact.

Did Bush steal the election in 2000? A matter of fact, not something
settled by a matter of principle about conspiracies -- since they can
never affect anything that might be important, they could not have
affected the  outcome of the 2000 election.  The prevalence of the
non-materialist approach characterizes, for example, the Militant, which
declared that opposition to conspiracy theories proves that Bush could
not have stolen the elections, but ALSO PROVES that the Democrats in
that same year "decided to steal the election from Bush."

Since world politics allows room for a lot of conspiracies, the
supporters and opponents tend to end up picking up their favorites,
rather than starting from facts.

Fred Feldman

More information about the Marxism mailing list