bcblue1878
Player Valuation: £50m
???
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Conspiracy theories
- Thread starter gorgeousgeorgeEFC
- Start date
- Status
roydo
in memoriam - 1965-2024
The Flat Earth Society
Welcome to The Flat Earth Society, home of the flat earth forums and the largest library of Flat Earth Society journals, newsletters, interviews, and books.
theflatearthsociety.org
There you go mate. Pretty sure we paid it a visit back in the day.
4737carlin
Player Valuation: £90m
Anyone come across these "Birds arnt real" idiots? I can't work out if this is genuine or a comedy sketch
More than 1,000,000 people have become followers of a conspiracy theory that birds aren't real. The birds in the sky are supposedly government drones. Except, the conspiracy is a satire. Sharyn Alfonsi meets with the creator of Birds Aren't Real, Sunday. https://cbsn.ws/3koARi2
More than 1,000,000 people have become followers of a conspiracy theory that birds aren't real. The birds in the sky are supposedly government drones. Except, the conspiracy is a satire. Sharyn Alfonsi meets with the creator of Birds Aren't Real, Sunday. https://cbsn.ws/3koARi2
Taifi gorm
Player Valuation: £15m
Krispy Kreme sell these??? Like the look of the frosting
random
Player Valuation: £15m
Zeitgeist trilogy the pick of the bunch imo, and decent of the filmmakers to release them on youtube
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
The first one is quite something.
Daytripper
Player Valuation: £40m
Read up on Bill Cooper, particularly around the time just before 9/11 and afterwards.
Lobster Johnson
Player Valuation: £35m
Birds Aren't Real is a joke that got out of hand.
canuckblue
Player Valuation: £50m
Apparently 40 people died at the inaugural Flat Earth Surfing Championships when they fell off the edge...
Deary me: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-the-great-replacement-theory-went-mainstream
They're out there. All of the time.
They're out there. All of the time.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
TL/DR warning...and i realise what i'm gonna say won't be popular. But i'm just gonna call it how i see it:
it depends on how you formulate it. The article admits: There are two versions of the theory. One, we might call it ‘great replacement lite’, is saying: ‘There’s a huge demographic shift and these people tend to vote Democrat in the US or Labour in the UK.’
Fact: white folk as a percentage of the population in Western nations is declining, while non-white folk's numbers are increasing.
Fact: non-white folk tend more to vote Democrat/Labour than Republicans/Conservatives.
Fact: Democrats/Labour support non-white immigration more than Republicans/Conservatives.
Fact: The birth-rates of migrated non-white folk is higher than native white Westerners.
Fact: the issue of skin-colour has risen significantly these last few years, with media outlets devoting far more airtime to it than in previous decades. The media-consuming masses are hyper-aware of skin-colour now, which i would argue is counter-productive if the aim is harmony.
What one may think about any of these facts doesn't change their factual nature.
Further:
Biden confirming:
Which studies also support:
The nation is diversifying even faster than predicted, according to new census data
Discover how new census data shows the rapid diversification of the American population.
www.brookings.edu
White demographic decline - Wikipedia
The actual Conspiracy Theory aspect is believing that the above facts are intentionally planned to reduce the influence of conservative politics, and further: to reduce individuality by promoting group identities (what's known as identity-politics) as a populace of group-identities are easier for authoritarian states to control. This is achieved by ensuring pro-Democrat/anti-conservative people head major media outlets, which then push an anti-conservative narrative (i.e. making it a social-minefield, stigmatising it, to even talk about). This - theoretically - then results in more votes for the pro-liberal party. Which then results in being able to push such pro-immigration more, which results in more pro-liberal voters...
As conspiracy theories go, it's not totally outlandish or fantastic like others out there. Arguably even feasible.
Devil's Advocate: let's say it's true: this is being planned. If so, what does it mean for Western Society? Does it change anything? Why is it a bad thing, or why is it a good thing? Does it matter either way?
What's important is the tone and basic sense of human decency one should have when discussing such political-minefield subjects. People are people equally, regardless of their views or ethnic background. I try to treat all sides of the debate with respect. Tho' frankly it's easier here than on right-wing forums, who are even less intolerant of other views, and do sadly house some hateful racists who distort the debate with inhumane views.
A literal stone's throw from my flat we've got a refugee centre with 500 mostly-Arab folk residing. I've helped one with his asylum-application, because he's just a bloke with family who wants a stable comfy life, like we all do. But i also don't shy away from the big questions: like what this trend may mean in a few generations time. Islam, as we know by observing other countries, tends to dominate a nation's society when it becomes the main demographic. The population/ratio of adherents to Islam in Western societies is increasing every year. Is this trend pointing to something? Does it matter?
These are reasonable thoughts and concerns normal-thinking folk have, but have become terrified to publicly utter for fear of being branded a bad racist violent Replacement-Theory adherent.
This pushes the debate into the fringes, where more extreme hateful views get air-time. Some of these vile haters so amplify the issue that they become evil & deranged, and beget unspeakable horror on innocent victims (Breivik, the recent shootings etc).
A step in the right direction would be to support and foster fair-meaning mainstream debate involving everyone (Left, Right, Fence-Sitters and of course non-Westerners, non-white folk themselves). We invite the debate into the mainstream, together, thereby normalising it. Otherwise we get what's happening now: the debate is shut-down by 'progressives', leaving space for the Extreme to infiltrate the mainstream with their one-sided distorted view. So we get this polarised situation.
By normalising the debate, we leave the extreme fringes with no major voice, no significant airtime, no real power. Psychological-profiles from racist-driven mass-shooting-murderers often reveal a deluded sense of serving a higher purpose, amplified by the extreme fringes who themselves are amplified due to the mainstream debate getting shut down.
i.e. let's consider the Elephants in the room, for if we don't they'll end up stampeding all over the shop.
soz for the essay...but we need to start thinking about how to improve things: less polarisation, more coming together.
TL/DR warning...and i realise what i'm gonna say won't be popular. But i'm just gonna call it how i see it:
it depends on how you formulate it. The article admits: There are two versions of the theory. One, we might call it ‘great replacement lite’, is saying: ‘There’s a huge demographic shift and these people tend to vote Democrat in the US or Labour in the UK.’
Fact: white folk as a percentage of the population in Western nations is declining, while non-white folk's numbers are increasing.
Fact: non-white folk tend more to vote Democrat/Labour than Republicans/Conservatives.
Fact: Democrats/Labour support non-white immigration more than Republicans/Conservatives.
Fact: The birth-rates of migrated non-white folk is higher than native white Westerners.
Fact: the issue of skin-colour has risen significantly these last few years, with media outlets devoting far more airtime to it than in previous decades. The media-consuming masses are hyper-aware of skin-colour now, which i would argue is counter-productive if the aim is harmony.
What one may think about any of these facts doesn't change their factual nature.
Further:
Biden confirming:
Which studies also support:
The nation is diversifying even faster than predicted, according to new census data
Discover how new census data shows the rapid diversification of the American population.
White demographic decline - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
The actual Conspiracy Theory aspect is believing that the above facts are intentionally planned to reduce the influence of conservative politics, and further: to reduce individuality by promoting group identities (what's known as identity-politics) as a populace of group-identities are easier for authoritarian states to control. This is achieved by ensuring pro-Democrat/anti-conservative people head major media outlets, which then push an anti-conservative narrative (i.e. making it a social-minefield, stigmatising it, to even talk about). This - theoretically - then results in more votes for the pro-liberal party. Which then results in being able to push such pro-immigration more, which results in more pro-liberal voters...
As conspiracy theories go, it's not totally outlandish or fantastic like others out there. Arguably even feasible.
Devil's Advocate: let's say it's true: this is being planned. If so, what does it mean for Western Society? Does it change anything? Why is it a bad thing, or why is it a good thing? Does it matter either way?
What's important is the tone and basic sense of human decency one should have when discussing such political-minefield subjects. People are people equally, regardless of their views or ethnic background. I try to treat all sides of the debate with respect. Tho' frankly it's easier here than on right-wing forums, who are even less intolerant of other views, and do sadly house some hateful racists who distort the debate with inhumane views.
A literal stone's throw from my flat we've got a refugee centre with 500 mostly-Arab folk residing. I've helped one with his asylum-application, because he's just a bloke with family who wants a stable comfy life, like we all do. But i also don't shy away from the big questions: like what this trend may mean in a few generations time. Islam, as we know by observing other countries, tends to dominate a nation's society when it becomes the main demographic. The population/ratio of adherents to Islam in Western societies is increasing every year. Is this trend pointing to something? Does it matter?
These are reasonable thoughts and concerns normal-thinking folk have, but have become terrified to publicly utter for fear of being branded a bad racist violent Replacement-Theory adherent.
This pushes the debate into the fringes, where more extreme hateful views get air-time. Some of these vile haters so amplify the issue that they become evil & deranged, and beget unspeakable horror on innocent victims (Breivik, the recent shootings etc).
A step in the right direction would be to support and foster fair-meaning mainstream debate involving everyone (Left, Right, Fence-Sitters and of course non-Westerners, non-white folk themselves). We invite the debate into the mainstream, together, thereby normalising it. Otherwise we get what's happening now: the debate is shut-down by 'progressives', leaving space for the Extreme to infiltrate the mainstream with their one-sided distorted view. So we get this polarised situation.
By normalising the debate, we leave the extreme fringes with no major voice, no significant airtime, no real power. Psychological-profiles from racist-driven mass-shooting-murderers often reveal a deluded sense of serving a higher purpose, amplified by the extreme fringes who themselves are amplified due to the mainstream debate getting shut down.
i.e. let's consider the Elephants in the room, for if we don't they'll end up stampeding all over the shop.
soz for the essay...but we need to start thinking about how to improve things: less polarisation, more coming together.
Well, yes, that goes without saying. Demographic shifts are of course fact and poly-causal. Naturally I was raising an eyebrow at the rather more sinister conspiracy theories in the second 'heavy' variant.
TL/DR warning...and i realise what i'm gonna say won't be popular. But i'm just gonna call it how i see it:
it depends on how you formulate it. The article admits: There are two versions of the theory. One, we might call it ‘great replacement lite’, is saying: ‘There’s a huge demographic shift and these people tend to vote Democrat in the US or Labour in the UK.’
Fact: white folk as a percentage of the population in Western nations is declining, while non-white folk's numbers are increasing.
Fact: non-white folk tend more to vote Democrat/Labour than Republicans/Conservatives.
Fact: Democrats/Labour support non-white immigration more than Republicans/Conservatives.
Fact: The birth-rates of migrated non-white folk is higher than native white Westerners.
Fact: the issue of skin-colour has risen significantly these last few years, with media outlets devoting far more airtime to it than in previous decades. The media-consuming masses are hyper-aware of skin-colour now, which i would argue is counter-productive if the aim is harmony.
What one may think about any of these facts doesn't change their factual nature.
Further:
Biden confirming:
Which studies also support:
The nation is diversifying even faster than predicted, according to new census data
Discover how new census data shows the rapid diversification of the American population.
White demographic decline - Wikipedia
The actual Conspiracy Theory aspect is believing that the above facts are intentionally planned to reduce the influence of conservative politics, and further: to reduce individuality by promoting group identities (what's known as identity-politics) as a populace of group-identities are easier for authoritarian states to control. This is achieved by ensuring pro-Democrat/anti-conservative people head major media outlets, which then push an anti-conservative narrative (i.e. making it a social-minefield, stigmatising it, to even talk about). This - theoretically - then results in more votes for the pro-liberal party. Which then results in being able to push such pro-immigration more, which results in more pro-liberal voters...
As conspiracy theories go, it's not totally outlandish or fantastic like others out there. Arguably even feasible.
Devil's Advocate: let's say it's true: this is being planned. If so, what does it mean for Western Society? Does it change anything? Why is it a bad thing, or why is it a good thing? Does it matter either way?
What's important is the tone and basic sense of human decency one should have when discussing such political-minefield subjects. People are people equally, regardless of their views or ethnic background. I try to treat all sides of the debate with respect. Tho' frankly it's easier here than on right-wing forums, who are even less intolerant of other views, and do sadly house some hateful racists who distort the debate with inhumane views.
A literal stone's throw from my flat we've got a refugee centre with 500 mostly-Arab folk residing. I've helped one with his asylum-application, because he's just a bloke with family who wants a stable comfy life, like we all do. But i also don't shy away from the big questions: like what this trend may mean in a few generations time. Islam, as we know by observing other countries, tends to dominate a nation's society when it becomes the main demographic. The population/ratio of adherents to Islam in Western societies is increasing every year. Is this trend pointing to something? Does it matter?
These are reasonable thoughts and concerns normal-thinking folk have, but have become terrified to publicly utter for fear of being branded a bad racist violent Replacement-Theory adherent.
This pushes the debate into the fringes, where more extreme hateful views get air-time. Some of these vile haters so amplify the issue that they become evil & deranged, and beget unspeakable horror on innocent victims (Breivik, the recent shootings etc).
A step in the right direction would be to support and foster fair-meaning mainstream debate involving everyone (Left, Right, Fence-Sitters and of course non-Westerners, non-white folk themselves). We invite the debate into the mainstream, together, thereby normalising it. Otherwise we get what's happening now: the debate is shut-down by 'progressives', leaving space for the Extreme to infiltrate the mainstream with their one-sided distorted view. So we get this polarised situation.
By normalising the debate, we leave the extreme fringes with no major voice, no significant airtime, no real power. Psychological-profiles from racist-driven mass-shooting-murderers often reveal a deluded sense of serving a higher purpose, amplified by the extreme fringes who themselves are amplified due to the mainstream debate getting shut down.
i.e. let's consider the Elephants in the room, for if we don't they'll end up stampeding all over the shop.
soz for the essay...but we need to start thinking about how to improve things: less polarisation, more coming together.
Only with open, honest, frank discussion and understanding will we be ever able to evolve to allow us all to live as one in harmony.
That is to say that is the objective, as clearly not every living being will subscribe to this or ever accept it but finding a common ground is imperative.
Thought provoking post with much sense spoken.
I do see this as a "thread" for the more perverse "theories" though I guess and only recently stumbled upon the Ale House trawling through the threads to find areas of and threads of interest found this one and I have done a good deal of "looking" at Out There theories and my God there are some real deep Rabbit Holes to go to.
I do see the "replacement" theory as one of more an evolutionary nature, purloined by extremist elements to further their cause, but being evolutionary as the World opens up further and further it does beg some questions of where it is headed though and is it good or bad?
Probably too deep a conversation to be had on this though. For here anyway.
On that note I'm off to see where Alice wants me to look today! The Pandemic has given too many people too much time!
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Reading this back just realised a typo:
i naturally meant: right-wing forums, who are even less tolerant of other views.
Thanks for the thoughtful replies
- Status