2.5 Is it science?

This subsection addresses the theoretical or speculative aspects of the content of this site.

Cognitive geopolitical theory

The New Oxford Dictionary defines a theory as “a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained”. This site develops a theory of human behavior that is based on general principles derived mainly from political psychology (the notion of authoritarianism), brain research (the strengths of our two brain hemispheres), moral psychology, emotion theory, soundscape research, autopoiesis and the diversity of scientific domains that address agency and autonomy. One truly novel contribution (as far is as known) is the introduction of the term authority as psychological key-term.

What the sites sets out to explain is are both age-old systems of self-empowerment and disempowerment as well as geopolitical tendencies.

Ideally this site succeeds in formulating a theory of human behavior on all spatial and temporal scales, fully derived from first principles, that can be proven or disproven with observations derived from domains unrelated to the domains that gave rise to the theory in the first place. This is the ideal.

The actual situation is more messy and interconnected. The geopolitical interests of the editor have always informed the search for suitable psychological constructs. And this site is an effort to come up with the best possible theory able to connect basic psychology to the full diversity of large scale (in time and place) human behavior. Disproving many ill-conceived aspects of the theory and improving their formulation was part of this process. It is never an effort to disprove the theory as a whole. That would be self-defeating. Disproving the whole of the theory is left as an exercise for the reader.

It will be possible to constructively disprove many aspects of it and in doing so help to improve the formulation of the theory.

Is this a conspiracy theory site?

Plot, cabal, conspiracy, intrigue, machination
If you come up with a secret plan to do something, especially with evil or mischievous intent, it’s called a plot (a plot to seize control of the company). If you get other people or groups involved in your plot, it’s called a conspiracy (a conspiracy to overthrow the government). Cabal usually applies to a small group of political conspirators (a cabal of right-wing extremists), while machination (usually plural) suggests deceit and cunning in devising a plot intended to harm someone (the machinations of the would-be assassins). An intrigue involves more complicated scheming or maneuvering than a plot and often employs underhanded methods in an attempt to gain one’s own ends (she had a passion for intrigue, particularly where romance was involved). (Source: New Oxford American Dictionary)

Very little of this site relies on secrets or people plotting in secrecy. In fact most of its basis relies on published and peer-reviewed scientific results, perfectly open sources, or officially disclosed information. This site addresses a number of policies and strategies that are often not at all secrets, but that are simply not widely shared and typically under-addressed in the (mainstream) media.

However, many of the topics of this website are highly unpalatable for those who prefer to not to think critically about their (actual) authorities: it addresses many topics typically avoided, trivialized, ignored, or even outright lied about in the mainstream media. In fact much of the website is easily dismissed as [conspiracy theory].

Please, call this a conspiracy theory site and ignore its contents if you feel so inclined. This will prevent your world-view from being influenced and defiled by scientific and other facts and critical thoughts. This is the comfortable thing to do. Calling this a (crazy) conspiracy theory provides you with an excuse not to think about any of its topics, and at the same time you can dismiss its contributors a crackpots or, at the very least, highly misguided individuals.

Calling something a conspiracy theory and using that as an excuse to dismiss, ignore or trivialize the content is however highly self-derogatory. It shows that you allow your thought processes to constrained by emotions, namely the unpleasantness of being confronted with a world-view you cannot cope well with. This gives a very strong feeling of disempowerment, to which the (left hemispheric) mind reacts with an initial lack of interest in the subject matter (the crazy conspiracy theory meme) and revulsion towards the bringer of the message. Calling something a conspiracy theory in a derogatory fashion and dismissing — for the rest perfectly sane and well-reasoning — purveyors of it as a (cracy) conspiracy theorist or conspiracy crackpot is highly self-disempowering.

It might surprise you, but especially highly rational people (with a dominant left hemisphere) are prone to this type of emotion-based dismissal. Rationality and logic are only defined in an open world. Highly rational people highly prefer a closed world in which they can apply their knowledge and domain skills successfully, over an open-world in which they cannot. Being confronted with a world-view that is essentially unsuitable for the application of one’s knowledge and skills invalidates much of the basis of self-confidence and self-esteem. More about this in the section on [uncomfortable truths].

Is this an ‘intrigue theory’ site?

If this site does not address ‘conspiracy theories’ is there an another derogatory term that approaches what it sets out to do? ‘Intrigue theory’ would be an adequate term. Intrigues involve more complicated scheming or maneuvering than typical plots or conspiracies. And there is no need to keep them secret as long as they are complicated and intractable enough to dupe all but a few. Intrigues require cunning on one side and ignorance or foolishness (i.e., lack of a good sense or judgement) on the other side to work. [Pathological normality] covers the required ignorance and foolishness.

So an intrigue theory is not so derogatory towards the persons who formulate or belief in it: it is derogatory towards anyone ignorant or foolish enough not to understand its insidiousness while everything one needs to know is (hidden) in plain sight. This is typical what the word ‘occult’ means: “beyond the range of ordinary knowledge or experience; communicated only to the initiated”. So one might expect that many aspects of this site touch on the occult.