But counterposing to this notion that one of the "standard forms of operation" of capitalism and other oppresssive systems through the millenenia is "small groups of people getting together planning and doing stuff" is even more devoid of content. This is what everyone, oppressors and oppressed alike, do on a daily basis in all spheres of activity. And often they don't even plan; they respond intuitively and spontaneously in light of how they perceive their interests.
So let me recast my response to your earlier post: Do I think representatives of the Republican party, the media, and the polling companies got together to "do stuff" to the Democrats by manufacturing data showing Bush way ahead? I doubt it for the reasons I mentioned, but can't prove a negative. From what I can gather, including from this list, the Time and Newsweek polls may have been flawed, but on technical grounds. Do you have any evidence of any key sectors of the ruling class initiating a coordinated plan through this medium to demoralize the Democratic base and sink the Kerry campaign? Do you think evidence is important? Or is the assertion sufficient because oppressors always do this kind of stuff? Maybe this is the source of the complaint about sweeping and unsubstantiated left-wing "conspiracy theories" -- complaints which emanate not only from outside, but also from within the left. The term may be faulty, but the substance of the complaint seems to have some validity.
Marv Gandall ------------------------------------
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Brown" <cbrown at michiganlegal.org> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 1:36 PM Subject: [lbo-talk] New CBS Poll: Bad News For Kerry
>
> From: "Marvin Gandall"
>
>
> No, I think the election was stolen by the Supreme Court justices.
>
> ^^^^^
> CB: I'm not sure what you mean by "no". Yes, I agree the Supreme Court
> majority , five, were part of it. I count them as part of the the
> interlocking directorate of the capitalist bureaucracy, don't you ? Maybe
> you mean that nobody had to call them up and tell them what to do on this
> one. I agree with that too.
>
> What's your point ? That the Supreme Court is "structural" ? :>)
>
> ^^^^^
>
>
>
> Also,
> Watergate was an indisputable conspiracy to steal the 72 election. The
> invasion of Iraq was the work of a cabal with a hidden agenda -- hidden,
> atleast, from the public although not people who follow politics closely.
> Maybe one day we'll find out there was another shooter around Dealey Plaza
> and that Roosevelt really did know the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl
> Harbor; I doubt it, but would not drop stone cold dead if new
incriminating
> evidence did turn up one day.
>
> So while I'm generally skeptical of conspiracy theories,
>
> ^^^^
> CB: This is starting to look like the most widespread error in left
thinking
> in 2004. Why have a bias against socalled conspiracy theories as to what
> happens in a particular instance ? This is generalized defense and
prejudice
> _in favor of_ the ruling class oppressive apparatus. What kind of bias is
> that to cultivate ?
>
> ^^^^^^^
>
> I agree with you that people in power do conspire. But I think they
> conspire over big things, because the risk of exposure is so great, as
Nixon
> discovered. A couple of opinion polls two months before an election? Those
> are hardly earth-shaking
> events, and too uncertain in terms of results -- there are so many other
> election variables, many yet to come into play -- for any would-be
> conspirator(s) to be tempted by what is really penny ante stuff.
>
> ^^^^^
> CB: Exactly because it is penny ante with less risk, why not do it ? All
> Rove and people like him is do this type of dirty tricks stuff.
>
> But I have to say that "conspiracy" is becoming the stupidest word in the
> Left vocabulary. "Conspiracy" from law is an agreement of more than one
> person, a sort of contract, to do an illegal act.
>
> In terms of how the capitalist bureaucracy works, one of its standard
forms
> of operation includes small groups of people getting together planning and
> doing stuff. To call these "conspiracies" is a kind of exaggeration.
> Sometimes they are illegal,sometimes they are not. They are standard
> operating procedure for the state and its oppressive apparatus for
> centuries, millenia. To start labelling them conspiracies, and then
getting
> hung up that one who talks about them has a "theory" is starting to look
> like the greatest corruption of left thought in the last ten years.
>
> I note that the monopoly media has the exact same "theory" about the
> foolishness of socalled conpiracy theories and theorists. This bourgeois
> conception is accepted wholecloth on the email left,as far as I can tell.
It
> is quite a thorough brainwashing of the left by the bosses and their
> ideologists.
>
> ^^^^^
>
>
> Sorry about
> the earlier edginess.
>
> ^^^^^^
>
> CB:Likewise.
>
> No problem, comrade.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> MG
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>