By MICHAEL TAVOLIERO
What if there was a plan, conceived in the incredibly productive times of the 1950s and 1960s, to reshape the world order as we knew it?
What if this plan involved an unlikely alliance between the global elite and Islamic radicals?
It might sound far-fetched at first but consider the profound societal and cultural changes that have occurred since the tragic events of 9/11.
Has there been a noticeable shift in the social and cultural fabric of countries like the United States and parts of Europe?
Are we witnessing the erosion of the post-World War II consensus, which once upheld principles of interdependent mutuality and collective security against the evil that plagued the world in the ‘30’s and ‘40’s?
Amidst the relentless barrage of tragic news and loss that inundates our daily lives, one cannot help but wonder if powerful individuals and groups are collaborating to disrupt the already fragile homeostasis in the world.
Could they be orchestrating a transition towards a fear-based existence, ultimately paving the way for the rise of totalitarianism on a global scale?
It does seem like a scenario straight out of ancient prophecies or Alex Jones, yet recent events have given rise to the reality of such speculations.
While conspiracy theories often elicit skepticism, it is worth delving into the underlying narratives that fuel such conjectures, especially when many conspiracy theories have turned out to be grounded in reality. At the core of this particular theory lies the notion that the global elite, consisting of influential figures from the realms of wealth, politics, and industry, are seeking to consolidate their power and influence over the masses. In their pursuit of dominance, they purportedly view Islamic radicals as valuable allies, leveraging religious extremism to sow chaos and instability in strategic regions around the world.
The adage, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” is often attributed to Winston Churchill.
In this narrative, can the collaboration between the global elite and Islamic radicals serve as a means to an end – the establishment of a totalitarian regime marked by authoritarian rule, pervasive surveillance, and the suppression of dissent? This dystopian vision paints a picture where individual freedoms are sacrificed in the name of security and safety, and citizens are subjected to behavioral modification, constant monitoring and control.
While such a grand conspiracy seems implausible to some, there are historical precedents and contemporary developments that lend credence to these concerns. The rise of authoritarian regimes, the erosion of democratic norms, and the proliferation of surveillance technologies all contribute to a growing sense of unease and distrust.
In the United States, the conversion of individual states, like Alaska, changes the idea of a constitutional republic into a shaded and clandestine monopoly of bureaucracies which urges the surrender of principles like free speech and association to a treatise of rules to be obeyed in day-to-day living.
Not in Alaska … Hmmm … Remember Covid?
However, it is crucial to approach these theories with a critical eye and a healthy dose of skepticism. While there may be kernels of truth in some of the claims, attributing complex geopolitical events to a single, overarching conspiracy oversimplifies the intricate web of global dynamics. Instead of succumbing to fear and paranoia, it is imperative to engage with the world around us in a rational and discerning manner, focusing on empirical evidence and critical analysis.
Russian collusion enjoys the convenience of made-up empiricism to distract certainty, right?
Attributing complex geopolitical events and social phenomena to a single, monolithic conspiracy overlooks the multifaceted nature of global dynamics. The world is shaped by a myriad of interconnected factors, including politics, economics, ideology, culture, and history, making it challenging to reduce complex phenomena to simplistic explanations.
Should we omit climate change from this discussion?
While the idea of a conspiracy involving the global elite and Islamic radicals may capture the imagination of some, is it essential to approach such claims with caution and skepticism ignoring emotion and feelings and rely on empirical proof? Is this reminiscent of the person experiencing a flood only to be told there were several rescue attempts before their demise?
Or am I just a racist?
On the other hand, recently a family was investigated by Indiana officials for refusing to refer to their son using pronouns and a name inconsistent with his biological sex. Despite the unsubstantiated claims of abuse, the State of Indiana claimed the parents made the child’s eating disorder worse and thus removed the child from his home even though this eating disorder worsened after he was removed and placed in a “transition-affirming” home.
Michael Tavoliero is a writer at Must Read Alaska.
