Was reminded how Epstien not killing himself was/is so accepted yet it’s still a conspiracy theory. Is there any similar ones you guys believe to be completely true ?

  • jantin@lemmy.world
    73·
    11 months ago

    Was there a massive behind-the-scenes NWO plan between billionnaires, old aristocracy and top politicians to fuck up the world, reduce population etc? No, the world ran its natural, chaotic course for most of history.

    Is there this kind of conspiracy now?

    ABSOLUTELY YES.

    In 2023 it is not possible to have any influence and not be aware of the climate disaster. Anyone who does have big influence and does not act to mitigate warming and its consequences is doing it willingly and with full conscience. Doubly so if they act to worsen the situation. It’s almost like the elites read some of the crackhead theories and thought “hey, this is actually a decent plan!”

    • JoBo@feddit.uk
      35·
      11 months ago

      It might feel almost like that but there’s no conspiracy, just power doing what only power can: protecting itself. These people have billions tied up in fossil fuels; oil wells and coal mines but also the products which rely on them. Tesla is only profitable because it sells its carbon credits to carbon-reliant manufacturers.

      None of these people would exactly be left in dire straits if we stopped using carbon fuels tomorrow. But they would lose most of their wealth and thus most of their power.

      There are undoubtedly small-scale conspiracies, such as various oil companies covering up what they knew about global warming decades ago, or misleading accounts of emissions. But there is no grand (explicit) conspiracy, just tips and tricks and extremely rich people refusing to become merely rich. Even if it means planning escape bunkers and working out how to control the servants they will need to take with them when their money means nothing any more.

      • jantin@lemmy.world
        8·
        11 months ago

        Yes. And they know protecting themselves means destroying lives of billions so they need to make sure the billions won’t go after them. And since the masses are also aware of the situation it means at least short-term planning against the people. This requires at least basic coordination between interest groups and gradual capturing of whatever means of power are still left for the masses. Then they figure out how easy it is to wield even more power and off we go to the land of the tin foil headwear.

      • icepuncher69@sh.itjust.works
        4·
        11 months ago

        Id say we repalce millionares, politicians and all of the leadership with A.I. Im convinced that it will pretty much save us from ourselves, or at least from ashole leadership since they are not capable of making decisions for the greater good, specially when it comes to inequality and global warming. Democracy is a lie, we are playing a videogame and we are the little brother with an unpluged controler being made to think that we are playing, but we are not and the controller is just so that we dont riot.

        • JoBo@feddit.uk
          5·
          11 months ago

          AI simply reproduces the world it has obtained all its content from. It’s not intelligent in any way, shape or form. It’s a system perpetuator and it’s not going to save you.

          • icepuncher69@sh.itjust.works
            1·
            11 months ago

            But we are close, and it could probably do a better job than the leadership that we have right now if we feed it with the right data. But when i mean A.I. i dont mean language models or machine learning, I mean the singularity type thing that can get better and realize when its failing so that it can correct it and itself.

            • JoBo@feddit.uk
              1·
              11 months ago

              We’re not close at all. It’s good at some well-defined tasks, that’s all. It is not intelligent, it cannot think, it is not capable of ruling the world and neither should we want it to. “Hey, here’s all the fucking terrible decisions humans have made in the past, copy them.”

              • icepuncher69@sh.itjust.works
                1·
                11 months ago

                I say that we should feed it diferent data and tune its performance before we set it out, of course we are not gonna put chat gpt as it is as the president and pray, of course not, and yes its not inteligent, neither are our leaders, but it would be able to control logistics amd enforce a judiciary system in a fair way . I think that you are simply not open to that idea and i respect that since there are a lot of risks to the A.I. thing, like it going full skynet on us, but imho it shouldnt do that unless we explicitly program it to destroy all humans, and you cant denny that the cycle of corruption with human leadership is just gonna continue no matter what system or people we put on the kings throne, and given time it will always fail or default into tyrany and fascism. Communism is unacheabable, they never get past the dictatorship part, democracy (even if voting actually did something) ends up defaulting into a popularity contest and the masses in all honestly can be terribly wrong be it by willingly having bad hatefull takes or by being manipulated, and i think i really shouldnt explain why tyrany or fascism are wrong, and anarchic comunities work only in a very small scale like tribes or small villages and even then they are usually reigned by religious believes and traditions. You could have something going with social democracies, but the problem of corruption is always present, and it suffers the same problem as democracies. The only thing that might work is the warhamer thing with the god emperor, (stick with me, im serious on this one) in like the golden age of humanity, since by ourselves we are never acheaving unity, we would need an all powerfull figure to trully unite us all, and since we dont have magical psichic neandertals, and religion is a no go, id say that an omnipresesnt benevolent, A.I. is the next best thing.

    • jantin@lemmy.world
      11·
      11 months ago

      I’d put the cutoff between the “natural” history and emerging NWO around 1995. From whatever little I know the Clinton administration wanted to seriously tackle climate change and use it to reestablish the US as global leader in some regards. In 1992 the first attempt at global climate treaty was sabotaged by big business lobby and it kinda went downhill from there.