MIERLEEU: April 2015
E-POSWISSELING VAN ONS TYD
From: Petrus Potgieter <potgieter.petrus@gmail.com>
Date: 2015-03-08 22:31 GMT+01:00
Subject: TEKEN OF TOEVAL
Beste Coen Vermaak
Ek en my gesin woon al lank in Vlaanderen, want ek is in 1981 getroud met my (Suid-Afrikaansgebore) Vlaamse vrou - haar ouers was immigrante in SA.
Ons het besluit om met Pase vanjaar SA toe te gaan en, meer spesifiek, om te gaan kyk of 'n mens kan terugkom Orania toe, maar ons is nie regtig besonder geesdriftig nie, veral nadat ons met iemand gepraat het wat 'n paar jaar daar gewoon het.
Terwyl my skoonma vanmiddag by ons op besoek was, het ek vir haar gesê ek wag eintlik op 'n "teken" dat ons inderdaad moet kaartjies koop en gaan en toe sy (natuurlik) wou weet "watse teken", kon ek maar net antwoord: "Ek weet nie, maar ek sal weet as dit die teken is."
Nadat Ingrid (my vrou) haar ma teruggeneem het Gent toe, het ons aan die kombuistafel gesit en gesels terwyl die rekenaar aan was op Radio Pretoria en ons toe oor die nuus hoor dat een-of-ander kernkragorganisasie in SA bankrot is en die naam Pelindaba word toe genoem.
Ingrid merk toe op dat ons buurman-oorkant-die-straat op Hartbeespoort 'n sekuriteitsamptenaar daar was en ek sê toe "Ja, Paul Vermaak."
Aangesien ons in die internetera leef, het ek uit blote nuuskierigheid Paul se naam gaan Google om te sien wat van hulle geword het en toe maak ek natuurlik die afgryslike ontdekking - waarmee dan ook ons meegevoel.
Die erdvarkgat van die internet het my dan uiteindelik by jou uitgebring en vandaar dié skrywe, aangesien ek, voordat ons destyds uit SA vertrek het, persoonlike besoeke gebring het aan oom Robert van Tonder, Eugène Terre'Blanche, Piet Rudolph en Jaap Marais, want dít was waar my lojaliteite geleë was - in die lig daarvan sal jy miskien hierdie skrywe kan begryp...
...miskien hoor ek van jou
From: Coen Vermaak <coen@kerbmaster.co.za>
Date: 2015-03-09 10:59 GMT+01:00
Subject: oor toeval of teken
Geagte mnr. Petrus Potgieter .,Baie dankie vir u brief en ook u meegevoel oor Paul .
Paul was n oulike mens en baie opreg en dit is sulke mense wat goedgelowig is en maklik verkeerde besluite neem
As hy nie Investeck en Erny Els se ontwikkelings Propaganda geglo het nie , was hy vandag nog hier. Hierdie COPPERLEAF onwikkeling is direk langs Diepsloot en om hulle is nog 5 plakkerskampe waar 90% Zimbabweans en Mozambiekers bly.
Daar is tans ongeveer 8 tot 14 miljoen onwettige assielsoekers in die land en in my ondersoek na die moordenaars , sien ek dat hulle hul eie ASLAM id boeke maak .
Hulle is uiters gevaarlik met militere opleiding en die witmense is nie opgewasse teen hulle nie.
Jy se nie of julle kinders het nie maar dit sal onwys wees om weer witmense hierheen te bring.
Jy sal nou snaaks dink maar Eugene was reg toe hy gese het dat die N P regering nie oorgegee het nie maar dat die VOLK oorgegee het.
Verwoerd het ons doodsklok gelui in 1960 toe sy beleid veroorsaak het dat 50% van die volgende geslag gekeer is om gebore te word .
Nou pluk ons die vrugte van mense wat hul besluite berus het op geloof en nie die werklikheid wou raaksien nie .
Verder moet jy verstaan dat die witmense 70 miljoen van hul eie soort doodgemaak het in die twee WERELDOORLOE.
Dink net wat se vakuum dit onder ons gelaat het en as ons die wat deur voorbehoedmiddels gesneuwel het bytel dan praat ons van meer as n 100 miljoen witmense en hul nageslag beloop ten minste 400 miljoen.
Doen jou eie navorsing en jy sal sien dat geen witmens in AFRIKA geduld gaan word nie.
Verder is alles hier besig om in duie te stort , paaie, riool, water,elektrisiteit , werkloosheid verbode immigrante , moord en doodslag is alles wat bydra tot n land wat op sy laaste bene staan.
Ek klink seker baie negatief maar ek baseer my siening nie op geloof nie maar op werklikhede.
Ons het in 1994 vir de klerk gese dit gaan gebeur maar hoor was min.
Daar kon n baie beter ooreenkoms beding geword het maar daar sit ons toe met n man wat n prokureur was en geleer was om te lieg en die Volk glo hom en 68% het ja gestem.
Petrus jy is welkom om van my te verskil en jy moet weer vir my skryf .
Gebruik dan sommer my epos coen@kerbmaster.co.za of kry my op facebook.
Groete vir almal daar
Date: 2015-03-09 15:53 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: oor toeval of teken
To: Coen Vermaak <coen@kerbmaster.co.za>
Ja, in die enkele maande wat ons in Hartbeespoort bure was, het ons beide Paul en Louise (soos ons haar geken het) as gawe mense leer ken - in dié mate dat ons die politiek as gespreksonderwerp liewer vermy het aangesien ons bewus was dat ons politieke beskouinge drasties verskil het. Ingrid herinner my daaraan dat Louise 'n "blourok" was, wat ons destyds maar beskou het as soortgelyk aan die Jehovasgetuies - dis eers wanneer 'n mens in Europa woon & werk dat jy besef hoe naby Afrikaners, van watter denominasie ook al, eintlik aan die Jehovas is en ons sal wéét want ek het 'n Jehova-egpaar meer as 'n jaar lank een maal per week by ons tuis ontvang waartydens hulle my probeer oortuig het om 'n Jehova te word en ek hulle probeer oortuig het dat die hele bybel omtrent "afgekyk" is van ander geskrifte en godsdienste...
Dan het ons natuurlik ons een hond, Suske, by hulle gekoop - hulle het 'n mooi Boerboel gehad wat kleintjies van 'n Rottweiler gehad het.
Die interneterdvarkgat het my nie net na dinge gelei wat ek nie geweet het nie, maar ook na dinge wat eintlik al in vergetelheid verval het, byvoorbeeld die boek wat Willy Diegenant vir my gegee het, te wete THE KLASSEN LETTERS Volume 2 1976 - 1981, wat ek ongelukkig nie destyds gelees het nie omdat ek siek & sat was van die Joods-Christelik-Islamitiese drie-eenheidsgodsdiens se Bedrog, Misleiding, Wanvoorstelling, Swendelary of kortweg: BMWS.
Ons het hier in Europa agtergekom dat die begrip "heiden", wat vir ons niks anders beteken het nie as "swart mensvreters", eintlik verwys na die mense wat op die heide gewoon, met ander woorde plattelanders, in teenstelling met die stedelinge wat eerste gekersten is. Ons het die Vlaamse heidendom saam met ons drie jong seuns ondersoek, maar dit kon ons nie werklik "bekoor" nie en sedertdien leef ons sonder om betrokke te wees by 'n georganiseerde godsdiens, maar hoegenaamd nie as "belydende ateïste" nie.
Ons het dus drie seuns, wat aldrie al uit die huis is en waarvan die oudste getroud is met 'n meisie van Letland en in Riga woon. Die ander twee woon & werk in Gent en gevolglik hoef ons in ons besluit om terug te keer na SA, nié met hulle rekening te hou nie, maar uitsluitlik met die "veiligheidsaspek" vir ons - vandaar dan ook ons belangstelling in Orania, behalwe dat ek die volgende brief van 'n internetvriendin ontvang het:
From: J... <j....@gmail.com>
Date: 2015-03-02 9:03 GMT+01:00
Subject: Nou's ek in N...!
Sjoe, wat 'n verrassing om van jou te hoor! Ver in die wêreld, Kittie ...
Ai, liewe Petrus, terwyl ander mense ordelike, stabiele lewens lei of ly, is ek al weer weg van Orania, taamlik bitterbek. Dis nogal 'n lang, dramatiese vertelling, wat ek later in detail sal verhaal as ek julle hopelik van aangesig tot aangesig ontmoet. Ek woon nou in N..., 'n pragtige dorpie in die Wes-Kaap, al van Desember af. Ek huur 'n knus kothuisie. Ek het J... (eks-verloofde) en die drie seuns in Orania agtergelaat, my huis vir hulle gegee as soen- en skuldoffer – ek was 'n tyd lank feitlik geknak van skuld oor ek nie meer kans gesien het nie, die arme kinders hulle "mammie" ontneem het.
Omdat ek glo dat my persoonlike omstandighede en my eie karakter heelwat bygedra het tot my uiteindelike ongelukkigheid op Orania, maak ek nie my mond in die openbaar (bv. in die media) oop oor my huidige siening van Orania nie.
Kortliks: Ek is ontnugter, want ek is ingeloop, bedrieg en aan die neus gelei, in so 'n mate dat ek my lidmaatskapkaart van die Volksfront Plus opgeknip het. Ek en J... het kartonbokse vol boeke op die vullishoop opgetel, weggegooi om verbrand te word. Wonderlike boeke (tot 'n eerste uitgawe van Langenhoven se Ons weg deur die wêreld), stapels ou Panoramas en Lanterns ... Weggegooi deur Anje Boshoff (Carel IV se vrou) uit die Volkskool se biblioteek sonder om die gemeenskap in kennis te stel. Carel was moerig oor ek dit 'n "barbaarse daad" genoem het.
Ek het gou agtergekom jy moet jou mond hou oor baie dinge, anders is jy persona non grata.
Ek was baie eensaam daar, want ek het feitlik geen geesgenote gevind nie. Daar is baie agterlikes van ons volk gekonsentreer, die uittand-brigade. Dis 'n barre wêreld waar jy kan verstar ... en dis baie duur.
Gaan kyk gerus, maar onthou, almal word aanvanklik bekoor deur die fraai, ordelike prentjie, veral as jy by die lowerryke uitspanplek by die rivier, die Oewer, tuisgaan. My raad is, as julle op die eerste oog af van Orania hou, probeer om 'n plek te huur en eers so 'n paar maande tot 'n jaar daar te woon. Moenie dadelik koop nie.
Julle moet beslis by my in N... kom kuier. Dis 'n baie mooi wêreld hier rond en nie te ver van die see af nie.
'n Mooi pienk Maandag vir julle.
Ns: Onthou, Petrus, hierdie brief is persoonlik en privaat aan jou gerig – nie vir publikasie nie!
Ek het haar soos volg geantwoord:
Date: 2015-03-02 11:39 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: Nou's ek in N...!
To: J... <j....@gmail.com>
My liewe J...
Baie dankie vir 'n openhartige reaksie - in vandag se Facebookwêreld is dit 'n skaars verskynsel...
In die ou Suid-Afrika was ons ook mos so behep met "...wat sal die wêreld van ons dink..." en kyk hoe lyk ons nou!
J..., jy moet jou nie laat mislei deur die ordelike, stabiele lewens wat ander mense lei/ly nie - en jy kan maar seker wees dis ly.
Ek & Ingrid wou oorspronklik met pase SA toe gaan en dan wou ons na die Suidwes/Angolagrens toe ry om te gaan kyk wat van Mahanene geword het waar ek onder andere in die Weermag was, maar toe vind ons drie seuns - wat eintlik aldrie al uit die huis uit is - so één na die ander daarvan uit en wil saamgaan. Die enigste datum wat almal op die oomblik pas, is September.
Intussen het die Oraniagedagte egter opgeduik en toe dink ons ons kan met pase vir so 'n twee weke gaan nét om Orania saam-saam te gaan verken, want ek wás al daar in 2010, maar Frans de Klerk, wat my sou ontvang, het my in die steek gelaat en ek is ná 'n naweek wat ek alleen by Die Oewer deurgebring het ook maar "bitterbek" daar weg.
Eintlik wil ek al geruime tyd vliegtuigkaartjies koop, maar wag nog vir 'n soort "teken" om tot die handeling oor te gaan en dis ook waarom ek vir jou geskryf het. As jy nog by jou eks-verloofde en ook nog "mammie" was, sou ek byvoorbeeld kon vra of julle 'n ou motor met woonwa kan gebruik wanneer ons weer terukom Vlaanderen toe en as jy dan sou antwoord dat julle kán, dan kan ons hulle by julle laat tot 'n volgende keer...en dan had ek natuurlik my teken.
Hierdie skrywe van jou is wél 'n teken dat ons Orania nie 'n prioriteit moet maak nie en eerder in September via N... Suidwes/Angola toe moet ry.
Ek is natuurlik jammer om van jou onaangename ondervinding in Orania te hoor, maar kan nie regtig sê dat ek verbaas is daaroor nie - jy het jou "vrye gees" al te veel die vrye teuels gegee om jou te laat kortwiek deur gewone of geëikte/geykte (common or garden variety) huigelary.
Ek & Ingrid is die absolute teenpool van koningshuise en anderlike dinastieë, wat eintlik die wesenskenmerk van die Afrikaner is en ons onderskei van ons Europese voorgeslagte.
As jy wil, hou ek jou op die hoogte van ontwikkelinge en ons sal beslis nie op jou nek kom lê nie!
Coen, ek het jou nou al baie meer laat kry as waarop jy gereken het, maar om aan te toon dat ek presies weet waarvan jy praat wanneer jy sê: Verder is alles hier besig om in duie te stort , paaie, riool, water,elektrisiteit ..., kan jy gerus hier gaan lees as jy lus het:
Wat n wonderlike voorreg om Iemand te ontmoet wat in n paar sinne sy vinger presies op die sweer te plaas wat ons volk vir meer as n honderd jaar vergiftig het.
Die christene het baie om te antwoord vir die onheil wat hulle oor ons volk gebring het , maar dit is seker onregverdig om die normale kerkganger te beskuldig.
Dit is die leiers van die kerke wat ons in die moeras ingelei het soos die spreekwoordelike JUDAS bok.
Gelukkig het ek nie in Paul se kerk grootgeword nie maar sy vrou Louisa was die groot oorsaak dat Paul sulke dwase besluite geneem het omdat hulle vas geglo het dat hulle n bewaar engel het .
Jy kan gerus ook ons Boerestaat webwerf besoek
En ja van Orania kan jy my niks vertel nie ,Hulle is nog vas oortuig dat seks sonde is en dat die spermpie wat nie n trouring aan het nie , nie n SIEL gaan kry nie Hulle is n voortsetting van die gif waarvan ek gepraat het. Hulle is diegene wat ons nageslag uitgewis het sonder om n oog te knip of selfs te verstaan wat hulle gedoen het.
Praat later weer en groete aan die gesin
Posted by Petrus Potgieter at 11:03 AM No comments:
RADIO PRETORIA REDAKSIONELE KOMMENTAAR
16 April 2015 - ‘n Omvattende Afrikanerstrategie nodig
Daar is al hoe meer eenstemmigheid, vanuit feitlik alle oorde in Afrikanergeledere, dat die land tans in ‘n stadium van ongekende wetteloosheid inbeweeg. In die tagtigerjare het dit heelwat minder as die huidige skynbare anargie gekos om ‘n noodtoestand te laat afdwing met die doel om wet en orde te herstel en menselewens te beskerm.
Vandag word veral die wetteloses se regte hoog geag: die vermeende moordenaar het die reg om op borg vrygelaat te word; onwettige immigrante het die reg om beskerm te word teen uitsetting uit die land; stakende werkers het dikwels meer regte as die werkgewers wat hulle salarisse betaal, en so kan die lys nog heelwat uitgebrei word.
Hierdie toestand van wetteloosheid het al daartoe gelei dat daar gepraat word van ‘n toestand van anargie wat heers. ‘n Engelssprekende rubriekskrywer, Eric de Castro, beskryf in ’n artikel op die webwerf News24, ’n anargie as “’n toestand van wanorde as gevolg van die afwesigheid van ‘n regering – die chaotiese toestand wat ontstaan as gevolg van daardie afwesigheid – ‘n toestand van verwarring en wilde gedrag waardeur die mense van ‘n land, groep of organisasie, nie beheer word deur wette en reëls nie. Daar heers ‘n ontkenning van die bestaan van gesag en instellings – ontwrigting van vrede en openbare orde. Wetteloosheid, nihilisme, revolusie, opstand, chaos, opstand, rumoer, onrus.”
As daar ooit sprake was van ‘n omvattende aanslag teen veral die Afrikaner, dan is dit juis nou.
Ons kan onsself nie sus met die gedagte dat die huidige xenofobiese geweld slegs by geweld teen buitelanders gaan bly nie.
Die huidige beeldestorm is ‘n voorbeeld daarvan. Die universiteite is steeds in die spervuur, die skole is onderdruk oor toelatingsprosesse, boere se grond word al feller geteiken, en dit gaan nie noodwendig ophou by landbougrond nie.
Daar word dikwels vanuit owerheidsweë gedreig dat as grond nie oorgedra gaan word na swart eienaars nie, daar ‘n revolusie gaan kom.
Op hierdie dreigement het TLU SA al tereg die vraag gevra of mense besef watse revolusie kan wag as daar nie meer kos in die land gaan wees nie?
Die Arabiese lente en die gebeure in Egipte, Tunisië en Libië het dit duidelik uitgewys.
Die Nelson Mandela Stigting se jongste navorsing dui daarop dat daar tans meer rassisme in die land is as in 1994. Dit beteken dat daar tans ‘n gees van onversoenbaarheid in die land heers. Navorsing laat verlede jaar het daarop gedui dat wit- en swartmense mekaar steeds minder begin vertrou.
Steeds is daar instansies wat probeer voorhou dat die onderhandelings voor 1994 ‘n sukses was. Dit was bepaald nie!
Minderheidsregte is hoogstens semanties aangespreek, maar nie wesenlik nie. Daar is nie onderhandel vir ‘n algehele amnestie van veligheidsmagte nie; daar is nie “onomkeerbaar” onderhandel vir eiendomsregte nie; daar is nie onderhandel vir die uiteindelike uitfasering van swart bevoordeling nie; die kultuurerfenisse van die land se diverse gemeenskap is nie “onomkeerbaar” vasgelê nie.
Wat nou nodig is, is ‘n nuwe strategie en onderhandeling na ‘n ander model, waarin vir ‘n begin, minderheidsregte baie stewiger en duideliker omlyn, vasgelê moet word.
Om dit te kan afdwing, sal ‘n omvattende Afrikanerstrategie, met sterk instellings wat aan daardie strategie gestalte gee, nodig wees.
Ons het nie meer die luukse om vas te klou aan magsbasisse nie. Almal se plek en se rol moet uitgeklaar word ten einde ons regmatige eise weer op die tafel te kry, ter wille van die oorlewing van ons kinders en kleinkinders.
Posted by Petrus Potgieter at 9:57 PM No comments:
ÔSEM(ROWEND)...IN GOEIE TRÔNSVÔÔLS
Posted by Petrus Potgieter at 5:30 PM No comments:
WAAROM "SAMESWERINGSTEORIEË" EN NIÉ SAMESWERINGSHIPOTESES NIE?
By WakingTimes April 2, 20150 CommentsRead More →
Lance deHaven-Smith, Ph.D, New Dawn
In his book Philosophical Investigations, philosopher of science Ludwig Wittgenstein demonstrated that words are more than designations or labels. They are signals in a context of activity, and are invested with many assumptions about the roles and social status of speakers and listeners.
In the 20th century, men often called women “girls.” This term, while indeed referring to something real – to women – was more than merely a label; it was demeaning and implicitly conveyed a subservient status. Wittgenstein called the common sense view of words standing for things, the “naming theory of language.” However, he pointed out, if words were merely labels, you could not teach language to children. If you pointed at a table and said “table,” how would a child know you are referring to the piece of furniture and not to the rectangular shape of its top, or the table’s colour, or its hardness, or any number of other attributes? Language is taught in the context of activity. You say to the child, “the cup is on the table,” “slide the cup across the table top,” “I am setting the table for dinner,” and slowly the child learns what a table is and how the word table is used.
Wittgenstein’s observation may seem simple, but it posed a profound challenge to all of Western philosophy since Plato, who had asked: What is beauty? What is truth? What is justice? Wittgenstein’s critique of the naming theory of language suggested these were the wrong questions. What needs philosophical investigation is who uses such words in what circumstances and with what implications.
The term conspiracy theory did not exist as a phrase in everyday conversation before 1964. The conspiracy theory label entered the lexicon of political speech as a catchall for criticisms of the Warren Commission’s conclusion that US President Kennedy was assassinated by a lone gunman with no assistance from, or foreknowledge by any element of the United States government. Since then, the term’s prevalence and range of application have exploded. In 1964, the year the Warren Commission issued its report, the New York Times published five stories in which conspiracy theoryappeared. In recent years, the phrase has occurred in over 140 New York Times stories annually. On Amazon.com, the term is a book category that includes in excess of 1,300 titles. In addition to books on conspiracy theories of particular events, there are conspiracy theory encyclopedias, photographic compendiums, website directories, and guides for researchers, sceptics and debunkers.
Initially, conspiracy theories were not an object of ridicule and hostility. Today, however, the conspiracy theory label is employed routinely to dismiss a wide range of anti-government suspicions as symptoms of impaired thinking akin to superstition or mental illness. For example, in his 2007 book on the assassination of President Kennedy, former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi says people who believe JFK conspiracy theories are “as kooky as a three dollar bill in their beliefs and paranoia.” Similarly, in Among the Truthers, Canadian journalist Jonathan Kay refers to 9/11 conspiracy theorists as “political paranoiacs” who have “lost their grip on the real world.” Making a similar point, if more colourfully, in his popular book Wingnuts journalist John Avlon refers to conspiracy believers as “moonbats,” “Hatriots,” “wingnuts,” and the “Fright Wing.”
As these examples illustrate, conspiracy deniers adhere unwittingly to the naming theory of language. They assume that what qualifies as a conspiracy theory is self-evident. In their view, the phrase conspiracy theory as it is conventionally understood, simply names this objectively identifiable phenomenon. Conspiracy theories are supposedly easy to spot because they posit secret plots that are too wacky to be taken seriously. Indeed, the theories are deemed so far-fetched they require no reply or rejoinder; they are objects of derision, not ideas for discussion. In short, while ridiculing conspiracy beliefs, conspiracy deniers take the conspiracy theory concept itself for granted.
This is remarkable, not to say shocking, because the concept is both fundamentally flawed and in direct conflict with English legal and political traditions. As a label for irrational political suspicions about secret plots by powerful people, the concept is obviously defective because political conspiracies in high office do, in fact, happen. Officials in the Nixon administration did conspire to steal the 1972 presidential election. Officials in the Reagan administration did participate in a criminal scheme to sell arms to Iran and channel profits to the Contras, a rebel army in Nicaragua. The Bush-Cheney administration did collude to mislead Congress and the public about the strength of its evidence for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. If some conspiracy theories are true, then it is nonsensical to dismiss all unsubstantiated suspicions of elite intrigue as false by definition.
This fatal defect in the conspiracy theory concept makes it all the more surprising that most scholars and journalists have failed to notice that their use of the term to ridicule suspicions of elite political criminality betrays the civic ethos inherited from British legal and political traditions. The Magna Carta placed limitations on the King, guaranteed trial by one’s peers, assigned historic revenue sources to London, and in other ways recognised the dangers of unrestrained political authority. More generally, the political institutions of the English speaking peoples presuppose political power is a corrupting influence which makes political conspiracies against the people’s interests and liberties almost inevitable. One of the most important questions in Western political thought is how to prevent top leaders from abusing their powers to impose arbitrary rule or tyranny. The men and women who fought for citizens’ rights, the rule of law, and constitutional systems of checks and balances would view today’s norms against conspiratorial suspicion as not only arrogant, but also dangerous and historically illiterate.
The founders of English legal and political traditions would also be shocked that conspiracy deniers attack and ridicule individuals who voice conspiracy beliefs, and yet ignore institutional purveyors of conspiratorial ideas, even though the latter are the ideas that have proven truly dangerous in modern history. Since at least the end of World War II, the citadel of theories alleging nefarious political conspiracies has been, not amateur investigators of the Kennedy assassination and other political crimes and tragedies, but political elites and governments. In the first three decades of the post-World War II era, officials asserted that communists were conspiring to take over the world, Western governments were riddled with Soviet spies, and various social movements of the 1960s were creatures of Soviet influence. More recently, Western governments have accepted US claims that Iraq was complicit in 9/11, failed to dispose of its biological weapons, and attempted to purchase uranium in Niger so it could construct nuclear bombs. Although these ideas were untrue, they influenced millions of people, fomented social panic, fuelled wars, and resulted in massive loss of life and destruction of property. If conspiracy deniers are so concerned about the dangers of conspiratorial suspicions in politics and civic culture, why have they ignored the conspiracism of top politicians and administrators?
In my book Conspiracy Theory in America, I reorient analysis of the phenomenon that has been assigned the derisive label of conspiracy theory. In a 2006 peer-reviewed journal article, I introduced the concept of State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD) to displace the term conspiracy theory. I say displace rather than replace because SCAD is not another name for conspiracy theory; it is a name for the type of wrongdoing which the conspiracy theory label discourages us from speaking. Basically, the term conspiracy theory is applied pejoratively to allegations of official wrongdoing that have not been substantiated by public officials themselves.
Deployed as a derogatory putdown, the label is a verbal defence mechanism used by political elites to suppress mass suspicions that inevitably arise when shocking political crimes benefit top leaders or play into their agendas, especially when those same officials are in control of agencies responsible for preventing the events in question, or for investigating them after they have occurred. It is only natural to wonder about possible deception when a US president and vice president bent on war in the Middle East are warned of impending terrorist attacks, and yet fail to alert the public or increase the readiness of their own and allies’ armed forces. Why would people not expect answers when Arabs with poor piloting skills manage to hijack four planes, fly them across the eastern United States, somehow evade America’s multilayered system of air defence, and then crash two of the planes into the World Trade Center in New York City and one into the Pentagon in Washington, DC? By the same token, it is only natural to question the motives of President Bush and Vice President Cheney when they dragged their feet investigating this seemingly inexplicable defence failure and then, when the investigation was finally conducted, they insisted on testifying together, in secret, and not under oath. Certainly, citizen distrust can be unwarranted and overwrought, but often citizen doubts make sense. People around the world are not crazy to want answers when a US president is assassinated by a lone gunman with mediocre shooting skills who manages to get off several lucky shots with an old bolt-action carbine that had a misaligned scope. Why would there not be doubts when an alleged assassin is apprehended, publicly claims he is just a patsy, interrogated for two days but no one makes a recording or even takes notes, and then shot to death at point-blank range while in police custody at police headquarters?
In contrast, the SCAD construct does not refer to a type of allegation or suspicion; it refers to a special type of transgression: an attack from within on the political system’s organising principles. For these extremely grave crimes, English legal and political traditions use the term high crime and included in this category is treason and conspiracies against the people’s liberties. SCADs, high crimes, and antidemocratic conspiracies can also be called elite political crimes and elite political criminality. The SCAD construct is intended not to supersede traditional terminology or monopolise conceptualisation of this phenomenon, but rather to add a descriptive term that captures, with some specificity, the long-recognised potential for representative democracy to be subverted by people on the inside – the very people who have been entrusted to uphold the constitutional order.
If political conspiracies in high office do, in fact, happen; if it is therefore unreasonable to assume conspiracy theories are, by definition, harebrained and paranoia; if constitutional systems of checks and balances are based on the idea that power corrupts and elite political conspiracies are likely; if, because it ridicules suspicion, the conspiracy theory label is inconsistent with the traditional Western ethos of vigilance against conspiracies in high office; if, in summary, the conspiracy theory label is unreasonable and dangerous, how did the label come to be used so widely to begin with?
Most people will be shocked to learn the conspiracy theory label was popularised as a pejorative term by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in a global propaganda program initiated in 1967. This program was directed at criticisms of the Warren Commission Report. The propaganda campaign called on media corporations and journalists around the world to criticise conspiracy theorists and raise questions about their motives and judgments. The CIA informed its contacts that “parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by communist propagandists.” In the shadows of McCarthyism and the Cold War, this warning about communist influence was delivered simultaneously to hundreds of well-positioned members of the press in a global CIA propaganda network, infusing the conspiracy theory label with powerfully negative associations. In my book, I refer to this as the “conspiracy theory conspiracy.”
For a more detailed exposition on the above, read Prof. Lance DeHaven-Smith’s Conspiracy Theory in America (University of Texas Press, 2013), available from all good bookstores and online retailers.
LANCE DEHAVEN-SMITH is Professor in the Reubin O’D. Askew School of Public Administration and Policy at Florida State University. A former President of the Florida Political Science Association, deHaven-Smith is the author of more than a dozen books, including The Battle for Florida, which analyses the disputed 2000 US presidential election, as well as The Hidden Teachings of Jesus: The Political Meaning of the Kingdom of God (Phanes Press, 2001). His latest book isConspiracy Theory in America (University of Texas Press, 2013). DeHaven-Smith has appeared on Good Morning America, the Today Show, NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, CBS Nightly News with Dan Rather, the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and other US TV and radio shows. His website iswww.dehaven-smith.com.
Posted by Petrus Potgieter at 10:58 AM No comments:
SLEGS BLANKES IS RASSISTE
WATCH: I don't want to see a white face - Mugabe
10 April, 11:27 AM
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe told a crowd of media and spectators on Thursday while visiting Hector Pietersen Memorial in Soweto, "I don't want to see a white face". Watch.
An SABC reporter described the incident as Mugabe exited the museum, he walked past a television journalist who asked whether the tour had evoked any emotion.
When Mugabe saw a white journalist behind her, he pushed the microphone away and reportedly said: "I don't want to see a white face."
Mugabe's comment can be heard in the above video.
Posted by Petrus Potgieter at 9:33 AM No comments:
Let veral ook op die enkele kommentaar heel aan die einde wat ek uit die honderde "uitverkies" het...
A rainbow nation in pieces
Security stepped up after Paul Kruger statue defaced
Louis Botha statue should be removed from its pedestal
The public arguments around symbolism, history and racism the last few weeks have brought out the worst in white and black participants. But perhaps it is part of a catharsis that we haven’t properly experienced since liberation 21 years ago – the price we’re paying for a smooth transition to democracy.
I think we have to accept that the dream of a rainbow nation now lies in pieces at our feet.
If this Mandela/Tutu concept could not withstand the test of time, isn’t it time for it to disappear so that we can build something else in its place? Is it time for a paradigm shift?
It was thoroughly depressing, though, to see otherwise reasonable people withdraw into racial trenches from where they attacked and defended their own “group”. It’s as if we haven’t made any progress since 1994 in getting to know each other’s fears, frustrations and anger.
Harsh, hurtful words were exchanged the last few weeks. My first reaction was that it did more damage than good and simply hardened attitudes. Or did it?
It is crystal clear that there is an immense reservoir of black anger and impatience at the status quo. On the white side there is a groundswell of frustration at remaining the target of all resentment so long after the formal end of apartheid.
Many black voices argue that the social and economic environment in the country is still dominated by the tiny white minority. It is as experienced as a basic injustice, an assault on black dignity and pride and a message that they’re still regarded as inferior.
Many declare that this can be blamed on the white community’s racism, arrogance and resistance to reconciliation.
Some take it a bit further and say that all symbols of white history before 1994 should be destroyed and their wealth be redistributed.
Few white voices have shown any understanding of these frustrations of dreams deferred. And then they do exactly what reinforces the prejudices against them: they make sarcastic comments about Africa and her people’s failures and rub the achievements of the so-called European civilisations under black noses. And so the vicious cycle continues.
I was shocked recently at this white insensitivity and arrogance, even if it is true that it is a result of fear and ignorance. It really appears as if they believe that now that the political power has shifted from white to black, nothing else has to change.
But I’m also surprised how few black voices are prepared to publicly admit that we would not have had today’s polarised conversations if the ANC governments since 1994 had governed with more vision and efficiency and with less corruption, private empire building, nepotism and wasting of resources.
During the weeks that these debates were raging, newspapers were full of reports about gross corruption in government, manipulation of institutions of our democracy, billions spent on aircraft and super luxury vehicles for politicians, a complete disregard by politicians and civil servants for ordinary people in townships and squatter camps, and a reminder of what happened during the Marikana Massacre.
And yet the focus was solely on white privilege and intransigence.
As someone tweeted this week, and I thought it was a legitimate point to raise: “If statues are symbols of oppression, what is dysfunctional hospitals, mud schools, collapsed water and electricity infrastructure?”
But I can understand why it could be difficult for many black people to admit to white counterparts that the black-dominated government was failing. There is a good Afrikaans expression for this:skaam-kwaad. A mixture of shame and anger.
A mosaic nation
Some voices – it was all over Facebook and Twitter – then went one step further: you whites are foreigners, you don’t belong here. Shut up and go away or we’ll make you. Sigh.
The voices of the wild and irrational ones among us will be loudest in the days ahead. The ground is fertile for the mushrooming of the EFF and its ilk.
The voices of reason on all sides will have to work much harder to be heard over the shouting. Emotional over-reactions will be counter-productive.
It turns out we were not a rainbow nation after all. Perhaps we should borrow a term from the long-time former mayor of Jerusalem, Teddy Kollek – without judging his politics or legacy of course.
Kollek once said his dream for his troubled and divided city was to be a mosaic of different cultures where the tension is benign and invigorating and not threatening to destroy the city.
Perhaps the best we can do for now is to be just a mosaic nation. But we should never abandon the noble dream of one day achieving that elusive ideal of a non-racial society.
Disclaimer:News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.
William Jefferies - April 7, 2015 at 14:20
Report commentComments Policy
Here's a thought - We are fiddling with statues while 'Rome burns'.
Why not reinvent southern Africa. All southern African countries are European constructs. Why not redraw the country map by having major ethnic groups in their own states as it would have been without the colonialists and then group them together in a federation of southern African states. Much like Europe is today. The French live in France so the Zulu's live in Zululand, etc etc.
Then there is no past just future.
Perhaps that is what we need. Put everyone like the Zulu's Sotho's etc in each cultures own country and then link it all together in a federation of southern African states. This would make more sense than fiddling with statues while 'Rome burns'.
mosaïek is die nuwe apartheid
Posted by Petrus Potgieter at 9:50 AM No comments:
WAAROM "SAMESWERINGSTEORIEË" EN NIÉ SAMESWERINGSHI...
OPE BRIEFIE (BYGEWERK MET DIE KLIPVROU)
BEVESTIGING VAN BMWS