I'm listening to that Norman Dodd interview right now (
LINKEY), and I have to say that he is very vague in describing the conspiracy he espouses. I am at minute 24 of 49, and so far, everything he's said could have been condensed into 5 minutes. (Edited to add: I quit listening at about minute 32, at which point he was still rambling and still hadn't gotten to the crux of it.)
This is the trouble I have generally with conspiracy theories. And, as I've posted before in other threads, the principle of
Occam's Razor states:
"entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity."
One of the general principles of Occam's Razor is that a proposition may not be supported by unproven suppositions. Each unproven supposition you add in to try and support the original proposition has the actual effect of tending to
disprove it.
This is why I refuse to get my unmentionables in a twist about the Bilderbergers and Carlisle Group conspiracy theories. They are
too complex, and rely on too many unprovable suppositions. I
do believe that dark forces
are arrayed against us, but they are in the spiritual realm, not the temporal one.
I also do believe that there is a class of people who consider themselves to be the elites, and that they believe their elitist status entitles them to certain privileges denied to others, and to certain powers
over others. Here's where the theories of a billionaire conspiracy to control the world breaks down: a large part of that class of people who think of themselves as elites are people who have no
real power, and no
real wealth. They are teachers, college professors, student activists, aspirants to political office, community activists, socialists/communists, etc. They may hold a set of common values about how to rule the world, and about their entitlement to do so, but they lack all power to enforce it.
If you look at
Margaret Sanger's biography and you can get past all the hype about her being a crusader for women's rights without throwing up, you'll find that she was not some kind of powerful billionairess. She came from lower middle class roots, and willingly allied herself with billionaires who shared her disgusting and twisted worldview if they would support her goals... ...and
some of them
did.
When I look at the Maafa 21 movie, I see a story of a group of people who had (and continue to have) racist beliefs in common and who saw enforced eugenics as the means of bringing their vile goals into fruition. That shared belief led to their tending to congregate, hire one another, and try to protect each other from public scrutiny that would reflect poorly on their beliefs and goals — in the same way that pederasts trade child pornography pictures amongst themselves and won't rat each other out to law enforcement.
Some of them are billionaires with bizarre ideas about the entitlements of wealth; but Margaret Sanger was all about the entitlements of race, not wealth. So the billionaires and Margaret Sanger each used to other to get what they wanted. What they are doing is evil, no doubt, but for me it doesn't rise to the level of conspiracy.
And I'm not trying to make excuses for them. What they did, and are continuing to do, is terminally vile. I know that I do not necessarily speak for everybody else when I say this, but I personally am a Bible believing Christian, and I see my world through that filter. I'm not capable of seeing it any other way. What some see as conspiracy, I see as a group of individuals with very dark hearts who are in thrall to the devil and doing his bidding. And like
most people who sin, they
know they are sinning, and like the above mentioned pederasts, they do not want to get caught sinning, so they take steps to commit their sins in darkness, away from public view. Evil hates the light and flees from it, because evil cannot exist where there is light.
Anyway, all of that is to say that, while the eugenics and gun-control movements
may be part of some elaborate racist conspiracy, I am cautious to not call it a
conspiracy and think of it instead as a
movement.
.