Tuesday, November 6, 2007

Ronpaulian Conspiracy Theory Madness

It's nice to quoted, or the blog equivalent: linked to. Imagine my surprise when I found myself linked to in an amusing bit of preemptive conspiracy theorizing by a Ronpaulian (newly coined phrase -- copyright pending). According to the conspiracy theory postulated by this Ronpaulian blog, the far right wing and racist supporters of Ron Paul are not true Ronpaulians. They are, in fact, part of the great neo-con conspiracy, as are all the bloggers reporting on them, including me.

Now the idea that I am either a neo-con or part of a conspiracy would be surprising to those who know me. I'm a liberal Democrat and far too contrarian to participate in any conspiracy, let alone a massive yet top-secret one of the sort imagined by Ronpaulians. I always wonder exactly why such conspiracies would be considered necessary to explain more simply explained phenomena. Occam's Razor was a rule made to broken by conspiracy theorists. It's absolutely impossible for this person to believe that far-right racist extremists support Ron Paul because they legitimately like him -- he believes they must be working for the great neo-con conspiracy. It is similarly impossible for the Ronpaulian conspiracy theorist to accept the idea that bloggers might be reporting on this support because they find it interesting or dangerous on the one hand, or, on the other, because they support an opponent of Paul, but aren't part of a conspiracy. No. Everyone involved must be part of the anti-Ronpaulian conspiracy scheduled to come to fruition just as the inevitable success of Ron Paul's campaign kicks in. That's the only logical explanation.

from the ironically-named on several levels:
Too Much Tinfoil: "Ron Paul Train Wreck Coming"

Ron Paul Train Wreck Coming

Gh0d, I hope I’m wrong. I see a trap being laid for Ron Paul.

Today on CNN, I saw a video about Hal Turner. This crazy, sad asshole has his own radio show where he says nutball white supremacist crap all day long and goes so far as to suggest that people shoot their politicians.

Here’s the rub: I remember reading on some blog that Hal Turner gave money to Ron Paul. In fact, he gave the maximum possible allowed under law, which is $2,300. They also have been talking up Alex Jones, although Alex Jones is not a white supremacist. Alex is mostly known for his abrasive, combative style of getting in people’s faces. He’s also been an ardent advocate of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Here we come to the 5th of November, where the “money bomb” is supposed to go off. The media knows that they won’t be able to keep the lid on it. Instead, they will point out that Hal Turner made a donation to the campaign and may have urged his radio followers to give as well. Maybe Hal Turner (who would be in the back pocket of the FBI’s Cointelpro division, most likely) mentioned the 5th of November idea or even heavily promoted it. It’s guaranteed that, if he did, they’ll trot out a tape of it so as to imply that it was Hal Turner’s promotion of the November 5th event that made it so popular.

Also, it seems that a racist from Stormfront, a neo-Nazi organization, is a Ron Paul organizer in Tennessee. Other scary associations of Ron Paul with neo-Nazis, etc, are found on this website. I, for one, do not believe most of these allegations. Clearly, racists have supported Ron Paul. That’s what the opposition does: they organize counterintelligence and sabotage political movements that can be threatening. See for examples the way the Feds smashed the American Indian Movement, the Black Panthers, and the anti-war movement of the ’60s.

One thing that the campaign might do to counteract these accusations would be to leak information to a known mole in the campaign (every campaign has them) a short list of some possible candidates. Include a few sensible non-white or non-male choices to counteract the racist associations. These should be serious choices. Thomas Sowell comes readily to mind. He and Ron agree on economics and would make an excellent vice presidential candidate.

Another, more explosive choice, although very attractive to the left, would be Russell Means, a former Libertarian Party candidate from 1988, who also ran for governor once or twice. It might behoove them to verify that Russell Means doesn’t hate Ron’s guts first, of course.

Either way, the Paul campaign will become visible and target #1 for the neo-cons and their paid mouthpieces. They had better be ready for this fight.

Interesting to note that this conspiracy theorist is taking contradictory positions, saying that the racists supporting Paul are in on the conspiracy, then saying that he doesn't believe the charges about racist support at all. That's precisely the sort of internal contradiction that conspiracy-minded Ronpaulians work hard to ignore. It's a constant struggle to keep the simple truth from intruding on the Ronpaulian alternate reality.


Anonymous said...

It’s quite ironic, really, that the Paul-bashers have turned out to be the real conspiracy theorists.

Their first conspiracy theory was that it was just a few dozen (or maybe a few hundred) bloggers in their mothers’ basements, manipulating online polls with their mad hacking skills. See Little Green Football and Pajamas Media. (Remember them?)

The next conspiracy theory was that it was the Ron Paul campaign (which had 4 paid staff at the time) furiously auto-dialing into a text message poll after the Fox News debate, one which allowed only one vote per phone number. See Sean Hannity.

A more recent conspiracy theory was that it was a worldwide network of spam bots, making Ron Paul’s online support look stronger than it really is. Apparently these spam bots are quite sophisticated — they can post YouTube videos, write blog entries, carry on conversations in comment threads, even project holographic images of themselves at Ron Paul campaign rallies. See Wired, a source you would think would know better.

The latest conspiracy theory is that the tens of thousands of Ron Paul supporters are really liberals pretending to be conservatives, financed by Hillary Clinton and George Soros, as if the MoveOn crowd is ready for the Tenth Amendment to be vigorously enforced. See RedState — I bet they’re feeling pretty stupid right about now for banning the only conservative candidate that people are actually getting excited about.

Adam Holland said...

To Anonymous:

What the Paul campaign is doing ain't a conspiracy: it's grass roots campaigning for the internet era. But they ARE gaming the flash TV and internet polls, Youtube rankings, editing relevant Wikipedia pages, etc. Why deny it? It isn't a crime. It's a clever sort of semi-dirty trick that other campaigns will emulate in the future. It's self-evident that this is worth reporting on both to assess the real level of support for the candidates and to understand how new media are changing the campaign environment.

It's also very amusing when the Paul supporters SWEAR they're not gaming the polls and that they reflect real levels of Paul support. Presidential campaigns need that sort of comic relief, and you guys are unwittingly providing it. The more you make these ridiculous claims, the more you encourage debunkers.

But you guys have a nerve saying that the racists supporting your candidate are neo-con double-agents, and that the bloggers reporting it are in on the conspiracy. That's UFO abduction level wacky, and on some level you know it. That's why your comment doesn't address what I posted about this at all.

Terrence C. Watson said...

Great post and great response to that comment, too. My own blog is at http://racistsforronpaul.blogspot.com Yes, the name is obviously tongue-in-cheek, but I think I've made some good points against Ron Paul and his various fanboys, like Lew Rockwell.


adamhollandblog [AT] gmail [DOT] com