|
July 07, 2006
Another day, another wolf
In previous posts, I discussed allegations of an allegedly "secret" government plan to create a "North American Union" which would supposedly erase the borders between the United States, Mexico, and Canada. I now see that John Hawkins of Right Wing News has entered the fray, in a dramatic online debate with John Corsi, the man who's been sounding the alarm at World Net Daily and at Human Events (the latter hosting the current debate). John Hawkins doesn't think there's much cause for alarm right now: Let's cut to the chase here, folks: Corsi's articles amount to a great big sack of nothing. There's just no "there, there" to anything he's saying. I mean this stuff is so ludicrous that the sort of people who believe that the Trilateral Commission secretly controls the whole world would look at it and go, "No, that's just too far fetched."More at Human Events and Right Wing News, and trust me, it's getting nasty. (I think it's significant that Corsi has attempted to remove what John properly calls "enormous blunders" -- apparently without even admitting his mistake!) I think Corsi's argument elevates paranoia over substance. The fact that "working groups" have been formed does not mean anything in the legal sense, because they have no power to do anything. What I think is going on is hobnobbing by utopian globalists, which has been uncovered by people who are crying wolf. However, I think it's important to remember that that does not mean that there might not be a wolf in the future. Lots of gun owners, for example, are indignant about the UN's plan for international gun control, and for now, John Bolton is preventing the United States from entering into any treaty which would violate the Second Amendment. The present ineffectiveness of a conspiracy does not negate the existence of a conspiracy, and the powerlessness of conspirators does not negate their existence. And just because a group of utopian globalists can't erase the border does not mean that this is not their plan. They'll keep trying. And I imagine that the blogosphere will keep watching. In this respect, the neat thing about the blogosphere is its sheer size, and uncontrollable nature. What that means is the obsolescence of the old "boy who cried wolf" principle. In the old days, a boy could cry wolf once, maybe twice, and then eventually, no one would pay any attention if on the third occasion he turned out to be right. WorldNetDaily, for example, often strikes me as the boy who simply will not stop crying wolf, because he's now grown into a professional wolf-crier. (I called them on at least one prediction I can remember, and I'm ever-skeptical.) But with the blogosphere, hordes of highly motivated analysts are now there to go over every detail of every boy's cry of wolf. If it turns out that a cry of wolf happens to be right, and that is verified by a blogger, even if the blogger is small and insignificant, his verification of the wolf cry will now be noticed, and will tend to work its way up whatever blog heirarchy might exist at the time. Every cry of wolf can now be heard, analyzed, debunked. Or taken seriously when necessary. I think it's cause for optimism, and I think it's worth remembering that there's more than one moral lesson in the story of the boy who cried wolf. "Nobody believes a liar...even when he is telling the truth!"There's tragedy in missing the truth because it was told by a liar. While Aesop understood the importance of truth, he didn't realize that one day there'd be a lot of nobody bloggers listening. (These nobody bloggers, of course, have the time to evaluate every lie. And every potential truth.) UPDATE: Speaking of global utopianism (which in this case is not paranoia at all) David Kopel reports that the UN gun-grabbing conference has ended in failure for the UN, and victory for the Second Amendment: Today's victory is extremely important, but it should not be mistaken for a final victory in the international arena. The international gun prohibition lobbies are already looking towards other international fora where they can advance their goals, including their ultimate prize--a binding treaty requiring severe restriction of citizen gun possession. The various U.N. departments which have been providing funding and propaganda for gun prohibition and confiscation will almost certainly continue to do so.(Via Glenn Reynolds.) Kopel notes that things could have gone very differently with a different president. And they'll be back. So will the blogosphere. posted by Eric on 07.07.06 at 09:38 AM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
"North American Union?" That name, at least, comes from a series of SF novels by former bureaucrat Alexis Gililland. Which makes me wonder where the rest of the allegations are coming from...