Consider the following points:

• After decades of federal meddling in education, the quality of its product has deteriorated. But education funding continues.
• In the 1970s, when federal officials discovered that our nation was importing 30 percent of the oil we use, they launched the Energy Department. After it has spent tens of billions annually impeding energy development, we now import 60 percent of our oil.
• Federal involvement in housing brought on the housing bubble whose collapse ushered in the current recession. But expensive housing programs remain on the federal agenda.
• The Obama administration announced that the deficit for the just-ended fiscal year would be $1.4 trillion — three times the largest amount of a year’s red ink in the nation’s history. But they will still give away billions through a foreign aid program.
• The Constitution requires a formal declaration of war before our nation’s forces can be sent into battle. No declarations have been issued for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But no one is supposed to refer to this portion of the Constitution each federal official has sworn solemnly to uphold.

There are only three possible explanations for the seeming insanity.  1) Our leaders are ignorant of these undeniable facts; 2) Our leaders have the facts but are too dumb to change their course; or 3) Our leaders know what they are doing because the destructiveness they preside over fits into their agenda.
 
The third explanation alone makes sense. But accepting it entails arriving at the notion of conspiracy — the shunned concept defined as a secret plot among more than one for an evil purpose. Merely suggesting conspiracy invites ridicule, harassment, even isolation. But it is those who trash this explanation and who defend the indefensible should be ridiculed.  

A brilliant man once stated, “The first job of conspiracy is to convince the world that conspiracy does not exist.” Many who are not themselves conspirators but who benefit from protecting its existence eagerly do the convincing. They know such effort on their part earns them adulation, exalted position, even monetary gain. That’s how a conspiracy works its evil.

The Wall Street Journal’s Thomas Frank has joined the conspiracy-debunking parade. In a recent article, he equates the conspiracy explanation with paranoia, a worn-out theory advanced decades ago by Richard Hofstadter. Frank targets the John Birch Society and Senator Joseph McCarthy by name, and in doing so is correct because both never shrank from using the reviled word to explain why America is in steep decline. He also indicts television’s Glenn Beck and columnist Michelle Malkin for stirring up their many fans.

Frank is obviously worried. So are other conspiracy debunkers. They undoubtedly understand that once a person accepts conspiracy as the source of the harm being done, he or she gets involved. In other words, self-preservation kicks in. Deciding that stupidity is at the root of the nation’s ills customarily does little more than generate hope that our leaders will soon “get it” and reverse course.

While conspiracy debunkers seek to convince the world of its non-existence, they remind us of Shakespeare’s oft-cited line from Hamlet, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” Frequent protesting that conspiracy doesn’t exist continues to suggest that it does in fact explain what is occurring. 

Frank scoffs at the claim that we as a nation “are being marched secretly into communism or fascism.” He asks, “Why would someone bother?” But honest history that is replete with conspiratorial activity proves that many have indeed bothered to generate colossal harm.  

If there were no conspiracy currently steering what the U.S. government undertakes, wouldn’t sensible leaders abolish the completely unconstitutional departments of education, housing, energy, etc.? Wouldn’t there be a termination of the drive to duplicate for America’s medical industry the harm that has already been done in so many other government operations? Wouldn’t foreign aid be ended? And wouldn’t Thomas Frank be among many calling for a reversal of government’s disastrous policies instead of ridiculing the rising number who are demanding real change?

Those who discount conspiracy do so at their own peril. Exposing it is all that’s needed to defeat it and get the nation back on track.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (10)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

RP said:

Respectful disagreement Conspiracy is NOT the root cause of America's problem. Conspiracy (which DOES exist, by the way) is nothing more than an opportunistic parasite. I will not disagree with the position that our leaders know what they are doing. I am convinced they do. The REAL root of our problem is the reason the parasite (the conspiracy) is able to thrive in America. The REAL root of the problem is morality (or the lack thereof). John Adams said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." A moral and religious people can only exist where there exists absolute truth. America is (for large part) a morally relativistic society. We have (for large part) abandoned absolute truth. People who know Truth would are be so easily deceived by lies (which the conspiracy needs). People who know Truth are not easily led to drink from bitter waters. The conspiracy may facilitate immorality, but it can't force anyone to partake. And yet, even among alleged constitutionalists, there are those who rail against Truth. Not the truth of conspiracy, but the Truth that leads a people to be moral and religious. Should we fight against the parasite (conspiracy)? YES! But unless we promote Truth and combat the REAL root of the problem, we are just pulling weeds. Weeds just grow back.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 23, 2009
Votes: +3

RP said:

	Correction and clarification People who know Truth would not be so easily deceived by lies (which the conspiracy needs). The original post has "... Truth would are be so ...", which makes absolutely no sense. My apologies.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 23, 2009
Votes: +2

Larry Brown said:

... RP: When did "the conspiracy" begin? When did the morals of our nation start down the slippery slope? The question is a circle: A causes B and B causes A. It might be impossible to determine which came first. So I suggest a different tack. Which would be easier expose "the conspiracy" or restore the morals of the nation? IMHO it would be far easier to expose "the conspiracy" then restore the morals of the nation. It would be best to do both.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 23, 2009 | url
Votes: +4

RP said:

A (hopefully cordial) reply to Larry Brown When did the morals of the United States of America begin slipping? July 4, 1776. It hasn't been continuously downward. It's like two steps downward and a step back up. The better question would be "When did moral decline begin?" It began in the Garden of Eden. You can read about it in the book of Genesis. When did the conspiracy begin? Well, in a SENSE it began before the fall of Adam. But if we are speaking of the specific conspiracy we are facing today, we could probably trace it back to approximately 1776 and the Illuminati. It was the 19th century that the real elements began coming together. The 20th century has seen it gain steam at a remarkable pace. There is no circle. The process is that moral corruption breeds conspiracy. Conspiracy only facilitates moral corruption. One is the seed, the other the fertilizer. Would it be easier to expose the conspiracy than to restore the morals of the nation? Undoubtedly so. But to what end? The conspiracy thrives on the lusts and desires of unrighteousness. Restoring morality is indeed a daunting enterprise. How do we take on such a task? We begin with ourselves. We spread it to our families, friends, neighbors, community... the nation. We do it, one day at a time, with perseverance. We can't be moral for six days a week and take Saturday off! And, we can't do it alone. We need the Author of Truth. It would be best to do both. Yes, indeed it would be.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 23, 2009
Votes: +1

DDW said:

In those awful '60s These united States pretty much told God to shove off. God is a gentleman and so He did as we requested. Nature abhors a vacuum. When God lifts away His hand of protection, Satan rushes right in and begins creating the only two things he can create: lies and murders. When morals decline, immorality fills the void. When truth is no longer wanted, lies fill the void. The major problem these United States faces is spiritual, not intellectual. As for those who think they will receive special favors for covering conspiracy and lies, they are trying to pet an alligator and they WILL be devoured when the enemy no longer finds them useful. I personally believe that there are so many conspiracies that even the conspirators, save a very select few, can sort them all out.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 23, 2009
Votes: +3

Still Free said:

	Clear, Concise and Correct ... That's our "JBS Treasure" at work ... explaining the insanity! Beautifully written, as always. Thank you, Mr. McManus.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 24, 2009
Votes: +1

Stophel said:

... It's amazing how the evil conspiracies stare everyone in the face (Rockefeller famously admits his part in the conspiracy), and still people refuse to believe that it is even POSSIBLE that there are evil people in the world who conspire to control it. Every day on Glenn Beck's show, he outlines all the evil connections in the Soetoro administration...but doesn't see "conspiracy"...and denounces everyone as a nut who does see it. For the Christian who knows that Satan has power in this world, conspiracy is not hard to believe. Satan can control the conspiracy, over generations, including people who might not even know at the time that they are his pawns.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 26, 2009
Votes: +1

WM said:

Mrs. In my short 71 year lifetime, these things have changed. The most shameful thing that teens could do were smoking nicotine cigarettes, drinking beer, or pregnancy out of wedlock. Today teens imbibe things I never heard of that destroy their minds and bodies, and out of wedlock pregnancies are not only celebrated, but you wouldn't dare use the term "illigitimate" (a term which is proudly a word on my 1938 legal birth certificate). Divorce was legally limited to "adultery" or physical abuse. Today, there is "no fault". Then, clothing that is tight, a show of cleavage, and any skirt above the knee was indecent. Today, nothing is considered indecent short of total nudity. Homosexuality was an abhorrent perversion and if you had any small inclings in that direction, you had the virtue and respect for others to keep it to yourself. Today it is lauded as "normal" and pushed upon our society (even our youngest) as misunderstood victims who deserve the same rights as people who are born with different colors. Gambling was illegal then. Look at us now! We grew up with, "If you don't work, you don't eat." Now, how many live "on the system"?? Is there any doubt about the morality of the USA? In the 50's, Sundays (AND Wednesday nights!) were reserved for worship and Bible studies! It is common today to see the ball parks filled as we are on our way to worship! If the majority of our nation still holds to Truth and the values thereof, WE HAD BETTER TAKE OUR STAND NOW, AND TAKE IT WITHOUT FEAR!!!! CONSPIRACIES,... BY ANYONE, FOR ANY REASON, AT ANY TIME CANNOT STAND IN THE FACE OF MULTITUDES WHO ARE NOT AFRAID TO STAND FOR WHAT IS RIGHT AND TRUE!!!!! Time is short.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 26, 2009
Votes: +1

It doesn't matter what my name is said:

To all of you: I think that the problem is violent aggression. The problem is pillaging instead of producing. The problem is the idea that you are owed something other than your life, liberty and rightfully gained property. The idea that you can use violence to get your way is the problem. The idea that you can encourage violence from others to get your way is the problem. The idea that you can change others, instead of simply living your life productively, is the problem. All this talk about morality is thinly veiled coercion. That if I don't agree with you, or live my life the way YOU want me to live it, I am deserving of punishment and condemnation is ridiculous. As long as I don't violently aggress, as long as I respect your life, liberty and rightfully gained property, I am fine. The reason the world is unjust is because of the propensity of some to violent coercion to get their way, be it wealth or power or influence or popularity or ... whatever. The ways many of you have framed your comments convinces me that you (and people just like you on all sides of all spectrums) are part of the problem.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 26, 2009
Votes: +1

Cathy W said:

... That there are conspiracies in the world is a foregone conclusion. When three or more people get together, generally two of them conspire against the third at some point, if only to put on a birthday party for the other. The question posed by the writer, however, is that there is one grand conspiracy (or two or three almost-grand conspiracies) being engaged in to destroy the United States of America. Hogwash! Such conspiracies only work if they are small and closely held. The more people who know of them, the weaker they are. A conspiracy that would destroy America would have to be so large that it would fail of its own weight. Instead, we have hundreds, thousands, of small conspiracies with limited goals running around getting in one another's way, creating chaos more often than order.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 29, 2009
Votes: -1