I have explained that conspiracy is the water that civilization floats upon.
I have explained what a "blueprint" is, it's a fictional sketch of something you want to build. Only people with capital, or architects, dream in blueprint forms. It takes money-power to build wonders, and you have to sketch them first.
"Atlas Shrugged" was a blueprint/sketch by Anna Rosenbaum, child of Capitalists killed by Bolsheviks.
"Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars" is another such true blueprint. Allegedly found on some copy machine? Derp. Thanks to whatever absent minded clerk did that eh?
"Iron Mtn Report" is another such blueprint/sketch. It is dreaming out loud, as in the occult philosophy that what we say is what we do, and when we say something in front of you and then do it, we therefore have power over you. Simply put that is the occult operative mechanism behind fiction as blueprint.
How shall the world be grasped, if there are not those whose fingertips gently stroke the cords by which it be grasped? How shall the grasping occur if those cords are not gently counted and gathered into one fist? How shall the fist of the world, grab the cords of the world, if there isn't someone to type a paragraph using cords and fist and world as words to program your mind to expect it?
I could be a conspiracy "theorist", or a conspiracy factualist as term I see coined below. Ah yes, I like conspiracy factualist much much better. Thanks here to David Kramer for the new term, "conspiracy factualist".
Yes,it is a fact, that blueprints are fictionalized truths. They do represent a building, but only the potential of a building. Blueprints are both fact and fiction, as such.
So factually, how does one write a fictional blueprint?
[link to www.lewrockwell.com
December 1, 2009
'Report from Iron Mountain': Better Late than Never
Posted by David Kramer on December 1, 2009
Back in 1967 a "fictional" book
was printed entitled, Report from Iron Mountain. It allegedly revealed the plans
for a One World Government. Here's an excerpt (page 51 of the report, not the pdf) from this "fictional" report written back in 1967: Nevertheless, an effective political substitute for war would require "alternate enemies," some of which might seem equally far fetched in the context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species. Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power. But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis for a solution.
Conspiracy "theory" has finally become conspiracy fact.
[link to www.lewrockwell.com
] January 1, 2012
Report from Iron Mountain
Posted by David Kramer on January 1, 2012
Back in 1967, a book was published called Report from Iron Mountain. It put forth the claim that "it was authored by a Special Study Group of fifteen men whose identities were to remain secret and that it was not intended to be made public. It details the analyses of a government panel which concludes that war, or a credible substitute for war, is necessary if governments are to maintain power." The author of the book's introduction, Leonard Lewin, later claimed that the book was a hoax. But conspiracy factualists
didn't buy his claim. Guess who was right?
At any time, a capitalist or architect, can refer to a blueprint, as a building or a sketch. The context is set by them, for it is they who have the capital to do grand scale building.
Can't we say that people like Newton, dreamed in the blueprints of math? Isn't math just a blueprint? Therefore do not economists and politicians just sketch what they think might work? And yet, don't all their sketches and math, eventually go into the fire? Do not all the sketches of economists, result in death, wars and ruin?