top of page

The Conspiracy of Conspiracies

The Conspiracy of Conspiracies

Image: The Conspiracy of Conspiracies

First off, let us be clear: this post is not going to argue the truth or validity of any ONE particular conspiracy theory or explanation of reality over another. It is, in fact, the very point of this article NOT to do so. Rather, we intend to reveal the conspiracy of conspiracies: THE MOTHER OF ALL CONSPIRACIES, if you will. There is, in fact, one overarching explanation which resolves the apparent conflict and confusion arising from multiple competing versions of reality, history, economics, politics, religion, and yes, conspiracies, including—but not limited to—the illusory freedom and actual enslavement of humanity by the 1%, International Banking Cartels, the Monetary System, The New World Order, Zionists, The Illuminati, reptilian overlords, alien invaders, Archons, various other nefarious forces of darkness, et al (sincerest apologies if we missed your particular conspiracy theory / alternative explanation of choice).  Even the staunchest believers must agree: they cannot ALL be true, right? (Or can they?)

Let’s see how deep the rabbit hole really goes.

Conspiracy Theory Defined

 Conspiracy Theory definition

According to Wikipedia, the definition of conspiracy theory is as follows:

“A conspiracy theory is an explanatory hypothesis that accuses two or more persons, a group, or an organization of having caused or covered up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation which is typically taken to be illegal or harmful. Although the term “conspiracy theory” has acquired a derogatory meaning over time and is often used to dismiss or ridicule beliefs in conspiracies,[1] it has also continued to be used to refer to actual, proven conspiracies, such as United States President Richard Nixon and his aides conspiring to cover up the Watergate scandal in the 1970s.” Source:

Is it truly enough to define this term and claim to understand it without also looking at the internal psychological motivations behind the existence of conspiracy theories? In other words, defining the term is just the tip of the iceberg. A conspiracy theory is an effect, and all effects have a cause. The cause of any theory is not external. The phenomenon or event(s) a theory or explanation purports to describe and explain may be externalized in nature (“out there”), but the theory or explanation itself is internal, it is a mental construct (“in here”). All mental constructs originate in the mind(s) of individuals for a reason… they have a purpose. They are motivated into existence, and that motivation is itself an individuated internal psychological response to the external phenomena / event(s).

How Do Conspiracy Theories Emerge?  

Motivation is both an effect and a cause. Motive appears. It is formed. An event (say, 9/11) happens. Our immediate reaction may be shock, anger, sadness, and fear—and many more.  We may also have an immediate intuitive insight/response like: “Oh my God, it’s an inside job!” (Our personal intuitive insight as we saw planes hitting towers). As we have time to dwell on things, and our initial reaction subsides, we are left with a secondary wave of internal responses to what we are being told to believe about the event. Perhaps we notice things about the official version of the event, the media coverage, particular details, omissions, peculiarities, anomalies, etc. We may begin to develop a deeper feeling, a stronger hunch—intuition, again—that “something’s just not right with the official version of events.” So our minds begin gathering and putting together the pieces of the puzzle until a version of events emerges which not only “makes sense” but that “feels right;” that is, explains any initial intuitive insight we experienced in the moment, and satisfies the deepening intuitive feeling we had which made us question the official story, accepted explanation, and/or established dogma surrounding the event.

There are, of course, other possible motives. Perhaps we wish to intentionally fabricate a lie and create confusion. Perhaps we wish to make ourselves seem like geniuses or feel important. Perhaps we are cynical and want to believe the worst of our government. Perhaps we are bored, like solving mysteries and find this intriguing event in history a worthwhile pursuit of our time and intellectual prowess (like a Sherlock Holmes). Perhaps we identified with Scully and Mulder of the X-Files. Perhaps we, like an overzealous prosecuting attorney, feel it’s our job to indict what we believe to be a corrupt and nefarious government in cahoots with a secret hidden cabal, and will build a case against them no matter what. Perhaps we are part of some militant group like Anonymous and feel we have to believe in conspiracies to remain part of our clan. Then there’s just good old fashioned skepticism (pure intellectual doubt). To sum up, perhaps we experience no particular intuitive feeling that “something’s not right with the official version of events.” We can hop on the conspiracy bandwagon for any number of different motivations: personal, egotistical, rational, irrational, peer-pressure, etc.

For the purposes of our discussion, however, while acknowledging not everyone who believes in conspiracy theories does so because they are responding to an intuitive impulse, we will for the sake of argument give people the benefit of the doubt: that on some level, no matter how subtle it may be, they refute the established explanations in favour of alternative theories to satisfy an internal nagging doubt which simply cannot accept the status quo as truth.  Our reason for making this distinction is sound. One who formulates or adopts an intellectual belief in conspiracy theory based on an intuitive impulse is making use of an additional faculty as opposed to one whose motivations are based solely in ego-mind. However, as will shortly become clear, intuitive impulse or not, a myriad of possible ego-intellectual motivations can and do quickly come into play and take over the process, ultimately leading the individual to the same place mentally…believing one or more different rational explanations of the circumstances surrounding events.

We don’t have to dwell on the details or theories around 9/11 here…there are countless hours dedicated to this pinnacle (some might say defining) event of the early 21st Century. We will, however, focus on why there are so many different versions of what actually happened.

How can There Be so Many Competing Versions of the Same Event?

Have you ever had one of those days? You know: one which was just truly awful, filled with events, circumstances, conversations, and coincidences which felt like going 12-rounds with Muhammed Ali? When someone asked you how you felt, rather than reliving your whole day giving them a blow-by-blow account, or trying to give them an accurate account of how you were feeling, you probably said something like: “I feel like crap.” That was enough. They got it. (In the same way you probably could relate to having “one of those days” which felt like going “12-rounds with Muhammed Ali”).

The mind uses simile, metaphor, allegory, signs and symbols to approximate and point toward our experiential knowledge. The mind (and language) cannot actually capture reality. It can only ever approximate it, express some form of reality. But when we hear an expression or form of reality which seems to capture the essence of it, our consciousness makes the connection and we are satisfied we “know” what that person is talking about. “I feel like crap.” Yes, well, we all know what that’s like. Just like we’ve all had “one of those days,” even if no two days throughout history have ever been exactly alike. With figurative language and figures of speech, we can encapsulate a whole series of events into a single expression which seems to perfectly capture the essence of our experience.

The reverse is also possible: think of how many lines of poetry have been written about being in love.  Most everyone knows what it’s like to fall in love, and yet no one has ever managed to capture that feeling exactly, neither in their mind nor in words. There are countless beautiful poems, stories, plays, paintings, movies and songs which, when we experience them, do seem to capture the essence of love, and so we feel somewhat satisfied if they invoke our experiential knowledge of being in love. The point is, while we can experience love and know what love is in our conscious experience; the mind itself cannot know what love is…it can only formulate an expression of the experience. So it weaves elaborate stories, explanations, poems, paintings, songs etc. in an attempt to express the feeling of love which satisfies its own need to believe it knows and/or put it into a form others can relate to. And certainly, someone who has never experienced love cannot actually know what it’s like to be in love as a result of reading a poem, story, explanation, etc. They can only think they know what it’s like. Because the mind can never actually know.

The point is, the mind both reduces series of experiences and feelings into a single concept or expression, and elaborates at length to describe or explain a single experience or feeling in a multitude of different forms.

Remember, the intuitive sense which motivates the birth of many conspiracy theories may be as simple and vague a feeling as: “things are not what they appear to be.” This is a conscious knowing. The mind then latches onto that feeling-turned thought and immediately starts weaving an elaborate story around it (like the countless stories, poems, songs, etc. about love).

In the case of 9/11, there are many ways to bring a building down: controlled demolition with explosives, missiles, secret military weapons, alien technologies, black magic (we don’t have to speculate, YouTube is filled with all these explanations and more). As for who are behind “the inside job,” that list is as long as the one we opened this discussion with (Military Industrial Complex, CIA, international banking cartels, Illuminati, Zionists, Demonic Forces, etc—again, do the research yourself into all the theories people have put forward as actual alternative explanations of events).

The point is, on some level ALL these competing theories satisfy the most basic intuitive knowledge: “things are not what they appear to be.” The mind is by nature semiotic, symbolic, and allegorical. The mind functions through comparison, contrast, simile, metaphor and APPROXIMATION.  The mind simply puts forth an approximation which is “more or less” LIKE what actually happened, and our doubt is instantly satiated. The more profound our intuition (that is, the deeper and more specifically clear our insight into reality), the less likely we will be taken in by just any old theory. We will continue to have doubts until the theory presented to us is elaborate enough to approximate what we know, intuitively, to be the case.

So “I feel like crap…like hell…like I was hit by a bus…like a train wreck…like I want to die…etc.” can all substitute for the reality of “one of those days.”  We aren’t lying, even though it’s technically impossible to literally feel like any of those things! We’re telling the truth; at least, we’re expressing a form which is essentially true, more or less. Still, our conscience isn’t pricked. It knows the mind cannot technically and exactly capture reality. So, based on experiential knowledge of ourselves and the events which led to the feelings we’re experiencing, so long as the essence of that knowledge is being captured and communicated, it’s fine with it. “I feel like [insert something terrible here].” is as good an explanation as any. What we actually use to fill in the blanks is really personal preference.

In other words, we will be attracted to one particular version of events or another, depending on our own particular individual idiosyncrasies, beginning with level of intuition, mental motivations, dispositions, biases, other belief systems, level of skepticism, etc. In the same way the metaphor we chose to describe how we feel comes from our mind, so too the theory we will believe will be a matter of personal preference. Subjective.

We will tell ourselves “I choose to believe this,” but in fact it’s really a matter of ego-satiation. The mind feels uncomfortable with the idea that it is “not right.” The ego-mind wants to be “right.” It is the nature of self-righteousness. The intuition, conscience, is a superior faculty and doesn’t need to be “right”…it simply knows what it knows. It cannot be erased by the mind (try it sometime). But what the mind CAN DO and DOES DO is weave an elaborate story which approximates or substitutes for the reality the intuition knows, and because the language of the psyche is symbolic, a symbol, allegory or approximation of the truth can be used to satisfy the intuition. The mind’s explanation isn’t technically right, but it’s not entirely wrong either…it can be essentially correct, given a low enough level of consciousness. And the conscience does not judge, condemn, or argue.

The mind also distracts us from our conscience. Our intuition says “9/11 is an inside job,” but then we get bombarded by media stories, the families of dead firefighters weeping on live TV, the President of the United States making bold accusations about terrorists in caves, and images of planes hitting towers played over and over and over again…until the Still Soft Voice of our conscience is completely drowned out by the raging voices of our mind. Our awarness becomes so inundated with whatever it is we’re being bombarded with, that we forget our intuition altogether and get lost in the official story being fed to us. “Truthers” like to say our minds are being manipulated; but in truth, it’s our mind which is hypnotizing our consciousness, and so our conscience (which would normally prevent us from entering into unjust wars, torturing detainees, taking away people’s civil liberties) gets lost in the cacophony of a mind which is actively cooperating with the external forces manipulating it.

What the mind can ALSO do is convince us that our intuition is wrong. Again, by weaving an elaborate explanation which “makes sense,” we forget our intuitive feeling in light of “overwhelming evidence.” This is the case of all those who accept the official version of 9/11. For them, the official version of Al-Qaeda terrorists hidden in caves, box-cutters, etc. is more “plausible” and “realistic” than any alternative which might actually satisfy the feeling of “something’s not right about this.” The mind is very subtle and clever. It will continue convincing us internally until we accept what it wants us to believe, until it can make us “feel good” about its explanation and that we can “be right” (feel self-righteous).

Of all the theories about 9/11, which one made people feel self-righteous enough to support invading Afghanistan, Iraq, torture detainees in GTMO, enact unprecedented liberty-infringing legislation, etc.? In this case, conscience is “overruled” much like a judge in a courtroom overrules the objections of an attorney.

How good is the mind at hypnotizing/convincing us that its version of events is the right version? As soon as we make it OUR VERSION. Just read the comments under any particular YouTube video about anything. (The Internet trolls come out.)

Why such Vehemence?

Beliefs are a funny thing. One minute, they don’t exist (not in our mind, anyway). The next minute we’re ready to fight to defend them. The minute we accept them as true, it’s like they become a part of us. The longer we hold onto them, the more they seem to crawl under our skin, burrow inside of our brain, and wrap themselves around our cerebral cortex. And, like Khan says in Star Trek II – The Wrath of Khan, once they do so, they not only make us “open to suggestion,” they eventually lead to our death.

What exactly do beliefs kill? We’ll get to that later.  For now it’s enough to recognize that our attachment to beliefs, theories, explanations is what empowers them to do this to us and makes us react as passionately, vehemently, and in some cases violently against anyone who dares comment, question or oppose our precious beliefs. It’s our emotional investment in beliefs—how much of ourselves we invest in them—which makes things personal.

Conspiracy theorists are among the worst offenders. Perhaps because they have invested so much time into their conspiracy of choice (there are hundreds of hours and thousands of pages devoted to every conceivable explanation of reality imaginable). But more so, because of the comfort and security the feeling of “I am right” gives the psyche. That, and of course the fact that the theory gives us the feeling that our mysterious intuition, “thing’s aren’t as they appear” and/or “something’s not right with the world,” has been solved. The mind tells us we have the answer. As Trinity tells Neo in The Matrix, “It’s the question that drives us.”

“It’s the question that drives us.” – Trinity, The Matrix

Image: “It’s the question that drives us.” – Trinity, The Matrix Source:

An intellectual animal, once driven, is not easily dissuaded, challenged, or stopped. The driving question is like a hungering lust which must be satisfied. And once the mind is satisfied it has the answer, we feel we own the truth like a bull owns alpha mating privileges. When an opposing viewpoint appears, it is like a competing male threatening to knock us from our alpha status and take away our mating privileges (if we lose ownership of the truth, we will once again be left questioning; the hungering lust in need of satisfaction returns with a vengeance). And so, like bulls duelling for alpha status and mating privileges, we argue, fight, and literally “butt heads” in defense of our beliefs.

The feeling that it doesn’t know is unbearable to the ego. Like the bull who knows what it’s like to live with unfulfilled desire, burning questions left unanswered are an experience of pain we’d rather avoid.  We’re afraid of not knowing, plain and simple. So fear invents intellectual curiosity as a means to occupy our consciousness, relieve our pain of not knowing, and give us a reward in our pleasure-centre when we “figure it out.” When the mind thinks it has solved something, learned something, etc. it feels better, smarter, more important. It also feels more comfortable and secure since the pain of not knowing has been replaced by the pleasure of thinking it knows; of believing itself to be right.

An opposing viewpoint clearly jeopardizes a mind’s stability, comfort and security. A mind cannot bear to feel the pain of being proved WRONG (which would make us feel worse, dumber, less important), and so it will defend itself against any and all such intrusions / incursions, if for no other reason than to once again convince itself (and us) that it is right: “I am RIGHT!” The best defense is a good offense: “You are WRONG!” And the classic modus-operandi of human enslavement emerges…

Divide and Conquer

It is almost universally accepted among conspiracy theorists that “the powers that be enslaving this humanity” do so by manufacturing conflicts and playing both sides of the conflict. “Divide and conquer” is the mantra you will hear time and time again, particularly in relation to conspiracies of the New World Order, Zionism, alien reptilian invasion, the media, religion, politics, historical events (especially WWII) and many more.

Google Image Search screenshot: Divide & Conquer Quotes

Image: Google Image Search screenshot: Divide & Conquer Quotes

This humanity created computers in its own image. Computers think as the ego-mind prefers to: in absolutes…1’s and 0’s…on or off, yes or no, right or wrong, me or you, us or them, etc. In other words, our minds want to be mechanical machines capable of perfectly knowing the answer. It’s why we created computers as a projection of this egotistical idealized version of ourselves; why computers cannot handle answers which “do not compute.” All of materialist science claims to produce knowledge of an absolute nature (and not just provisionally as they claim, since it often takes decades if not centuries for stubbornly entrenched scientific dogma to be overturned by new discoveries and evidence).  But here’s the point: every act of defining knowledge via the dialectic of thesis/antithesis (THIS, NOT THAT; US, NOT THEM) is an exercise in DIVIDE AND CONQUER.

This begs the question: who or what is doing the dividing and conquering? Who or what is being conquered?

Who is a Threat to Whom?

Conspiracy theorists love to point out how they are “lifting the veil” and revealing the dark secret forces hiding in the shadows, threatening our freedom, our lives, our very planet. Conspiracy theories are all about shedding light on the dark cabals “out there,” secretly manipulating the world.

They also love to point out how threats to the “powers that be” are eradicated, assassinated, persecuted, etc. Who hasn’t heard of the numerous conspiracy theories around the assassination of JFK, John Lennon, and many other figures throughout history?

That may be, but if that is so, why are all the conspiracy theorists, the self-styled “Truthers,” allowed to operate with impunity?

Knowledge is power. If the Truthers are right, then revealing their versions of reality to the masses is an incredible threat to the power structure that’s been hiding behind lies, disinformation, misinformation, misdirection, mass-hypnosis and mind control. And according to their own beliefs, that power structure would be moving to shut down, silence, persecute, prosecute, or put away all these conspiracy theories and their champions.

And yet, people like Alex Jones, David Icke, and many others spread their gospel of fantastical interpretations of events, history, scripture, media reports, and official versions of reality. If they were actually lifting the veil on the truth, wouldn’t they have been silenced by now? Or, is it possible that spreading their beliefs in a universal plot (or in some cases intergalactic plot) by a secret society are, in fact, playing right into the hands of the very secret society they claim to want to expose,  oppose and depose?

Perhaps Umberto Eco said it best: “There exists a secret society with branches throughout the world, and its plot is to spread the rumour that a universal plot exists.”Umberto Eco, Focault’s Pendulum.

Image & Quote by Umberto Eco on Conspiracy, Foucault’s Pendulum.

Image & Quote: “There exists a secret society with branches throughout the world, and its plot is to spread the rumour that a universal plot exists.” Umberto Eco on Conspiracy, Foucault’s Pendulum.

We are not the first, then, to reveal the irony in the conspiracy theory movement. Nor, it seems, is the concept lost on the conspiracy theorists themselves. There are many videos on YouTube “revealing” how popular conspiracy theorists are, in fact, deliberately spreading misinformation and disinformation; purposefully misleading the masses with false accusations and explanations, in order to throw them off the scent of the REAL story.

In synthesis, what is being claimed is that if you want to run a campaign of disinformation, you may as well control the counter-intelligence movement as well. This way, you can control both sides. Divide and conquer.

What ends up happening, of course, is rifts begin to develop in all camps. As different versions of the truth are parlayed onto the stage of public opinion, camps begin to form around each version. You have a kind of intellectual tribalism develop, and before anyone knows what’s happening, the original intuitive insights which lead to the whole movement become completely lost and forgotten as competing tribes argue over the details of whatever version of reality they ascribe to.

Whatever honesty may have been present in the original conspiracy movement gets watered down and lost as the movement splits into more and more sects, each claiming to be in sole possession of the superior account of reality. Each schism takes place over arguments around various details, so new camps form around beliefs based on details. After a while, the essence of reality begins to fade.

If this sounds at all familiar to you, it should.

The Law of Entropy 

Everything that is born under the sun grows, develops, divides into many sects, decays, and dies. That is the way of things. There is nothing humanity creates which is immune to this immutable law of nature. The law of entropy states that things move from a state of wholeness and simplicity to one of separation and complication as they break down as a matter of course. Even granite rock erodes and breaks down.

Ideas, belief systems, even language is not immune to the law of entropy. And we don’t have to go back in history to the Great Schism, the collapse of the Roman Empire, the Protestant Reformation, or the countless groups, tribes, nations, religions, schools of science, philosophical movements, political parties and languages which splintered off into new versions of themselves. Let’s take a look at an example which hits frighteningly close to home, yet was brilliantly observed and put forth by the late great George Carlin (a master of observation and language if ever there was one).

The first few minutes of the above video describing the 70-year devolution of the term “shellshock,” though “battle fatigue,” “operational-exhaustion” and finally what we know today as “post-traumatic stress disorder” or PTSD demonstrates precisely the law of entropy as it applies to mental expressions around real-world phenomena.  Notice anything about Carlin’s analysis of PTSD? “The pain is completely buried under jargon.” In other words, the reality of the condition once aptly expressed by the simple and highly expressive term shellshock has been successfully evaded; watered down under unnecessarily complicated, euphemistic language (what he calls “soft language”).

We can imagine the materialist scientists’ and clinical psychologists’ reaction already: “PTSD is a more clinically accurate, more technically descriptive, more scientifically meaningful description of the condition!” Yes, perhaps it is, which means it’s more meaningful to the literal, materialist, scientific mind. But what about the conscience? (Con-science, that is, what science cannot explain; what the literal mind cannot make sense of.) In other words, what about the heart? Surely a condition like PTSD, as Carlin points out, deserves a descriptor like shellshock to convey the essence of the experience of the condition, so that those in a position of easing the suffering of victims of shellshock can better empathise and take appropriate action to do just that. PTSD, no matter how detailed a description of the condition, in no way shape or form conveys the essential truth of the experience of shellshock, and thus is entirely inappropriate to the actual needs of those suffering from it. It is a term for those who don’t have it to deal with it in a way that allows them to avoid actually dealing with it.

The Devil is in the Details

What comes to mind in this instance is the expression, the Devil is in the details. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with detail…the world is filled with it. But the ego-mind has a tendency to identify with, latch onto and obsess over details which end up distracting from the essential truth which really matters in any given situation.

Example 1: a white racist refuses to help a black man because he is black. The essential truth which really matters (and that the white racist’s conscience will be trying to get him to hear) is that the black man is a human being in need. The detail that he is black distracts from the fundamental truth which really matters and what should be acted upon; a fundamental truth which is informed from within by the conscience. The mind of the racist, however, uses its attachment to detail to trump the conscience with whatever beliefs it has accepted or woven around that detail (about black people). The racist follows an attachment to a detail “out there” rather than the truth which is available to him through his own inner conscience.

Example 2: a scientist observing a beautiful sunset with a tour group begins explaining to everyone how the angle and atmosphere of the earth creates the various colours they are seeing. The essential truth which really matters in the moment (which most of the people in the tour group no doubt are trying to experience in silence) is its beauty. Not aesthetics. Those too, are details. The beauty, awe, and wonder experienced THROUGH the medium of the physical and aesthetic mechanics of the sunset and its colours. To focus on the physical science or the aesthetic beauty (the form and/or function of the physical phenomenon “out there”) in that moment is to miss the true beauty of the moment…a beauty which one connects to from within oneself.

The Truth is NOT “Out There”

Ironically, George Carlin, Umberto Eco, and every Truther still seems trapped in the X-Files version of reality (that the truth is somehow “out there” and must be uncovered).

The X-Files The truth is out there

Carlin (rest his soul) blamed the degeneration of language on “white rich people.” Eco blames conspiracy theories about secret societies on—what else?—a secret society. The Truthers can go on at length into ever-more complex and complicated explanations, pointing out all the intricate details “out there” which support their theories of who or what are manipulating which theory / theorist. Detailed explanations which, as we have just pointed out, take us further away from the essence of reality…that first intuitive nudge which motivated the whole conspiracy enterprise in the first place:

“Things are not what they seem.” “There’s something just not right with the world.” “The official story just doesn’t feel right.”

These are the equivalent of a conscious shellshock. A condition which the ego-mind then quickly grabs hold of, externalizes, pieces together elaborate explanations using evidence from without in order to find a cause for the condition “out there,” and then packages it all in what ends up being the equivalent to post-traumatic stress disorder. Technically correct; literally detailed; certainly not incorrect; rational and logical; scientifically sound; and an almost complete evasion of the pain and suffering which go along with an actual conscious comprehension of reality.

But we want a scapegoat. We tend to blame others. It is the modus operandi of the ego-mind to divide and conquer (us and them; good and bad), ascribing good to us and bad to them. Judgment and condemnation are natural, automatic functions of mechanical binary thinking. They come part-and-parcel with ego-mind and why the world is run in part by the courts and the court of public opinion.

If ever there was jargon-laced euphemistic language which was “technically correct and literally detailed,” it’s legalese. Also completely lifeless, heartless, and a complete evasion of the essential truth of reality. A distraction. An attempt for the mind to answer questions with externalized detail, missing the point entirely.

Are we beginning to see a pattern here, yet?

Nonetheless, we have no problem buying into conspiracy theories lock, stock, and smoking barrel. The more elaborate, evidence-based, rational, technically detailed, well-researched and jargon-laced, the better we feel about believing in them. There is something strangely comforting about belief, even if that belief is horrific. It’s like having a plan. As the Joker says in The Dark Knight, nobody panics when things go to plan, “even if the plan is horrifying…”

Animated Gifs: The Joker “It’s all part of the plan.” Source: * * *

Plans, theories, labels, externalized concepts in the mind…they are “out there” and comfort us because so long as they are “out there” (even if they are horrific) we feel safe and secure. “At least they’re out there and not in here!” It’s that dialectic again. Binary thinking. Out there is better than in here! So long as the world gives me plausible explanations that keep the root of evil and the source of danger “over there,” we’re okay. We’re relatively safe. NIMBY (not in my backyard). Not only that, but now we have an excuse to arm ourselves to the teeth to defend ourselves against them by taking them out, or at the very least start drawing up our own plans to take them down. “People are dying in the Middle-East? That’s terrible! At least we’re safe over here.”

So, given the world we live in today, and the many unanswered questions driving us given the ever-more intense and strange events we must face, one worldview the conspiracy theorists prefer to believe is that a nefarious cabal of sinister actors (not the 1%; more like the 1/10th or 1/100th of 1%) executing a demonic ritual of black magic against us all: the innocent and unwitting human race.

How we see ourselves: innocent victims of the demonic rituals of the dark masters behind the curtain.

Image: How we see ourselves: innocent victims of the demonic rituals of the dark masters behind the curtain. Source:

Now really, if we’re honest with ourselves, how is the above image really any different from the classic Judeo-Christian belief that external evil forces (The Devil, Satan, evil spirits, etc.) are conspiring to control and enslave us?

The Devil’s Puppet Show

Image: The Devil’s Puppet Show Source:

Modern day conspiracy is in many ways just a degeneration of the externalized explanation of satanic influence as the source of evil in the world, in the same way that PTSD is a degeneration of the externalized term “battle fatigue.” But wait a minute…the original term was shellshock, you say? That means that the externalized satanic myth is itself an elaboration, a degeneration, a distortion, an externalized story which simultaneously explains the truth while evading the essence of reality…

Shellshock! The Hidden Forces of Evil are “IN HERE.”

This is really no secret. Let’s face facts: people who commit what we judge as acts of evil can only do so because that’s what’s within them to do. It is the nature of mind, in fact, to divide and conquer. Therefore, everything that conspiracy theorists accuse the master criminals behind the curtain of doing is only possible because it’s within them to do so. And if we are truly honest with ourselves; that is, we observe ourselves with our free consciousness and listen to the Still Soft Voice of our own conscience, we realize that we are not the “innocent victims” of some externalized source of evil. In fact, we are all culpable in the very conspiracies we claim to be victims of.

Evil in the World – What your ego-mind believes; what your conscience knows

Image: Evil in the World – What your ego-mind believes; what your conscience knows

Right about now your mind may be raging. Observe that. Watch how your ego-mind reacts. Are you really free to think as you choose? Are you really free to believe what you want? If your mind is reacting against the facts, there is only one possible conclusion: your ego-mind is refusing to allow you to see things as they are. And if your mind is reacting negatively to the fact that the ego-mind is the source of all evil in the world, it is probably telling you all sorts of stories about us, about this article—judging, condemning, possibly plotting a verbal attack or trolling comment, or any number of reactions to being shellshocked (confronted with the painful reality of humanity’s condition).  If your ego is reacting to shellshock, it is actively raging (like the alpha bull threatened by a rival), butting heads against this “opposing set of beliefs,” jumping from thought to thought in search of formulating some intellectual solution to satisfy the pain of facing reality as it is and wanting to water down the essence of reality with a concept like PTSD. Lifeless, heartless, but technically accurate, intellectually satisfying, and ultimately ego-empowering.

Take a moment to contemplate that: ego-empowering. This is the ultimate endgame of the conspiracy of conspiracies…the goal of the internal cabal known as ego-mind and the function of this thing we call thinking. Beliefs are a means by which the ego uses the mind to empower itself, gain control over our consciousness, entrench its foothold in the driver’s seat of our psyche, and galvanize it’s stranglehold over our lives. The ego-mind is what enslaves us—and by extension, all of humanity.

The Devil’s Trick

Charles Baudelaire once said, “the finest trick of the devil is to persuade you that he does not exist.” You may be more familiar with the contemporary version of this sentiment, expressed by Keyser Soze in The Usual Suspects…

Image Quote on Devil's Trick by Keyser Soze, The Usual Suspects

Image Quote: “The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.” – Keyser Soze, The Usual Suspects  Source:

You might be protesting: “but many people do believe in the devil.” Yes, many do. But as we pointed out, they believe in a degenerated, watered-down externalized story of Satan; a literal interpretation of what was always a symbol; an allegorical expression of our own ego. They believe in something which they do not have to be responsible for, something that is “out there.”

But this is, in fact, not what people used to believe and understand about themselves. In the past, many symbols and allegories were used to express the essence of the reality about the state of our psyche.  And if you check in with your conscience, you can directly experience and know the facts on which these symbols and allegories were based.  Perhaps the most well-known in the West are the seven deadly sins.

Wrath Envy Pride Sloth Gluttony Greed Lust

The Seven Deadly Sins.

To this day we often refer metaphorically to “the demons” in our mind. How very often we must “battle our demons,” etc. Sometimes, we are able to witness cases where the evidence for what Gurdieff called “the terror of the situation” becomes abundantly clear:

What we have attempted to reveal is that the Devil’s REAL trick (Satan, the ego) is to convince us that he doesn’t exist INSIDE OF US.

So maybe now you’re protesting: “but we all know we have an ego and a mind!” Yes, we all do, but do we know that we have more than one ego? Are we aware that we have egos—plural? Are we conscious of how the multitude of egos (lust, vanity, fear, pride, shame, greed, ambition, anger, etc.) form the building blocks from which the ego-mind uses to construct a false sense of self? Are we aware of how the ego-mind has convinced us that we are it; that it is us?

When the ego-mind convinces us that we are it, and it is us, and that everything we call “evil” is chalked up by intellectual rationalism as “just human nature.” It is in those precise moments that we are convinced that the “devil” doesn’t exist.

But it is not enough to know this intellectually. It must be known directly, experientially, consciously. And so long as we are trapped in thoughts, led by the “divide-and-conquer” binary thinking of ego-mind, our attention is split into many directions, chasing many rabbits down many holes, we are denied the concentration and relaxation required to focus in on the inner workings of our own psyche. Maybe you’ve heard of this thing they call ADD; ADHD. We are hypnotized by beliefs, so distracted by what we THINK we know, our ability to actually know is, in effect, divided and conquered. Diluted and sanitized. The hard truth is lost in the cacophony of soft language chattering ceaselessly in our heads.

The Allegory of Humpty Dumpty

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the King’s horses and all the King’s men Couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

Humpty Dumpty is a symbol for our consciousness. His “great fall” is exactly the same allegory as “The Fall” of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (succumbing to lust, desire, what creates the dialectic of craving and aversion and binary thinking in the mind “I want this; I don’t want that”). It is the tragic hero’s fall from grace told in every Greek and Shakespearean tragedy, high opera, Faust, and countless other great works of art, literature, theatre and music. It is the recurring theme of ascending and descending in Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy, and the falling and rising in Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy. “All the King’s horses and all the King’s men” refer to the multitude of animal and intellectual elements of our ego-mind, each ego and attachment now holding a “piece” of Humpty Dumpty in hand, but none able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. They are the “King’s” because the King created them; they belong to the King. In exactly the same way that our egos are ours. We created them. They belong to us.

How? Each and every time WE fall. Moment by moment. Lifetime to lifetime. Each and every time we give into desire, listen to the voices in our head instead of the Still Soft Voice of the heart, we empower ego. We create more egos.

Two Wolves

Image: Two Wolves Source:

We break the Humpty Dumpty of our consciousness into even smaller pieces and hand them to even more horses and more men (we feed our consciousness to the dark wolf, who gets even stronger, and the stronger he gets, the more his hunger grows…you know this; observe yourself satiating desire. How long does it remain satisfied? Does its hunger not return with a vengeance?). The simple, whole Humpty Dumpty is made more complicated, complex, technical, broken down and labelled by the ego-mind, defined in ever more detailed components. Like shellshock transforming into PTSD, while the reality of the condition itself remains exactly the same.

Our mind would have us believe that this process of intellectualization and creating ever more complicated concepts of ourselves is evolution’ feeding the strong, dark, animalistic wolf is “survival of the fittest.” It is just the opposite. It is devolution. Simplicity is the ultimate in sophistication. Breaking down that which is simple and whole and working into parts may help you think you understand what it is and how it works, but like an amateur mechanic who tears down an engine for the first time…it’s easy and fun tearing one down; it’s quite something else to put one back together again so that it’ll run.

All the King’s horses and all the King’s men Couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

The practical way in which we hand pieces of our consciousness to egos and intellectual concepts in the mind is through IDENTIFICATION. We self-identify with the pain we are feeling, the suffering, the desires, the thoughts, feelings, and beliefs we have. We say: “I am _________.”

I am my body. I am my name. I am my gender. I am my sexual orientation. I am my race. I am my nationality. I am my beliefs. I am my politics. I am my dreams. I am my desires. I am lustful, hungry, thirsty, exhausted, angry, upset, sad, depressed, proud (or ashamed), stressed, et al. I am… I am… I am…

With each and every externalized concept/label we identify with, each and every “I am…” we identify as, another piece of our consciousness gets bottled up inside that concept/label. And it is only through a more whole, simple, sophisticated consciousness that we can know reality and who we truly are. Like shellshock is closer to the essence of the reality of the condition than PTSD. So who are we, truly?

Aheieh asher Aheieh…I Am that I Am.   

In antiquity, Aheieh asher Aheieh (I Am that I AM) is known as “the Holy name of God.” When we practice mindfulness (self-observation and self-remembering), we identify not as the things we are observing, but as the observer. We are who we are. Whole, complete, one with the still-point of the moment and all things. The zero-point of absolute nothingness. We are just temporarily assuming the form of a body, name, gender, sexual orientation, etc. (as we have done many times before).  We are simply experiencing lust, hunger, thirst, exhaustion, anger, et al. But we are not those things.

In the same way that the weather is always the weather, be it sunny, raining, snowing, or whatever, so too our true nature is unchanging, unflinching, and undefinable in crude, limiting, reductionist terms as any particular forecast or report.

And have you noticed that forecasts and reports seem to be the ONLY things the ego-mind concerns itself with? To the mind, it’s all about the future or the past. While hypnotized by the mind we’re either worried about the weather forecast for the weekend or obsessing over the weather reports from yesterday. “What’s gonna happen!?” and “OMG, what just happened!?” “What will they think of me?” and “What did they think of me?”

Whereas the truth of the matter is that the weather just is, at any given point in time. It is what it is, and that is all. There is no future. There is no past. There are no labels. These are literally just concepts in the mind. Illusions, delusions, more made-up stories and conspiracy theories about what will happen and what has happened because in truth, the mind is never actually present in the moment. So if the mind cannot know reality directly, what can?

It is the faculty we possess which is NOT ego-mind and which is capable of knowing the true nature of itself, ego-mind, and all phenomenon, moment by moment, is CONSCIOUSNESS. It is the faculty which can experience reality as it is, in each and every moment, from one moment to the next, HERE and NOW, and accumulate direct experiential knowledge—gnosis, the Greek word for experiential knowledge—which is the only antidote to the hypnosis and ignorance of ego-mind.

The consciousness is not and cannot be a product of ego-mind.  The Descartes axiom “I think therefore I am” is the most heinous and preposterous delusion of ego ever perpetrated on the mind. The truth is, “I am, therefore I can think.”   But we don’t have to think. Ask an extreme athlete, a martial arts expert, a ballerina, a meditator, a master craftsperson, anyone doing anything “in the moment” or “in the zone.” They will tell you that the second they allow their mind to start thinking about what they’re doing, in that instant it all starts to go wrong. You cannot think your way through backflips on a dirt-bike or mid-air 360’s on a snowboard or flying dragon kicks in a sparring match…the split-second you do, you’re done.

Ego-mind wants to keep us in its make-believe world of future and past to keep us distracted from the OTHER THING our ego wants to convince us doesn’t exist. To distract us from the real meaning and purpose of life, and the TRUE VEHICLE for our TRUE SELF’s ability to know the nature of itself and reality. Consciousness.  The “I Am that I Am” which only pure awareness leads us to: Our True Self, and our true purpose for being.

We are here to express the pure light of love emanating from the zero-point of absolute nothingness within us, and to know all the myriad forms and expressions such light, love, peace, beauty, compassion and sacrifice can take through others, high-art, music, true science, philosophy, nature, the universe, and all beings. We are here to know our Selves, in all the ways It can be known. Not in the mind, but in the heart; via awakened consciousness. To know ourselves and all phenomena simply as they are.

This is the simple, elegant, whole Truth which the conspiracy of conspiracies doesn’t want you to know.

The Truth is in You

Don’t take our word for it. Don’t fall prey to the propaganda of the X-Files: “I want to believe.”  Know. How do you know? Experience the truth of everything shared here directly, consciously, for yourself. Observe yourself. Know yourself. Become an intrepid explorer and conscious investigator of your own inner worlds. Observe how your ego-mind messes with you. Observe how cravings, aversions, and the countless identifications with concepts and attachments to beliefs end up dividing and conquering your consciousness. Observe how one second you want one thing (like a bag of chips) and then the second you’ve finished it you now want the exact opposite thing (like wishing you hadn’t eaten a whole bag of chips!) What the hell is that if not a kind of hell? Ever see a cat play with a mouse? Observe your mind playing with your attention. You can verify all for yourself.

The Devil, Satan, for lack of a better name, is real. They are the demons, egos, sins, nafs, psychological aggregates, memes, in your thoughts, in your emotions, and in the cravings and aversions in your body.

Cracking the conspiracy of conspiracies is within your grasp, and a Great Detective is waiting inside you to help guide you in your investigations. But every great detective needs a sidekick. Sherlock Holmes is the one who sees things and knows things. Holmes is our consciousness. His sidekick, Watson, is the one who does the muscle-work and has to “thinks things through.” Watson represents our body and mind. Only by working together, can Holmes and Watson battle to defeat the forces of evil—the criminal mastermind and Mr. Holmes’s arch-nemesis—Dr. Moriarte, the Devil incarnate…our ego.

The conspiracy of conspiracies has been encoded in all scripture, mythology, art, legend and literature since the dawn of time. From nursery rhymes to fairy tales, the signs pointing us toward the great conspiracy of the world and the keys needed to unlock prison of said conspiracy have been given to us in countless forms. It is the ego-mind and the law of entropy which corrupts and degenrates all that is pure and whole and capable of expressing the essence of truth, until what we end up with is countless splintered camps arguing and fighting over details and their illusory version of subjective reality. Lifeless. Heartless.

We sincerely hope after reading this you are that much closer to knowing the Truth for yourself, through your Self, and by your Self.

But every hero needs a little help. And if you’re suspicious of turning to an organization or online reasource like Maybe you can start with someone who seems like an honest, trusted source. Someone who, let’s say, maybe reminds you of your grandmother (or someone’s grandmother, video below) before diving deeper into the question of What is the Ego?

5 views0 comments


bottom of page