In the late 40s, there was a Hungarian communist — whose name I can’t remember since communists names are generally not worth remembering — who employed in his politics what he called “the salami slice” tactic. The idea was, after the war, that any of his opposition could be shut down and lose public credibility by simply calling them “Nazis”. Like a piece of salami, he would chop all of his opponents out of the competition, until he ran out of salami to slice.
A little later, in the 1970s and such, you saw all of these American “conspiracy theorists” who came forth with all kinds of ideas that went against the mainstream narrative surrounding such things as the JFK assassination. Today, with the quiet release of many documents from the investigation of the day coming to light thanks to the Trump administration, we now know that what many of those conspiracy theorists said about the shooting (and other events) were, in fact, true — no one believed them in their time because they were “conspiracy theorists”.
But there was something about the 1970s that was remarkably different from our own time: The internet. If this were 1971 right now, and you and I were high-ranking politicians with some sort of nefarious plan, no one outside of this room would ever know what we talked about or did. If they someone did manage to find out, how are they going to disperse that information? Especially if they don’t have physical evidence? We can tell our friends on our payroll at the papers, the newsman, etc. to print and say whatever we pay them to.
Despite the fact that we can now easily disperse the truth, such as the case of Covington High School MAGA kid, pointing out certain plans of groups or even them openly saying it on national television is now shot down as a “conspiracy theory”. One such “conspiracy theory” involves the idea that white people are being replaced with non-white people so that corporations and leftwing political parties can maintain eternal dominance over the public. Every leftwinger and a majority of normie-cons will tell you “it’s a conspiracy theory”! Yet, after this week’s elections in Brandenburg and Saxony in former East Germany, in which the nationalist AfD came in a close second place overall and first among voters age 18 – 24 (AfD would’ve won had it not been for boomers) the leader of the Green Party’s youth wing in that region called for migrants from camps in Jordan, Libya, and Lebanon be relocated to the east so that they can dilute the AfD’s voting power.
I’ll give you a second conspiracy theory related to the first: Years ago, Barbara Spectre said, on national TV, that she moved to Europe to force it to become multicultural (because reasons) and that her people would be resented for their “leading role” in this “transformation.
In the years since, we’ve seen that many of her predictions have come true. George Soros, one of Barb’s kinsmen, teamed up with Mastercard to fund the migrant flow.
Another of Barb’s kinswomen is in charge of an NGO that teaches migrants how to lie to immigration officers.
Others of Barb’s countrymen are thrilled at the happenings in the Mediterranean!
When Iceland’s capital recently got its first of one of Barbara’s kinsmen, he didn’t wait a week before demanding that Iceland take more migrants.
We also know that NGOs bearing the name and flag of nation of Barb’s kin regularly helps migrants ashore in Greece; they’re more than happy to break the laws to do this.
Michelle Goldberg writes with glee about how whites can be replaced.
Why are so many of Barbara’s kin so eager to participate in and fund an effort she told us that they would? One that would bring resentment upon their people? Why, despite all of these happenings being empirically demonstrable as true, right from the mouths of the alleged conspirators, is it still branded a “conspiracy theory” by the same mainstream who promotes it? I thought a conspiracy theory was supposed to be a unproven, but theoretical idea that events were deliberately set in motion by a particular entity, but remained speculation because ultimately nothing supports it. That doesn’t seem to be the case here.
Could it be that it’s not a conspiracy theory at all? Could it be that it’s an agenda and the “conspiracy” label is a salami-slice tactic that enables them to publicly speak about their agenda with each other, while making it unacceptable for the targets of their agenda to do so as well?