3 ms·

This essay makes exactly the same points as "Yes Minister", except in non-comedic form. "Yes Minister" is widely regarded as a politician's manual and not as a

by natemp 5y ago

This essay makes exactly the same points as "Yes Minister", except in non-comedic form. "Yes Minister" is widely regarded as a politician's manual and not as a conspiracy theory. But perhaps if the elite BBC makes a series that is surprisingly accurate, it is the truth. If an internet commentator makes the same points, it is a conspiracy theory. Which proves the first paragraph of this very essay.

vmception 5y ago
From my experience, many conspiracies are manuals. Like, whether they happened or not, they're good ideas. "Good" in that they can be executed successfully. Obviously this depends no which conspiracy comes to mind when you hear "conspiracy theory", but many can be inspirational.
- hammock 5y ago
  >From my experience, most conspiracies are manuals. Figuratively true, and sometimes literally. Take the Operation Northwoods manual for instance: http://www.smeggys.co.uk/operation_northwoods.php?image=01#tt http://www.smeggys.co.uk/operation_northwoods.php?image=01#t... >Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the U.S. Department of Defense to stage acts of simulated or real terrorism on US soil and against U.S. interests and then put the blame of these acts on Cuba in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro. As part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative, the plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.
WJW 5y ago
I don't think anyone in the UK sees "Yes Minister" as a manual. Its comedy derives from exposing things that everybody perceives to be true (politicians want to have morals but are forced to let them go during election season, civil servants know they're supposed to be supporting the current government but will also need to work with the other party when the political tides change again, etc) but saying so in public is "not done". It doesn't need to be a manual because it is accurately describing human weakness in the face of a complex world, and the results are (as in the real world) often highly absurd.
- mbg721 5y ago
  It (or similar programs) might appear to be a manual if it generates a feedback loop: it starts as a comedic exaggeration of actual truths; people see it and become jaded and cynical, assuming the exaggerations literally to be happening; and this expectation enables politicians to get away with more corruption.
pjc50 5y ago
Yes Minister is fiction. The problem with conspiracy theories is that they read as fiction and fail to engage adequately with actual evidence. Things happen like they do in Yes Minister (or more recently, The Thick Of It), but not in identical ways. On the other hand .. > What this says is that, even in a democracy, the ~90th percentile rich have the most influence, business interest groups have about half as much, and mass interest groups have about a third as much. We less rich folks only get what we want, to the extent we do, because these elites mostly agree with us, and because we sometimes influence mass interest groups. .. this is Marxism 101, the most basic set of observations about how classes work made over a century ago. I don't thing any sensible person would deny that there is such a thing as an elite, or that the elite have their agendas, but if you want to make specific claims about specific real people then you need evidence.

by natemp 5y ago

vmception 5y ago

From my experience, many conspiracies are manuals. Like, whether they happened or not, they're good ideas. "Good" in that they can be executed successfully. Obviously this depends no which conspiracy comes to mind when you hear "conspiracy theory", but many can be inspirational.

hammock 5y ago
>From my experience, most conspiracies are manuals. Figuratively true, and sometimes literally. Take the Operation Northwoods manual for instance: http://www.smeggys.co.uk/operation_northwoods.php?image=01#tt http://www.smeggys.co.uk/operation_northwoods.php?image=01#t... >Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the U.S. Department of Defense to stage acts of simulated or real terrorism on US soil and against U.S. interests and then put the blame of these acts on Cuba in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro. As part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative, the plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state-sponsored acts of terrorism on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.

WJW 5y ago

I don't think anyone in the UK sees "Yes Minister" as a manual. Its comedy derives from exposing things that everybody perceives to be true (politicians want to have morals but are forced to let them go during election season, civil servants know they're supposed to be supporting the current government but will also need to work with the other party when the political tides change again, etc) but saying so in public is "not done". It doesn't need to be a manual because it is accurately describing human weakness in the face of a complex world, and the results are (as in the real world) often highly absurd.

mbg721 5y ago
It (or similar programs) might appear to be a manual if it generates a feedback loop: it starts as a comedic exaggeration of actual truths; people see it and become jaded and cynical, assuming the exaggerations literally to be happening; and this expectation enables politicians to get away with more corruption.

pjc50 5y ago

Yes Minister is fiction. The problem with conspiracy theories is that they read as fiction and fail to engage adequately with actual evidence. Things happen like they do in Yes Minister (or more recently, The Thick Of It), but not in identical ways. On the other hand .. > What this says is that, even in a democracy, the ~90th percentile rich have the most influence, business interest groups have about half as much, and mass interest groups have about a third as much. We less rich folks only get what we want, to the extent we do, because these elites mostly agree with us, and because we sometimes influence mass interest groups. .. this is Marxism 101, the most basic set of observations about how classes work made over a century ago. I don't thing any sensible person would deny that there is such a thing as an elite, or that the elite have their agendas, but if you want to make specific claims about specific real people then you need evidence.