Conspiracy literally means "to breath together" in Latin and its modern usage means to work together to promote a secret (often evil) plan (i.e. a means to accomplish a political objective). "上海帮" was originally coined in a pejorative
usage, so there's your 'evil' part. And as I said, the difference between this organization and western conspiracy theories is that it is not secret.
So what's your problem that makes this statement so difficult for you to understand? Is it lazy reading or flat-out faulty logic? I'm inclined to believe it's the latter.
I think the fact that no one other than me has bothered to respond to this post speaks volumes for how much Chinese folks give a shit about conspiracy theories. They didn't get very much of a say in who their leaders are in the first
place, so why would they have to invent unsubstantiated and speculative stories to explain why their country is so fucked up? In the US, we believe this shit because we still cling to the illusion of democracy and can't swallow that bitter pill that we are
actually controlled by a handful of well-financed special interest groups.
Conspiracy theories are for fools who want to avoid the very real socio-political phenomenons of war profiteering, the prison-industrial complex and corruption-called-lobbying. Instead of trying to explain anything (such as unchecked
crony capitalism and a religious devotion to the idea that human greed has redeeming qualities), they just ask unanswerable questions.
The philosopher Karl Popper defined pseudoscience as any untestable hypothesis. I don't have answers to your questions, and quite frankly, they don't excite me, and I have an extremely excitable curiosity for all manner of trivial intellectual
bullshit. This Illuminati shit is about as interesting as day-old dumplings.
I said that people who believe in conspiracy theories are part of an anti-intellectual tradition, wherein journalists disobey common rules like citing information with footnotes or properly attributing information sources. If you want to take it as a personal
insult, that's your deal. For all I know, your interest in the subject could be more from curiosity than mental laxness.
But hey, thanks for confirming my suspicions.
But if you expect me to take this shit seriously, then I'm going to do three things: first, I'm going to point out that the Roman numeral MDCCLXXVI does not equal 666, but 1776, the year America declared its independence. Fucking duh! The 666 notion comes
from splitting the Roman numeral into three parts MDC CLX XVI, but this is not an operation that is particularly common in any established numerological tradition.
Then I'm going to flatly dismiss everything else you've presented as a complete and total waste of time, because when you're making "arguments" based on total speculation, your reasoning is like a chain, which is only as strong as its weakest link. One of
your sources is contains an error, so I'm going to throw out the rest of it because it demonstrates that you lack a capacity to think critically about the information you consume.