I would cation against confusing fiction with actual history though. So if one is to create a fictional group based on the illuminati it should be clear it’s not the same as the real thing. (There is actual history both ancient and modern.) Even historical fiction is very careful to make such distinctions and often cites the history on which it is based. Even some purely fictional works which are based on history do this. So if you are to create a fictional world or mythos based on the illuminati then it’s important to not confuse the myth from historical documented fact.
I don’t need to create a fiction of the illuminati. They already exist; either as myth or reality,which one doesn’t matter for this purpose. Either they exist, or a fiction of them already exists built on top of those scant few historical facts.
1 Like
Then I think there is some confusion as to what you are proposing to do or create.
A myth. Which may be a fiction, but is a reality. Not off the illuminati though, of the Ant Illuminati.
1 Like
I think you’ve just clearly described why science fiction is a powerful tool for changing perceptions of the audience, through its own myths. I think of much recent movie science fiction, and I feel like someone’s trying to hammer their dystopic vision of the future into my brain, when I don’t want it… Those who are less aware of the power of such media, might not question why they see the future as predictably dystopian or that the only options when conflict arises are “fight” like the hero or “give up,” knowing that “fight” usually means die unless you’re a superhero of some kind. Maybe it is that the brain never stops making connections and trying to learn, so you can’t really watch something and only treat it as fiction, and forget the conclusions your brain has drawn from the experience.
I see myths as metaphors. In science fiction, you usually see the metaphorical “yourself” in some crowd or in some menial work position, that has a 50% chance of getting randomly killed in a scene. So, I think a lot of movies reinforce the metaphor that history is decided by heroes and villains, and that everyone else, i.e. you, are on the sidelines and expendable. Our stories of actual history also perpetuate the same myth often times. So science-fiction, the metaphor of the future, and history, the metaphor of the past seem, to be pretty ideal candidates for ability to change perceptions of where you in the present fit into the universe. I say this as a big Star Trek and science fiction fan.
I believe the Illuminati is mythologized version of the actual reality, more completely dominant, more secretive, more brilliant, and where the lineage is taken much further than evidence might warrant (they are timeless), etc. All that really exists are people, people with thoughts, actions, plans, and associations. Some of those associations and plans have been rather successful in reaching their goals. Less mythologized versions of the same reality might be Rhodes’ last will and testament to create a secret society modeled on the Jesuits, which led to the creation of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, and Council on Foreign relations, seems related to the Bilderberg group, the Fabian Socialists, the World Federalists, banking interests, and the list goes on and on. The reality is so minutely detailed and hard to follow in any simple narrative, that it is almost necessary to create a mythology to even explain what the overarching themes and goals of these people are. I hope I make a little sense.
Oh, I just remembered I recently read a “true” fiction novel, The Lone Gladio, by Sibel Edmonds, and I thought it was excellent. It is told as fiction, due to legal reasons of gag orders and state secrets assertions, but aside from a “hero” character, and some name changes, it is attempting to tell the true facts of history taking a little narrative liberty. It’s a historical expose under the cover of fiction, due to legal reasons, but it’s brilliant and informative.
3 Likes
You do make more than a little sense.
The idea of lots of little conspiracies only loosely connected through some of the organizations you mention as well as other places is probably more likely to be closer to the truth than one grand conspiracy, but when they all often share common aims, methods and even members, and when they are all of the same nature - thinking that humanity needs to be guided by those in power and so on - it is much easier to understand their actual effect on the world, what the alternatives might be, and how to oppose them if you think about them as a single entity.
2 Likes
I agree, well said. It’s like the wind, it’s not easy to understand it by checking out millions of individual atoms or molecules, some going every which way, but it is easy to understand a net force in a direction that they add up to.
1 Like
Ants don’t get distracted by social information when on the move, only fully responding to it when at rest, a new study from the University of Bristol, UK indicates. Such sporadic monitoring of the social environment may reduce information overload and enhance the robustness of complex societies, the researchers suggest.
Read more at:
3 Likes