A Horrifying Conspiracy Theory For Your Reading Pleasure

Posting on or surfing the internet is dangerous. Readers should be aware that they are closely monitored at all times by CIA plants posing, in some instances, as regular commenters. Financed with off-budget Federal Reserve money printing, they are aided by intelligent bots, developed using secret technology received from the greys. The goal is a new world order under the rulership of Obama, soon to be confirmed Antichrist. Opponents can expect mind control through chemtrails and, if caught, their guns to be seized by foreign troops and deposited in a special closet designated for the purpose in a FEMA concentration camp. With a trio of sixes branded on their hands, they will be compelled to worship the president each Sunday – rain, hail or shine – even when they have better things to do. This is what makes the present post such a risky endeavor.

Readers will be aware that in the fight against the establishment of the new world order, patriots have joined in underground bunkers to develop theory. Once fully tested, these theories are signaled through special code known as words to Fox News, which broadcasts them in the condensed form of talking points that can be picked up by talkback radio hosts and news journalists. In their efforts, they are supported by an army of bloggers who spread the message far and wide into those nooks and crannies of cyberspace not so susceptible to mass-media penetration. This bunker-to-blogger strategy is how the birther and deather talking points successfully reached the sheeple. Without the painstaking theoretical work undertaken in the bunkers, the president’s time-machine travel, planting of birth announcement in Hawaiian newspaper and forgery of birth certificate could never have been convincingly sold to the public.

Readers may also be aware that a team of historians of economic thought have been located in one of these bunkers, poring over collected works of dead economists in an effort to uncover something sensational. For a while, nothing very sensational was uncovered, and food stocks ran dangerously low. Several senior members of the bunker became disgruntled, resigned, and returned to submitting blog posts to the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Of those remaining, there were divisions in the ranks.

Miraculously God, in his wrath, sent the debt-ceiling fiasco, lifting spirits in the bunker immeasurably. Remaining staff, reinvigorated, resolved to continue their serious work.

God’s invisible hand must have guided them, for at last they uncovered something. And what they uncovered is sensational. So sensational that I have agreed to post it here, despite the risks.

The breakthrough came at morning worship, after foot washing but before the songs. During the bible reading, to be precise. In the Book of Revelation, considered by those in the bunker to be one of the more prescient works of the great economists, a beast with multiple heads is described. In the text, one of the heads is said to suffer a fatal wound, only for the fatal wound to be healed. This was not the first time the members of the bunker had pondered the riddle. They had returned to the perplexing revelation many times. But on this occasion they happened to do so while surfing the internet. This enabled somebody to notice something that everybody already knew but that nobody had paid much attention to before:

Karl Heinrich Marx: born 5 May 1818, died 14 March 1883.
John Maynard Keynes: born 5 June 1883, died 21 April 1946.

Oh my! What? No! Surely?

How was it missed for all these years? It should have been so obvious. Marx, after spending a lifetime brainwashing the working class with communist propaganda, died in March of 1883 only to reincarnate three months later as Keynes and deceive the liberal elites as well! The two of him played the classes off against each other as patsies! Now the workers and ruling class alike have been lulled into the same socialist beliefs without even realizing it.

Other stuff begins to make sense now.

All that talk by Keynes about future society learning more from the spirit of Gesell than Marx was just for cover! The new world order and one world government were in the pipeline all that time, concocted in the wickedly devious mind of Marx-Keynes, paving the way for Obama, Antichrist.

By leaving his major work unfinished, Marx was able to obscure the fact that his later ideas delivered in the guise of Keynes were a direct continuation of his earlier ones, merely sugarcoated a bit for elite consumption. No wonder he grew that beard! It aided the ruse no end.

Despite the magnitude of the breakthrough, however, there does remain one concern. Analysts in the bunker worry that the theory is so explosive that even Fox News might balk at its broadcasting. And talkback hosts have been disappeared for less.

That’s where we come in. Those of us hidden away in the nooks and crannies of cyberspace. Those of us with profiles sufficiently low that we might conceivably escape the notice of the ever watching eye.

It’s up to us to get the word out. Maybe there’s still time to turn everything around. If we work as a team, we can turn this theory into the talking point that unravels the world.

Let’s go!


21 thoughts on “A Horrifying Conspiracy Theory For Your Reading Pleasure

  1. Pete

    A word of advice: add a big, fluorescent, flashing, HUMOUR before the title. To be on the safe side, if you can add a sound effect, do it.

    And don’t be surprised the reaction comes from the most unexpected place: some PoMo/PoKe could take issue with the birth year thing.

    Just sayin’…

  2. Magpie, Are you speaking Australian again? PoMo/PoKe?

    Also Peter, I just noticed that you have a lot more subscribers/readers than the number of commenters here would suggest. So allow me to make an announcement:


    “Hi, my name is ________ and I have been lurking for __ months/years. I am not an internet pervert because ________, _________, and ________.”

    (Bonus points for not following instructions)

  3. “Magpie, Are you speaking Australian again? PoMo/PoKe?”

    Close, but ultimately, no. 🙂

    PoMo/PoKe is not Aussie; it’s still gobbledygook and nonsense, but unlike Aussie, it’s of a more “sophisticated” nature.

  4. Also Peter, I just noticed that you have a lot more subscribers/readers than the number of commenters here would suggest.

    Trixie, in enticing new commenters into the fray, I may have made a strategic misstep mentioning the CIA and other dangers of being on the internet.

    So far the only new commenter brave enough to enter the thread goes by the name of “Dangerous”, so he probably feels right at home. Welcome, Mr Dangerous! I like your style.

  5. Hi, my name is of no consequence (I might have to give up my position in cabinet if word got out) and I have been lurking for strange eons. I *am* an internet pervert. No. Really. How do you think I got a position in cabinet?

    P.S. Trixie, I am only responding to your demand because of your use of the Oxford comma (not to be confused with the Oxford coma; bane of the Bullingdon boys).

  6. FlimFlamMan, I make up grammar as I go along. Always have. But I won’t budge on the Oxford comma, of which Peter is the biggest offender. Drives me nuts. I once got into an argument with an english professor that devolved into an epic battle of mom jokes. (I won.) Double-spacers after periods? Them too.

    Besides if it weren’t for the Oxford comma, Nelson Mandela would be a dildo collector:



    P.S. Magpie, so you’re not going to tell me what PoMo/PoKe refers to? This is something perverted, isn’t it? I REST MY CASE.

  7. Titter ye not.

    At least until you work out this anagram. Further proof in my book.


  8. John Maynard Keynes.

    So obvious, but I’m still working on ‘Titter ye not’.


  9. Ooh missus. Common as muck that one.

    Ode to Trixie
    I hereby vow to give my all
    to you most beauteous Venus
    All that I own. my heart and soul
    And half a yard of gold brocade

  10. Hi Peter,

    Can you please tell Andy to stop speaking British? It’s abusive (not to mention tricky). What do you think this is? Some kind of game we’re playing? Commentary around here has really deteriorated. I just don’t know what to say anymore. Except this:

    paPer hEarts toRe eyes
    tosh words Vaunted rEmoRseful
    back down now lamplighT

  11. Peter,

    Please tell Trixie:

    “P.S. Magpie, so you’re not going to tell me what PoMo/PoKe refers to?”

    Nope. That’s something that must not be spoken of in polite society 🙂

    “This is something perverted, isn’t it?”

    Well, given that you insist, I feel at liberty to say this much: it is.

    Actually, it’s worse than simply depraved: it’s criminally annoying.


    And I plead guilty as charged.



    Please tell Peter: Thank you.



    Please tell yourself: shut up.


  12. As this post is about Humour, this comment by Prof. Wolff fits the bill:

    “I began blogging out of desperation at the prospect of retirement and it has grown on me, so I shall carry on until at long last my two forefingers can no longer bang out the words. There has been one good consequence of all this writing: The article on me on Wikipedia no longer says that I am dead.”

  13. Good read. Thanks, Magpie.

    In many respects it is an inspiring story. I especially like the degree of democracy and priority given to serving human needs. Personally, I would prefer to embrace the higher technical efficiency enabled by scientific advances but ensure the material benefits are effectively distributed to all while opening up free time. If some wanted to spend free time engaging in traditional agriculture for its own sake, they could do so, but at the same time, science opens up so many other possibilities, both in leisure and production broadly conceived, for those with different interests.

  14. LOL. I have decided only to use the Oxford comma if it clarifies the intended meaning.

    When I started the blog, I began using them for no good reason other than that I was trying to keep spelling and grammar as American as possible for consistency. Big mistake! Turns out Americans are not agreed on the Oxford comma.

    Australian English is somewhere between English and American English. We generally don’t use the Oxford comma, but it seems appropriate if it clarifies the meaning. Perhaps the most idiosyncratic aspect of Australian English is to end words with “ise” rather than “ize”. I think there is a split on this in the UK, but Australians uses “ise” just about every time.

  15. I have decided only to use the Oxford comma if it clarifies the intended meaning.

    When I started the blog, I began using them for no good reason…

    I somewhat recall noticing a change in your policy. Now, if I were to review all your posts for Oxford comma and anti-Oxford comma presentation (and don’t think I won’t), would I find equal representation?

    If not, WHAT IS YOUR AGENDA? You are, after all, an economist.

Comments are closed.