• Welcome Guest

    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
    Fun 💃 Threads Overdosed? Click
    D R U G   C U L T U R E

Was 60's Counterculture a Government Plot?

RecoveringPothead

RecoveringPothead

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
124
I heard somewhere (I will try and find the source) that the CIA distributed LSD to the masses in the 60's to break down society so that a "new world order" could be established by the elite.

What if the 60's counterculture and every subculture than grew from it was/is a conspiracy to make people take too many drugs and do stupid things etc. in order to cause a breakdown of the family and community?

What if, by breaking down the family and community, the elites are making people far more easily controlled by the government who could then usher in a "new world order" carefully designed by and for the elites?

I just had a mildly bad trip in which this idea became very lucid to me. Lucid meaning it became clear how plausible and possible it is, not that I necessarily believe(d) in it.

What is your take on this theory?
 
well, psychedelics are the kind of drugs every user reacts different to. There have never been two people having the same experience on a psychedelic. not really suited for brainwashing, I think.

besides that you just had a probably difficult experience, you should try to get some rest. thinking about delusions like that is pretty pointless, because you can never prove or disprove them.
 
Theory is garbage, they would get everyone hooked on opioids if they wanted to do that, not LSD.
 
Everyone I meet that gives me psyches I suspect might be a CIA agent working in the mkultra program. lol. I dont know why but I just leave the possibility there because they could be monitoring you. It would be cool if Edward snowden released something like mkultra is still going on but now using the NSA as well. but its all speculation...but after all if the government did it once they could do it again because nothing was done about the cia when the revelations came out. They still have absolute power over everything.
 
A'ight, so. The conspiracy theory prima facie checklist:

* Is the plot actually possible? That is, did the actor(s) have the ability to carry out the plot they were accused of? The October Surprise conspiracy theory regarding the election of President Reagan usually fails this test.

* Is the plot cost-effective? That is, could the actor(s) have, by using the same amount of effort, done a whole lot more? 9/11 conspiracy theories usually fail this test.

* Is the plot actually beneficial to the actor(s)? I.e., would a perfectly evil, perfectly ruthless version of the conspirator(s) actually do it? JFK conspiracy theories always fail this test, because he was such an incompetent moron (Why not assassinate someone with a brain, like Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton?).

* Is the plot actually necessary? That is, could the desired goal be met in a much more obvious way? Water fluoridation controversy, vaccine controversy, iodized-salt controversy, HAARP conspiracy theories, and other mass disturbance theories fail this test.

From what I'm seeing, this fails points 2, 3, and 4. Point 2: as f33lg00d and the historical example of the Opium War make obvious, it's not entirely clear why the CIA would want to give everyone the least harmful drugs available. Point 3: it's also not entirely clear why it would be worth ruling the world if you had really caused a total breakdown of social structures. It'd be like commandeering a ship after blowing holes in the hull. You're going to sink! Point 4: if the CIA or some other malicious insider wanted to institute a New World Order, why not use the proven template established by Hitler et al? Far from condoning the use of psychoactives, most cults -- Scientology, Unitarianism, Jehovah's Witnesses, SGI -- are actually very anti-drug. This is because cults thrive on order, and drugs -- even the ones nobody would consider "mind-opening" -- tend to cause people to behave erratically, which disrupts the rigid structure that a cult needs to instill obedience in its followers.
 
Last edited:
I like the prima facie checklist a lot. (And I love it when it's italicized!)

I've always evaluated conspiracy theories with an additional element. Although perhaps it's wrapped up somewhere in the prima facie checklist? It draws on the old motorcycle club slogan, "three can keep a secret if two are dead." Which gets at the fact that people *suck* at keeping secrets. So, ask yourselves: how many people would have had to have knowledge of the conspiracy ... versus how many people have come forward with an admission?

Think about all of the horrible conspiratorial shit that we suspect has gone down over the years ... and how few people have come forward with admissions. Like, none. Not even on their deathbeds to clear their consciences. This is why all of these conspiracy theories remain theories and never get outed as conspiracies.
 
atara said:
* Is the plot actually beneficial to the actor(s)? I.e., would a perfectly evil, perfectly ruthless version of the conspirator(s) actually do it? JFK conspiracy theories always fail this test, because he was such an incompetent moron (Why not assassinate someone with a brain, like Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton?).
Click to expand...

http://www.whenthenewsstops.org/2011/04/was-timothy-leary-cia-agent-was-jfk.html



If you ever get the time read through this, It may shed a little light on why it may have happened.
 
Last edited:
Some of the shit the CIA was doing makes it hard for me to keep a straight face. It's like the place was run by a 14 year old Alistair Crowley. Hiring psychics, remote viewers, drugging prostitutes with acid etc...

Also: they couldn't even keep cocaine sales quiet and under-the table (Iran-Contra). I think a coordinated plot to unweave the social fabric of America just so that the zionists reptiles greys trilateral commision whoever is running the NWO can consolidate their power to be a Big Meanie to everyone is probably above their level of competency, and statistically someone would likely speak out against it at some point.

Plus, Occam's Razor offers a simpler explanation: people are stupid and do not cooperate en masse - and empires collapse. It's not like family conflict didn't exist prior to the 60s. (Or drug use/abuse)
 
The thing that bugs me about such theories is that they greatly over-estimate the power of government. Sure, as an institution, it can do stuff... but like the financial institutions and the globalist elites, the government is not omnipotent. Most of their systems of power are actually quite fragile, and are reliant on common complacency.

Don't get me wrong... I think top-down manipulation of the public is possible. It's happening right now due to 6 companies owning most of the media industry. But the kind of coordination it would take to instigate entirely new culture trends? Doubtful. That kind of thing is spontaneous.
 
Most of the ideas of the 60s counterculture certainly have the effect of breaking down family and society and making everybody reliant on the government, but they've all been around festering and spreading like a cancer for hundreds of years before the 1960s
 
Liquid Sunshine said:
CIA distributed LSD and other psychedelics for military reasons under code name mkultra, not for the reason suggested.
Click to expand...

Are you sure they "distributed it"? Or just tested it to see whether it could be used for brainwashing?
 
Sweet Jones said:
Most of the ideas of the 60s counterculture certainly have the effect of breaking down family and society and making everybody reliant on the government, but they've all been around festering and spreading like a cancer for hundreds of years before the 1960s
Click to expand...

Which idea are you talking about? They certainly suggested we shouldn't give chief executives and the cunts running our financial system a free hand to devastate the country etc. That idea should never have been lost. Too bad Reagan managed to blame everything on "big government".
 
Ismene said:
Which idea are you talking about? They certainly suggested we shouldn't give chief executives and the cunts running our financial system a free hand to devastate the country etc. That idea should never have been lost. Too bad Reagan managed to blame everything on "big government".
Click to expand...

Basically everything in the leftist paradigm, from socialism, to feminism, welfarism, egalitarianism, to everything else under the sun promoted today and then by leftism.
Regardless of whether they thought we 'shouldn't give chief executives and the cunts running our financial system a free hand to devastate the country' they helped set up a system that is easy to use by those people in that way. The road to hell being paved with good intentions, etc
 
Introduce a substance that lets people think for themselves and see right thru government BS? Doubt it. Give them booze and keep them stupid is probably their policy. I fail to see how anyone anywhere benefitted from from the high divorce rates or single parenthood of the post 60's wstern world. The government doesn't want you on welfare, they want you to work until you die and pay taxes the whole time. LSD makes me want to become a surf bum or follow a jam band around or live on a commune. The USA has gone to war to force capitalism on people, they are not going to hand out a substance than makes you question their system. Anyway most of the hippies became yuppies and are not dependent on welfare state. What about steve jobs and the thousands and thousands like him you didn't hear about who dropped acid and became uber rich? Why are we still stuck with this sterotype of LSD hippie bum? Everyone I know who drops is successful.
Its kind of paranoid right wing thing to think that liberals want everyone on welfare or mass abortions. If you really think the CIA introduced LSD to promote feminism i will just say I am glad there is no conspiracy board on BL.
 
CIA carried out a variety of tests on a variety of different drugs. Anything that popped up that appeared mind-altering, they wanted to test it. There is evidence that they tested LSD on a few unsuspecting folks (they dosed visitors to a brothel and they also 'pranked' each other, which led to the death of an officer) but they didn't purposefully introduce LSD to the population.

LSD found its way into the general population in much the same way other drugs did: from scientist to doctor to patient to people. You can't keep a good thing quiet. BOOM! :)

read this, it's groovy :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top