"Desmet wants us to believe that these people (conspirators) don't really exist, or if they do, they're just like us (part of the world of mechanistic thinkers.)"
It's not the former, but the latter. He's very open in the book that such conspirators do exist. The main flaw in his argument is that he does think they're "just like us."
"Desmet wants us to believe that these people (conspirators) don't really exist, or if they do, they're just like us (part of the world of mechanistic thinkers.)"
It's not the former, but the latter. He's very open in the book that such conspirators do exist. The main flaw in his argument is that he does think they're "just like us."
"Desmet wants us to believe that these people (conspirators) don't really exist, or if they do, they're just like us (part of the world of mechanistic thinkers.)"
It's not the former, but the latter. He's very open in the book that such conspirators do exist. The main flaw in his argument is that he does think they're "just like us."
I'd say that's a fairly large misunderstanding of social psychology on Desmet's part.
Which is why he should read Political Ponerology and subscribe to HarrisonтАЩs substack! :-)