this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
580 points (99.5% liked)

Not The Onion

21773 readers
1480 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 15 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Conspiracy theories are controlled opposition.

Tell people to be mad at a made up shadow cabinet of rich lizard people who run the world in secret so they won't be mad at the actual, real, existing cabinet of rich human people who run the world out in the open.

I thought only the queen of England, John English, and PDQ Bach's estate had that kind of wealth. I wish I was right

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 26 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The retreat is scheduled for August 12–16 at a venue near Dublin, Ireland.

The original version of the source article identified the location as the Powerscourt Hotel; in an act of journalistic cowardice (to be expected from a Condé Nast Publication) Wired later edited their article to remove that detail "to address a security concern raised by a Dialog representative".

Esquire is unsurprisingly sticking with Wired's "near Dublin" description of the location, but fortunately it looks like some Irish media outlets (eg this and this) are reporting where it actually is so hopefully there will be some local opposition present.

[–] Bo7a@piefed.ca 4 points 6 hours ago

This shit never changes.

And this is good old Boston, The home of the bean and the cod, Where the Lowells talk only to the Cabots, And the Cabots talk only to God

  • John Bossidy, 1910.
[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 27 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

More accurate to say "several overlapping cabals trying to expand their own fifedoms"

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 hours ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 14 points 10 hours ago

Other talks include “Build-a-Cult,” moderated by the founder of the Christian networking site Pray.com

I mean, we all know what these people are about but I'm just taken back by the brazenness and openness of all of it.

This is basically "Yes, I made a cult to become a billionaire with a following, what about you?" and somehow nobody bats an eye? That is, of course, nobody that could do something about this.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 20 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Escape13@slrpnk.net 9 points 9 hours ago

And compost them too!

[–] Binturong@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 hours ago

yes... trying...

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 10 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

“As you are probably aware I represent the Rothschild’s” -Jeffery Epstein in email to Peter Thiel

[–] dan1101@lemmy.world 18 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

I almost wonder if Rogan is a useful idiot, if someone running his show is the elite crazy or at least wannabe elite.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 11 hours ago

No need to wonder, it's been obvious for years now.

Being a useful idiot doesn't require the person being aware of their idiotic usefulness. Usually they aren't.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 10 points 11 hours ago

I think Rogan believes he's in charge though. He talks like he's making his own decisions.

Undoubtedly he's being manipulated but yeah at the very least he's a useful idiot.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 4 points 12 hours ago

Yes, and that someone is largely believed to be Thiel.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 5 points 10 hours ago

Having a lot of money doesn't make you immune to grifters, bullshit, facebook cooker theories or just plain going nuts.

[–] Herr_S_aus_H@lemmy.zip 86 points 19 hours ago (20 children)

This is the reason why I always get way to mad at conspiracy theorists. You don't have to make up some shadowy cabal or the jews, be mad at the wealthy oligarchs.

[–] Susaga@sh.itjust.works 40 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

One theory I heard: Crazy conspiracy theories were created by the government to make legitimate conspiracy theories look ridiculous by association. "Oh, you think there's an island of pedophile billionaires running the world? I bet you also think the moon landing was fake." A classic "the butts match" gambit.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 11 hours ago

Which is why Alex Jones was a CIA asset whether he knew it or not

[–] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

smoke screen

[–] Herr_S_aus_H@lemmy.zip 9 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I don't think it is planed like the conspiracy theories are created but ampliefed to distroy the public trust and muddy the waters, I don't think that is too far fetched.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 9 points 13 hours ago

Thats level one feury. Level 2 is when they tell you a well known asshole billionaire is going to fight the shadow cabal for us.

[–] LittleBorat3@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

You know them, you know their names, net worth ranked etc.

Among other things they were high on ket and thought they can teabag democracy in the face because everyone is so dumb.

They have shits for brains now that betray the game blatantly.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 151 points 20 hours ago (4 children)

I think it's important to understand, these people believe that they already control the world. From their perspective, they aren't "trying", they're doing. And they believe they have the right to do so. They believe that having wealth makes them more important and more capable than everyone else, even though the reality is often that having wealth separates them from having to actually do anything for themselves, making them less capable and less experienced than everyone else.

The rest of us, our needs, our concerns, our desires, our lives... none of that matters to them, except when it either enables or impedes getting what they want.

The only thing preventing the entire world from being stuck in complete, abject despotism is that these people are often at each other's throats. When they collude, everything they touch turns to garbage.

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Imagine fighting a long war where one side knows they are fighting the war, and a vast majority of the other side thinks they are trying to help them.

There's no war other than class war. We've been fighting it for centuries. Remember that.

Right but there are people amongst us poor who threw their lot in with the wealthy years ago. They're as much the enemy because they would fight on the side of wealth.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 26 points 20 hours ago

The only thing preventing the entire world from being stuck in complete, abject despotism is that these people are often at each other's throats. When they collude, everything they touch turns to garbage.

That's the hope. I'm sure there are a handful of billionaires who are decent enough people, tech co-founders who didn't get all weird about the tech money. But the other 98% are legit sociopaths. They can't co-exist for long, they're all secretly undercutting each other. It's in their nature.

One possible future is letting the dragons fight it out, and picking off the stragglers. Fingers crossed 🤞

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 11 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

i think the oligarchs do defacto control a significant chunk of the world and they are trying to exercise that control to enact their deranged ai-hallucination-like version of reality that their confirmation broken brains think should be done

thankfully they do not share these visions with eachother commonly and nation states are slowly making laws to prevent them abusing the global financial system

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 6 points 13 hours ago

Being insulated from reality and surrounded by sycophants causes literal brain damage.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 25 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

How many of them have been on Rogan?'

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Has he had on Timothy Mellon, the second largest political contributor after Elon Musk in the last election cycle? Has he had on the Uihleins or the Adelsons?

Only a small subset of the people making huge political donations want publicity, and only an even smaller subset of those are interesting enough that Joe Rogan would do a podcast with them.

Don't think that most of them are interesting in a macabre way like Thiel or Musk. Most are old, crotchety assholes who inherited vast fortunes who aren't interesting, don't seek publicity, and just want to remake the world without pesky democracy interfering.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

A lot of the griftiest sorts have to make public appearances to sell their poison pills (such as elon's meme stock.) So them also being on rogan says they are particularly scammy.

[–] LittleBorat3@lemmy.world 8 points 15 hours ago

Who hasn't? Simpler that way. Someone showed up with money at Joe's, 2012 if I had to bet.

[–] x0x7@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

And yet when people tried to point this out earlier, they were called conspiracy theorists. There are false conspiracy theories and true conspiracy theories. That's just how theories work. The ones that espouse true theories are then denigrated for seeing things faster than you.

This is why labeling something a conspiracy theory is not a useful way to dismiss an idea. The dismissal is only right half the time. And the other half you are missing something important, or refusing to believe something without looking into it. Instead, more correct is to critically assess what is true and false and not what is a conspiracy theory and not a conspiracy theory. It's more work but it's also more correct.

Who prefers the term "conspiracy theory" to be a shortcut for claiming an idea is false? A: People involved in actual conspiracies.

Also, people who use that pattern to claim something is false just generally struggle with English. Conspiracy != Conspiracy theory != False. But a common trope of a useful idiot is to claim something is false because it's just a conspiracy. And a shocking number of people take that argument seriously. Despite the fact that this person can hardly differencial aspects in the English language, much less develop useful anticipation of how the powerful will strategize, or worse, comprehensively determine without evidence what is not possible there.

If you discuss an idea of what powerful people will do, you are technically engaging with conspiracy theory. And we can't be having any of that!

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Its also worthy of note that you need not refer to them as conspiracy theories if they are openly discussed by the conspirators and/or there is direct record of them happening or having happened. They're just conspiracies then.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MutantTailThing@lemmy.world 47 points 20 hours ago (3 children)

Why yes they’re called ‘billionaires’ and there’s like 3.5 thousand of them.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 15 points 17 hours ago

There Really ARE Cabals of Elite Crazies Trying to Control the World
It's more than this one.

[–] Shameless@lemmy.world 28 points 20 hours ago (3 children)

Whilst this was always obvious and is not at all surprising, it's definitely worth reviewing the list which someone took the time to compile: https://github.com/nzaki-dev/dialog

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Cory Booker, Ezra Klein, and Reid Hoffman aren’t people I generally consider evil. I wonder if we can get them to say something about this whole affair and what goes on there.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›