I realise “errata” really isn’t the right term to describe the following snippets of Icke-related material below, but given how error-laden Icke’s thesis is, I think it’s appropriate-cum-metaphorical.
Which is also not the right term to describe this.
Oh well. Here it is.
On the Jews…
In the second part of Icke’s talk he discusses an interesting fact about the Jewish people (not Zionists in general): they apparently put cubes on their heads to protect their pineal glands. I say “apparently” here because it seems prima facie false.
The Rothschild symbol turns into the Hammer and Sickle, which is a Satanist symbol. Indeed, the Star of David is actually a symbol of Saturn (and thus the Star of David is a Satanist symbol). Does he not realise that he’s moved away from talk of Rothschild-Zionism to talk which is tarring Jewish people as vassels of Satan?1
On beliefs and science…
Icke claims that if everyone believes it, it is almost certain to be false.
A frequent fallacy in Icke’s thesis is to do with correlation and accident. Icke points out that crystals make excellent receivers and that stone circles are made of crystalline rock: ipso facto henges are giant crystal radio sets.
Firstly, a lot of rock is crystalline, so a lot of ancient structures are going to be crystalline in nature.
Secondly, assuming that what we know now has to to be something people knew then is the fallacy of assumed knowledge. Now, once again, Icke has an out: he can claim that we knew more then than we know now (because we weren’t imprisoned in those days of yore and thus could know all reality), so those stone circles were built as receivers, but such an answer assumes a lot of Icke’s thesis, which in turn drives his explanation. There is a lot of question-begging going on.
He also treats any account of history as being plausible: he talks about the creation stories of many religions as if they are meant to be taken as being literally true. So, when a culture has a story about the Great Python and his bag of eggs, that is proof positive that the story is about the reptilians. Let’s hope he doesn’t find out about Tangaroa…
Icke says the Moon Landings were faked but he also claims we have been to the Moon…
On the Masters…
Did you know that one of the many genetic manipulations our masters have performed on our species is the removal of a vertebrae in the neck so we are permanently looking up (and thus look up to power)? I didn’t think you did, and I wouldn’t think about it too much, or you’ll go “How does that even work?” given that the removal of a vertebrae would just make us slightly shorter, rather than always looking up, and then you’ll begin to think “Did they do that to all the other species that we are related to, since we all share the same number of vertebrae?”
On those damned Fabians…
The Fabian Society was a secret (and terrible) society, according to Icke. Admittedly, not a very good one when it came to being secret. I get the impression that Icke doesn’t appreciate that the motto “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” and the adoption of Fabius Maximus (the Cunctator) as their hero was all about them trying to change society by using its rules against them. He’d rather believe that they were all about ushering in a hidden state. Still, he does make an interesting point when he talks about how George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, who were both Fabians, ended up writing dystopic fictions when they became disillusioned by their former fellows (however, I suspect we might explain some of this by reference to “grumpy man” syndrome).
On 2012, again…
I went to Icke’s talk thinking that he was a collector, a mere aggregator, of conspiracy theories. I’m wrong about that. Icke, in a surprising turn of events, did not think much of the 2012 apocalypse hypotheses, mostly because they do not fit with his overarching theory.
Icke is not a collector but rather a synthesiser of of conspiracy theories. His theory about vampires and shape-shifters is the synthesis of two schools of thoughts about who rules the world, the supernatural and the alien (or, if you will, the Satanic and the technological). He can claim they are both true because, as hypotheses suitably interpreted, they are not contrary but rather complementary (especially if, like Icke, you believe that at the very basic level of reality there is no real difference in kind).
However, the 2012 story, one about a predicted and terrible apocalypse cannot be integrated, as a whole, into Icke’s overarching theory. The 2012 material comes from an apocalyptic (and largely Christian) worldview to which Icke does not subscribe.
Whilst Icke thinks that the world in which we are imprisoned will get worse, he also thinks that it will also get better. The Illuminati are battening down the hatches because the shift is near (the Illuminati, recall, can see the future and thus know their time is coming to an end. The 2012 story, however, is not one of hope but of mere survival: the world as we know it will end, terribly, and only the good will survive to rebuild the world from scratch. This is not the future Icke has been shown: in his future we, the people, will overcome the 4%2 who control us and come to live in the abundant paradise that is an unimprisoned Earth.