OK, I’m reading a semi-paranoid link that’s interesting and juicy and just FULL of conspiratorial fun, and run across something that is typically seen on the Loony Side Of Left rather than off in this other land of strange… and I’ve decided to just “fess up” and see if folks can help me “get it”…
First off, the link was one about China and Pakistan that I got to from another link posted by R. de Haan. While I don’t agree with his conspiratorial links, they are great fun to read. (And sometimes it takes a jump or two to get to the really fun and more “out there” stuff in a link too far ;-)
Besides, frankly, I don’t really have any evidence to be able to show them wrong anyway. (How do you show that a False Flag operation was in fact such if it was done well? How do you know that UBL was in Pakistan? Really? We take a great deal on faith, and a TLA – Three Letter Agency – arriving with a script for NBC to read on the air will not have a lot of ‘push back’ from the guys running the place, whose licence depends on being cooperative). So I enjoy the occasional “dip” in the conspiracy pool as much as the next guy. I just have a general rule to never embrace a skullduggery conspiracy explanation if the cover story holds up well enough. Not a great “razor” but one that keeps me more “centered”.
The link is here:
and in it is the phrase:
civil society organizations
Now there are a lot of words and phrases that I’ve picked up from context, or some I’ve had to look up and learn. Others are self evident. But every so often there is a phrase that my “BS-O-Meter” just flat out rejects. It’s just not “sane” enough to make the passage.
When I run into one of those and it is so tagged, there is little I can do to “get past it”. Basically it takes a very good, reasonable, and clearly valid explanation to get me “over the hump”.
So for a few years now I’ve seen folks on Link TV talk about “civil society” and folks in various “Progressive” contexts talk about “civil society” and it just goes THUNK on the floor.
I keep thinking: Is there an Un-Civil Society?
Or do they mean Civilian Society, as though there is a Military Society that is not made of “just folks”?
It just is a big Non-Op in my head.
So what is it?
I’ve done a couple of web searches and gotten “no joy”.
I’m just not “getting it”.
So I throw myself on the mercy of the audience. What the hell is a “civil society” and what makes it different from an “Un-Civil Society” or from a “society” unadorned?
Don’t we just have a ‘society’ of the people? Whatever clothes they are wearing on a given day?
Or perhaps it distinguishes the “peons” from the “High Society”?
Government run “society” from that which “just growed” in a hodgepodge way in small towns and churches?
Or is it the non-Religious Society as opposed to the theocratic?
I’m tired of just skipping over “civil” and having no idea what “code word” it is and what bit of propaganda notion it is supposed to be shoving into me. Yes, you can basically just leave it out and every sentence with it still makes sense (often better sense); but I’d like to know what “wink-wink nudge-nudge” the users of the phrase are giving to each other.
So, what’s it mean to you?
And where did it come from?