Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Single Issue: The Four Whys of Conspiracy Theories





All images used without permission, because permission is the only thing you can't find online.

I don't believe in any conspiracy theories unless you count the neo-conservatives. I know everyone defends their own irrationality, but I think the neo-conservatives don't count as a conspiracy theory because they're pretty open and honest about who they are, what they believe, and how they want to reshape America. As scary as they are, I mean the kind that don't really have evidence to back them up, like the idea that the moon landing was faked, the government is secretly trying to kill us, the pyramids were built by aliens, etc.

They are a hobby of mine, though. I have an entire collection of 2012 Doomsday videos I downloaded just for fun. I spend a lot of time watching videos on everything from ghosts to Illuminati-based theories, and I used to wonder, why do people believe things like this? How do people not only believe things this stupid, but proudly push them out there to convince others? After countless reviews of the videos, talks with the true believers, and attempts to at least raise the shadow of skepticism in the world, I've come up with four motives at the foundation of every theory, either in concept or promotion.


1. Genuine Craziness Seeking a Common Bond

For reasons science doesn't understand yet, one of the most common delusions of people subject to delusions is being contacted by aliens. I believed that myself when I was nine. Because I was a kid, people thought it was cute. If it suddenly overtook me now, people would realize I was crazy. The only people who wouldn't think so were people who also thought they had been contacted by aliens. If you've ever heard stories from people who claim that, you probably noticed that there are usually some vague things they all have in common (they always seem to happen at night, to somebody who's alone and geographically isolated, who is usually contacted by more than one being who appear out of nowhere, you get the idea) and there are a lot of details that don't always add up. For instance, the vague facial traits of most aliens in these experiences are almost universal, but height, build, skin tone, other physical characteristics, as well as details about the space ship if there is one, all vary enormously.

What's more, if you ask someone about the details of the story, they change over time, usually more and more change as time goes by. But they don't realize their stories don't line up. They usually don't even remember the previous version of events. That's another trait common to delusional behavior – since the brain is effectively creating a false memory, it also deletes memories that don't match the current version.

Get enough people with the same type of experiences together, at a UFO convention or on the Internet, and they start to compare details. Some of them get eliminated, some of them don't, some of them divide into separate theories. Looking at the 2012 Doomsday theories, for example, the predicted cause and effects of the end of the world were almost never the same. Some of the predictions included:

A celestial body was going to appear out of nowhere and crash into the earth

Aliens who bred humans into existence were going to come back and kill us

Some sort of energy pulse from space was going to wipe out the planet

There was no agreement on any details. What was the celestial body? A comet? A rogue planet? A brown dwarf? I heard all of these and more, and some variants that combined others, such as the idea that it was going to be a rogue planet carrying the alien overlords back into contact with Earth. But all of these mismatched details are subject to change or be ignored, because the root delusion is the same. Finding other people who believed “the same thing” is a very powerful internal force. Finding a justification that YOU were right all along is pretty strong motivation. If the facts get mangled up a bit to make that happen, it usually doesn't matter, and the people who don't believe you are (part of/victims of) the conspiracy to keep the evidence hidden.


2. People With Something to Gain

At the risk of oversimplifying, people will lie to you if it benefits them. What lie they're willing to tell you varies, but that quasi-rhetorical question “Why would he lie to me?” can usually be answered with “Because he wants your money.” In the Internet age, attention is worth at least as much as money. We've had three mass shootings in America in the past two years, one on Arizona, one in Colorado, and one in Connecticut, that were all intended to get attention. If there are people willing to kill randomly picked strangers for it, you know there are people willing to do less despicable things for it.

The most common manifestation of this reason is somebody who's either trying to (sell something to/win the admiration of) the people in the genuinely crazy group. The second most common is someone at the origin trying to profit from a no-pretext-of-reality work of fiction (like Loose Change or The Da Vinci Code) that gets its fictional context removed by someone looking just for the attention.

I should point out here that there's no such thing as “just” a cry for attention. When it works, they do it again. When it doesn't, they do something bigger next time. Neither ignoring nor indulging them will fix anything. The only solution is to address the underlying problem with that person. Or shoot them first, depending on your point of view.

People who stand to profit one way or another from conspiracy theories usually don't stick to just one, and they work a lot harder to find things that look like evidence and make subsequent “facts” up to support their theories than delusional people do. When you believe because you believe, you don't need proof. When you're trying to sell something, you need to give the buyer an incentive.

A lot of JFK conspiracy theories hinge on some letters written back and forth between the CIA (or FBI depending on the theory) and Lee Harvey Oswald. In the sixties, with the Cold War still raging impotently, the Soviets had some of their best forgers write those letters. Why? They had something to gain from stirring up distrust. They also had millions of dollars in resources and effectively limitless manpower to put into doing so. Of course their product convinced a few people. Apple computers was able to sell an iPhone that doesn't make calls as an iPad Mini. You can convince people of nearly anything if you work hard enough.

With so many people out there either creating or repeating things, more and more people get convinced. If you want a good, modern example, and don't mind some disturbing imagery, look at some of the evidence out there for Slender Man. It's so popular, it was the top suggested result when I entered just the letters “sl” into an image search. Slender Man, if you haven't heard of him, is a modern urban legend bogeyman that was deliberately created as such. I really like it as a case study because you can still see the exact moment and place it was created.
 
Now look around out there and see how many people have already been convinced he's real.


3. People Want to Believe

I've said before that people have an innate need to believe in things. Faith and fear are different sides of the same instinctive coin. We need to believe in something bigger than we are, and we're usually scared of things that are bigger than we are. As long as there are governments, there will be people who don't trust them. Give them a good, sound reason that supports their instinctive need and they'll never let it go.

These days, cynicism rules all public communication. People will tell you they don't believe something like there's a prize for doing so. Many of us have become so insecure about the concept of belief, we have to constantly reassure ourselves and others that we're not gullible idiots and we don't believe the lies the rest of the world does. Sadly, there's a belief system and a market just for that.

Conspiracy theories provide a "faith free" way to satisfy our faith need, because the delusion they center around is usually one of distrust. Where religion provides a place for each and every one of us who follows the religion faithfully, conspiracy theories provide a place for everyone who believes in them, no matter what the ubiquitous THEY say. THEY are just stupid. THEY are blind to the truth. If THEY opened their eyes and looked around, THEY would see the truth as clearly as YOU do. Look at the type of person who usually expounds on their conspiracy theory publicly. For example, the woman I've heard argue the most fervently that Obama is a Muslim and part of an Islamist movement to seize control of the government is the same woman who also insisted the human spine has only four bones in it because it was an answer on a game show. People want to believe in secret information only they and their fellow believers have the sense to spot. They're not crazy, or even all that stupid, but they're insecure about their knowledge of the world, and end up having to make some of it up from time to time if they want to function.


4. Good Old-Fashioned Envy

This one took me a while to see. One of the most popular conspiracies has to do with the goverment, business, religion, the entertainment world, and nearly any other source of authority you can find. The idea is that people get into power because of some secret network of other people in power, and that you can't really accomplish anything unless you're part of that network because they're so intent on keeping the rest of us down. Part of the reason it was hard to see this for what it was is that it is partially true. No matter what area of influence you're in, there are always people at the top. They usually didn't get there by playing by the same rules as everyone else, and they don't want anyone else taking their power away from them. Sad, but true.

You can't get to the top of any field by just hard work and ability. It also takes quite a bit of luck, and a competitive spirit. You have to be willing and able to take out your competition to advance, and the higher you want to go, the more competitive (and lucky) you have to be. Both of those can be turned in your favor if you have friends who are already up there willing to help you. The result is that the top tier of any power struggle is only occupied by the people who did the worst stuff without getting caught and/or had help from people who did the same.

The thing is, we should be able to recognize the competitive nature of the world without having to read some sort of supernatural element into it. Most of the New World Order/Illuminati/Masonic conspiracies have some sort of Satanic pact worked into them. The ones that don't frequently involve that old stand-by, space aliens. Secretly inhuman lizard-people of possibly extra-terrestrial origin make up a few as well. It's depressing that most of us will never be what we dreamed, and it's harsh to realize that it's because the world is competitive and there's only so much awesomeness to go around. Quite a few of us judge ourselves as failures because we didn't get what we wanted, or more futilely, we didn't get what someone else got. A lot of times we want some excuse for our failure. The other guy got lucky, worked harder, and stabbed everyone else in the back seems like a valid excuse to me. The people who believe these theories go a little further - we never had a chance, because we didn't have whatever supernatural abilities the powerful exploited to get what they have.

While I can understand that position, I don't like it, and I am opposed to spreading it around, because it encourages people to give up without trying. Your life may never be what you think it should, but you can always work a little harder to make it better. If you're unhappy with your life, you have the responsibility for trying to improve it. It's not up to whoever you say victimized you to fix your problems. You can always do better next time. Failure is inevitable, but it never becomes permanent until you stop trying. I don't like competition myself, and I'd rather end up homeless and starving than push someone else out of my way. But it's just as reprehensible to just give up and blame someone else because that's easier.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Single Issue: Fifteen Under-Exploited EDH Combos

This wasn't supposed to be a Magic blog, but then it wasn't supposed to be a recipe collection or a religious rant blog either. Oh well.

I wanted to throw out 15 combos I'm surprised I don't see used more in EDH games. If you don't know what an EDH game is, you can find the official information on it here. If you don't know what Magic: the Gathering is or don't want to read about it, you're in the wrong place.

This post will feature some copyrighted material. My use of it should be protected under the same sort of laws that allow for fanfictions and other fan tribute creations. The name Magic: the Gathering, the mana symbols, the card templates and designs, set names, setting names, card names, and all major character names (if I've mentioned any) are copyright 1993-2013 Wizards of the Coast.

Also, some of these combos are not original. So if you think you've seen this somewhere else before, you may well be right.

15. Thalakos Library
 
Library of Leng with Thalakos Scout
 
Effect - Retrievable creature, no maximum hand size, the ability to toss stuff into your graveyard or library as needed.
 
Combo Type - Resource Management with a decent creature.
 
Pros - Thalakos Scout is hard to block and with the Library hard to kill
Both cards are fairly cheap and easy to get
You only need one color and three mana to make it work
Provides a constant threat that is hard to answer, allowing you to build up your board position
 
Cons - It's still vulnerable to counterspells and any wipe effect that hits both creatures and artifacts
It doesn't win you the game on its own
The Library is open to removal even if the Scout isn't
 
14. Haunted Hanna
 
Hanna, Ship's Navigator with Haunted Crossroads
 
Effect - Easy retrieval of three permanent types.
 
Combo Type - Resource Management
 
Pros - Runs with only three or four mana
Not especially weak to counter magic or removal - you only need one to watch the other
"Budget" recursion
Doesn't give your opponents an "I have to kill that now!" level of threat
 
Cons - Requires three different colors of mana to play and use
Doesn't win you the game on its own
Has the potential to lock you up if you don't have a good draw effect
 
13. Transcendence of Punishment
 
Transcendence with Leyline of Punishment
 
Effect - You can't be killed with damage. Nobody can gain life or prevent damage, and you don't need to.
 
Combo Type - Shield Effect
 
Pros - You're effectively immortal
Fairly easy to assemble
Removes all drawback from spells that damage everyone indiscriminately
 
Cons - You have to wait a while to play Transcendence - you have to be below 20 life to use it
Doesn't protect you against Commander damage
Removing either once you get them out might kill you
Doesn't provide a win condition on its own
 
12. Concerted Protection

 
Guardian of the Guildpact, Enemy of the Guildpact, and Concerted Effort
 
Effect - All your creatures have protection from all colors.
 
Combo Type - Shield Effect
 
Pros - The protection starts over at the beginning of each upkeep
May make your creatures unblockable and unkillable
Budget combo
Fairly easy to assemble
 
Cons - Doesn't help against mass removal
Doesn't address colorless effects
Not a static effect. Your opponents have a chance to respond to the protection each upkeep.
Assuming you have the winning attack, you'll need one turn rotation before you can attack with your invincible army.

11. Rooftop Conspiracy

Rooftop Storm with Conspiracy

Effect - Free creatures

Combo Type - Free creatures

Pros/Cons - All your creatures are Zombies, which opens them up to a lot of other enhancements. Death Baron and Noxious Ghoul affect all your creatures, but then so do Extinction and Slayer of the Wicked. You have to craft your strategy around it, but it should be easy to do.

10. Mirror, Mirror, Mirror, Mirror

Mirror-Sigil Sergeant, Followed Footsteps, and Paradox Haze

Effect - Each of your turns, you get two upkeeps, and each upkeep you copy Mirror-Sigil Sergeant at least twice.

Combo Type - Token Production

Pros - The Paradox Haze and Followed Footsteps trigger Mirror-Sigil Sergeant's own ability.
Even the first double upkeep, you'll get three Sergeants the first time and then four more the second. You go from one to eight immediately, and the next turn it goes to 36.

Cons - No matter how many you have, they're all the same creature, and most of them are tokens, so they're open to even more mass removal spells than usual.
You have one turn rotation before you can attack with any of them.
You put a bulls-eye on your combo and yourself until it's dealt with.

9. Spirit Squall

Squallmonger with Spirit Link

Effect - Damage to all flyers and players, gaining you life.

Combo Type - Creature Enhancement

Pros - Cheap and easy to get and use
Even if it's destroyed, you can massively alter the board state at instant speed first.
Squallmonger's "any player" clause might get opponents to hurt each other for a little bit first.
You can use it without having to build a deck around it.

Cons - Dies to anything

8. Vigorous Wumpus
 
Thrashing Wumpus, Vigor, and Charisma/Basilisk Collar

Effect - Version 1, Steal everything and pump it. Version 2, Kill everything and gain a lot of life.

Combo Type - Creature Combos

Pros/Cons - You can use the Wumpus and Vigor on their own to buff your army. If you go the Charisma route, you also get everyone else's stuff. If you go the Basilisk Collar route, you'll kill everyone else's stuff. You will also kill your own Vigor (and all your own creatures if you activate the Wumpus more than once), but only your creatures will survive. Apart from the obvious removal problems, if you use Charisma and they destroy just that, everyone gets all their creatures back with the counters on them. Also, this uses a lot of color-specific mana in at least two different colors, so you might have a hard time getting it to work in the first place.

7. Unnatural Mirror

Unnatural Selection with Spirit Mirror
Credit for this combo gos to Eric Kretzschmar

Effect - Pay 1 to kill anything.

Combo Type - Abuse of Rules

Pros - Kills nearly anything at instant speed
Ignores renegeration (You just destroy it again)
Easy to use

Cons - Does not work on shroud, hexproof, pro blue, pro white, or indestructible creatures.
Doesn't win the game on its own and does make you a target.

6. Hazy, Lazy Manta

Mistmeadow Witch, Torpor Orb, and Wormfang Manta
 
Effect - Infinite turns

Combo Type - Infinite turns

Pros - Fairly easy to use and maintain
Another budget combo. These aren't hard cards to get

Cons - Your turns don't stack in the queue. You have to repeat it each time.
Wormfang Manta needs seven mana and is really easy to kill in response to you blinking it.
Torpor Orb is a target anyway, and if any of your opponents destroy it, the rest of it becomes useless.

5. Squirrel Craft

Earthcraft with Squirrel Nest (plus a basic land)

Effect - Infinite 1/1 Squirrel tokens and next turn, infinite mana

Combo Type - Token Production, Infinite stuff

Pros/Cons - Works in one color, off three mana. The biggest drawback is that no matter how many you make, all but the last one is tapped. If you had a mass untap effect (like Vitalize) and a mass haste effect (like Concordant Crossroads) you can win that turn, but that takes a lot of luck or some fetch effects. Also, they're both enchantments, and green has no way to fetch enchantments on its own. If you get really lucky, you can win the game your third turn. Otherwise, you're going to have to be able to survive a turn rotation wearing a bulls-eye.

4. Freed Mana

Argothian Elder with Freed from the Real

Effect - Infinite Mana

Combo Type - Infinite Mana

Pros - The cheapest, easiest infinite mana combo in print. All you need is two lands, one of which has to produce blue.

Cons - You still need something to do with the mana.

3. Pact Hive

Hive Mind with any/all of the Futuresight Pacts

Effect - Win the Game

Combo Type - Kill Combo

Pros - Given the color restrictions of EDH, you're almost certain to kill someone. You might well kill everyone (especially if you tap out and cast Exhaustion before the pact). Also you can make it work in any color combination as long as one of them is blue.

Cons - Some of the pacts are hard to use, and Hive Mind is a rules problem even without any other weird interactions. The black one requires each player to have a separate target for it to work. The blue one not only requires each player to have a separate target, but it counters a spell. Everyone just picks one that's already been targeted to stop it from resolving. Also, if anyone manages to pay the upkeep cost, you have to have something to follow up, and you'll still have Hive Mind to worry about.

2 and 1. The Cereal Combos - Lucky Charms and Fruity Pebbles
I'm including these together because a lot of their parts are interchangeable and they do the same thing. As a side note, I don't know where the names came from. These are old combos people were using when I was in high school. I thought they were all well-known, but I've learned otherwise.

Fruity Pebbles
Goblin Bombardment, Enduring Renewal, and Memnite or Ornithopter (either)

Lucky Charms 
Aluren, Furious Assault, and Horned Kavu
 
 
Effect - Win the Game
 
Combo Type - Kill Combos
 
Pros - Both of these result in instant kills, and both only need four mana to work. Also, Lucky Charms in particular doesn't require you to have that creature. It also works with Shrieking Drake, Man-o'-War, Cavern Harpy, or anything else that can bounce itself as soon as it comes in.
 
Cons - There are a few ways to shut them down. You are re-casting creatures ad infinitum, so counter magic will break them both. Instant creature removal works on Lucky Charms but not Fruity Pebbles. Enchantment removal kills both. Any effect that punishes you when you cast a spell will hurt quite a bit. An untargetable player can't be killed this way. Also, Aluren affects everyone, not just you, so your opponents may have some tricky cheap creatures they can drop and screw up everything.



Friday, January 11, 2013

Political: Guns and Banks - Taking Scapegoating To a New Level

I'm absolutely disgusted by how much the Newtown shooting last month has been co-opted for political gain in this country. The sad fact is that it was a horrible tragedy, but the school did everything it could have. They had a security camera system, they had intruder drills, and they had locked the doors by the time the shooter arrived. They evacuated the school according to a rehearsed method into a pre-arranged meeting place, and everything they practiced went through according to plan. It just wasn't enough. They did everything right, and it might have saved more lives than we know, but it didn't save the 26 people he got to before the plan could be put into motion.

What we don't want to hear is, under the circumstances it couldn't have gone any better than it did. This simply couldn't have been prevented any better. What we are hearing is that if only the shooter hadn't been able to get his hands on the guns, it wouldn't have happened. That if only there weren't any guns he knew about anywhere between New Jersey and Connecticut, he wouldn't have been able to come up with some other sort of plan and would have gone about his business like everyone else that day.

There are people in this country who want guns outlawed no matter what it takes to make that happen. I acknowledge that guns are responsible for a lot of deaths, and more importantly they don't have any other purpose. Guns were invented to make it easier to kill things, and every improvement and modification to them over the years has been to make them even better at it. They're not useful for anything else. But I really don't buy that if the shooter had been unable to get his hands on a gun that day he would've just climbed in his car and driven to work. He had snapped. He was going to do something that day, and there really wasn't any stopping him. Blaming the tool he used to do it is a stretch. It just so happens that it's a stretch some people were already trying to make anyway.

On a different subject, do you know how the current recession started in this country? I can remember the first market crash in the spring of 2007 because I was a senior in college at the time. One of my friends who was about to graduate with a finance degree was watching the international reports and told me the markets had just crashed in China and we needed to sell most or all of our stock immediately because it was about to happen over here too. He was right. By noon that day, the markets had plunged about a thousand points and kept falling all week. It seems that a lot of the banks backing the market had been counting on that not happening, because they didn't have any other source of income because they were overburdened with loans people weren't paying.

The story of the bad debt begins a lot further back though, in the late 1990s. Prior to that, there were some really stringent laws about what constituted a bank, what sort of bank it was, and what it could do. Savings, lendings, checking, and credit were all treated quite a bit differently than they are now. Your local bank where you had a savings or checking account couldn't also issue you a credit card, for example, and businesses didn't have their own financing divisions. Nowadays you can get a credit card from department stores and gas stations. That was illegal twenty years ago. The change in the law meant that credit was a lot more available than it had been. The result was that people used it a lot more.

The other change in the law at about the same time was in regard to loan approval. Basically, banks used a person's credit rating to determine how likely they were to be able to pay back a loan, and set an interest rate and assessed a monthly payment based on each individual person's record with debt. Somehow, the government decided that this process was discriminatory against particular races. I don't want to make any claims about skin color having anything to do with ability to pay back loans, but the result was that banks were basically forbidden from denying people loans, even if a person's credit indicated there was no way they could pay it back. What's more, the banks weren't allowed to tell people that they didn't think they could pay a loan back and maybe it wasn't a good idea for them to get one. The only thing they were allowed to do is charge whatever interest rate seemed fair based on the person's credit. This ended up producing the now-dreaded adjustable mortgage. In order to allow for the increasing number of people out there who couldn't pay off their mortgages, and still basically forbidden to refuse one, they had to charge higher and higher rates just to keep enough money on hand to make the next loan.

After the first market crash in 2007, it became more and more obvious that the banks couldn't keep up with the staggering number of defaults. Mortgage companies in particular were selling their loans to whoever they could just to try to keep their own companies open, and even repossessing the houses they'd lent the money on wasn't helping anymore because nobody could afford to get another mortgage to buy the house back from the bank. Then from somewhere, we got the idea that all this had happened on purpose. We got the image of the greedy banker, sitting in his office, smoking a cigar and drinking brandy and making plans to get everyone's houses by loaning them money.

Who is a banker? Is the teller at the window a banker? She's just a low-level employee, like me. Her boss, the branch manager, is no different than the manager of a McDonalds or Payless Shoes. They don't make the rules. They're just in charge of making sure everyone else there follows them. What about the middle managers who balance all the accounts and make sure there's enough money in one area to cover all the debts the banks in that area have? They're salaried people, but they're still just paper-pushers and don't get any more money when the bank records a higher profit. So it must be the top-level executives. After all they're the ones that get the huge bonuses all the time. They must be the ones who pushed all the loans onto the public. If you know anything about high-ranking executives, you know that it's all numbers and long-term management. Although they set the policies and procedure in place, they're only carrying out what they've been told to do by their board of directors, who are in turn looking at the stock price and trying to protect the interests of their shareholders. Their bonuses are awarded for how closely they follow their instructions, which, if developed correctly, should mean increased profits. So it's those greedy shareholders at the bottom of everything, huh? Who are those guys?

Holy crap, I'm one of those guys!

Seriously, I own stock in Citigroup, effectively making me one of the people responsible for the price of the stock and the decisions that people make to keep it up. Am I a banker? Am I the guy everyone hates? I'm just an assistant manager in a gas station. I wasn't trying to take anyone's house. I don't even own one myself.

The problem gets a little clearer - what's happened here is that we the public borrowed a bunch of money we couldn't pay back from a bunch of banks that weren't allowed to say no, and then when it all went to pieces we were quick to blame a fictional construct for it so we didn't have to face the reality that it was our own fault. Guns similarly make a good scapegoat beause they're inanimate objects.

We've blamed all our problems on things that either don't really exist or aren't alive so we can face the reality before us secure in the knowledge that it's not our fault and we don't have to change anything to fix it. We're the victims here, which means it's not our responsibility to fix our lives. It's the responsibility of the bankers to quit demanding their money back and the guns to stop firing bullets at the things we point them at.

It's true AIG made the embarrassing decision not to re-schedule their conference in the Bahamas. After all, the tickets were already bought and the rooms were already rented. That money was already spent. It looked bad that the conference fell about two days after they got their bailout money from the government. But that was one bank, making one bad decision, that wasn't all that obviously bad until after the fact. Most of the rest of the idea that greedy corporations were out to plunder all they could take from the American public remains a fictional construct. Why does it exist? So we can keep irresponsibly pouring all our money into those corporations and screaming about victimization when we go broke.

The scary thing about this new level of scapegoating is that we didn't find something to blame our problems on so nobody noticed while we fix them behind the scenes. What we've moved on to is continuously blaming them on things that aren't real so we don't have to try to fix anything.