Conspiracy Cafe

KRYPTEIA: PROVOCATEUR SPARTAN STYLE

April 7, 2010 – 6:15 PM

Military conflict is an obvious theater for the use of such agents as described above. However, in every culture there are factions, good and bad, contending for advantage and dominance. Sometimes, such factions are contending for the very life of a culture and use means to ensure the humiliation and destruction of whatever faction(s) they oppose. In ancient Sparta, the Spartans were the minority ruling class who dominated the much larger slave class, the helots. The Spartans knew the internal rage of the helots and needed a way of keeping the helots from successfully revolting.

The Krypteia was the dreaded secret police of the Spartan state. One of the major weapons which it used to ensure the stats would be protected from helot sedition was the use of the agent provocateur.

It should be noted the Spartans were realists. They did not pretend things would go well in their society. They never took a "wait and see" position. They planted agents among the helots because it was their task to MAKE things go well for their cruel Spartan state. They knew the helots would be tempted to revolt at some point due to the nature of their servitude, the impact of economic impoverishment, cruel political control, and the ever mounting rage of the helot mindset. It was only a question of “when”, not "if". Once that point was understood, Spartan leaders studied the mind of the helots to determine their most probable future leaders. Afterwards, they would determine what their opponents MUST do to defeat them. Provocateurs exist as the primary means- (and often the only means) to dissuade their opponents from such vital action by eroding confidence in its practicality, diverting its alms, betraying its strengths . . . or just plain misleading it themselves.- Theirs a the art of strategic mismanagement and betrayal from within.

.

The Spartans were constantly planting agents among the helots BECAUSE they viewed those whom they enslaved as enemies. (Incidentally, the Spartan state formally declared war upon its helot slaves each year as a symbolic act.) Those agents were to become leaders among the helots so as to neutralize effective action, if the helots were tempted to revolt, agents were selected to lead" the helots so their revolt would be premature. A premature revolt could be more easily cut off by the Spartan state.

To accomplish this, such agents would make themselves the voice of the "moral mandate" among the helots (posing as helots themselves which means they, perhaps, had been living among them for many years). They would raise the cry to "do something" about the cruel Spartan masters and would begin to gather many around them "secretly" (the Spartans knowing every move and only acting in such a way so as to make the helots believers in the agent provocateur). Using his newfound position of leadership, the agent would then manipulate the helots so as to ACCELERATE their intensity and their timetables beyond their capability and maturity. Indeed, effective leadership must always recognize the maturity and capabilities of the people at hand–not just what problem must be solved. Knowing that, the agent provocateur uses an arsenal of strategic, psychological weapons such as acceleration, misrepresentation, alienation, disintegration and manipulation.

Acceleration is possible only because of two factors, both easily used by such inside control artists. Those two factors involve: (1) the urgency of the moral mandate itself and (2) the two kinds of individuals which, invariably, become attached to the movement.

First, moral causes almost always carry the basis for "urgency". Because it is a constant temptation, even for honest leadership, to meet the urgency of the moral mandate with rashness, malformed plans and actions are constantly being hatched without a sound regard for consequences. Unfortunately, this is normal for poor but committed leadership. However, this does make it even easier for the provocateur to accomplish his task of compromising the cause by also accelerating timetables and intensity. Thus the provocateur operates in this milieu without being detectable. In other words, the counterfeit looks like the real thing . . . committed and zealous.

Internally, the provocateur has nothing but a veiled contempt for the objects of his manipulations. He is a soulless automaton who will even "love and marry" one of the objects of his enmity, raise children among those for whom he has such contempt and without any sense of guilt or feeling of remorse, abandon or sacrifice them upon command or necessity so as to fulfill his task. To him there is nothing but "the game"; nothing is inviolable; nothing is sacred.

The problem with this is obvious. Where the honest leader is zealous, sometimes his work is effective because of that zeal (though usually disproportionately costly). On the other hand, the provocateur plans his strategic malevolence. His acceleration tactics always have in view the advancement of his own position so as to compromise the movement more effectively at a later time or . . . the precipitation of more immediate follies which do irreparable damage now.

In addition, intense fervor is easily MANIPULATED because of the presence of two types of individuals. One is the "idealist" who (though often misguided) intends the very best for "the cause". The other is the "unstable" individual–those angry, semi-alienated, unrestrained daredevils who readily commit themselves to actions which irresponsibly enmesh many others to follies not of their own making. Both types of individuals are very usable to the control-artist who enlists their activities so as to constantly compromise the movement.

The idealist is usable because he is usually impractical and zealous. As for the unstable individual, the irony is that one of the "calling cards" of the provocateur is he is diabolically able to achieve what good leadership usually cannot, i.e., the ready and willing accountability of the normally unaccountable, unstable individual to the plans of the manipulator. Why? One of the marks of good leadership in general is the ability to recognize instability and thus try to work around it (while perhaps trying desperately to instruct it). The provocateur, on the other hand, flatters and promotes the unstable, gaining its affection. Remember, the ability to recognize and use "flaws" in character is the real talent of this operative.

It should be understood the Spartans were realists. They would risk war because they believed conflict was inevitable (especially since they were the constant cause of provocation). So, they "co-opted" a revolt which they helped to provoke, thereby making it their own, so to speak . . . and ensuring its ultimate failure. As a result, the helot population was left to despondency with its hopes dashed, far less likely to revolt in the future, thereby ensuring their continued servility.

If today’s rising opposition to the official Socialism in our government has any meaning it is this: Those in power intend to stay there. They know they will be opposed, probably by majorities of increasingly disappointed voters. Thus, the only way to stay in power, is to plant agent provocateurs amongst the people, FINANCING them to ORCHESTRATE SOME EXCUSE FOR AN ARMED OPPOSITION against the government.

The good people in the Tea Parties are a perfect target for the agent provocateurs. Anytime there is a determined opposition to a socialist Spartan-type government, understand this point: If you call for a public meeting, your friends may come… your enemies will ALWAYS be there.

http://earlychristianamerica.com/blog/?p=533