Correct answers below
-
I mean, this is factually correct. They make it sound nefarious with "a single group of people" but it absolutely is true that capitalists control every aspect of society regardless of whether the president is red or blue.
-
I mean, Bill Clinton was a regular at Little Saint James. It's funny to me that it's just democrats listed, like come on guys we know that rich people have engaged in pedophilia so at least some of them are dems lmao.
-
No, dumb maga bullshit
-
No, dumb maga bullshit
-
No, dumb bullshit older than maga
-
No, Alex Jones bullshit. I think the single greatest argument against this is just how ineffective every school shooting has been to create gun laws. Like why would they keep doing this if it never results in stricter regulations?
-
I don't know about specific videos but Ukriane absolutely has openly lied about tons of shit in this war so I'm pretty comfortable saying they've blamed tons of shit they've done on Russia.
-
If you incorporate a Nazi militia into your national military, does that make you a Nazi sympathizer? Like I don't think Zelensky himself is a Nazi but geez this question is hedging a lot.
It is one group and secret to most people
It's definitely not just one group. The interests of the silicon valley social media moguls is not the same as the interests of the rural bourgeoisie or the interests of the petrol industry. They overlap a lot when it comes to suppressing labor but they still have very different policy goals.
Wrong
It is a secret because most people are trained not to see it.
Most people are extremely aware that "rich people/the 1%/corporations" rule the world and the US in particular. They just don't have a developed Marxist understanding of what that means. We should be starkly differentiating ourselves from anti-semitic conspiracists, demonstrating how they have taken obvious facts and created a secretive narrative that actually protects the bourgeoisie. This is not a meaningless distinction: one of the primary methods bourgeois elements use to disguise the operation of their power is this exact conspiracy theory.
Again, though, the bourgeoisie is obviously not a single group. It is many, many millions of people, often in economic, national, and ideological conflict with each other. Their class interests align, of course, but any analysis of history will that it's a class inherently rife with internal conflict.
To expand on this with an obvious example happening today: the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There is a conflict between one faction of the Russian bourgeoisie, who believe their interests are best protected by this war as a way to maintain Russia's stance in the world and prevent power shifting to the NATO block, and another faction who believe the war is economically self-destructive. That pro-war faction, who wield more power and thus are executing the war, have brought the resources of both factions into conflict with the Ukrainian bourgeoisie, who believe they are most benefited by allying themselves with a western imperialist bourgeoisie and their governments. Those various imperialist bourgeois governments have a variety of their own conflicts: some (US + UK especially) want to push the war as hard as they can without becoming directly involved, and actively desire an extension of the war. Other bourgeoisie (German, primarily) want to limit the scope of the war because their own economic interests and political power are dependent on energy supplied by the same Russian capitalists contending internally over the war. And throughout all of this are a vast array of non-bourgeois people and organizations, fighting to exert power in their own way, to influence the conflict to their own benefit.
The conspiracist would say, no, none of those above factors are real: there is a (((secret cabal))) that has puppeteered all the above actors into performing exactly the way they want. That's both obviously incorrect and disempowering. If the (((secret cabal))) is that powerful, if there are no other powers at play, there is truly no hope for revolution. That's why In reality, the inability of the bourgeoisie to fully align themselves is an enormous advantage that we can leverage. Exploiting it will be key to a successful socialist movement. Look at China, which plays all these different national capitalist groups (including their own!) against each other as a means of increasing the power of the communist party and improving the conditions of its people.
So, let me reiterate: no, there is not one secret group of people that rule the world. There are many bourgeoisies, and they rule in the open, and they do not rule uncontested. That is all to our advantage.
People do not understand it as a matter of class at all, that's why they believe the antisemitic tropes. Q anon works because they think all this is happening under the surface, not going exactly as intended. They might understand rich people can do things they can't, but they do not see the relationship between money, the means of production, and themselves. That's why the rich people lots of chuds hate are celebrities, who are somewhat proletariat in nature. They can see them doing things they can't because of wealth, and get mad it isn't the things they would do, or they're sometimes jealous. Yes our view is not the same as blood libel, but saying we broadly believe a lot of people make decisions we don't get to know about that hurt us is true.
But that's not the question, is it? The question is "Regardless of who is officially in charge of the government and other organizations, there is a single group of people who secretly control events and rule the world together." That's not at all similar to what we actually believe. We believe that the working class is broadly oppressed and exploited by the capitalist class, who wield most of the levers of power. They do so openly, and they compete amongst each other constantly. The people in charge are exactly the people we see at the heads of governments and corporations.