* * *
This is a short post, about “common knowledge,” that appears to not be so common. It seems so obvious, and yet so much media commentary and reporting seems to ignore it. What if what is being attributed to a “mistake,” ignorance, or “stupidity” is, in fact, quite intentional?
“Follow the money.”
An internet search of this phrase suggests it is generally attributed to financial investigations into corruption or crime.
Wikipedia says “Follow the money” is a catchphrase popularized by the 1976 docudrama film All the President’s Men, which suggests political corruption can be brought to light by examining money transfers between parties.”
This is a narrow interpretation of an idea that has much broader application.
What is money, but a resource, a benefit, stored energy, maybe power. Exchanged for something else.
And there is a corollary: Benefits flow in two directions — at least.
When someone’s actions — a person, a political party, a country (or its leadership) don’t immediately make sense, it can be useful to “follow the money.” Ask, “Who benefits from this?” And what is the connection to this person or thing?
This idea has great relevance in the light of current events.
When you see the leader of a country antagonizing their closest and strongest allies, it doesn’t make sense. It appears to be self-defeating . . . until one asks, “Who benefits?”
And if you see them dismantling their own security institutions, that seems insane . . . until one asks, “Who benefits?”
And if you watch them generally acting against their own interests, it suggests one of your premises is wrong. What if what you thought were their interests . . . was wrong? What if they are, in fact, acting in their own interests? If one accepts that they are acting “rationally” to further their own interests, then the question becomes, “What are their real interests?”
And who benefits?
* * *
To paraphrase Sherlock Holmes . . . “When you eliminate the explanations that appear to be irrational, the explanation that remains must be the truth.”