As an aside, where is the ‘242 nations of the world’ coming from? Wikipedia lists 207 sovereign nations* and they’re including several places whose nationhood is rather iffy (ie, Transnistra, Republic of Northern Cyprus, Abkhasia). What are the extra 35 nations?
Up to here you’re doing pretty well. I don’t think you’ll get much argument from the peanut gallery. You oversimplify things; the world has always been a very complex place. Nations aren’t monolithic blocks; they never have been. There are factions that want different ends all bundled up in the same country, different actors creating organizations and implementing plans at odds with each other.
You’re beginning to go astray here. While the technology is different, nothing is fundamentally different in the past 30 years except for the rise on non-governmental actors on the world stage. Stuxnet is very interesting, but it’s not a major event in world history nor does it single a major shift in international relations. Y2K was overblown, but it was a real computer issue that I and 1000’s of others worked on. Your statement makes it sounds like it was imaginary or sinister - it was neither.
I have no idea what this means.
And here’s where you go off the rails. There’s no evidence for the Illuminati, and there’s tons of evidence against them. You make a completely unsupported leap of logic and don’t recognize what you are doing. There’s no rational reason to posit the existence of a secretive cabal controlling world affairs when we see no evidence of it.
Nothing you have presented, in any way, shape or form, supports the idea of the Illuminati. All you have is an unsupported hypothesis. You could just have easily said that all world affairs are controlled by turtles. It would have the same predictive power and the same lack of evidence.
I think the logic is as follows:
a. Stuxnet was initiated and implemented by a small group of people acting more-or-less independently of national governments.
b. Therefore, everything is initiated and implemented by small groups of people acting more-or-less independently of national governments.
c. Therefore, everything is initiated and implemented by the same small group of people acting more-or-less independently of national governments.
The problem is, of course, that a. does not prove b., and b. does not prove c.
The thing about OCD, you see, is that it often puts the normal human tendency to look for patterns into overdrive, causing one to see patterns that aren’t necessarily there.
Sounds kind of hokey.
Do it in front of the wrong people and it could land you in the pokey.
Ok.
Ok.
Explained in this book by Slavoj Žižek.
Ok.
I’m going to oversimplify with the aim of you explaining where I’m going wrong.
Three eras:
The 2000s: January 1, 2000 - ?
A non-event, the absolute event, war, reality TV, global financial crisis, Obama.
The 1990s: January 1, 1990 - December 31, 1999
Gulf War, Sega vs. Nintendo, Clinton, OJ Simpson, talk shows, terrorism, Tamagotchi, Monica Lewinsky, Columbine.
Before the 1990s: June 28, 1914 - December 31, 1989
The end of history.
Again - patterns that aren’t there.
The super secret ones. 
History can be divided (and understood). It’s not necessarily arbitrary; for example, the Cold War is over.
No. Check your sources.
Enough said.
Anyway your entire argument is based on a moronic premise. Nobody thinks Barack Obama runs the United States by his lonesome. He’s the president and most people would call him the most powerful individual, but he doesn’t do that job by himself, and he also shares power with the rest of the executive branch, Congress, and the judiciary. Most other countries have a similar system. I think only in dictatorships and non-Constitutional monarchies could you really argue that one person runs an entire country. So we’ve just gone from 242 people to thousands and thousands of people. But the bigger problem (for you) isn’t the fact that this is incoherent nonsense, it’s that it sounds like a paranoid delusion.
Another example, June 1st, 2012. The Mets get their first no-hitter in their history.
But is it? A blown call by the umpire would have meant a double in the 6th inning but it was called foul. Was the ump part of the Illuminati?
You should probably actually read that list. Pitcairn Islands? Falkland Islands? those are not nations.
Check YOUR sources, dumbass.
I did, smartass.
From the Wikipedia article:
What the hell. You’re not attempting to misuse science to justify your own superiority, so welcome, Kozmik! Tell me more! I’m fascinated and ready to learn!
Not very closely, your own quote says: “The list includes independent countries and inhabited dependent territories”. Inhabited dependent territories are not countries. Also, did you see on that list the many entries with a country abbreviation in parenthesis, that means those items belong to the country in the parenthesis.
The quote also says that “This is a list of countries by population.” And if you add up the percentages you should get 100%.
First, whether history can be divided into eras doesn’t support your idea of the Illuminati. It’s not evidence, it’s just random noise until you connect the dots.
Second, what is significant about these three (seemingly arbitrary) eras? I could just as easily divide the last 100 years into 2, 5, 10, or 100’s of eras with the same level of detail and significance. WW II would seem to be a much more significant dividing line than the 1990’s. How about the end of smallpox? Or the rise of Twitter as a communications medium?
Third, as others have said, you are looking for patterns where they may not exist. It’s very common and a trait of all humans. But if you step back and look at the totality of the evidence you may realize that the Illuminati don’t exist, and that no external entity is necessary to explain world affairs.
But this is turning into a repeat of the previous thread that you are complaining about. You have yet to produce any evidence, or even a coherent hypothesis, but you’re trying harder and we appreciate that.
Wait, we’re in the Pit. Fuck, shit, and stuff.
We see faces in everything. Toast, trees, mountains on Mars.
We see intelligent action in everything. That’s how we invented Gods in the first place.
So of course, we see CONSPIRACY in everyday events. We’re wired to see patterns.
As an attempt to explain your worldview (or much of anything else) it doesn’t really work.
As two extra lines to fill out Billy Joel’s “We Didn’t Start The Fire” it’s a decent start. Need to make it rhyme, though.