Illuminati: New World Order gets discussed as if some cards predicted later events, while others read them as ominous plans. How do you tell a meaningful prediction from a vague image that got matched to events afterward?
Do those old conspiracy cards really count as predictions?
Asked by
Clatterbox
Answers
I’d start by checking what the card actually depicts, when it was published, and whether the claimed match was being made before or after the event. A specific, dated prediction is a different thing from a broad theme that can be connected to lots of outcomes.
It also helps to ask what didn’t come true. If people only keep a highlight reel of apparent hits and ignore the misses, the game can seem much more predictive than it is.
Reply to this answer
I find it more useful as a snapshot of conspiracy culture than as evidence of a secret plan. A game can collect fears and political ideas that are already circulating, then later readers may recognize familiar patterns in real events.
Claims about a raid or hidden knowledge need their own evidence too. Even if an event happened, it wouldn’t by itself show that the cards revealed an actual plot.
Reply to this answer
Some of the named themes are so broad that they can be mapped onto many different events. I’d want a clear, precise match, not just a card title that feels eerie after the fact. Interesting material for studying how people make connections, but not proof of foreknowledge on its own.
Reply to this answer
Add your answer
Answers are reviewed before publication.
Clatterbox:
That makes sense. The exact wording and the failed predictions seem just as relevant as the striking comparisons.