You are a conspiracy theorist, and you probably don't even know it.
You read about conspiracy theories every day in your newspaper. You hear about conspiracy theories every night on the evening news telecast. You gather around office watercoolers, and you talk about conspiracy theories --and most of the time, you believe in them without realizing that you have made a leap of faith to do so. You see, you believe in conspiracy theories in such instances where the conspiracy theory does not make you feel uncomfortable.
Then suddenly, along comes a well-supported, factually based conspiracy theory to make you feel squeamish. A conspiracy theory that challenges your beliefs. A theory that causes you to question your worldview, and perhaps even your identity. A conspiracy theory that would require you to make a paradigm shift just in order to examine it. And it is at this point that you "rationally" decide to denounce conspiracy theories.
It is at this point where cognitive dissonance takes place, and you belittle the entire notion of conspiracy theories altogether (even though you believe in them elsewhere, perhaps unknowingly). It is at this point where you scoff and make references to "tin foil hats" and a living Elvis Presley.
It is only when a non-dominant, progressive, or controversial alternative theory or description of events is set forth, that you choose to backhandedly dismiss conspiracy theories with absolute finality. If a particular conspiracy theory illicits an uncomfortable feeling, beckons self-examination and/or a paradigm shift, more likely than not, you will deem that theory 'irrebuttably false.'
At the point where a conspiracy theory challenges your world view, you suddenly use the term "conspiracy theory" as a perjorative term.
Oh, the hypocrisy!
A "conspiracy" is defined as "an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action."
A "theory" is defined as, "a set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
Let's look at a couple examples, shall we?
Story #1
First we have the following news item reported by Reuters today:
"HARARE, Zimbabwe (Reuters) — President Robert Mugabe's guards briefly detained the U.S. ambassador to Zimbabwe after he entered a restricted security zone near the African leader's residence, state television reported Thursday....[snip]....a calculated disregard of the rules governing relations between states ... clearly intended to provoke an unwarranted diplomatic incident."
In this story, Reuters is reporting that more than one guard calculatedly (e.g. by agreement, either expressed or implied) broke rules governing relations between states. This is a story about an alleged conspiracy-- a group of people coming together to break a rule or law.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - JCB
Mayabe some are a figment of ur imagination. Nonetheless, certain things have been explained in a way that insults the intellect of any rational person. Conspiracy theories come to life precisely because you expect so much more from the ones making the explantation (e.g U.S Goverment). I wrote something related here in BC: The FBI's Latest Conspiracy Theory
Good read though. Highly appreciated.
2 - Dave Nalle
The great thing about conspiracy theories is that you can just make them up and they seem perfectly plausible regardless of the quality of the sources. For example, it's well known that the members of the DLC hold orgies and worship the god Pan at a compound just south and east of Washigton DC, with rituals which include eating raw pork and grapes off of the naked body of 12 year old boys.
See, perfectly believable. And you can take my word for it. My cousin's wife's hairdresser's uncle is the groundskeeper there and he saw it with his own eyes.
Dave
3 - alienboy
good work bulldog, always good to read rational writing
4 - alienboy
Dave, I believe your scenario is a theory but lacks a conspiracy...
5 - Dave Nalle
Whenever two people with more than a million dollars in the bank and/or an elected office get together it's a conspiracy, Aleinboy - you ought to know that by now.
Dave
6 - alienboy
Oh look, a Nallyism!
7 - Dave Nalle
Well nobody cares about conspiracies being fomented by 3 broke drunks in a corner bar. They are more likely to produce conspiracy theories than the actual conspiracies.
Dave
8 - Maurice
This is your best post yet, Bulldog. You are well on your way to becoming a healthy skeptic. There are many more dissappointments in your future.
I've never believed in conpiracies simply because it is impossible for humans to keep a secret. One person can keep a secret but as soon as 2 or more are involved the story will be told.
9 - demabloggery
Conspiracism is one of the greatest dangers facing the world today; it drives arab terrorism, it drives American terrorism,and is currently ripping apart the American and European left because what was at one time a right-wing phenomena had now been transferred to the left via clowns like Michael Moore. Conspiracism is a flawed world-view, a replacement for the difficult work of institutional analysis where an individual can turn himself from a part-time websurfer to a revolutionary "in the know" who doesn't have to do anything but create fear, doubt and hatred.
It is marked by innuendo and speculation and places upon the reader the responsbility to disprove such theory.
The fact that there are real conspiracies going doesn't change the fact that it is a very real, and dangerous threat.
publiceye.org
10 - ENDtheNWO
ROFLMAO at the person linking to "Publiceye.org", which uses slander and lies to smear people it disagrees with. I've never seen a page so full of conspiracist nutbag nonsense (all the while claiming to oppose "conspiracism" [which according to publiceye.org is a form of anti-semitism]) in my life.
Governments use terrorism to mobilize the public consciousness. That isn't conspiracy theory. That's historical fact.
11 - Romach
Here's an hypothesis. The war on terror is a scheme. Someone in our administration figured we needed another Cold War type of continual warfare to expand the most diplomatic, economic, and military supremacy in as much of the world as possible. Whoever has alliances with the most energy producing nations has the greatest wealth; hence, has the greatest strength. The object is to expand that diplomatic, economic, and military sphere to gain and to maintain control over the most energy access corridors. The winner controls as much prime real estate as possible. Of course we need a perpetual enemy, which enemy is either terrorists, tyrants, or both. The amount of troops, money, and freedom lost in warfare is worth the potential gain. Strength means more wealth, more influence, and more security, which is power. Having power translates into the opportunity to constantly pursue more power, which constant pursuit is driven by a desire for power for its own sake. Those key people who want the war on terror want power for its own sake; and the war-on-terror scheme serves no purpose than to get that power.
12 - Ebony Ghost
Romach:
I don't know if you were serious or not with your hypothesis. But if you dig up some info on the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) you can put some faces to it.
13 - Dave Nalle
PNAC is too purist to use terrorism as a tool. They believe the US has an absolute right to an empire and doesn't need any stinking excuses like terrorism. We just deserve to run the world.
However, if you do like conspiracies of the full blown Arnold Schwarzenneger is Hitler's secret Clone variety, you have to spend some time on InfoWars.com - that's where our next Tim McVeigh will be coming from.
Dave
14 - Luke
My theory is that it doesn't matter how many trillions of dollars america spends on iraq, because their machine which can see the future has already told them that all the currencies in the world are going to crash in the next decade and usher in the new great GREAT depression, eventually the monetary system itself will crumble and all the power in the world will be in the hands of those who control the natural resources, such as oil and uranium and things of that sort, not to mention food, but when everyone is starving I'm not sure if people will trade food for oil, George Bush senoir let his good friend Saddam know what was going on, they're currently secretly ruling the world in an underground bunker somewhere, along with hitler, stalin, and emperor hirihito.
15 - Nancy
#10 is correct: governments have been using conspiracy theories & fear tactics to control the public ever since the human species rose up on its hind legs & formed a government. The How-To manuals go all the way back to Machiavelli, and before him all the way to T'ang China, and before them probably all the way back to Sumer & Jericho, and before them all the way back to Olduvai Gorge, I have no doubt. The most valuable courses I ever took were a series in critical thinking, that taught me how to resist & analyze the bombardment of garbage being shovelled at me to ingest, from political quackery to advertising. Of course the downside was I have since been pretty much perpetually angry at those who are trying to perpetrate it.
16 - demabloggery
ROFLMAO at the person linking to "Publiceye.org", which uses slander and lies to smear people it disagrees with.
======================
ROTFLMAO at the person who posted this. Chip Bertlett slandering Lyndon LaRouche and Mike Ruppert, who are icons of critical thought! How dare he!
17 - demabloggery
if you dig up some info on the Project for a New American Century
=================
They may be jackasses but they are FAR from being some kind of sinister cabal of zionists operating behind the scenes. The version the wingnut left trots out here is insulting and conspiracism at it's worst.
18 - The Bulldog Manifesto
The Project for a New American Century acts somewhat like a "sinister cabal of zionists" in many respects.
Sorry, but there is no group on the planet more dangerous than the present Bush Cabal.
19 - Dave Nalle
Bulldog, the Bush Cabal and the PNAC are hardly the same thing. Right now the PNAC is quite unhappy with many of Bush's policies and they've been quite vocal in their criticism in the media and on their website.
Dave
20 - The Bulldog Manifesto
Dave,
The fact that there may now finally be some dissention between the PNAC neocons on some old guard paleo-cons is hardly enough to say that the "Bush Cabal" and the PNAC are "hardly the same thing".
Sorry charlie, but for the past five years, the Bush Cabal has been running the PNAC playbook. The present rumors do not undermine the five years of undeniable fact.
Nice try.
21 - Dave Nalle
Bull, you're clearly not familiar with the 'PNAC Manifesto' if you can say that at all. While Bush has some PNAC types in his administration, and may support their ideas in an abstract way, almost from the beginning his foreign policy efforts have been generally incompatible with PNAC dogma. Even Wolfowitz is splitting somewhat from the PNAC line in his recent activities negotiating with China.
The fearmongering about the PNAC just doesn't stand up when compared with reality.
Dave
22 - demabloggery
Dave's right. It makes a good story, but the reality is quite different.
23 - The Bulldog Manifesto
LOL Dave. No, I think I'm pretty well informed on the PNAC's manifesto. More than you know, my friend.
24 - Dave Nalle
Ah, so you're a secret member of the quasi-trotskyite imperialist legion?
Dave
25 - The Bulldog Manifesto
Not even close.