Criteria of a Bad or Good Conspiracy Theory

[JackRiddler]

The problem with this site is that so many think it is a "conspiracy theory" site.

90% of everyone has long been primed to be repeled automatically by this term. Most of them can't help it, a physical response is observable.

Others with the poor judgement to consider this term favorable are attracted to this site, and keep using the CT tropes constantly, reinforcing the effect. Among them, not with you brekin, poor judgement of course goes far beyond the use of a self-defeating term. So the site has been turned into a colony VeteransTodayLaRoucheAlexJonesEuroPopulistStormshitliteReptilians

It is an automatic attack thrown at almost any unconventional thinking about the political-economic-ideological status quo. It is also useless as a model for about 99% of the issues and events discussed here.

[minime]

What You Don't Know Can't Hurt Them

So... Who is "Them"?

[82_28]

When I bartended I was known as a conspiracy theorist because I would ask questions that were unorthodox yet espousing nothing affirmative. Or I would engage in conversations and ask what others thought. Many people think that questioning anything is at best, stupid. Though I can pipe up at will, I typically listen and absorb.

Before the Iraq "war" my entire staff berated me for being unequivocally against it in no uncertain terms. Sure I'm a big boy but it would send me into tears. When the deed was finally done I had to finally somewhat angrily tell everyone how fucked they all were for believing the narrative. I said to them do you understand at the very least the emotional stress the US attacking Iraq will put on innocent, oh so innocent Iraqis? People are not inclined to consider the big picture or at least entertain an outside perspective. This is obviously before ever finding RI blog and was before obviously the advent of this forum. Fuck I joined this place almost 10 years ago! I should go back and see what my first comment or whatever it is I did -- in fact we all should. Doe eyed idiots wondering what this place was -- all new to one another. But by hook or crook some of us have managed to hang on all this time because we value one another and open ideas and minds.

[82_28]

What You Don't Know Can't Hurt Them

So... Who is "Them"?

I always took the "them" to mean the considerable ephemeral other. Shit we don't know but can see or detect.

[JackRiddler]

What You Don't Know Can't Hurt Them

So... Who is "Them"?

I take that as concentrated and abusive power of all kinds, overt and covert. "Conspiracy" is not a useful model for almost any of these activities, however. If it was, I'd be insisting on it. But it is almost always an invalid reduction of little value to understanding. Furthermore it long ago became a subculture and cottage industry of unscrupulous preacher-style "thinkers" selling their wares as entertainment products. I don't want to be part of it not only because it's uncool (and it is, very much so) but also because it produces confusion, disinformation and distraction about some very serious matters - often to a heartless and insulting degree as with "crisis actors." And it evokes all kinds of baggage you don't need: master narratives about Jews or whatever. This is in part a semantical matter. You can talk about PTB, covert operations, hidden arrangements (legal and illegal), elite organizations, even secret societies, or parapolitics and deep politics (which usually need to be explained) without automatically turning people off. Call yourself a CT and you're cooked with most, but gain access to the niche market.

[brekin]

The problem with this site is that so many think it is a "conspiracy theory" site.
90% of everyone has long been primed to be repeled automatically by this term. Most of them can't help it, a physical response is observable.
Others with the poor judgement to consider this term favorable are attracted to this site, and keep using the CT tropes constantly, reinforcing the effect. Among them, not with you brekin, poor judgement of course goes far beyond the use of a self-defeating term. So the site has been turned into a colony VeteransTodayLaRoucheAlexJonesEuroPopulistStormshitliteReptilians
It is an automatic attack thrown at almost any unconventional thinking about the political-economic-ideological status quo. It is also useless as a model for about 99% of the issues and events discussed here.

Yes. Well, and most of this is probably a doomed crusade against the encroaching suburbanization of the forum anyways. But as the forum starts to mirror 99% of the issues and events covered everywhere else and even the comments do (as conspiracy themes are mainstream and not fringe now, at least in in comments and forums, if not the news stories themselves) then I really only see two options. Let the drift happen naturally with long time or engaged residents moaning the lost "character" of the old neighborhood. Or decide what types of development should be encouraged or discouraged. People come to RI because it is a nice speculative site along with a basic conspiracy orientation. Long time residents may not see it that way, or see it as a site that does it right, but as that is what attracts and seems to retain people, I think it would be smart to codify in some way, what is a good hamburger and what is pink slime as people are coming here now primarily for the burgers.

None of this can be enforced formally of course, but if it isn't done I think to some degree purposely, collectively and informally, it will happen anyways. And as there isn't someone at the masthead anymore determining the scope and character of the site through their own writings and commentary it will probably just drift towards and become something it use to be stunned and amazed about,...never forget that the following song became Rush Limbaugh's theme song, (the instrumental only of course) and as the first Youtube poster notes:

Rush made this song 100x more popular than it ever was before him.

MY CITY WAS GONE

I WENT BACK TO OHIO
BUT MY CITY WAS GONE
THERE WAS NO TRAIN STATION
THERE WAS NO DOWNTOWN
SOUTH HOWARD HAD DISAPPEARED
ALL MY FAVORITE PLACES
MY CITY HAD BEEN PULLED DOWN
REDUCED TO PARKING SPACES
A, O, WAY TO GO OHIO

WELL I WENT BACK TO OHIO
BUT MY FAMILY WAS GONE
I STOOD ON THE BACK PORCH
THERE WAS NOBODY HOME
I WAS STUNNED AND AMAZED
MY CHILDHOOD MEMORIES
SLOWLY SWIRLED PAST
LIKE THE WIND THROUGH THE TREES
A, O, OH WAY TO GO OHIO

I WENT BACK TO OHIO
BUT MY PRETTY COUNTRYSIDE
HAD BEEN PAVED DOWN THE MIDDLE
BY A GOVERNMENT THAT HAD NO PRIDE
THE FARMS OF OHIO
HAD BEEN REPLACED BY SHOPPING MALLS
AND MUZAK FILLED THE AIR
FROM SENECA TO CUYAHOGA FALLS
SAID, A, O, OH WAY TO GO OHIO

[Nordic]

Is conspiracy theory going mainstream?

Check out the comments at the end of this story. It seems 90% of the commenters or even more believe strongly that the E. coli outbreak at Chipolte restaurants was sabotage by GMO giants.


http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/02 ... foodinc-fb

[brekin]

I think its been mainstream now for more than few years now but since fostered by the web is more of a large shadow demographic.
In many ways it is almost a demographic that cuts across all party lines and while differing on what conspiracies they subscribe to, believe that multiple, long running conspiracies are in effect.

The president now even has to deny specific conspiracy theories, such as that he is secretly planning to take away everyones guns as he did at the CNN townhall.
(Which is a more than a little ironic when Vanderbuilt clan, CIA alumni, Anderson Cooper is asking about them.)

Interestingly enough, Obama seemed more eager to talk on the subject and the whole exchange felt a little planned, preemptive strike, where Obama had some conspiracy talking points he was sitting on and ready to lay down. Whole 3 minute video worth to watch the exchange if people haven't caught it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/and ... beacf683ed

With tongue planted firmly in cheek, Kelly asked, “I’d like you to explain, with 350 million guns in 65 million places, households from Key West to Alaska ... if the federal government wanted to confiscate those objects, how would they do that?”

Obama endeavored to explain how it came to pass that the lawmakers Kelly encountered had come to believe what they believed, when Cooper suddenly came to the aid of the conspiracy-mongers.

BARACK OBAMA: This notion of a conspiracy out there, it gets wrapped up in concerns about the federal government. Now, there’s a long history of that. That’s in our DNA. The United States was born suspicious of some distant authority —

ANDERSON COOPER: Let me jump in. Is it fair to call it a conspiracy? A lot of people really believe this deeply, they just don’t trust you.

OBAMA: I’m sorry, Cooper? Yes. It is fair to call it a conspiracy. What are you saying?
...
OBAMA: Are you suggesting the notion that we are creating a plot to take everybody’s guns away so that we can impose martial law —

COOPER: But there is certainly —

OBAMA: It’s a conspiracy, it is a conspiracy. I would hope you would agree with that. Is that controversial?

[tapitsbo]

Obama is displaying verbal dexterity of course, just because it might be a conspiracy doesn't mean it isn't real, our Pavlovian training aside.

Media and think tank admissions of the objective confirm its reality to my mind.

[brekin]

Obama is displaying verbal dexterity of course, just because it might be a conspiracy doesn't mean it isn't real, our Pavlovian training aside.

Media and think tank admissions of the objective confirm its reality to my mind.

Maybe its Friday, but I had to read that four times and I'm still not sure what you mean.
You think there is such a conspiracy a foot, is happening?

[tapitsbo]

Among others which are at cross-purposes with it, of course.

Don't tell me there are no forces that want to disarm the general public as was done elsewhere in the Anglosphere an beyond?

That pro-gun conspiracies exist, I do not doubt, either.

[brekin]

Among others which are at cross-purposes with it, of course.
Don't tell me there are no forces that want to disarm the general public as was done elsewhere in the Anglosphere an beyond?
That pro-gun conspiracies exist, I do not doubt, either.

Well, sure there are numerous little conspiracies, you got em, I got em, heck even little coffee shop liberal enclaves dream of taking everyones guns away and giving them yoga mats instead, but I thought you were talking about a big "C", conspiracy where the Obama administration was planning to severely limit or curtail totally gun ownership.
If anything he's been slow to rise to the tide of many liberal Dems clamoring to disarm everybody. I mean one could also honestly say there have been, and are, also conspiracies to un-car the general public in the anglosphere.

I don't see what purpose that would serve really, though to disarm the population. Population is already pretty compliant and manageable. Most of the big shakedowns happen overseas. Having a moderately armed citizenry that individually is no match for the military and most local law enforcement is already a good strategy I would think. Hard to justify being armed to the teeth when the citizenry can only tote a 2 inch blade. (Of course if you could do that, there would be no need to justify anything anymore.) But as the most resistant, marginalized, members of society here enter the judicial system and become unable to own guns, it seems their is a built in disarmament program going on already.

[tapitsbo]

Yes, I've thought of all that.

So why did they need to take away guns in other countries?

I do believe in a big C conspiracy to disarm Americans on the behalf of certain global governance networks and the like (and I don't need no conspiratainment to tell me that when the horses' mouths are so refreshingly forthright!)

During Obama's terms this seems to have been outpaced by counter-campaigns to expand gun ownership.

It's more than obvious that LEO's and the military don't always co-operate eagerly enough with other branches of government, anyways, which is another wrinkle in your synopsis as far as future developments in this area.

Another form of marginalization - besides the disarmament via incarceration you mentioned - is when illiterate low-information types are used as muscle, armed or no, for organized crime, as it's called.

Anywho, what interested me here is Obama's elocution which I parse as "conspiracy = not true".

I wish the plots to un-car a greater proportion of the people in Oceania would achieve lift-off more soonly.

[stillrobertpaulsen]

.

Well, you see, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. The truth is hidden somewhere in there...

Jeff wrote a great essay titled "Unknown Knowns" on August 17, 2004 on this quote; what I remember specifically is that the most important part of it is what Rummy left out:

It's always great fun to make sport of a Rumsfeldism, but I find myself ashamed to admit I understand what he was saying. Though true to form, he didn't say enough. Rumsfeld neglected to add that there are also unknown knowns. That is, there are things we don't know we know.

[brekin]

Forgive me if I'm nitpicky, I'm fighting the Friday afternoon ennui.

tapitsbo wrote:

Yes, I've thought of all that.

I remember when I was young and already knew everything.

So why did they need to take away guns in other countries?

Maybe because "they" weren't a unified they, but differing they's with different agendas in time and space? Many countries (in the past, present and possible future) make gun ownership hard or impossible because they don't want their citizens killing each other or they plan on killing some of their citizens. It's probably the same differing motive when someone buys a gun themselves, to protect themselves, kill someone or themselves.

I do believe in a big C conspiracy to disarm Americans on the behalf of certain global governance networks and the like (and I don't need no conspiratainment to tell me that when the horses' mouths are so refreshingly forthright!)
During Obama's terms this seems to have been outpaced by counter-campaigns to expand gun ownership.

This is the thing I'm not understanding. Your rhetoric, (rather minty and floridly forthright I declare), at times sounds like your pretty structured power pyramid with ruling elites having "The Agenda", a grand conspiracy against the bottom parts of the pyramid, but then you also seem to open the door to myriad power balances and competing/collaborating agendas, more like pie chart. I mean, are you saying there is a shadowy global governance that is conspiring together, but is just not able to always agree or get their way? Because if the shadow network is planning to disarm the US, but is derailed by "counter-campaigns to expand gun ownership" it doesn't seem like then it has much power or reach. Granted, secret world dominance is probably not an easy thing to swing and manage.

It's more than obvious that LEO's and the military don't always co-operate eagerly enough with other branches of government, anyways, which is another wrinkle in your synopsis as far as future developments in this area.
Another form of marginalization - besides the disarmament via incarceration you mentioned - is when illiterate low-information types are used as muscle, armed or no, for organized crime, as it's called.

Yes, those low information types, and their dial up intellects.

Anywho, what interested me here is Obama's elocution which I parse as "conspiracy = not true".

Word.