Why do so many people reflexively deny the role of conspiracies in human affairs?

T

TheDailyElitist

New member
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Points
1
I have absolutely no respect for anyone who automatically rejects any talk of motives behind the headlines as a "conspiracy theorist," or "conspiracy nut." These are merely derisive labels for anyone who has the audacity to suggest that there may be something the elite isn't telling us. I mean, really - how much more intellectually lazy and willfully ignorant must one be to assume that the political and business elite is ALWAYS telling the truth unless a major media outlet says they aren't?

This sort of derision is little more than a tool of cognitive manipulation, used by the elite in order to condition the ignorant masses to "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" Actually, it's very much like a widely-used method of suppressing dissent in the Soviet Union: the public was conditioned to treat anyone expressing dissent, or raising questions about the veracity of state news, as mentally ill, and the masses generally did as their leaders told them. Only when the government collapsed did many realize that they had been brainwashed into accepting the self-serving "official" accounts of any number of important events.

So, what do you think is with this? Is it just a manifestation of laziness, or is it more a result of the naive desire for an always-benevolent elite?
You lost,

I'm obviously not talking about batshit stuff that's pure fantasy - I'm talking about things like collaboration between businesses and intelligence agencies, not reptilian aliens inserting mind-control devices into our skulls.

Here's how the rational person thinks on these issues:

- Notice a news story featuring person A, who's saying or doing something possibly suspicious. Make a note of it.

- Read another news story, this time with person A collaborating with person B on something. Ask yourself what they might be doing that for, aside from the motives they actually give.

- Think about why persons A & B might be motivated to act in such a way, and what's going on behind the scenes. Draw out (mentally or otherwise) a few possible reasons, along with predictions for each contingent possibility.

- If you repeatedly see news stories that fit with the hypothesis, flag it (again, mentally or otherwise). Look for other evidence to confirm or deny your suspicions, and so on.
 
Because many people have that little human failing that is requiring some factual evidence in order to support a hypothesis.
 
Because many people have that little human failing that is requiring some factual evidence in order to support a hypothesis.
 
You do have a point that those terms are used as dismissive labels.

But... I do have little respect for people who truly are "conspiracy nuts" because of their tendency to use only the Chimpanzee part of the brain. I've dealt with a lot of folks like this and they all seem to make the same fundamental error. Because they have a particular axe to grind, when an event occurs they tend to draw their conclusion about it first, then seek out the evidence to support that world view. THAT is intellectually lazy, not to mention dishonest and runs counter to rational thinking in which one allows the evidence to lead them to the truth.

But them you are doing the same thing that you criticize others for. You use the terms "political and business elite." Isn't that a derisive label? You compare people who criticize so-called conspiracy theorists with Stalin? Isn't that intellectually dishonest?
 
A-friggin-men.

I explained a bunch of hidden details of a probable conspiracy between the government and some businesses to my family last year. I did it calmly and matter-of-factly. I cited objective sources of the information that I had. I didn't make any declaration of a definite conspiracy, just suggested that the evidence points to a very possible one.

Exasperated, my aunt exclaimed "I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE THAT'S POSSIBLE!!!! I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE OUR GOVERNMENT COULD DO THAT TO ITS OWN PEOPLE!!" I reminded her that governments throughout history have always done such things to their own people.

So there's the answer to your question. People would rather intentionally believe in a benevolent power elite than entertain the possibility that they're not entirely in control of their own lives.
 
A-friggin-men.

I explained a bunch of hidden details of a probable conspiracy between the government and some businesses to my family last year. I did it calmly and matter-of-factly. I cited objective sources of the information that I had. I didn't make any declaration of a definite conspiracy, just suggested that the evidence points to a very possible one.

Exasperated, my aunt exclaimed "I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE THAT'S POSSIBLE!!!! I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE OUR GOVERNMENT COULD DO THAT TO ITS OWN PEOPLE!!" I reminded her that governments throughout history have always done such things to their own people.

So there's the answer to your question. People would rather intentionally believe in a benevolent power elite than entertain the possibility that they're not entirely in control of their own lives.
 
Back
Top