Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DesuMaiden

    DesuMaiden New Member

    I am not sure if any of you guys have enncountered this quote before, but I thought it would be worth sharing on a site like this. The url for the quote is on the following link:

    http://dillanweems.com/wordpress/internets/alan-moore-on-conspiracy-theories

    The quote is in the following passage in quotation marks:

    The reason I'm making this post is because I'm somewhat annoyed by how much irrationality can be found on the Internet.
    There are plenty of people making Youtube videos and writting articles on topics such as "how the Rothschilds control the Federal Reserve", "how the Rothschilds start and fund almost every major war since the Napoleonic Wars" and spreading other similar stupid myths and nonsense. But here's the truth...

    Many conspiracy theories have no basis in reality. But I have always wondered about why certain people cling onto certain irrational beliefs. Now I have a better idea behind one of the reasons: it is because the world is chaotic and oftentimes out of humanity's control. It is more comforting to bebelieve in a conspiracy theory that gives people the illusion that the chaos they observed can somehow be tied to a certain entity or group of people who are supposedly in control. That's because humans have the tendancy to anthropomorphize scary natural phenemenon to give themselves the illusion they have control when in fact they do not.

    Another reason behind the popularity of conspiracy theories is that they provide people with an excuse to scapegoat society's problems on a particular group of people or entity. For example, conspiracy theorists like to blame the Federal Reserve for all of our financial problems by coming up with all of these elaborate myths and conspiracies about the FR. So they think if we were to abolish the FR we will automatically solve all of our social problems (which is not true because the FR is not the root of our social problems contrary to what conspiracy theorists like to say).

    Eiither way, I hope this makes sense. I dislike CTs because they are counterproductive to making the world a better place. They are basically a blame game rather than accepting what the root cause of our problems are and coming up with ways to cope or mitigate them. And I honestly have to admit many of the biggest problems we are facing have NO SOLUTIONS (like climate change, resource shortages and the imminent collapse of industrial civilization) because the world is rudderless. Nobody is in control, which makes everything way more scary.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 16, 2018
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. Svartbjørn

    Svartbjørn Senior Member


    This is purely anecdotal, but in my experience it boils down to control. People feel a lack of control in their lives (for whatever reason) and it makes it easier to blame a boogie man than admit that life generally just sucks sometimes.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    Yes... all that, except that it is more personal. It is about blaming others for their OWN problems.

    No, it's that EVERYBODY is in control of THEIR OWN situation, but CT people don't want to accept that responsibility.
     
  4. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    I think maybe different CT beliefs stem from different things. For ex, from what i see in Hoaxerdom it's more that they are bitter about their own lives and they take that bitterness out on other people because they are jealous of the attention and sympathy victims get from the world.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    If the feeling of lack of control is a key component in conspiracy theories then the best way to reduce CTs is to strengthen people's control over what happens in society. In other words, enhance democracy.
     
  6. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    i dont know. we have (so they say) one of the strongest democracies in the world and we just elected a Conspiracy Theorist with anger management issues.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    Nah... I think it's more on a spiritual level, if one chooses to believe in that sort of thing. It's about PERSONAL power and control over their own lives which CT people feel they lack or refuse to apply.
     
  8. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    It's the elites that have the real power, and people elected a person they perceived as being anti-elite.
     
  9. skephu

    skephu Senior Member

    I don't think this is limited to personal matters.
     
  10. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    A white male Ivy League-educated billionaire businessman is "anti-elite" now?
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Landru

    Landru Moderator Staff Member

    To be fair skephu said "perceived to be anti elite." I think it's nuts too.
     
  12. Z.W. Wolf

    Z.W. Wolf Senior Member

    Over the years I've been trying to boil down this type of thought to its basic elements.

    Simplify, exaggerate, choose a single devil, invent facts, universalize, be aggressive, mob.

    1. Simplify an issue to the point it becomes a simple cartoon.
    2. Exaggerate certain details until the cartoon becomes a caricature.
    3. Choose a single devil from which all evil flows.
    4. Truth is invented on an ad hoc basis, and instantly becomes absolute truth which no evidence can change. (Unless it becomes inconvenient, at which time it disappears and it never existed.)
    5. All evidence points to the theory and the theory explains everything.
    6. Use aggression to promote and defend the theory.
    7. Recruit aggressive followers who will shout down or even beat down opponents.

    I think this is basic human intraspecies aggression. I think it has evolutionary roots in how to recruit and sustain a dominant coalition. It has nothing to do with truth; it's all about how to become dominate.

    This is what we call paranoia, but paranoia is simply intraspecies aggression.

    The OP's issues of certainty and scapegoating are a part of this general theory of aggression.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2016
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    c
    Not personal "matters", but personal feelings ABOUT external matters. It's the idea that everything which happens around and "to" somebody is being controlled by some vague other(s).
     
  14. Lisa P

    Lisa P Active Member

    I think we are just trying to work things out. We need a story that makes sense.
    I only believed that chemtrails were a thing because I spoke to 2 well educated men that I trusted and they believed very strongly contrails did not persist and spread (one ex- navy the other a retired commercial pilot for Ansett). I looked into only one side of the story (the conspiracy side) once I spoke/argued online to more knowledgeable people I started to get a more complete picture and then slowly began to see there was no merit to the chemtrail story. It took me a year and a fair bit of study.
    I still have a few other conspiracies that I hold onto because nobody yet has given me satisfactory answers to my questions or I don't have time to fully investigate them.
    There is also I think a need to put people in boxes. It is nice and neat to wipe someone by labeling them a CTer. None of us are perfect and have all the answers. One thing that I miss is the kindness, friendship and comerarderi of belonging to the chemtrail groups.
    I find it difficult to understand why people like Jim Lee, Patrick Roddie et al continue to pump out info once they have been told it is incorrect. I do not believe they do it for power or to deceive and I find it incredibly frustrating because I don't understand. As an example just recently there was a twitter conversation regarding jet fuel containing barium and it was proven to Jim Lee the so called evidence he had was incorrect. As far as i know he hasn't corrected it. That kind of thing infuriates me and I am unsure if it is the action or the fact I dont understand I can't label it why someone would do that.
    So in a sense I disagree it is more comforting to believe in a conspiracy but rather a belief in the story that makes the most sense.
    Was it comforting to believe in chemtrails, hell no! On so many levels. There was no concrete evidence and I had to keep searching for it until I found it. When I finally realised there was none I felt very comfortable knowing the most likely explanation was contrails that is where I found comfort the story finally fit.
    When I was first ever told about the 9/11 conspiracies I laughed because it didn't fit the story in my head that a government could get away with that much corruption but to other people (much more educated than me) it fit their story same with these so called crisis actors.
    For me to believe something fully I need concrete evidence and if I care enough or am concerned enough about a subject I will research as much as I can both sides and then form a conclusion.
    Some conspiracies I will hold onto until more information is forthcoming that makes sense to me. I think I sit on a bridge between both worlds and I am happy with that. I have learnt a great deal in that year of being emmersed in a CT but it was also a very painful year with a lot of hours spent chasing something not real.
     
    • Like Like x 5
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. BopBox

    BopBox New Member

    Same here. I arrived here at Metabunk because of well known conspiracy theorists and I'm glad of that. And again like you, there are still some CT's I can see some merit in however throughout all of my dealings within CT circles Truth has been the beacon for my questioning and if that leads me to see that everything I have erstwhile believed in is nonsense and that there are only simple rational explanations behind them then so be it. I have found that so many within the CT communities state they are about finding truth however when faced with it they instead shirk from it and feel the person saying whatever it is must be a government shill or misleading them in some ways. Often the answers and explanations are the simplest. That's not to say that deception on a grand scale can't be pulled off, just that it's more than likely the exception and not the rule.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. "We need a story that makes sense."

    The problem with most conspiracy theorist is that when big events happen the story part is already written.What they seem to do is look at how can the evidence match `the story`(their conspiratorial world view) instead of letting the evidence tell the story. (You also find this narrative based news.)
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. joseppi

    joseppi New Member

    I think that all important events are the result of careful planning and that a conspiracy to hide the planning is always necessary if opposing forces exist.
     
  18. MikeG

    MikeG Senior Member

    Pretty vague. Could you clarify?

    Hurricane Katrina was an important "event," but I don't think it was planned.

    What fits your criteria?
     
  19. joseppi

    joseppi New Member

    Planned events rules out natural events as you pointed out.

    Conspiracy is notable by its dependency on a coordination of forces toward a perceived goal.

    I point this out to explain why I, and others think that a conspiracy, although hidden, nevertheless, must exist.

    It is rational to try and connect the dots so to speak. So, I for one, utterly reject the idea that there’s anything irrational about theorizing about a conspiracy being at work behind publically known events.

    Since history reveals that conspiracy to obtain power is common historically, there must be a powerful force that drives intelligent people to think otherwise about their own modern times. Therefore I think debunkers often seek total dismissal of anything suggesting conspiracy, and we should expect intense emotions will arise leading to things like name calling such as “ conspiracy theorist.
     
  20. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    But not when you make up your own dots. Or one gets their dots off a youtube video without verifying their truthfulness.

    I can't speak for all debunkers on the internet, but here on Metabunk we examine claims of evidence in order to determine intellectually IF there actually is anything suggesting conspiracy for any given event.

    I'm glad you think this. There are groups of conspiracy theorists who believe the very clouds in our sky are faked by the government. That every snow fall is suspicious. And every drought, in historically drought prone areas, is caused by magic machines that steal rain.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    It does, but the real historical conspiracies tend to be fairly small scale compared with the fashionable modern conspiracy theories. eg it only took 6 or 7 plotters to plan the assassination pf Gustav 3rd of Sweden, One guy to plot the assassinaion of British Prime Minister Spencer Percival, or about 40 fiesty roman senators to take out Julius Ceaser, all perfectly sane and sensible ploys carried out for beleivable and, with the hindsight of history, logical reasons. (logical from the plotters stand point atleast)

    However claims that alien shapeshifting jewish illuminati lizard people, planned 9-11 to the minute detail, or put both Stalin and Hitler i power to cause WW2 for reasons not yet revealled.... well that is pushing the bounds of any kind of real believabilty. Not saying you believe that kind of thing, just playing the extremes to make the points that just because conspiracy A happened it doesn't follow events B, C and D are conspiracies. And to point out its a matter of scale.

    Small groups of plotting conspirators can succedd in bumping off a monarch, etc, bevause there are fewer of them to squeal, get cold feet, indulge in careless pillow talk etc. The bigger the conspiracy, the more likely it is to fail.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  22. Keith Beachy

    Keith Beachy Active Member

    The key, already mentioned, is evidence.

    Theorizing about an event, the definition of conspiracy theory. It might not be irrational, but remains a theory about a conspiracy, or imagined conspiracy.

    A conspiracy theorist, to me, someone who refuses to present facts to support the theories they come up with. Someone who ignores the evidence and persists in a theory based on nothing; a conspiracy theorists. No need to call anyone a conspiracy theorist, it is self-critiquing. When we have no evidence for a claim, it remains a theory. Facts and evidence, not speculation is required to keep a claim from being a theory.

    Yes, the colonies conspired to form the USA, the evidence is solid, the power of freedom from tea tax. Facts and evidence keep theories at bay. When evidence and facts are used, a conspiracy can be solved, like when Watergate investigation earned a Pulitzer.

    It is easy to dismiss theories which are evidence free, very easy for intelligent people who require evidence not speculation. Intelligent people? - many evidence free conspiracies are supported by intelligent people with only speculation.

    Pushing, repeating, and creating crazy unfounded conspiracy theories can mislead people to do crazy things, as seen in the news. Can't believe someone believed the theories, and took a gun to a pizza shop. Theories are anti-intellectual reckless gossip.

    I agree with/like the opening post. Do you?
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  23. joseppi

    joseppi New Member

    True.

    I expect no less.


    To be straight with you, and others, I have no interest in nonsense.
    But I am a Christian with interest in conspiracy to form a world government.
     
  24. joseppi

    joseppi New Member

    I agree.
    However I think there is a global conspiracy to form a world government.
    But I wouldn’t expect anyone else to simply believe that.
    I intend on discussing what I understand with them that are or may be opposed to my understanding. For, iron sharpens iron.
     
  25. joseppi

    joseppi New Member

    True.
    No.
    The reason I don’t agree with the op post is because I am not irrational, and don’t seek comfort in notions of conspiracy.
    Yet I do perceive a conspiracy exists.
     
  26. Z.W. Wolf

    Z.W. Wolf Senior Member

    You might be a conspiracy theorist if ...

    - your theories are unfalsifiable. If disconfirming evidence is presented it is dismissed as faked or otherwise rationalized away. The theory moves farther away from the credible without limit.

    - you get angry and contemptuous when confronted with disconfirming evidence. When pressed you get evasive, relentlessly change the subject, hold onto a standard manta, or run away.

    - you hold onto zombie beliefs - beliefs which have been explained and disproven over and over and should be dead. E.g. "It's only a theory."

    - you never admit a mistake.

    - your thinking is based in suspicion. Your default assumption in all situations is that you are being lied to.

    - your emotions are primarily negative. Suspicion, anger, disgust, contempt and fear.

    - you believe in multiple suspicion-based theories. Crank magnetism.

    - you believe in suspicion-based theories which are contradictory. The filling cabinet syndrome.

    - you present evidence that some people within a group have lied and use this as proof that all people within that group always lie.

    - you have a personal devil. All evil flows from this devil; e.g. the Government, Masons, Jews, Bankers.

    - you seek any connection between your devil and your suspicion-based theory and use this connection as absolute proof of your theory.

    - you aggressively sort people into categories: "awake," "sheeple," "evil" and "shills."

    - your suspicion-based theories seem all consuming. Will not discuss other subjects and scorn people who are not consumed with these suspicion-based theories. "Sheeple watch their sports and gossip shows on TV."

    - you habitually engage in argument by intimidation.

    - you habitually engage in sophistry.

    - you habitually engage in binary thinking. All true or all false, all good or all evil, for us or against us.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2018
    • Like Like x 6
    • Agree Agree x 1
  27. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    which conspiracy theories are 'nonsense' is subjective.

    I don't personally feel people with political suspicions are 'conspiracy theorists', obviously we all know the history of the Church and other government entities ie. they have conspired and do conspire to advance their political goals.

    Just remember Metabunk is a fact based forum, we expect specific claims of evidence with back up sources. Unclear, ambiguous writing or assertions without proof attached will most likely be deleted.
    https://www.metabunk.org/posting-guidelines.t2064/
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  28. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    Moderation Note: deirdre
    I am locking this thread for now as we basically have the same conversation happening in two threads , which can get confusing to members trying to follow along.

    If anyone has something specific to add to THIS thread topic ie 'a rudderless world', please contact a moderator to unlock the thread.

     
    • Like Like x 2
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.