Conspiracy theories… I’ve had more than my share of run-ins with conspiracy theories. Occam’s Razor cuts through them every time, but still people are willing to believe utter nonsense.
“The minute you get into the JFK stuff, and the minute you sniff at the 9/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live,”
Yes, indeed, tell me about it. Having been involved with emergency planning and response in the rail industry, I am well aware that inconsistencies in the timelines will be inevitable – due entirely to human error and the inability to keep an accurate track of what happened when and where due to so much happening at once. Been there, done that and so on. The conspiracy theorist will see not the obvious and easily explained but black hats indulging in false flag operations and somehow managing to keep it all a secret. Indeed, such a closely guarded secret that the Internet is full of it. It’s palpable nonsense of course. Demonstrably palpable nonsense, but this doesn’t stop truthers demanding answers to questions and it is a brave, foolhardy soul who dares to try and answer those questions, because the answers will be dismissed out of hand and yet more questions posed – as farcical as the first lot and so on and so on until you do, indeed, lose the will to live.
But you can’t stop these things and to suggest that they undermine democracy is to give them a credence they really do not deserve. And, that said, a healthy suspicion of the motives of politicians and bureaucrats is no bad thing. No, I do not believe for one minute that George Bush masterminded the 9/11 attacks (the weakness of that idea stops dead at the word “masterminded”), however, it is certainly true that the US government made hay from that little harvest with homeland security now a beast that is going to be difficult to tame, likewise our little war on terror following the attacks on London Transport. So, yeah, rampant opportunism, but conspiracies? Do me a favour.
Indeed, LR, Occam’s Razor is generally most apt.
Also, with our current regime of ruling élite, Hanlon’s Razor can also be generally applied:-
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
And stupidity – especially among the parasite class – is rife.
‘Hanlon’s razor’ is pretty good but I’ve, generally, found the stupid to be quite easily led by the malicious. A combination of both though it’s fair to say there are more ‘stupid’ ones than ‘malicious’.
“Sir Richard Evans, who heads the five-year Conspiracy and Democracy project”
When you can openly engage in piss-taking projects like this, there is zero need for conspiracy.
Quite so, hence my dismissing the idea that this stuff is a threat to democracy – not that democracy is anything to write home about.
Democracy is an interesting idea:- but the establishment would never permit it.
I agree with you completely, I read somewhere recently that there was another surge in this JFK pish, all because his brain was missing from some archive somewhere.
The article alleged that his brother had had it destroyed to hide the fact he had some terrible degenerative disease.
This was a serious news periodical. I was aghast, I just thought OH for f**** sake get a grip.
I suppose conspiracy theorists are like urban legends, ignore all fact and actuality and just pretend that Dr Who can travel in time and that Sam and Dean Winchester really do fight Wendigo’s for a living.
Conspiracy theorists = away with that fairies.
I agree with you completely on this one Kath. given that the US Air force could not overfly the correct airfield at Southampton a couple of years ago, when they were booked to appear at an air show, far far more likely is the fact that they have put it in the wrong place and simply cannot find it.
In fact, when dealing with all bureaucracy, I find that the most likely reason for anything going wrong is stupidity, and if that cannot possibly be the answer, then it is usually some jumped up twerps ego that has put a blockage in the system. the more petty the bureaucrat, the more s/he is likely to act like a Vogon.
Longrider, great post. I have zero tolerance for conspiraloons because I believe that quoting them kills the quoters credibility. You may be interested in reading book that I recently read which was David Aaronovich’s Voodoo Histories, which is an examination of all the major conspiracy theories, how they came about and why they are utter cack. I completely agree that politicians are often untrustworthy but I find the whole idea of ‘lizard people’ and ‘illuminati’ utterly preposterous.
Having worked in a Govt environment I’ll pick stupidity, incompetence and venality over Bilderberg Group puppet masters every time. I’ve often thought that those talented writers who write approvingly on conspiracy theories are wasting their talents. Anyway here’s my take on the conspiraloons
http://www.fahrenheit211.net/2013/01/29/you-were-doing-ok-right-up-until-you-said-new-world-order-and-then-i-stopped-reading/
I was doing some temping in a call centre some years back when one of my co-workers started spouting the Loose Change cockwaffle to an audience lapping up the faux physics he was dribbling. I thought briefly about saying something, but decided “fuck it” was probably best and kept quiet. I can’t be bothered arguing with conspiraloons.
“Conspiracy theorists” do “Governments” a great service.
No matter HOW stupid they (“Governments”) get, there will always be the possibility to shout “Conspiracy”, and no one is sure of the truth any more.
It means they can, LITERALY, get away with murder.
and probably did, in Dr Kelly’s case.
Not pushing any conspiracy theory, other than that both Blair & Campbell are particularly nasty obnoxious shits – not far off being really evil.
Not far off? You are too generous.
There is no doubt that conspiracies exist. The problem is that you only know that a conspiracy has existed after it comes to light. Does anyone doubt that a conspiracy existed in the Health Dept when Subry was whisked off to Luxembourg to agree the Tobacco Control Directive without consulting the appropriate parliamentary committee? Does anyone believe that the failure was an oversight? But no one can ever be sure until someone involved describes what happened. Does anyone have any doubt that the smoking ban was the result of a thoroughly well considered plan, complete with red herrings and false promises of exceptions? Was that not the result of a conspiracy? Is it not true that all the junk science which accompanied the ban was the result of the same conspiracy?
And finally, did anyone realise the extent of that conspiracy until the trap was sprung?
To me that is underhanded connivery and out right lying not conspiracy, the 2 are not really the same thing to me at least, Conspiracy theories tend to be about the fantastic and unbelievable such as 9/11, JFK, Area 51 etc.
The way the smoking ban went down was in actual fact transparently obvious, myself and many of my friends and family at the time foresaw exactly what was coming, and that was just a nasty evil piece of smoke and mirrors out and out lying not a conspiracy.
Well, yes conspiracies do occur. No one is gainsaying that. However, for a conspiracy to work, it has to involve very few people or word will get out. And I agree with Kath, the examples you cite are certainly evidence of malign behaviour,and overblown hubris but of a conspiracy, less so.
The idiots who fall for the Loose Change claptrap are willing to believe in massive world-wide conspiracies that would never work anyway as far too many people would be in the know – yet as it is, only the conspiraloons seem to have all the answers. In which case, we are all doomed – or they are a bunch of credulous whack-jobs. The latter being more likely.
At the risk of making a complete arse of myself, from what I have read the Illuminati was a secret society that started in Germany in around 1770 and wanted to overthrow the by then considered debauched Church of Rome, apparently it was very hierarchical and included many people of wealth and influence, not only did they sponsor the French Revolution but they also infiltrated the Free Masons, something noted by one of the founding fathers of the U.S.A. What relevance or influence they hold today I do not know and how true any of this is I cannot verify but there is usually no smoke without fire.
John Leon, for a decent background on the ‘Illuminati’ thing I would again recommend David Aaronovich’s book ‘Voodoo Histories’. There were secret societies at or around the time of the French Revolution but they had nothing like the influence or power that the tin foil hatters say they did or do.
I know that you were talking about the loony conspiracy theories, but what I was trying to point out is that conspiracies do not need to be crazy. A conspiracy can exist, and, until the truth is revealed, any talk about that conspiracy is ‘a conspiracy theory’.
I think that small conspiracies are far more likely that huge ones. I disagree with Kath. The vast majority of people did not, and probably still do not, see the conspiracy that produced the smoking bans. For example, after the Irish ban, little information appeared in the press about its effects. Only later did it become apparent that pubs in Ireland started to close down in huge numbers. Also, after the ban in Scotland, the same thing occurred, but went unreported. Only after the calamitous effect of the ban in England and Wales, did anyone notice what had happened, and even then, the observations of the effects were not promulgated by the press.
Underhand conspiracies are occurring NOW! We ought not to deny it. Our political system stinks precisely because of the conspiracies. But note that the conspiracies are not about FACTS, they are about public perceptions. Modern conspiracies are about manipulating public opinion. In those circumstances, TRUTH becomes a nuisance and morality ceases to be a factor. It then comes down to “commercial imperative” – grab the popularity by any means possible, whether legal or not. Such minor considerations can be argued about later – after the desired result has been gained.
Who cares if a MP made a speech in parliament about the dangers of second hand tobacco smoke knowing full well that the dangers were vastly exaggerated? Such speeches would be lost in the ‘noise’. Only when the template is applied to other things do people take notice. Only then does the ‘conspiracy’ become apparent.
What I think is happening, a little at a time, is that people are becoming aware that we have been subjected to conspiracies for years and years and years – all based upon lying to the public.
The silly conspiracy theories, like the suggestion that the moon landings were faked, distract from the TRUE conspiracy theories.
There is nothing wrong with a group of people getting together and ‘conspiring’ to produce some sort of result. What is wrong with ‘conspiring’ is when the ‘conspiracy’ involves trickery and lies.
I pretty much agree with the thrust of this post but it leaves me with a problem. I became sceptical about climate change alarmism quite a few years ago. While I was trying to get a handle on what the actual facts and figures about the climate were, the one thought that kept occurring to me was, that for climate change alarmism not to be true would mean that an absurd conspiracy would have to be going on. It is so difficult to believe that the whole thing is built on shonky science and political opportunism, but that does indeed seem to be the case. Do I need a tinfoil Hat?
I would be inclined to view AGW alarmism as a religious meme rather than a conspiracy.
Sometimes the conspiracy is the Occam’s Razor choice. After deniers have brought every argument under the sun, some very clever, in the end the best answer is that it happened in the simple way – they were guilty after all.
Ah, yes, because we don’t believe, we are deniers. Won’t wash, I’m afraid.