Conspiracy theories (meta)

Inspired by the exposure of the systematic hacking of people's phones by journalists from Rupert Murdoch's News International titles, which is clearly a conspiracy on some level (and has its own thread).

Do you believe in conspiracy theories or are you a sceptic, and why?

My own view would be that I believe that powerful people sometimes band together behind closed doors to do illegal or questionable things to advance their ends - look at the Murdoch case, Tony Blair and others "selling" the invasion of Iraq to the public or Watergate. However, I'm sceptical of anything supposedly involving secret societies, The Man Behind the Man, aliens - the wilder stuff. It worries me when people construct arguments that are incapable of being disproved because they can just say "Ah, but all the evidence was suppressed by the conspiracy."

Incidentally, the "meta" bit is to stress that this isn't the place for anyone's specific pet theory about who killed JFK/RFK/MLK/Bambi.

edited 16th Jul '11 8:20:59 AM by captainbrass2

JFK was totally shot by Alex Mason.

But seriously, while some theories have their roots in reality, far too many of them are just out there and kind of dumb.

Actual criminal conspiracies tend to get exposed, sooner or later. No plan is perfect, and the more people in on it, the likelier it is to get exposed. Somebody slips up, law enforcement catches on, or somebody exposes it.

One conspiracy that I can think of in recent memory was the Enron scandal. There were maybe a dozen key players in it, and it went on for several years until they couldn't hide their illegal activities any more. A lot of credit for how long it went on goes to the people who should have seen something earlier but either ignored it or just weren't paying attention.

But for huge, world-spanning conspiracies, I don't find those theories to be credible. Nearly all real-life conspiracies are intended to provide some immediate benefit to those involved, usually money. If nobody benefits, or if the risk of exposure is so great that no reasonable person would go through with it, then it's probably not a conspiracy.

Depends on the conspiracy theory.

They tend to run the gamut from "Hmm, that sorta makes some sense" to "Wat."

I believe that humans who succumb to the corrupting influence of power and money will naturally tend to band together and try to lock in the sources of their power and money.

As time goes on, eventually their brains deteriorate. Across multiple generations, their brains are reduced to a level at which they will inevitably get displaced. If we're lucky, their brains may dissolve within a matter of months or years, rather than requiring decades and generations. The only question after this is whether or not society is prepared for their absence.

I don't usually believe conspiracy theories. I am a skeptic. Maybe it's just because all the ones I hear about are ridiculous. And most of them haven't been true anyway.

As a former conspiracy nut, I understand the impulse, "If it's horrific enough, it must be true." Especially if it has anything to do with the government.

Well, there's an old adage about "never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity". I'm pretty sure "stupid" describes the government better than "malicious".

A lot of people suggest that conspiracy theories are just paranoid delusions pulled out of the air. Completely untrue. There is evidence, both concrete and circumstantial, which support suspicions about the New World Order and Zionism.

"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."

- Congressman Larry P. Mc Donald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets

"Conspiracy theorists" are not all gullible Alex Jones types who will believe every paranoid notion of Reptilian control and omnipotent, omniscient freemasonry. Also, at least some prominent "conspiracy theorists" are subversive agents out to mislead and discredit legitimate investigation of conspiracies.

edited 16th Jul '11 11:54:39 AM by Shichibukai

Bart: So finally, we're all in agreement about what's going on with the adults. Milhouse?

Milhouse: [steps up to blackboard] Ahem. OK, here's what we've got: the Rand Corporation, in conjunction with the saucer people —

Bart: Thank you.

Milhouse: — under the supervision of the reverse vampires —

Lisa: [sighs]

Milhouse: — are forcing our parents to go to bed early in a fiendish plot to eliminate the meal of dinner. [sotto voce] We're through the looking glass, here, people...

edited 16th Jul '11 12:05:17 PM by blueharp

Rough rule of thumb: each extra person involved in a hypothetical conspiracy divides it's credibility by two.

There have been some successful conspiracies - 9/11, Enron, that recent tabloid wiretapping thing, arguably the US revolution ... there are also some more-or-less secret societies - Freemasons, Al Quaeda, etc. But in terms of influencing world events, I'd put conspiracies and secret societies way behind most governments and a lot of corporations, news organization and NG Os.

edited 16th Jul '11 12:09:21 PM by SlightlyEvilDoctor

The pyramid of manipulation.

As you ascend the hierarchy, your inside knowledge grows accordingly, yet only as much as you need to complete your role. A select few are initiated into the illuminati proper, and information is kept segregrated by professions. This sort of collusion is subtle for the most part, even most CEOs are kept out of the illuminati inner circle.

edited 16th Jul '11 12:18:49 PM by Shichibukai

My belief in conspiracy theories is inversely related to how much they effect me and their probability of discovery.

Giant, world spanning cabals controlling the world's economies hold little credibility to me.

Actually, I think Slightly Evil Doctor's point about the credibility of the conspiracy shrinking the more people have to be involved is a good one. I'm a bit annoyed I didn't put it that succinctly.

It's also fair to say that extreme conspiracist thinking tends to appeal to the political extremes. The most notorious extreme right wing one would be the whole belief in a world-wide Jewish conspiracy, and on the left you could argue there's always been an element of conspiracy theory in Marxism (all those evil capitalists plotting).

Conspiracy theories are fucking stupid. I am a former conspiracy nut because of my father, who was brainwashing me to believe in all sorts of crap. (i.e., "9/11 was an inside job", "Vaccines are a plot to kill you", "Obama is a closet eugenicist," etc.)

Now, there is a huge difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. A conspiracy is a bunch of dudes plotting something in secret. A conspiracy theory is simply an unproven allegation of conspiracy.

Conspiracy theories are unproven and rely on huge leaps of logic and distorted evidence. I have never come across a conspiracy theory that has been backed up by evidence. In cases where it appears there is a conspiracy, Occam's Razor applies very easily to shear away the parts that are genuinely bizarre.

Conspiracy theories that have been proven to be true located at the bottom of this page.

I don't think that link shows what you think it shows

Actually, I was talking about the template at the bottom.

Obviously the result of evil government plotting to hide the truth from us, right?

edited 16th Jul '11 4:25:35 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

Please read my original post again, more specifically this bit:

"Now, there is a huge difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. A conspiracy is a bunch of dudes plotting something in secret. A conspiracy theory is simply an unproven allegation of conspiracy."

Once conspiracy theory is proven, it by definition is no longer a theory and enters the realm of fact.

@Shichi: "Icke pyramid." Isn't Icke the guy who believes in shapeshifting alien lizards?

I believe that what might as well be called conspiracies are a necessary consequence of international politics, but I tend to avoid the term, and I don't know enough to say whether any individual conspiracy theory is true or false. One important caveat is that I usually believe in conspiracies where two or more leaders are conspiring against another leader—one leader may very well think that all the leaders who know about the conspiracy are on his side, but he'll be proven wrong in short order.

Also, there's a conspiracy theory I find probable, that some supposed conspiracy theorists are actually working for one government or another to stir up disinformation. (This is one of the few conspiracy theories banned from discussion at Above Top Secret, especially if you apply it to that site's administrators.)

edited 16th Jul '11 4:53:45 PM by feotakahari

Icke doesn't hate Jews, he just hates the reptilian alien shapeshifters who HAPPEN to be associated with Jews! He doesn't hate the Jews, he just hates the Zionists, who happen to be very similar to Jews!

edited 16th Jul '11 5:15:54 PM by LilPaladinSuzy

Generally, I can believe the more small-scale conspiracies. For example, I could see Oswald being an agent of some other power. Anything to do with the grassy knoll or a second shooter I find ridiculous. Something such as 9/11 I find a hard time believing to be a Conspiracy Theory because of the amount of things that are required to go right.

Yeah, I can imagine some plausible reasons for why, say, the FBI would want to bump off MLK.

I think JFK was probably shot by the mafia, and the government covered it up so as not to expose their joint operations with the mob in Cuba. I also think the mafia dons must have been dumbstuck at how eager Bobby et al. were to cover it all up.

But the big ones, like child prostitution rings in Washington DC, or the Vatican controlling the drug trade? That's a bit of a stretch. Like Göring, "I reach for my revolver."

edited 16th Jul '11 6:47:25 PM by johnnyfog

All proven conspiracies were once "conspiracy theories" at one point. There is a difference between a baseless allegation and a well-supported theory. Detectives make "conspiracy theories" all the time, and sometimes they have to work on their intuition.

That "big leap of logic" you speak of is often intuition, backed up by evidence. Something smells fishy about the movement towards globalisation, Zionist influence on American foreign policy, the death of Dr. David Kelly, for just a few examples.

There are very plausible conspiracy theories with strong evidence, and then there are more absurd ones with very scant evidence. For example, the whole lizardmen conspiracy theory is hard to believe, and based on faulty evidence. Whereas a more legitimate, plausible conspiracy theory alleges that Dr. Kelly -a UK weapons scientist- was assassinated for threatening to blow the lid on the Iraq War. There is alot of incriminating evidence surrounding his death suggesting that it was not a suicide.

• A group of scientists suspects that Kelly would not have been able to commit suicide in the manner stated by the inquiry.
• He died right after giving embarrassing evidence to a committee hearing.
• Kelly told a friend words to the effect that he might end up dead.
• There was suspicious activity around Dr. Kelly's house, including an unscheduled helicopter some hours before his death.
• The Hutton inquiry has classified some evidence for 70 years, a very unusual practice.

Yet faced with any such allegations from anything other than an official source, people engage in a form of doublethink, dissociating conspiracy theories from any other sort of "theory".

There is lots and lots of evidence backing up certain legitimate conspiracy theories. Many people outright reject any notions of a conspiracy because they are conditioned to only believe official stories, they place their faith in authority being able to hold authority to account. The current Western ruling elite control - directly or by proxy - all the "authoritative", "official" information channels. They define what is official, legitimate, and "truthful".

I believe that General Patton may have been assassinated too.

edited 16th Jul '11 6:58:11 PM by Shichibukai