Disecting the Conspiracy Theories

In my last post, I described the various constructs that surround Truth, truth and conspiracy theories (CT). It was a lot of information, poorly explained and presented. I apologize for that and will explain. In a series of posts then, I will tackle the concepts I tried to define in the Anatomy post.

A conspiracy theory is really just a concept (the theory) about a group of participants (the conspirators). The term however has morphed into a basic concept that a CT is, a)  a plan that involves secrecy to benefit some at the expense of others and b) it’s somehow…evil. I hesitate to use a broad descriptor like that, but that explains it best. This is an important concept in understanding CT makeup and theory.

The perpetrators of most CTs, that is, the participants as described by what I’ll call CT promoters, are the government (USG), major corporations and international groups like the United Nations (UN), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other similar triplets of initials. Popular also are agencies like the Federal Reserve (Fed). Corporate favorites run the gamut from banking groups to power producers to even diamond companies. Under that ‘corporate’ umbrella is also groups of corporate titans and aristocracy like Bilderberg’s or the CFR or those that attend the Bohemian Grove. The USG group also involves the various apparatus of national security (CIA, Homeland Security, NSA) and various secretive military units. Together, these orgs represent the primary targets of promoters of CTs.

The promoters are usually individuals or small groups of individuals who band together based on their common belief. That is, the promoters are typically not large corporations or the USG saying some other group is engaging in this behavior. We’ll skip the intel groups of the USG and their promotion of terrorist groups as CTs.

Next, as pointed out in the post ‘Anatomy…’, the ‘facts’ and bulk of most CTs are often “unintended consequences”, some of which are advantageous to groups previously mentioned as participants in CTs. Some of these consequences may be more or less ‘unintended’ than others. The fact that these programs often benefit rich and powerful while hurting the ‘average Joe’ is also a strong factor in creating a CT.

However, most of these CTs are not, as a CT implies, secrets. Most of the relationships promoted as nefarious are instead well publicized and known. That’s not to say they aren’t nefarious – that’s to say they aren’t secret.

A large portion of what CT promoters claim are secretive pacts are instead only secretive to listeners because they are ignorant. That’s not to say stupid, that is to say uninformed. Most Americans took one semester of high school American history and one more on American government. Few continued to learn about either following that. They know even less about world history, whether recent or ancient. Therefore, they have no basis of knowledge to judge what the promoters feed them.

Along with that is the ‘negative proof’ concept. A promoter can create a CT simply by making a statement that the target cannot (or does not) refute with proof. The lack of proof is considered proof itself.

TV is the primary educator – with the internet coming in a close second depending on your tech interest and your age. TV, at least in America, is financed by corporations and as such, probably contains bias. Information derived from TV is primarily conveyed for a purpose and often devoid of contextual information. Instead, as described in ‘Anatomy…’, the wording used to convey that information contains directive language – language that gives the listener descriptive, rather than fact-based context. These are important considerations. Most of the things that promoters talk about are not hush-hush, no-written-record-conspiracies but rather right out in the open policies. This works because so many Americans are ignorant of the facts. On top of that is one of these out in the open policies. As I explained, simple wording choices change not the facts, but the interpretation of those facts. They change how the facts are received and perceived and believed by the public. That allows these ‘conspiracies’ to exist and move forward – in full view – without being seen.

In most countries, perhaps none so much as the US, belief is polarized to the point of parity. Most major topics have believers that are not only evenly split on the topic, but those believers are grouped at the ends of the spectrum more than in the past. The extremes are the norms. This allows one group to say almost anything about the group at the other end with little moderation. This is true of believers in issues of faith, of political belief and of economic theory.

Topping this off is the human brain’s desire for stories like CTs. It produces endorphins as the mind gets excited – and people get excited about CTs. The ideas expressed in CTs are outside the rather boring existence that forms the bulk of life. That makes them appealing. They feel good to listen to and talk about. All of these conditions make the ‘average Joe’ receptive to CTs.

These ideas in this post to this point may seem to point to the fact that CTs are just that, theories. That the CTs themselves do not point to conspiracies to take our freedom, rule our lives or separate us from our money. Not necessarily true.

Indeed, it would appear the rich are trying very hard to distance themselves from the rest and are doing a good job of it. It would also be fair to say there is an almost unholy relationship between the private banking sector and the higher levels of the USG. Further, it is arguable that the majority of decisions our representatives make in our local, state and federal houses of government favor corporations over citizens. Lastly, it is reasonable to conclude that government is working to restrict, rewrite or eliminate the freedoms we enjoy. And for each of these preceding premises, I speak as a citizen of Earth, not just the USA.

So are these statements in conflict? That all of this is known and not happening, yet it is the path we are following. Not at all. The title and focus of these posts has not been on the programs, but rather that they shouldn’t be considered conspiracy theories under the current definition.

Note that this post does not make judgments. It does not say CTs don’t exist. It doesn’t comment on whether popular CTs are accurate. It also does not examine the motives of the promoters – or the participants. And it does not examine specific CTs. The point is to explore the concepts behind CTs and offer methods for interpreting and examining them. Further posts in this series will offer tools for dissection and discussion of CTs and the reasons they are so popular.


~ by Mad Prophet on October 21, 2012.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: