Are you a conspiracist?

[dcentity2000]

Conspiracy theorists annoy me. Just let the dead rest!



Rich::

 

[erincon23]

The proponents of tin-foil hats are all trying to make us think that they can stop the radiowaves from entering our brain... what they really do is amplify those waves to make us even more susceptible to doing what they want us to do. I believe that this group is actually the U.S. Health and Human Services Dept -- there's a suspicious sounding name if I ever heard one. It's like that Twilight Zone episode "How to Serve Humans." And don't even get me started on the Secret Service.

Seriously, I read too many spy thriller books -- that's all conspiracy theories. I think I do have those tendencies, though. You know, the cabals of high-placed, wealthy, secretive men who really run our government. Why are there never any women in these powerful secret societies? I'd like to nominate myself...

Erin

 

[freckles and boo]

Seriously, I read too many spy thriller books -- that's all conspiracy theories. I think I do have those tendencies, though. You know, the cabals of high-placed, wealthy, secretive men who really run our government. Why are there never any women in these powerful secret societies? I'd like to nominate myself...

Erin

I second the nomination simply because you used the word "cabals" in a sentence.

 

[Liberty Belle]

I imagine that the internet has made conspiracy theories more accessible to the masses.

But I think that people have always... rightfully so... been suspicious of their government.

Am I a conspiracist? I don't think so. Do I believe everything the government tells me? No.

 

[Sparx]

I don't consider myself a conspiracy theorist, but I would say that I'm critical of a lot of what I hear. I fundamentally believe that everyone should critically examine all information they hear, before forming an opinion.

 

[lacrosse_lady72]

No. And I think most of them are absolutely psychotic.

 

[LuvOrlando]

In answer to the original question, not usually. I think this way mostly because most people are too self centered to hand over the reigns to anyone else long enough to accomp0lish anything. But, it is undeniable that groups of people do get together for a common goal... unions are one such organization, and so are social groups such as the NAACP, NOW and GLADD. So if unions etc are a powerful collection of people with a common interest how could anyone dismiss that other groups might exist who don't publicize their goals, especially if those goals are unpalatable and better reached on the down-low so as not to draw attention? Wasn't ENRON a conspiracy? Also, aren't Anti-trust, Insider Trading & Organized Crime laws set up specifically to address conspiracies? How can anyone give a nod to these laws and recent events and also say conspiracies don't exist? I'm not putting anyone who disagrees down or anything, I'm really just putting my thoughts out there which is, I assume, the point of the thread..

I think Psychosis is only a factor when the person thinks these people are out to get him or her directly. Further, I also think people are off center when they go around trying to derail other people for the fun of it. Some individuals just get a demented kick out of manipulating or sabotaging others. But that's not a conspiracy, it's just one person being a you know what stirrer. Just saying.

I happen to think that the current stir in Oil is an attempt by a small group to manipulate public opinion &/or the markets because the market's behavior doesn't make sense from a theoretical perspective. Now what that goal is I am having a hard time figuring out, but still the fact there seem to be a relatively small number of participants raises red flags for me. I keep trying to work out what the end game would be for a surge in oil prices. Three jump out at me first, a jump in inflation which causes even more social unrest than we have at the moment second, a push towards more fuel efficient vehicles & third, anti-oil company sentiment. Hmmm, I'll be rolling the question "why" around in my head for a while but it seems a few are manipulating the markets. The funny thing is, all we have to do to cut them off is reduce spending for a few days to pull them in line but who knows if people will actually do it. Very curious.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I would not say I am a conspiracist, I guess I would call myself a skepticist.

The reason being, perception is in the mind of the beholder. A good recent example is the Stephen Colbert show.

Republicans AND Democrats believe that he is on THEIR side.

The last show to do that was All in the Family.

Truth is only as good as the person telling it and people lie.

I agree with you. A particular point of view was so exploited On All in the Family that it became a parody, but the people who agreed with the perspective didn't see it and the ultra easily offended didn't see it either and didn't get that it was a mockery. I was about 10 -15 and I got it though. Same goes for Huck Finn, it was an scathing look at ridiculous behaviors but many got so caught up in the language they didn't notice where the axe was aimed. It was not warm and fuzzy, at least not to my mind.

 

[disneyaddicted]

I don't think I would call myself a conspiracy theorist, I do have "suspicion of the man" though. I tend to question things alot that don't seem "right" to me. But to say everything is a conspiracy? neh.

 

[denisenh]

The thing with this type of question is that it isn't clear as to the intent.

Some (many? most?) folks, like lacrosse_lady72, seem to believe that a "conspiacist" is the same thing as a paranoid, raving lunatic who lives in a world of their own invention or at the very least, an "abnormal" person.
That really isn't the case.

Well, anyway, like other PP's, I don't always go along with what the media/government/big money companies want to "imply". It's like feeding some one purreed food. Don't chew, just swallow. (Nothing against folks that literally have to consume purreed food.)

Maybe folks that aren't conspiracists, at least on occasion, are "lazy thinkers"? Tell me what you want me to believe and I will. Now that's just nuts.

Main Entry: con·spir·a·cist
: one who believes or promotes a conspiracy theory
Main Entry: con·spire
1 a : to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement <accused of conspiring to overthrow the government> b : scheme
2 : to act in harmony toward a common end <circumstances conspired to defeat his efforts>


Main Entry: con·spir·a·tor
: one who conspires : plotter


Main Entry: conspiracy theory
Function: noun
Date: 1909
: a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators

Main Entry: the·o·ry

1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2 : abstract thought : speculation
3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>
4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn> b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory <in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>
5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>
6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : conjecture c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations

 

[princessmom29]

Anyone that subscribes to a religion believes in something less plausible than most conspiracy theories.

well that is just a toltally nasty thing to say! Totally uncalled for. Reporting.

 

[DVCLiz]

Anyone that subscribes to a religion believes in something less plausible than most conspiracy theories.

well that is just a toltally nasty thing to say! Totally uncalled for. Reporting.

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous, princessmom29. Believing in a religion is exactly what MzDiz said - most of the time less plausible than many of the "fact" based conspiracy theories. It doesn't mean that people shouldn't believe in their religion whole heartedly. But, think for a minute - if someone else has a religious belief that is very different from yours, don't you feel that they believe in something that is not true? Because you know YOUR religion is the real, true one? It's the same concept - that's all MzDiz was trying to say - I think.

And people who don't believe in any religion at all would feel exactly that way, and would probably equate religious beliefs and conspiracy theories. It's not nasty - it's just a different viewpoint, especially if you believe strongly in a particular religion.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Ummm, no, princessmom29 is absolutely correct. Not only was the statement inflammatory but it was disrespectful and dehumanizing. I noticed the statement cited too, but just wrote the other person off as an unbalanced zealot with a goal and let it slide. I don't think some sorts are worth engaging but don't make the mistake of thinking silence equals agreement. I guess I'm not silent any more though am I? Not cool, not cool at all.

 

[BCDisneyFanatic]

Ummm, no, princessmom29 is absolutely correct. Not only was the statement inflammatory but it was disrespectful and dehumanizing. I noticed the statement cited too, but just wrote the other person off as an unbalanced zealot with a goal and let it slide. I don't think some sorts are worth engaging but don't make the mistake of thinking silence equals agreement. I guess I'm not silent any more though am I? Not cool, not cool at all.

Because that's not inflammatory or disrespectful at all.

I don't think that the other post was necessarily insulting; all it said was that people believe in things every day for which there is an absence of absolute proof (and people who believe in God aren't usually viewed as unbalanced!).

 

[denisenh]

well that is just a toltally nasty thing to say! Totally uncalled for. Reporting.

Ummm, no, princessmom29 is absolutely correct. Not only was the statement inflammatory but it was disrespectful and dehumanizing. I noticed the statement cited too, but just wrote the other person off as an unbalanced zealot with a goal and let it slide. I don't think some sorts are worth engaging but don't make the mistake of thinking silence equals agreement. I guess I'm not silent any more though am I? Not cool, not cool at all.

Speaking as a spiritual person and as a Christian, I don't get these two (above quoted) comments.

I am secure in my religious thoughts and beliefs, no matter what.

Isn't it a sign of weakness in your own spirituality ( no matter what religion or belief ) to feel so highly insulted by comments like this?

I hold absolutely nothing against MzDiz ( ) or consider her comment anything other than "hers" and it IS thought provoking for many people.

 

[freckles and boo]

well that is just a toltally nasty thing to say! Totally uncalled for. Reporting.

Why? Because it isn't YOUR opinion? There is nothing nasty about what was said or how it was said. It is a fact. Most religions ask their adherents to stretch what they "know" and have faith in things that are, indeed, implausible.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Speaking as a spiritual person and as a Christian, I don't get these two (above quoted) comments.

I am secure in my religious thoughts and beliefs, no matter what.

Isn't it a sign of weakness in your own spirituality ( no matter what religion or belief ) to feel so highly insulted by comments like this?

I hold absolutely nothing against MzDiz ( ) or consider her comment anything other than "hers" and it IS thought provoking for many people.

What? I personally always think it's uncool when one person takes sucker punches at another person. What on earth does acknowledging bad behavior have to do with a weak belief system. I'm stymied by pretty much everything you are saying

 

[LuvOrlando]

Why? Because it isn't YOUR opinion? There is nothing nasty about what was said or how it was said. It is a fact. Most religions ask their adherents to stretch what they "know" and have faith in things that are, indeed, implausible.

Pretending the term 'conspiracy' does not have negative connotations is not a good defense.

You threw out a bomb, and that's all it was. It made absolutely no valid contribution to the issue at hand. That's as plain as it gets.

 

[paintnolish]

XH was and it drove me nuts. Look, the government can't tell the public everything. It has to have some secrets, and as long as you pay your taxes, Uncle Sam doesn't care what John Q. Public does on a say to day basis.

 

[freckles and boo]

Pretending the term 'conspiracy' does not have negative connotations is not a good defense.

You threw out a bomb, and that's all it was. It made absolutely no valid contribution to the issue at hand. That's as plain as it gets.

I didn't throw out anything. I defended an opinion that I happen to agree with.