Conspiracy Theories - Why?

[Matthew Shea]

I'm hoping you all can give me a little insight on the topic of conspiracy theories. I've never been one to believe in them personally, seeing them as a sort of mental trap for the unwary, but a friend of mine sent me a link to a video last week describing a conspiracy to control the world with RFID implants in every man, woman and child. This friend of mine is a very intelligent person, so I'm having trouble understanding why an intelligent person would buy into such things. I'm not looking for advice on dealing with my friend, but a little insight in general about why people buy into conspiracy theories would be welcome.

[palimpsest]

I think... conspiracy theories piece a puzzle together where there isn't one (or at least They want you to think there isn't one! A-ha!) this gets one thinking about relationships or alliances beyond the personal, and about the world -- political, or a large scope of social -- as it could be beyond us, it can be a way to define what we value (imagining a threat to something of value,) and generally provide a new perspective that's fun for a while but I wouldn't want to have to check every room for bugs forever.

[legend]

If you think about it a conspiracy theroy is a form of subjective reality....
I think some people have an outcome then go back and try to make reality fit that mold.... Others buy into it because a seemingly strong argument is made without any real evidence

[MadHyeNa]

The way that specific conspiracy story is expressed and the message that it conveys. The usage of specific technical terms and pointing our so-called facts that are actually misinterpretations of scientific studies and documents. Emphasizing and focusing on the bugs and extracting quotes by leaving out some of the key parts of a sentence to intensify their meaning, I mean, to convery a different message than the scientist actually aimed to present.

Ultimately, mixing all of these in a decent manner and if the presentation is not sub-par, marketing is well done, then chances are that almost all of the average Joes will buy into. And then the word-of-mouth advertisements continues. That's when Joe will fill up all of his friends with that specific conspiracy theory explaining and using technical terms himself because it boosts his level of confidence because he will look smarter than he really indeed.

Furthemore, that friend will end up amazed by the presentation and personal recommendation that his friend Joe did and, therefore, finds himself actually studying, researching, buying into that conspiracy himself too. It's social conditioning. It's the effect that our friends have upon us. It's the effect of technical terms, and the usage of quotes, high technicality, abstract philosophical language in a certain tone, remembering of scientists that actually have nothing to do with the specific conspiracy but still pointing out some excerpts by their works and, obviously, attaching a long, long list of further reading and references that contain seemingly 'correct and accurate' source for reference.

This is a psychological weakness and phenomenon that human beings usually buy into. If these weaknesses are used up to their full potential than they generate curiosity and have a deep lasting impression. That is, admiration toward the 'intelligence' of the conspiracy theorists. Why? Because they are so familiar with technical terms, accurate details, correct graphs and scientists' documents. Anything that can be brought as to look like a "strong argument" has serious value and effect upon the reader. Especially if the facts are overreacted and bit stretched!

Heck, I've read a study a while ago about how you can make graphs to convery a different meaning by using correct values. I mean, you won't actually cheat because you are applying the graph on the accurate values but still there are specific ways how you present it, the graph will have a different impression, effect and meaning upon the readers or listeners/viewers (in case of a seminar, conference, presentation, etc.). It is mind blowing how our mind actually misinterprets and pays not that much attention to details rather it goes with its 'first impressions' that are far could be far from the reality.

It is similar to social proof and there's nothing you can do about it. You either fall into or use it toward toward the highest good of all.

Oh, and something that I've remembered of, even if a specific negative message must be conveyed, that simply can't be mispresented and nor can it be left out, then still it can be used as to have no actual effect upon the readers/spectators. That is, generating specific moods in the public before hand, acquire some sort of states (similar to multiple "Yes" responses and then asking the ambigous question will result in a "Yes" answer from the victim) and then presenting the harsh fact will have absolutely no negative effect upon the public, or eventually even positive. There's a science behind all of these... it just is. There's nothing you can do about it. You cannot change the world.

[Laranja]

Why do people buy into cons. theories?

> Not very experienced in reading intelligent stuff. So for the first time they hear something that sounds logical on a "higher" (more complicated) level. And then they think: "Great! That is it!"

> Everybody wants to have an explanation for the various phenomenons of the world.

> It is obvious that something that would fall into the category of conspiracy theory is an explanation for various ongoings. Just logic: the big boys are playing their games, and offcourse, we are not invited. Do you know for sure why american trrops are in iraq? No, offcourse not. Neither does your average conspiracy theorist. But some reason might exist...

> Psychological needs: wanting to feel more important, taking the chance to blame others and so on.

> Addcition to the mental thrill. (That's why certain types of literature sell almost like drugs).

[Brad Isaac]

I like reading conspiracy theories for their entertainment value. Some are very well crafted pieces of fiction.

[MartialDev]

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

This friend of mine is a very intelligent person, so I'm having trouble understanding why an intelligent person would buy into such things. I'm not looking for advice on dealing with my friend, but a little insight in general about why people buy into conspiracy theories would be welcome.

Because if there is something wrong with THEM, then there is nothing wrong with YOU.

Perfectly logical, right?

[Matthew Shea]

Point taken, MartialDev. I'm not intending to say that those who get into conspiracy theories are un-intelligent, just that I don't understand why some minds grasp onto them and some don't, regardless of intelligence level.

I'll also admit that, for all I know, they may be right, but as far as I'm concerned, the burden of proof is on the person coming up with the theory. If that proof isn't offered (and it never is), I have no qualms about dismissing the theory.

[Amadeus]

I personally think there could be a link between intelligent people and paranoid schizophrenia. Your friend could think someone is after him or us (psychological health) but still can be extremely intelligent (cognitive ability).

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Sometimes I think we just 'know' there must be something more to certain things than meets the eye. Plus, the theories are entertaining and intriguing to say the least.

[Shamou]

Einstein said:

"Man tries to make for himself in the fashion that suits him best a simplified and intelligible picture of the world.

He then tries to some extent to substitute this cosmos of his for the world of experience, and thus to overcome it… He makes this cosmos and its construction the pivot of his emotional life in order to find in this way the peace and serenity which he cannot find in the narrow whirlpool of personal experience."

We believe ourselves to be rational being... nothing could be further from the truth... most of our conclusions and beliefs are based on intuition and "feelings."

People will believe in life after death... why...???

People believe that if they are good... good things will happen to them... why...???

People believe that they should be patriotic...why...???

People believe in organized religion... why...???

There are no "facts" supporting any of these (or thousands of other) fundamental beliefs...

And, the main reason that people hold beliefs is that, "They feel more secure in believing something even if all evidences appear otherwise, then to remain in a state of uncertainty..."

What is wrong with saying, "I don't know... I don't have to know... and I don't care that I don't know..." when there are no facts to support a theory...
.

[Dharma]

Conspiracy theory and religion are born of the same mother. For some reason religion is not questioned and conspiracy is highly questioned. Believing in one makes you a good person, believing in the other makes you a nut.

Now why would that be?

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by Dharma

Conspiracy theory and religion are born of the same mother. For some reason religion is not questioned and conspiracy is highly questioned. Believing in one makes you a good person, believing in the other makes you a nut.

Now why would that be?

I do believe that a great many people "do" question religion... I, for one, know many of them...
.

[Uplift]

It is empowering to investigate the roots of things rather than blindly accept them. Often what is revealed is extremely suprising. Anyone remember those tons of weapons of mass destruction? Would a wise person just accept that world champions eat Smacko Crunches in order to break records. Or that the models in the 1 sec Ab Mcgenius developed their impressive abs by using it. Or that tons of retired bodybuilders have stuffed kidneys and hearts because of genetic defects, and that it had nothing to do with a bombardment of drugs? In a different forum some original documents were traced and located by an enterprising poster, which threw an interesting light on the roots and aims of the US education system. Was the Roman Emporer really guided by and motivated by God, and the well being of mankind, when Catholicism was created?

If the herd is running over a cliff, or wandering straight into an ambush, its not a bad thing to stick your head up and have a look around. Sometimes its better to say 'See yas'. Make use of what you find. I have found self reliance to be a good thing.

[CoolStuff]

The reason there are "conspiracy theories" is because the government lies to us so much.

It's funny the government, biggest source of misinformation, put out something called "how to identify misinformation."

[stephencp]

Conspiracy theories play into both a desire to be a victim (i.e. I"m not in control of my destiny) and the desire to understand the big picture - regardless of thier validity.

Stephen

The Internet Largest Free Give Away Ever - ****************************

[legend]

The Great thing about Not knowing......
You gain Freedom...

[medaille]

The impression I got from the first few posters is, "What is faulty with human beings that allow them to be led astray by the cult-like conspiracy theorists?" and "Why do some people (the theorists themselves) only see a hidden dark side to things?"

The obvious thing is to strip connotations from the term "conspiracy theory" and leave it with its bare meaning. It's a theory, so it's trying to explain or model a certain portion of our reality which is unknown. The conspiracy portion of it means that a smaller group of people are performing an act that the larger supergroup, they're a part of, would disapprove with.

The modern definition is more-or-less twisted to mean, "Any explanation other than the one given by the media or the official in power." with an association that anyone who has any idea of how things really are that differs from the dominant narrative is a nutjob.

I can tell you the reason why I am drawn to conspiracy theories. It's a lot easier for me to believe that people on average are generally good, and that there are a couple of people with a lot of power that make selfish choices at the expense of others than it is for me to believe that a whole system of people is faulty (meaning acting against the will of the populace) and nobody caught it.

I find it hard to believe that Iraq was just a "Big whoops, we didn't know any better." It's easier to believe that a couple people with a lot of power made the choice that they could benefit a lot by us being at war (whoops: conflict) in Iraq than that the most highly sophisticated war machine in the world didn't have any idea what they were getting into, didn't learn from the wars from Vietnam through the South American wars. I know that I wouldn't go to war without knowing to a reasonable certainty the outcome beforehand, so I assume that by and large most people won't either which is what I would have to believe if I were to believe that we just didn't know any better.

Like all theories, you have to (by definition) create a model from your imagination to try to explain and predict the system that you are looking at. It is no different than the media or the government or whomever trying to explain to people what they are seeing. Everybody has their own personal experiences which help shape their model of reality. If the story that the government tells more or less fits with the experience that the person has lived through, than they are apt to believe that story. However, if it clashes with the person's experiences and their subconscious decides that the story doesn't seem accurate or acceptable then the brain is left looking for a new explanation. Any other option is fine as long as the brain doesn't notice the discrepancies in the theory.



I consider myself pretty knowledgable about people in general and in the theories of social control laid out in the assorted mirrors for princes and I find that they help explain what I see in a way that provides less obvious errors in explaining what I'm seeing.

I'm highly certain that we live in a society divided into social classes. I'm highly certain that you can also divide our society into two groups: the people that make decisions for our society and the people that don't. I'm highly certain that the more money you have, the more decision making power you have over other people and more specifically the more likely you are to be a career politician in a major position. I'm moderately highly certain that the social elite (the people that make the decisions that change the way we live) try to pull strings such that they benefit.



The example that glared at me and sent me in this direction was the school system. Everybody knows that school by and large doesn't teach you much of anything important. This is evident by the TV show thats about whether or not normal intelligent adults are any smarter than 5th graders. It's also evident by the concept that most of what is useful in your job is learned at your job and not in a classroom. I know that school is set up in a less than optimal manner for communicating information. My personal school experience gave me the idea that most people are by and large stupid, even though my personal experience outside of school gave me the opposite opinion. My school experience suggested that people are fairly sterile and inhuman, but my life experience suggests that isn't completely true, especially when I look at how children look before school and how they look after school. My little cousins are so affectionate and full of life, but the older children and adults are hesitant to touch each other. Human contact is reduced to a handshake and maybe a pat on the back.

I read John Taylor Gatto's work and Ivan Illich's work on schooling and it appeals to me. Maybe school causes some of the lack of humanity I see in people. Maybe, I'm making everything up and have an overactive imagination, but I can see in my life fairly clearly and can feel the personal shift in consciousness that I had while being in school and following the social norm and when I wasn't following the social norm. Not following the social norm feels a lot more natural to me. I don't think people are supposed to be so isolated from each other, so cold to each other. I don't think it's natural that most people can't look me in the eye when we cross each other in a mall or on a sidewalk. Deep inside, I have a longing to return to my perception of what naturalness is. It feels warmer, more comforting, more loving. It feels like the way I imagine that the creator would have created things.

Then I read this published quote by the General Education Board headed by Rockefeller (and maybe Carnegie):

In our dreams...people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present educational conventions [intellectual and character education] fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science. We have not to raise up from among them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have ample supply. The task we set before ourselves is very simple...we will organize children...and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way.

I refuse to blindly trust people in authority positions, especially ones with lots to gain by me not paying attention. That is what is expected of me and I know where that will lead. It leads to the adults I see. It leads to mediocrity and worrying about paying of mortgages on time. It leads to midlife crises. It leads to working longer hours for less money each and every year. It leads to the inability to fully love others and ourselves.

I joined the group of personal development and it cemented the mediocrity I saw. I don't believe we were created to be mediocre. I do believe we should live with a purpose and that certain purposes suit our own unique qualities. I don't see that in society. I can feel the force of the strings of the puppet master trying to persuade me to go in a direction that my heart doesn't feel like going in. If you can't feel the force of society pulling you away from yourself than I pity you, or I am completely happy for you that you lucked out into having an internal compass that coincidently followed societies compass. Either way, I don't believe that people are generic or interchangable, so most people can't be living true to themselves if they are living the same as others. I can see the heavy amount of sedating required by myself and my peers to tolerate this force. I've watched tv. I've smoked cigarettes. I've tried other ways to escape modern life. Now that I feel like I'm more true to myself, they aren't as necessary.

[Ree]

Originally Posted by Uplift

I

If the herd is running over a cliff, or wandering straight into an ambush, its not a bad thing to stick your head up and have a look around. Sometimes its better to say 'See yas'. Make use of what you find. I have found self reliance to be a good thing.

Excellent points Uplift! Have to I agree.

[JudyR]

I agree that some conspiracy theories are ridiculous, but I believe that some conspiracies have existed and others still do exist. A conspiracy is nothing more than a secret plot.

One of the earliest conspiracies is portrayed in an ancient book, The Bible. Although I believe The Bible is mythological, this story nevertheless illustrates the universality of secret plots. The incident of which I am thinking is Jacob's conspiring with his mother, Rebecca, to receive the blessing that his blind, old father, Isaac, had intended for Jacob's older twin brother, Esau.

It is difficult to know which conspiracies exist and which don't. If the conspirators are competent, no one else finds out about their conspiracy.

There seems to have been a conspiracy of silence that, for decades, protected from apprehension and conviction the White murderers of Black people during America's civil rights struggle in the 1960s.

I could quote many other examples from different periods of history and, recently, from both sides of the political spectrum (that is, left wing and right wing).

One conspiracy that is a historical fact is the series of maneuvers that Cecil Rhodes carried out to amass a personal fortune and to gain control of the Orange Free State Republic’s diamond fields and the Transvaal Republic’s gold fields for the British Empire.

In the case of the Orange Free State Republic, the diamond fields were close enough to the border with Briton’s Cape Colony that Rhodes was able to cheat, change the border, and incorporate the diamond fields into British territory.

The Transvaal Republic’s gold fields, however, were slap bang in the middle of the country. Fiddling with the border wouldn't help. Wresting control of the Transvaal gold fields from the Boers involved engineering the Boer War (1899 – 1902).

The scorched earth policy and the concentration camps that the British implemented during the Boer War left Afrikaans-speaking Whites defeated, impoverished, and humiliated. Like the Northern carpetbaggers after the American Civil War, Britons and people of British descent gained control of South African industry and government after the Boer War.

Cecil Rhodes’s conspiracy spawned a counter-conspiracy on the part of Afrikaans-speaking White South Africans. This conspiracy resulted in the formation of a secret organization known as the Broederbond (Afrikaans for “Brotherhood”). It operated successfully for several decades. It masterminded the policy of apartheid and was the invisible power behind the National Party that implemented apartheid. Every South African Prime Minister from 1948 until the collapse of apartheid in 1994 was a member of the Broederbond. To understand this phenomenon you need to go back to the beginning of the twentieth century.

After the Boer War, a handful of Afrikaans-speaking men gathered in secret and vowed to turn the tables on the dominant English-speakers. As their organization grew, it split into cells. Membership was by invitation only. University professors and school principals who were Broederbond members passed on the names of their brightest students. When the time was right, the Broederbond would invite these high achievers to join the organization. Only men were ever invited. If a man joined, he was bound to a solemn oath of confidentiality. Membership was so secret that members were not even allowed to tell their wives about it.

As Broederbond members gradually infiltrated government and industry organizations, they worked at getting other Broederbond members into positions of influence and power. If a high level committee in a government or business organization was making a decision about promoting or hiring one of several candidates, the couple of members of that committee who were Broederbond members would do everything in their power to influence the outcome so that the successful candidate was a Broederbond member.

The Broederbond got a break during the Second World War. Although South Africa was on the Allied side and sent soldiers to North Africa and Italy, there was no conscription. Military service was voluntary. English-speaking Whites had a traditional loyalty to the British Empire, and many of them volunteered to fight. Because of Britain’s shameful treatment of Boer women and children during the Boer war, Afrikaans-speaking whites still felt bitter towards the British Empire. Afrikaans-speaking Whites, for the most part, stayed home during WW II. Consequently WW II gave many Afrikaners an opportunity to step into influential positions that had been vacated by English-speakers who had volunteered for the war.

By the time the English-speaking soldiers returned from WW II, South Africa essentially had been taken over by the Afrikaans. The National Party came into power in the elections that followed the war, in 1948. From then onwards, Afrikaners increasingly dominated the cabinet, the army, the education system, the banking industry, etc. They even made significant inroads into the gold mining industry, which previously had been dominated by English-speakers.

I’m from Swaziland, a small country next door to South Africa. My husband is from South Africa. We migrated from South Africa to Canada in 1977, when we were in our mid twenties.

As an English-speaker in South Africa, I remember hearing rumours about something called the Broederbond in the early to mid 1970s. When anyone mentioned the Broederbond, everyone else would laugh. At that point mentioning the Broederbond was the equivalent of coming out today and declaring that Elvis is alive. The only way to mention the Broederbond and preserve a shred of credibility was to tell a joke about it.

After my husband and I had moved to Canada, another ex South African whom we met here gave us a copy of Brotherhood of Power: An Expose of the Secret Afrikaner Broederbond by J. H. P. Serfontein. This book provided extraordinarily detailed information about the Broederbond and named names. It read like a Who’s Who of South African government and industry.

I have since found out that Serfontein’s informants were Broederbond members who, ironically, belonged to a far-right faction of the Broederbond and who didn’t think the Broederbond was right-wing enough! Other investigative journalists and authors have written detailed accounts of the Broederbond.

There can be no doubt that the Broederbond existed, and there can be no doubt that the formation and operation of the Broederbond were the direct results of a conspiracy.

[JohnPlace]

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea