Conspiracy Theories and Imagination
- Thread starter Bowser
- Start date
I would say that there are so many big conspiracy theories that the odds are that one of those biggies should be true.
Well, of course not. I mean, at a certain point in the 30s rumors of something worse then thuggery and systematic discrimination against Jews no doubt were passing through the Jewish community in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. Some Jews and of course many Gentiles dismissed these as irrational ideas, but some took them seriously and got our of Germany and even Europe. Lo, a conpiracy theory - a really outlandish one, turned out to be true. Some who believed in it may have been privvy to certain facts. Others may have had intuitions that allowed them to notice patterns and correctly guage their weight. Some may simply have been lucky guessers.
There are of course other such examples in history, though that's a fairly extreme one.
The conspiracy to get a second invasion of Iraq is a more recent example. Fortunately neocon think tanks behind the presidency were kind enough to present publically their positions papers - openly calling for the making of excuses to get into Iraq. And of course so much public lying that did in fact catch up to the administration - though without doing the slightest bit of damage to the lifestyles and freedom of those involved.
So of course to decide if a conspiracy theory is based on this or that, one must find out what is true in the specific case and they how people arrived at their beliefs.
I think anybody living in Germany during those days should have seen the writing on the wall. Nonetheless, such events become known in short time, as with the excuses for invading Iraq. Is it possible to conceal a conspiracy of such major proportions? I'm looking at those who are fixated on 9/11. It seems ridiculous to think that anybody could orchestrate such a thing and keep their intentions in the shadows. People are blaming the government, the Jews, just about anyone other than those who were accused by the authorities. I ran into a video on YouTube about the 9/11 conspiracy and started reading the comments left behind. The wacky ideas it produced were incredible. People started posting all their fears, everything from flu shots and cancer to their admiration of Nazi Germany. It looked like a looney bin. I get the feeling that conspiracy theories attract people who are, well, paranoid and delusional. That's just my impression.
But many well educated Jews could not believe, as well assimilated professionals in German society, that they would be culled - in the modern Germany, the country of Beethovan, etc. - in a Genocide.
7 years or so and only after they were beaten.
Well, they lost the war, and utterly - iow their enemies got access to everything in Germany and any countries they invaded.
And most of what people call conspiracy theories have to do with things that would be much easier to hide.
Take JFK for example. Here we do not have thousands, to millions of witnesses. No need for complicated camps, train lines. And the Germans were 1) careful notetakers and 2) confident they would win.
The Germans lost and their country, records, facilities were gone through by governments happy to reveal anything - unless it had to do with scientists they wanted to bring into their own countries.
If Germany had won, I am not sure what would have happened to official history on the issue, even though the scope of the conspiracy - thinking of infrastructure and active conspirators - is orders of magnitude beyond what has been needed for other conspiracies.
I use the holocaust as an example because this was doubted worldwide for an amazingly long time. Only once photos of the inmates started being shown was there more widespread belief, but even then that millions were systematically killed was still doubted.
Despite huge numbers of witness accounts, infrastructure, and the state antisemitism of the Nazis.
In a sense I am trying to say, even this was doubted, and not simply by deniers who were later the exception, but in general. I have to use an example of an accepted conspiracy, otherwise my point has no weight. The assumption that all or even most conspiracies have come to light is just that,an assumption.
Last edited:
Well, this discussion has sparked my interest. It seems that NetFlix has a movie called Conspiracy. Looks like it might be a good watch.
If that is the one with Mel Gibson it's only going to reinforce your notions of conspiracies. It is over the top and everything is interconnected neatly. But I enjoyed it anyway.
Director:
Frank Pierson
Writer:
Loring Mandel
Stars:
Kenneth Branagh, Clare Bullus and Stanley Tucci
Isn't Mel a bit anti-Semitic? I don't know for a fact but think I've heard that he's a little over the top. I'm not sure where his ideas revolve. I do enjoy his movies though.
Frank Pierson
Writer:
Loring Mandel
Stars:
Kenneth Branagh, Clare Bullus and Stanley Tucci
Isn't Mel a bit anti-Semitic? I don't know for a fact but think I've heard that he's a little over the top. I'm not sure where his ideas revolve. I do enjoy his movies though.
I watched that one years back. I vaguely remember the plot--a conspiracy theorist who gets one right.
I've been reading up on Mel. It seems that he has said some shit that resulted in accusations, but he always denies they are his true position. It also seems that the antisemitism accusations are simply based on a movie he made--The Passion of the Christ. Maybe the guy is simply misunderstood. :shrug:
Yeah, half the time it seemed ironic - rather than ambigous - a kind of comedy, but then, it wasn't. And you are correct about my mistake here. Despite compentent actors, I would probably not rent the one he meant. Though I like the title supporting indirectly my thesis.
I think he at least bears some responsibility. I mean, I've been shitfaced and did not start yelling about a particular race. But I like his films in general and he can be a pretty good to very good director. Braveheart was very good as were some others.
He does seem to have a real fetish for suffering, in his choices of roles that is.
Yep, being famous can have its disadvantages. BTW: I'm watching Conspiracy Theory on NetFlix right now. His character does fit the image that I have in mind.
Ironic. There are those who believe that the "official" version of events is itself a culturally fabricated cover of a conspiracy. They believe that the numbers are exaggerated, that the Nuremberg Trials were actually just an extension of the war, etc. Even now, investigative forensic anthropologists are not allowed to investigate noted sights of interest where purported incidents of the holocaust occurred. Many records are kept buried because of post war legalese and occupation treaties that don't expire for another decade or two. It's all arcane stuff now being forgotten as the older generations pass.
Hitler and the Banksters: The Abolition of Interest-Servitude
But who knows. The victors and their
And given that people are regularly lied to by not only individuals with power, but also by corporations and governments, these latter entities need only look at their own behavior to find the source of people making mistaken hypotheses - when they do.
I don't know what year people think governments, supposedly democratics ones, stopping lying about important issues, but I can't find a good cutoff point to believe in. Yet 'rational' people seem to think the idea of larger conspiracies and such things not being revealed to consensus acceptance are nearly impossible.
I don't see their default position as rational.
Fox Mulder said that people rather believe in aliens, UFO's and all kinds of weird things,
than to consider that the government, their government that they themselves have voted in, could be acting against them.
Because if they were to doubt their government (that they voted for), they would have to doubt their ability to choose wisely - and they can't afford to do that.
yes, I think there is truth in that. I also think that 'what it would feel like if it were true' looms around the edges of how people evaluate the possibility of certain things being true, though rationalists think they are objective about such things.
A related phenomenon: I notice that people can complain about local government conspiracies and mismanagement and lies and accept the existence of patterns that would get called conspiracy theories when taken to a larger scale. So the Parks department can be behaving in ways, that the Nuclear regulatory Agency would never behave at Rocky Flats Nuclear facility, for example.
No corporaton would do a lot of irresponsible things - for money - and cover it up and be supported in the latter by the relevent regulatory agencies. But those assholes over at the Parks department or the Health board or the local hospital, they.......
Exactly people seem to be able to believe that smaller organizations can conspire, but not huge ones? Certainly flawed logic.
The other thing is they don't feel a larger organization could pull it off. The thing is when you are "too big to fail" it's extremely easy to not get caught and even if you do, the people don't want to believe it!
The other thing is they don't feel a larger organization could pull it off. The thing is when you are "too big to fail" it's extremely easy to not get caught and even if you do, the people don't want to believe it!
Nope - what YOU have presented is flawed, reverse logic. The larger the organization is the MORE likely it is for someone to let the cat out of the bag. A small group - say like a sleeper-cell of 5 or 6 people can do a MUCH better job of keeping it quiet. than a large group of say, 20,000 individuals
You can have the same # of people involved in a small or large conspiracy thanks to compartmentalization. This is how the CIA, NSA, and any other spy organization keeps secrets.