Conspiracies - Page 3

On October 29 2015 01:05 Djzapz wrote:To me, a conspiracy requires direct hands on planning by at least two people or entities that have some direct contacts.

On October 29 2015 00:47 Falling wrote:

My brother works in a pizza shop between two small cities and some of the regulars are conspiracy theory nutters so I hear a fair a bit from him about chem trails, vaxx conspiracies, etc, etc. I would say a common trait for those that fall for the crazy ones is they tend to personalize most bad things that come their way. One fellow is CONVINCED that the former premier of our province was out to grab HIS pay cheque. And not like generic tax increases for everyone, but that the premier is personally out for his money above and beyond the regular tax payer's money. But you see this fairly commonly- little allowance is made for undirected bad events or unintended consequences. Everything fits into the pattern of a deliberate, master plan. It's personal. There is also a tendency to reduce a wide array of interests to one secret and shadowy organization (a League of Shadows, if you will.) There must be one prime mover- somewhat akin to an evil pagan god, if you think about it.

They also tend to have a real shot-gun approach to facts- an indepth knowledge of a certain peculiar set of facts, but nothing around it because they tend to cycle through their arguments in a rather rapid pace, making it difficult to pin down any one of piece of their menagerie of facts. This is makes it fairly difficult to discuss their theories because you can never stay on one topic long enough to get down to their ground level assumptions, but they WILL cycle back to that set of facts again- possibly multiple times in the same discussion. Alex Jones is very much like this, but my brother and I have had very similar experiences with the local conspiracy theorists.

They also tend to have an unrealistic of view of human's capacity for secrecy (or rather the lack.) Franklin's "Three can keep a secret, if two are dead" never applies. They drastically underestimate (or else do not consider) just how many people would need to be in on the secret and how many people would need to be silenced.

On October 29 2015 00:04 Doodsmack wrote:
Chomsky's "political economy of the mass media" (forget if that's the exact title) is a good example of a conspiracy that assembles itself rather than achieves direct manipulation through deliberate coordination. Basically political power structures accomplish media complicity not through direct puppet stringing but through a system structure that forces the media to live off the government. The result is a lesser degree of control than could be achieved by puppet stringing or straight up state run media. And it may not even be a deliberate effort by those in power but rather an emergent feature caused by natural self-interest on the part of political power components of the "system".

On October 29 2015 13:38 notesfromunderground wrote:


So if Janet Yellen is having secret meeting with Jamie Dimon and not telling us about them, does that count as a conspiracy?

On October 29 2015 22:01 Djzapz wrote:
Janet Yellen meeting with Jamie Dimon is perhaps unethical (?) but would they directly conspire to accomplish anything?

It rigs itself through a sort of self-assembly

On October 30 2015 08:08 notesfromunderground wrote:
You don't think Dimon telling Yellen how to run the Fed would be unethical or beneficial to him?