5 ms·

It's time we stop stigmatizing people as "conspiracy loons", "conspiracy theorists", "paranoid tin foil hat wearers" and whatnot. The fact of the matter is tha

It's time we stop stigmatizing people as "conspiracy loons", "conspiracy theorists", "paranoid tin foil hat wearers" and whatnot. The fact of the matter is that you don't need to believe in idiotic pop culture theories like Illuminati, Jewish Bolshevism and reptilian men. Those are all straw men and have no credibility. On the other hand, conspiracies have been an essential part of politics and history for a very long time. The only way you could possibly deny this is if you're ignorant of politics, history and how military intelligence works. One most not underestimate the capability of malice. Hanlon's razor does not apply to politics, as FDR famously said. The authorities have conspired to and actually committed countless acts of lunacy and horror, like a plot to nuke the moon (Project A119), a large scale false flag terror plot (Operation Gladio) and the second Gulf of Tonkin attack, which was a false flag that kickstarted the Vietnam War. The last one was actually executed and the NSA declassified the docs years ago. NSA surveillance is hardly new. You can even see it (jokingly) referenced in Sneakers, which dates back to 1992. Before Snowden, we had ECHELON, Total Information Awareness, Presidential Surveillance Program, Room 641A and closely related: the FBI's DCSNet. So, here's a quick idea. Instead of insulting conspiracy theorists who voice perfectly reasonable doubts, let's actually praise them and try to voice their concerns, rather than going with official stories and pretending everything is like clockwork. It's absolutely disturbing how well people have accepted that the government works for their benefit. What bullshit. The outrage over the NSA disclosures was well warranted, but the surprise goes to show you just how much people, even those who should know better, are asleep and little more than cattle (sorry for the arrogance, but I feel it's deserved here). Conspiracy theorists are not loons. The only loons are the ones who think everything is just fine and are legitimately surprised the NSA is spying on them. Did you forget the Clipper chips already? Fucking please.

dllthomas 13y ago
"Hanlon's razor does not apply to politics, as FDR famously said." I'm not sure what FDR quote you're referring to, here.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Apparently it might have been misattributed (like many famous quotes are), so I apologize for that error. The rest still stands.
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    It wasn't meant as a criticism; I'm genuinely interested in which quote you're speaking of (FDR or misattributed to FDR).
    - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
      "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens you can bet it was planned that way."
      - dllthomas 13y ago
        Ah, right, that one. Thanks!
- philwelch 13y ago
  As Abraham Lincoln famously said, the problem with internet quotes is that you can't always verify their authenticity.
ChrisAntaki 13y ago
Like you said, conspiracies are a big part of history. Any group of people meeting, with a common goal, are conspiring. Calling someone a "conspiracy theorist" paints them in a negative light though. Better terms would be more like: "Awareness advocate", "Covert operations researcher", "Open source intelligence agent"
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  I like "political awareness advocate". The second one is a little too specific, and OSINT agent makes you sound like a fed.
  - ChrisAntaki 13y ago
    The arena of thought is typically shrunk when people fear negative judgment. Using more positive terms like this would promote healthy discourse. It would also open up a cleaner way to discuss paranoia, specifically. Some ideas could be singled out as paranoid, while acknowledging the value in others.
eli_gottlieb 13y ago
Actually, my problem with conspiracy theorists is that a whole lot of them do believe in Jewish Bolshevism/Zionist Occupied Government nonsense. And I'm Jewish: the result is that every time some nutter shoots up a community center, the real reason is because he never got the mental-health care he needed, but the proximate reason is that "not loons" conspiracy theorists told him we were holding Evil League of Evil meetings there.
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  > the proximate reason is that "not loons" conspiracy theorists told him we were holding Evil League of Evil meetings there. The post you replied to made it pretty clear that those are to be considered loons. Conflating legitimate concerns and crazyness is exactly what needs to stop.
  - vacri 13y ago
    You couldn't ask for a more textbook version of No True Scotsman. "Don't stigmatise conspiracy theorists, because the ones who attack places on the theory that there's a conspiracy going on... they aren't really conspiracy theorists!"
    - PavlovsCat 13y ago
      Huh. I didn't say they're not conspiracy theorists, did I? That's putting words in my mouth I never said, in other words a strawman. Labeling anyone and everyone as "conspiracy theorist" because they are talking about a conspiracy doesn't make them all the same, that makes as much sense as treating all humans like serial killers because Charles Manson was a human, too. Is realizing how silly that is a No True Scotsman, too? Please. To use big words, too, this is orders of magnitude below the standard of HN. When drug dealers, who conspired to deal drugs, are busted, does that make the police "conspiracy theorists"? Why not, since they technically are? Because more often than not, that label is used to lump legitimate concerns together with kooky ones.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Your entire argument is a non sequitur. Also if you really believe that conspiracies have no effect on the average person's daily life, that's just being hopelessly deluded.
  - cinquemb 13y ago
    I don't really want to take a leg in this thread (there are pragmatic reasons one may chose to put a foot down on whichever side in practice, and doing so now won't mean anything really to anyone), but it was interesting that the 3rd argument stood out to you (as did I) as well, as probably being one people would chose as being most rational (setting aside whether things like backroom trade agreements on a supranational scale like TPP have no effect on an "average" persons life, however obvious things like this may appear to some). But it is interesting to talk about, so here I go. If one were to consider #3 valid, then one would have to consider what people do in their lives to be "average". Setting aside any possible governmental motivations in #2 and omitting the chemicals part (to not be side tracked in this thought exercise), some would consider it fair to say "average" people probably fill a great deal of their leisure time on #2 and talking/thinking about #2. And if we assume that the rest of the time is spent working where independent thought is not necessary for workers or applied on such issues, then #1 could be a possibility simply because time is not taken in leisure time to pursue #1 since that is filled with things dealing with #2. But then again, the arguments rely entirely on what it means to be "average" (and who would be considered non "average"? People in power? People not in power who do not engage in #2 and by extension #1 may be void as well [what do non "average" people do for leisure that does not involve entertaining anything to do much with #2, while remaining incapable of independent thought since not engaging with #2 might be considered independent thought by "average" people who are generally assumed to be preoccupied with #2, if one we're to imagine such an interaction?]), and there's some kind of implication in #3 that on non "average" lives the arguments won't hold to be true. And if the arguments don't hold for non "average" people, why would they hold true for "average" people since we're talking about conspiracies in systems (governmental/corporate/etc) that are to affect all people on some level? Maybe someone could draw up some truth tables to show this more clearly? :D Edit: made in reference to this parent comment for future clarity: http://i.imgur.com/3k5KK05.png http://i.imgur.com/3k5KK05.png
saraid216 13y ago
Since we're lionizing crazy paranoid conspiracy theorists, please add me to the list of people to praise. My conspiracy theory is that Satoshi Nakamoto is the NSA.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Show some evidence to support your claims and it will be taken into consideration.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    No evidence; just reasoning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 But consideration? That's it? After the entire wall of text about how the conspiracy theorists must be correct? Not going to put your money where your mouth is?
kazagistar 13y ago
If conspiracy theorists come with sufficient facts to make a good case, it becomes useful, and then it is the news. Until then, well, good for you, keep looking, but don't expect anyone to care about your passtime until you have enough solid evidence to convince us. The false positive rate is too high to pay attention before then.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  What a very sugary way of viewing things. Expecting gripping journalism. It's not like the US government has ever attempted to manipulate the media-oh, wait... http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/contents/church/contents_church_reports.htm http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/contents/church/contents_c... (the Church reports cover on many things, including Operation Mockingbird and NSA surveillance... all the way back from 1975). Even without that, it's ridiculously ignorant to expect intelligence operations to end up as national news all the time. The Snowden revelations were an exception because of the breadth and due to the fact that the people had already had enough by then. The Gulf of Tonkin documents are here: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/gulf_of_tonkin/ http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/gulf_of_tonkin/ Clipper chips have a Wikpedia article on them and caused uproar amongst the tech community in the early 90s, you should be aware of that. Right? Operation Gladio is extensively documented fact. The precise details are debatable, but its existence and general goals are undeniable. Once again, Wikipedia article. So on and so forth. You're no better than a creationist telling people to "show them the evidence". Keep reading CNN, what do I care...
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
InclinedPlane 13y ago
"Conspiracy theorists" are indeed loons, but it's not because of what they believe it's because of how they arrive at their conclusions. Conspiracy theorists consistently apply the same basic logical framework on every line of reasoning. It goes a bit like this: "X is the established mainstream view of topic Y, however there are inconsistencies in X or non-intuitive aspects to X, therefore competing theory Z must be true". This is an incredibly erroneous way to reason about anything, and it's why any and every crack-brained theory under the sun (from the moon landing being faked to the pyramids being created by aliens to the "phantom time hypothesis" to the illuminati controlling the world, and so on). We absolutely do not need to entertain these illogical "theories" with no basis in fact whatsoever. We should entertain a reasonable level of skepticism when it comes to accepting the establishment view on anything, but that's no excuse to abandon reason or the necessity of evidence. A "theory" without evidence is just an allegation.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Sweeping generalization.
  - InclinedPlane 13y ago
    It's a generalization based on extensive examples of hundreds of different "conspiracy theories". The uniting factor in all these things is the ability to make strong conclusions based on lack of evidence.
whatevsbro 13y ago
Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRNYxL-oPsQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRNYxL-oPsQ (That channel is probably the best source of information on "conspiracies" out there, in case you weren't already familiar with it)
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
iterationx 13y ago
People want to be lied to. That's the big secret. You can shout until you're blue in the face. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8

dllthomas 13y ago

"Hanlon's razor does not apply to politics, as FDR famously said." I'm not sure what FDR quote you're referring to, here.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Apparently it might have been misattributed (like many famous quotes are), so I apologize for that error. The rest still stands.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  It wasn't meant as a criticism; I'm genuinely interested in which quote you're speaking of (FDR or misattributed to FDR).
  - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
    "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens you can bet it was planned that way."
    - dllthomas 13y ago
      Ah, right, that one. Thanks!
philwelch 13y ago
As Abraham Lincoln famously said, the problem with internet quotes is that you can't always verify their authenticity.

ChrisAntaki 13y ago

Like you said, conspiracies are a big part of history. Any group of people meeting, with a common goal, are conspiring. Calling someone a "conspiracy theorist" paints them in a negative light though. Better terms would be more like: "Awareness advocate", "Covert operations researcher", "Open source intelligence agent"

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
I like "political awareness advocate". The second one is a little too specific, and OSINT agent makes you sound like a fed.
- ChrisAntaki 13y ago
  The arena of thought is typically shrunk when people fear negative judgment. Using more positive terms like this would promote healthy discourse. It would also open up a cleaner way to discuss paranoia, specifically. Some ideas could be singled out as paranoid, while acknowledging the value in others.

eli_gottlieb 13y ago

Actually, my problem with conspiracy theorists is that a whole lot of them do believe in Jewish Bolshevism/Zionist Occupied Government nonsense. And I'm Jewish: the result is that every time some nutter shoots up a community center, the real reason is because he never got the mental-health care he needed, but the proximate reason is that "not loons" conspiracy theorists told him we were holding Evil League of Evil meetings there.

PavlovsCat 13y ago
> the proximate reason is that "not loons" conspiracy theorists told him we were holding Evil League of Evil meetings there. The post you replied to made it pretty clear that those are to be considered loons. Conflating legitimate concerns and crazyness is exactly what needs to stop.
- vacri 13y ago
  You couldn't ask for a more textbook version of No True Scotsman. "Don't stigmatise conspiracy theorists, because the ones who attack places on the theory that there's a conspiracy going on... they aren't really conspiracy theorists!"
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    Huh. I didn't say they're not conspiracy theorists, did I? That's putting words in my mouth I never said, in other words a strawman. Labeling anyone and everyone as "conspiracy theorist" because they are talking about a conspiracy doesn't make them all the same, that makes as much sense as treating all humans like serial killers because Charles Manson was a human, too. Is realizing how silly that is a No True Scotsman, too? Please. To use big words, too, this is orders of magnitude below the standard of HN. When drug dealers, who conspired to deal drugs, are busted, does that make the police "conspiracy theorists"? Why not, since they technically are? Because more often than not, that label is used to lump legitimate concerns together with kooky ones.
vezzy-fnord 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Your entire argument is a non sequitur. Also if you really believe that conspiracies have no effect on the average person's daily life, that's just being hopelessly deluded.
- cinquemb 13y ago
  I don't really want to take a leg in this thread (there are pragmatic reasons one may chose to put a foot down on whichever side in practice, and doing so now won't mean anything really to anyone), but it was interesting that the 3rd argument stood out to you (as did I) as well, as probably being one people would chose as being most rational (setting aside whether things like backroom trade agreements on a supranational scale like TPP have no effect on an "average" persons life, however obvious things like this may appear to some). But it is interesting to talk about, so here I go. If one were to consider #3 valid, then one would have to consider what people do in their lives to be "average". Setting aside any possible governmental motivations in #2 and omitting the chemicals part (to not be side tracked in this thought exercise), some would consider it fair to say "average" people probably fill a great deal of their leisure time on #2 and talking/thinking about #2. And if we assume that the rest of the time is spent working where independent thought is not necessary for workers or applied on such issues, then #1 could be a possibility simply because time is not taken in leisure time to pursue #1 since that is filled with things dealing with #2. But then again, the arguments rely entirely on what it means to be "average" (and who would be considered non "average"? People in power? People not in power who do not engage in #2 and by extension #1 may be void as well [what do non "average" people do for leisure that does not involve entertaining anything to do much with #2, while remaining incapable of independent thought since not engaging with #2 might be considered independent thought by "average" people who are generally assumed to be preoccupied with #2, if one we're to imagine such an interaction?]), and there's some kind of implication in #3 that on non "average" lives the arguments won't hold to be true. And if the arguments don't hold for non "average" people, why would they hold true for "average" people since we're talking about conspiracies in systems (governmental/corporate/etc) that are to affect all people on some level? Maybe someone could draw up some truth tables to show this more clearly? :D Edit: made in reference to this parent comment for future clarity: http://i.imgur.com/3k5KK05.png http://i.imgur.com/3k5KK05.png

saraid216 13y ago

Since we're lionizing crazy paranoid conspiracy theorists, please add me to the list of people to praise. My conspiracy theory is that Satoshi Nakamoto is the NSA.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Show some evidence to support your claims and it will be taken into consideration.
- saraid216 13y ago
  No evidence; just reasoning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 But consideration? That's it? After the entire wall of text about how the conspiracy theorists must be correct? Not going to put your money where your mouth is?

kazagistar 13y ago

If conspiracy theorists come with sufficient facts to make a good case, it becomes useful, and then it is the news. Until then, well, good for you, keep looking, but don't expect anyone to care about your passtime until you have enough solid evidence to convince us. The false positive rate is too high to pay attention before then.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
What a very sugary way of viewing things. Expecting gripping journalism. It's not like the US government has ever attempted to manipulate the media-oh, wait... http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/contents/church/contents_church_reports.htm http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/contents/church/contents_c... (the Church reports cover on many things, including Operation Mockingbird and NSA surveillance... all the way back from 1975). Even without that, it's ridiculously ignorant to expect intelligence operations to end up as national news all the time. The Snowden revelations were an exception because of the breadth and due to the fact that the people had already had enough by then. The Gulf of Tonkin documents are here: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/gulf_of_tonkin/ http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/gulf_of_tonkin/ Clipper chips have a Wikpedia article on them and caused uproar amongst the tech community in the early 90s, you should be aware of that. Right? Operation Gladio is extensively documented fact. The precise details are debatable, but its existence and general goals are undeniable. Once again, Wikipedia article. So on and so forth. You're no better than a creationist telling people to "show them the evidence". Keep reading CNN, what do I care...

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

InclinedPlane 13y ago

"Conspiracy theorists" are indeed loons, but it's not because of what they believe it's because of how they arrive at their conclusions. Conspiracy theorists consistently apply the same basic logical framework on every line of reasoning. It goes a bit like this: "X is the established mainstream view of topic Y, however there are inconsistencies in X or non-intuitive aspects to X, therefore competing theory Z must be true". This is an incredibly erroneous way to reason about anything, and it's why any and every crack-brained theory under the sun (from the moon landing being faked to the pyramids being created by aliens to the "phantom time hypothesis" to the illuminati controlling the world, and so on). We absolutely do not need to entertain these illogical "theories" with no basis in fact whatsoever. We should entertain a reasonable level of skepticism when it comes to accepting the establishment view on anything, but that's no excuse to abandon reason or the necessity of evidence. A "theory" without evidence is just an allegation.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Sweeping generalization.
- InclinedPlane 13y ago
  It's a generalization based on extensive examples of hundreds of different "conspiracy theories". The uniting factor in all these things is the ability to make strong conclusions based on lack of evidence.

whatevsbro 13y ago

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRNYxL-oPsQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRNYxL-oPsQ (That channel is probably the best source of information on "conspiracies" out there, in case you weren't already familiar with it)

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

iterationx 13y ago

People want to be lied to. That's the big secret. You can shout until you're blue in the face. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8