The word "conspire" according to Webster:
"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"
So from this definition, we can see that to qualify as a conspiracy, an action must be agreed upon (meaning two or more persons), kept secret, and either illegal or immoral.
The paradox of conspiracy theories that the very act of learning about a conspiracy disqualifies it as still being a conspiracy, because it is no longer a secret once people know about it.
It seems to me that what "conspiracy theorists" are really searching for are stories about where truth overlaps with absurdity. Like the US taking in thousands of Nazis (the scientists who later gave way to NASA), or the FBI trying blackmail MLK Jr. into suicide, or the CIA trying to give people so much LSD that they could control the mind or induce ESP. None of these are conspiracies anymore. They were conspiracies, but now they are history.
So the next time someone says "Conspiracies don't exist", just smile, agree with them, then ask them I've they've heard about the time the US Navy tested their biological warfare systems on the population of San Francisco.
5 comments
The Parable of the Poisoned Well:
“There was once a wise king who ruled over a vast city. He was feared for his might and loved for his wisdom. Now in the heart of the city, there was a well whose waters were pure and crystalline from which the king and all the inhabitants drank. When all were asleep, an enemy entered the city and poured seven drops of a strange liquid into the well. And he said that henceforth all who drink this water shall become mad.
All the people drank of the water, but not the king. And the people began to say, "The king is mad and has lost his reason. Look how strangely he behaves. We cannot be ruled by a madman, so he must be dethroned."
The king grew very fearful, for his subjects were preparing to rise against him. So one evening, he ordered a golden goblet to be filled from the well, and he drank deeply. The next day, there was great rejoicing among the people, for their beloved king had finally regained his reason."
This is also interesting. JFK speech.
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=IrqXq1ea9-w
So the moral of the story is that its better for a leader to compromise on their values for the sake of his people, than to stick to your guns and lose public support?
or is the idea that the well was indeed poisoned, and the madness of the people blinded them to the wisdom of their king? That the madness of of the many can easily be seen as the madness of the few?
On a side note, if everyone was asleep, how did anyone know about the strange liquid, or the words of the enemy?
Interesting question's I dont think it is for the sake of his people but they left him no choice. So your seccond point id say.
Also I think this is relevant :
"A time will come when the whole world will go mad. And to anyone who is not mad they will say: 'You are mad, for you are not like us.'" - St. Anthony the Great (attributed to)
When the limits of morality are being pushed the norm will change ?
Not saying this is bad or good i just think it is.